[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 1]
[Issue]
[Pages 1-272]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]
[[Page 1]]
VOLUME 153--PART 1
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES--Thursday, January 4, 2007
This being the day fixed by the 20th amendment to the Constitution of
the United States and Public Law 109-447 for the meeting of the
Congress of the United States, the Members-elect of the 110th Congress
met in their Hall, and at noon were called to order by the Clerk of the
House of Representatives, Hon. Karen L. Haas.
The Chaplain, the Reverend Daniel P. Coughlin, offered the following
prayer:
Today is built upon all the yesterdays and contains the promise of
all the tomorrows.
Lord God, You are the eternal author of all creation and every age.
You are the same yesterday, today and forever. Be present to us now. Be
gracious and bless all those duly elected by their districts who gather
today to form the House of the people as the 110th Congress of the
United States of America for the governance of our beloved Nation.
Together, may they know forthright debate and civil discourse, enact
quality legislation and persevere in representing the diversity and the
will of the people in addressing the priority issues facing the Nation
today.
Bless the families of these Representatives, granting them
forbearance and understanding of the public service implied by this
undertaking.
Lord, may the 110th Congress of the United States read the signs of
the times and seize this moment to create a history that will reflect
the values of Your kingdom here on Earth and thereby unite this Nation
and reveal to peoples around the world the dignity and the glory of
being the free children of God. For to You be the honor, the glory and
the power, now and forever. Amen.
At the request of the Honorable Nancy Pelosi, I am pleased to
introduce the Reverend Stephen A. Privett, President of the University
of San Francisco, for an additional prayer.
The Reverend Stephen A. Privett, President, University of San
Francisco, San Francisco, California, offered the following prayer:
I recall this morning the story of a poor mother of five children.
When she was asked which of her children she loved the most, she did
not answer the expected, ``I love them all the same.'' Rather, she bent
down and scooped up into her arms a young child with obviously
crippling disabilities. ``This one,'' she said, ``because he needs me
the most.''
Let us pray:
God of compassion and mercy, we pray that the new leadership of this
Congress and all of its Members will write into law the story of a
country that measures its success by God's standard; by how well it
cares for the weakest and most vulnerable among us.
We pray for the legislators of this 110th Congress, that they may
challenge, inspire and lead us to put aside self-interest and pursue
the common good of all the people of this great Nation of ours,
especially of those ``who need us the most.'' Amen.
Pledge of Allegiance
The CLERK. The Members-elect and their guests will please remain
standing and join in the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag.
The Clerk led the Pledge of Allegiance as follows:
I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of
America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
The CLERK. Members-elect, this is the day fixed by the 20th amendment
to the Constitution and Public Law 109-447 for the meeting of the 110th
Congress and, as the law directs, the Clerk of the House has prepared
the official roll of the Representatives-elect.
Certificates of election covering 435 seats in the 110th Congress
have been received by the Clerk of the House, and the names of those
persons whose credentials show that they were regularly elected as
Representatives in accordance with the laws of their respective States
or of the United States will be called.
The Representatives-elect will record their presence by electronic
device and their names will be reported in alphabetical order by
States, beginning with the State of Alabama, to determine whether a
quorum is present.
Representatives-elect who have not obtained their voting ID cards may
do so now in the Speaker's lobby.
The call was taken by electronic device, and the following
Representatives-elect responded to their names:
[Roll No. 1]
ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--435
ALABAMA
Aderholt
Bachus
Bonner
Cramer
Davis
Everett
Rogers
ALASKA
Young
ARIZONA
Flake
Franks
Giffords
Grijalva
Mitchell
Pastor
Renzi
Shadegg
ARKANSAS
Berry
Boozman
Ross
Snyder
CALIFORNIA
Baca
Becerra
Berman
Bilbray
Bono
Calvert
Campbell
Capps
Cardoza
Costa
Davis
Doolittle
Dreier
Eshoo
Farr
Filner
Gallegly
Harman
Herger
Honda
Hunter
Issa
Lantos
Lee
Lewis
Lofgren, Zoe
Lungren, Daniel E.
Matsui
McCarthy
McKeon
McNerney
Millender-McDonald
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Napolitano
Nunes
Pelosi
Radanovich
Rohrabacher
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Schiff
Sherman
Solis
Stark
Tauscher
Thompson
Waters
Watson
Waxman
Woolsey
COLORADO
DeGette
Lamborn
Musgrave
Perlmutter
Salazar
Tancredo
Udall
CONNECTICUT
Courtney
DeLauro
Larson
Murphy
Shays
DELAWARE
Castle
FLORIDA
Bilirakis
Boyd
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Castor
Crenshaw
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Feeney
[[Page 2]]
Hastings
Keller
Klein
Mack
Mahoney
Meek
Mica
Miller
Putnam
Ros-Lehtinen
Stearns
Wasserman Schultz
Weldon
Wexler
Young
GEORGIA
Barrow
Bishop
Deal
Gingrey
Johnson
Kingston
Lewis
Linder
Marshall
Norwood
Price
Scott
Westmoreland
HAWAII
Abercrombie
Hirono
IDAHO
Sali
Simpson
ILLINOIS
Bean
Biggert
Costello
Davis
Emanuel
Gutierrez
Hare
Hastert
Jackson
Johnson
Kirk
LaHood
Lipinski
Manzullo
Roskam
Rush
Schakowsky
Shimkus
Weller
INDIANA
Burton
Buyer
Carson
Donnelly
Ellsworth
Hill
Pence
Souder
Visclosky
IOWA
Boswell
Braley
King
Latham
Loebsack
KANSAS
Boyda
Moore
Moran
Tiahrt
KENTUCKY
Chandler
Davis
Lewis
Rogers
Whitfield
Yarmuth
LOUISIANA
Alexander
Baker
Boustany
Jefferson
Jindal
McCrery
Melancon
MAINE
Allen
Michaud
MARYLAND
Bartlett
Cummings
Gilchrest
Hoyer
Ruppersberger
Sarbanes
Van Hollen
Wynn
MASSACHUSETTS
Capuano
Delahunt
Frank
Lynch
Markey
McGovern
Meehan
Neal
Olver
Tierney
MICHIGAN
Camp
Conyers
Dingell
Ehlers
Hoekstra
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Knollenberg
Levin
McCotter
Miller
Rogers
Stupak
Upton
Walberg
MINNESOTA
Bachmann
Ellison
Kline
McCollum
Oberstar
Peterson
Ramstad
Walz
MISSISSIPPI
Pickering
Taylor
Thompson
Wicker
MISSOURI
Akin
Blunt
Carnahan
Clay
Cleaver
Emerson
Graves
Hulshof
Skelton
MONTANA
Rehberg
NEBRASKA
Fortenberry
Smith
Terry
NEVADA
Berkley
Heller
Porter
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Hodes
Shea-Porter
NEW JERSEY
Andrews
Ferguson
Frelinghuysen
Garrett
Holt
LoBiondo
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Rothman
Saxton
Sires
Smith
NEW MEXICO
Pearce
Udall
Wilson
NEW YORK
Ackerman
Arcuri
Bishop
Clarke
Crowley
Engel
Fossella
Gillibrand
Hall
Higgins
Hinchey
Israel
King
Kuhl
Lowey
Maloney
McCarthy
McHugh
McNulty
Meeks
Nadler
Rangel
Reynolds
Serrano
Slaughter
Towns
Velazquez
Walsh
Weiner
NORTH CAROLINA
Butterfield
Coble
Etheridge
Foxx
Hayes
Jones
McHenry
McIntyre
Miller
Myrick
Price
Shuler
Watt
NORTH DAKOTA
Pomeroy
OHIO
Boehner
Chabot
Gillmor
Hobson
Jones
Jordan
Kaptur
Kucinich
LaTourette
Pryce
Regula
Ryan
Schmidt
Space
Sutton
Tiberi
Turner
Wilson
OKLAHOMA
Boren
Cole
Fallin
Lucas
Sullivan
OREGON
Blumenauer
DeFazio
Hooley
Walden
Wu
PENNSYLVANIA
Altmire
Brady
Carney
Dent
Doyle
English
Fattah
Gerlach
Holden
Kanjorski
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Peterson
Pitts
Platts
Schwartz
Sestak
Shuster
RHODE ISLAND
Kennedy
Langevin
SOUTH CAROLINA
Barrett
Brown
Clyburn
Inglis
Spratt
Wilson
SOUTH DAKOTA
Herseth
TENNESSEE
Blackburn
Cohen
Cooper
Davis, David
Davis, Lincoln
Duncan
Gordon
Tanner
Wamp
TEXAS
Barton
Brady
Burgess
Carter
Conaway
Cuellar
Culberson
Doggett
Edwards
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Granger
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Hall
Hensarling
Hinojosa
Jackson-Lee
Johnson, E.B.
Johnson, Sam
Lampson
Marchant
McCaul
Neugebauer
Ortiz
Paul
Poe
Reyes
Rodriguez
Sessions
Smith
Thornberry
UTAH
Bishop
Cannon
Matheson
VERMONT
Welch
VIRGINIA
Boucher
Cantor
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Drake
Forbes
Goode
Goodlatte
Moran
Scott
Wolf
WASHINGTON
Baird
Dicks
Hastings
Inslee
Larsen
McDermott
McMorris Rodgers
Reichert
Smith
WEST VIRGINIA
Capito
Mollohan
Rahall
WISCONSIN
Baldwin
Kagen
Kind
Moore
Obey
Petri
Ryan
Sensenbrenner
WYOMING
Cubin
{time} 1232
The CLERK. The quorum call discloses that 435 Representatives-elect
have responded to their name. A quorum is present.
____________________
ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE CLERK
The CLERK. Credentials, regular in form, have been received showing
the election of the Honorable Luis Fortuno as Resident Commissioner
from the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico for a term of 4 years beginning
January 3, 2005; the Honorable Eleanor Holmes Norton as Delegate from
the District of Columbia; the Honorable Donna M. Christensen as
Delegate from the Virgin Islands; the Honorable Eni F.H. Faleomavaega
as Delegate from American Samoa; and the Honorable Madeleine Z.
Bordallo as Delegate from Guam.
____________________
ELECTION OF SPEAKER
The CLERK. Pursuant to law and precedent, the next order of business
is the election of the Speaker of the House of Representatives for the
110th Congress.
Nominations are now in order.
The Clerk recognizes the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Emanuel).
Mr. EMANUEL. Madam Clerk, as a father of three young children, I am
particularly thrilled to be a part of this moment, thrilled that a
generation of young girls and boys across America are about to witness
another historic step in our Nation's march toward equality of
opportunity. Nancy Pelosi's goal is a Congress known for its ideas, not
its insults; its patriotism, not its partisanship.
Madam Clerk, as chairman of the Democratic Caucus, I am directed by
the unanimous vote of that caucus to present for election to the office
of the Speaker of the House of Representatives for the 110th Congress
the name of the Honorable Nancy Pelosi, a Member-elect from the State
of California.
[[Page 3]]
The CLERK. The Clerk now recognizes the gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Putnam).
Mr. PUTNAM. Madam Clerk, I am pleased to put forward the name of a
man who represents the best of honesty, integrity, decency, uncanny
wisdom and understanding.
As chairman of the Republican Conference, I am directed by the
unanimous vote of that conference to present for election to the office
of Speaker of the House of Representatives for the 110th Congress the
name of the Honorable John A. Boehner from the State of Ohio.
The CLERK. The Honorable Nancy Pelosi, a Member-elect from the State
of California, and the Honorable John A. Boehner, a Member-elect from
the State of Ohio, have been placed in nomination.
Are there further nominations?
There being no further nominations, the Clerk will appoint tellers.
The Clerk appoints the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Millender-
McDonald), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers), the gentlewoman
from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), and the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-
Lehtinen).
The tellers will come forward and take their seats at the desk in
front of the Speaker's rostrum.
The roll will now be called, and those responding to their names will
indicate by surname the nominee of their choice.
The Reading Clerk will now call the roll.
The tellers having taken their places, the House proceeded to vote
for the Speaker.
The following is the result of the vote:
[Roll No. 2]
Pelosi--233
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castor
Chandler
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Giffords
Gillibrand
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Klein (FL)
Kucinich
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Wexler
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
Boehner--202
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachmann
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
English (PA)
Everett
Fallin
Feeney
Ferguson
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Hall (TX)
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hulshof
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Jindal
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
Keller
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lamborn
Latham
LaTourette
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McHugh
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Norwood
Nunes
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Porter
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Saxton
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shays
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Tancredo
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
{time} 1344
The CLERK. The tellers agree in their tallies that the total number
of votes cast is 435, of which the Honorable Nancy Pelosi of the State
of California has received 233 and the Honorable John A. Boehner of the
State of Ohio has received 202.
Therefore, the Honorable Nancy Pelosi of the State of California is
duly elected Speaker of the House of Representatives for the 110th
Congress, having received a majority of the votes cast.
The Clerk appoints the following committee to escort the Speaker-
elect to the chair:
The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), the gentleman from Maryland
(Mr. Hoyer), the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn), the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Blunt), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Emanuel), the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Putnam), the gentleman from
Connecticut (Mr. Larson), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. McCotter),
and the members of the California delegation: Mr. Stark, Mr. George
Miller, Mr. Waxman, Mr. Lewis, Mr. Dreier, Mr. Hunter, Mr. Lantos, Mr.
Berman, Mr. Gallegly, Mr. Herger, Mr. Rohrabacher, Mr. Doolittle, Ms.
Waters, Mr. Becerra, Mr. Calvert, Ms. Eshoo, Mr. Filner, Mr. McKeon,
Ms. Roybal-Allard, Mr. Royce, Ms. Woolsey, Mr. Farr, Ms. Zoe Lofgren,
Mr. Radanovich, Ms. Millender-McDonald, Mr. Sherman, Ms. Loretta
Sanchez, Mrs. Tauscher, Mrs. Capps, Mrs. Bono, Ms. Lee, Mr. Gary G.
Miller, Mrs. Napolitano, Mr. Thompson, Mr. Baca, Ms. Harman, Mrs.
Davis, Mr. Honda, Mr. Issa, Mr. Schiff, Ms. Solis, Ms. Watson, Mr.
Cardoza, Mr. Nunes, Ms. Linda T. Sanchez, Mr. Daniel E. Lungren, Mr.
Costa, Ms. Matsui, Mr. Campbell, Mr. Bilbray, Mr. McCarthy, and Mr.
McNerney.
The committee will retire from the Chamber to escort the Speaker-
elect to the chair.
The Sergeant at Arms announced the Speaker-elect of the House of
Representatives of the 110th Congress, who was escorted to the chair by
the committee of escort.
[[Page 4]]
{time} 1400
Mr. BOEHNER. Madam Speaker, Leader Hoyer, my distinguished
colleagues, welcome to you all. I would particularly like to welcome
our new colleagues. It is an honor and a privilege to serve in this
great institution, and I would like to thank you in advance for the
sacrifices and contributions you will make to this body during your
time here.
As colleagues, we owe a huge debt to those who have served before us.
I would be remiss if I did not mention the enormous contributions of
one of my predecessors, Gerald Ford. Former President Ford served in
the House over 25 years, including 8 of those years as Republican
leader from 1965 to 1973. He served his Michigan constituents and the
American people with great distinction not just here in Congress, but
as Vice President and as President of the United States. The thoughts
and prayers of this House and those of a grateful Nation are with Betty
and the Ford family.
This is an historic day. In a few moments, I will have the high
privilege of handing the gavel of the House of Representatives to a
woman for the first time in American history.
For more than 200 years, the leaders of our government have been
democratically elected, and from their ranks our leaders have always
selected a man for the responsibility and honor as serving as Speaker
of the House. Always, that is, until today.
It is sometimes said the Founding Fathers would not recognize the
government that exists here in Washington today. It has grown in size
and scope far beyond anything they could ever have imagined, much less
endorsed or advocated for our future. But today marks an occasion that
I think the Founding Fathers would view approvingly. And my fellow
Americans, whether you are a Republican, a Democrat, or an Independent,
today is a cause for celebration.
Today also, of course, marks a change in the House majority. Twelve
years ago, some of us stood proudly in this Chamber as our former
colleague, Dick Gephardt from Missouri, handed the gavel to the
Republican Speaker, Newt Gingrich from Georgia. There were some great
achievements during those 12 years that followed, and we are fortunate
that the man who was the driving force behind many of those
achievements will continue to serve with us: The gentleman from
Illinois, Denny Hastert.
There were some great achievements during those 12 years that
followed; there were also some profound disappointments. If there is
one lesson that stands out from our party's time in the majority, it is
this: A congressional majority is simply a means to an end. The value
of the majority lies not in the chance to wield great power but in the
chance to use limited power to achieve great things.
We refer to the gavel that I am holding as the Speaker's gavel; but
like everything else in this Chamber, it really belongs to the American
people. It is on loan from the real owners. This is the people's House;
this is the people's Congress. Most people in America don't care who
controls it. What they want is a government that is limited, honest,
accountable, and responsive to their needs; and the moment a majority
forgets this lesson, it begins writing itself a ticket to minority
status.
The 110th Congress will write the next chapter in American history,
but the American people will dictate it.
Today, the Democrat Party assumes the challenge and opportunity of
majority power in the people's House. Republicans will hold the
incoming majority accountable for its promises and its actions, but we
also want to work with the incoming majority for the good of our Nation
that we were all elected to serve.
Fundamentally, democracy is a battle of ideas. The battle of ideas, I
believe, is healthy and is important for our Nation. But it is also a
battle that can take place respectfully. Republicans and Democrats can
disagree without being disagreeable to each other. Sometimes what
people call partisanship is really a deep disagreement over a means to
a shared goal, and we should welcome that conversation, encourage it,
enjoy it, and be nice about it.
It is now my privilege to present the gavel of the United States
House of Representatives to the first woman Speaker in our history, the
gentlewoman from California, Nancy Pelosi.
Ms. PELOSI. Thank you, Leader Boehner. Thank you, my colleagues. Mr.
Speaker. Mr. Speakers.
I accept this gavel in the spirit of partnership, not partisanship,
and I look forward to working with you, Mr. Boehner, and the
Republicans in the Congress for the good of the American people.
After giving this gavel away in the last two Congresses, I am glad
someone else has the honor today.
In this House, we may be different parties, but we serve one country,
and our pride and our prayers are united behind our men and women in
uniform. They are working together to protect the American people; and
in this Congress, we must work together to build a future worthy of
their sacrifice.
In this hour, we need and pray for the character, courage, and
civility of a former Member of this House, President Ford. He healed
the country when it needed healing. This is another time, another war,
and another trial of American will, imagination, and spirit. Let us
honor his memory not just in eulogy, but in dialogue and trust across
the aisle.
I want to join Leader Boehner in expressing our condolences and our
appreciation to Mrs. Ford and to the entire Ford family for their
decades of leadership and service to our country.
With today's convening of the 110th Congress, we begin anew. I
congratulate all Members of Congress on your election. I especially
want to congratulate our new Members of Congress. Let's hear it for our
new Members.
The genius of our Founders was that every 2 years, new Members would
bring to this House their spirit of renewal and hope for the American
people. This Congress is reinvigorated, new Members, by your optimism
and your idealism and your commitment to our country. Let us
acknowledge your families whose support have made your leadership
possible today.
Each of us brings to this Congress our shared values, our commitment
to the Constitution, and our personal experience. My path to Congress
and to the speakership began in Baltimore where my father was the
mayor. I was raised in a large family that was devoutly Catholic,
deeply patriotic, very proud of our Italian-American heritage, and
staunchly Democratic. My parents taught us that public service was a
noble calling, and that we had a responsibility to help those in need.
{time} 1415
My parents worked on the side of the angels, and now they are with
them.
But I am so happy that my brother, Tommy D'Alesandro, who was also a
mayor of Baltimore, is here leading the D'Alesandro family from
Baltimore today. He is sitting right up there with Tony Bennett.
Forty-three years ago, Paul Pelosi and I were married. We raised our
five children in San Francisco where Paul was born and raised. I want
to thank Paul and our five children, Nancy Corrine, Christine,
Jacqueline, Paul, Jr., and Alexandra, and our magnificent
grandchildren, for their love, for their support, and the confidence
they gave me to go from the kitchen to the Congress.
And I thank my constituents in San Francisco and to the State of
California for the privilege of representing them in Congress. St.
Francis of Assisi is our city's patron saint, and his prayer of St.
Francis is our city's anthem: Lord, make me a channel of thy peace;
where there is darkness may we bring light, where there is hatred may
we bring love, and where there is despair, may we bring hope.
Hope, that is what America is about. And it is in that spirit that I
serve in the Congress of the United States.
And today, I thank my colleagues. By electing me Speaker, you have
brought us closer to the ideal of equality that is America's heritage
and America's hope.
This is a historic moment, and I thank the leader for acknowledging
it.
[[Page 5]]
Thank you, Mr. Boehner. It is a historic moment for the Congress, and
it is a historic moment for the women of America.
It is a moment for which we have waited for over 200 years. Never
losing faith, we waited through the many years of struggle to achieve
our rights. But women were not just waiting; women were working. Never
losing faith, we worked to redeem the promise of America that all men
and women are created equal. For our daughters and our granddaughters,
today we have broken the marble ceiling. For our daughters and our
granddaughters, the sky is the limit. Anything is possible for them.
The election of 2006 was a call to change, not merely to change the
control of Congress, but for a new direction for our country. Nowhere
were the American people more clear about the need for a new direction
than in the war in Iraq.
The American people rejected an open-ended obligation to a war
without end. Shortly, President Bush will address the Nation on the
subject of Iraq. It is the responsibility of the President to
articulate a new plan for Iraq that makes it clear to the Iraqis that
they must defend their own streets and their own security, a plan that
promotes stability in the region and a plan that allows us to
responsibly redeploy our troops.
Let us work together to be the Congress that rebuilds our military to
meet the national security challenges of the 21st century.
Let us be the Congress that strongly honors our responsibility to
protect the American people from terrorism.
Let us be the Congress that never forgets our commitment to our
veterans and our first responders, always honoring them as the heroes
that they are.
The American people also spoke clearly for a new direction here at
home. They desire a new vision, a new America built on the values that
have made our country great.
Our Founders envisioned a new America driven by optimism,
opportunity, and courage. So confident were they in the America that
they were advancing that they put on the seal, the great seal of the
United States: ``Novus ordo seclorum,'' a new order for the centuries.
Centuries; they spoke of the centuries. They envisioned America as a
just and good place, as a fair and efficient society, as a source of
hope and opportunity for all.
This vision has sustained us for over 200 years, and it accounts for
what is best in our great Nation: liberty, opportunity, and justice.
Now it is our responsibility to carry forth that vision of a new
America into the 21st century. A new America that seizes the future and
forges 21st-century solutions through discovery, creativity, and
innovation, sustaining our economic leadership and ensuring our
national security. A new America with a vibrant and strengthened middle
class for whom college is affordable, health care is accessible, and
retirement reliable. A new America that declares our energy
independence, promotes domestic sources of renewable energy, and
combats climate change. A new America that is strong, secure, and a
respected leader among the community of nations.
And the American people told us they expected us to work together for
fiscal responsibility, with the highest ethical standards and with
civility and bipartisanship.
After years of historic deficits, this 110th Congress will commit
itself to a higher standard: pay-as-you-go, no new deficit spending.
Our new America will provide unlimited opportunity for future
generations, not burden them with mountains of debt.
In order to achieve our new America for the 21st century, we must
return this House to the American people. So our first order of
business is passing the toughest congressional ethics reform in
history. This new Congress doesn't have 2 years or 200 days. Let us
join together in the first 100 hours to make this Congress the most
honest and open Congress in history. 100 hours.
This openness requires respect for every voice in the Congress. As
Thomas Jefferson said, ``Every difference of opinion is not a
difference of principle.'' My colleagues elected me to be Speaker of
the House, the entire House. Respectful of the vision of our Founders,
the expectation of our people, and the great challenges that we face,
we have an obligation to reach beyond partisanship to work for all
Americans.
Let us stand together to move our country forward, seeking common
ground for the common good. We have made history; now let us make
progress for the American people.
May God bless our work, and may God bless America.
{time} 1430
Before we move forward, because there are so many children here and
so many of them asked me if they could touch the gavel, I wanted to
invite as many of them who wanted to come forward to come join me up
here. I know my own grandchildren will.
Let's hear it for the children. We're here for the children. For
these children, our children, and for all of America's children, the
House will come to order.
I am now ready to take the oath of office from the Dean of the
Congress of the United States, Mr. Dingell. In acknowledging him, I
also want to acknowledge Speaker Foley who has been with us as well.
Mr. DINGELL then administered the oath of office to Ms. Pelosi of
California, as follows:
Do you solemnly swear that you will support and defend the
Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and
domestic; that you will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;
that you take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or
purpose of evasion; and that you will well and faithfully discharge the
duties of the office on which you are about to enter, so help you God.
(Applause, the Members rising.)
Mr. DINGELL. Congratulations, Madam Speaker.
____________________
SWEARING IN OF MEMBERS
The SPEAKER. According to precedent, the Chair will swear in the
Members-elect en masse.
Parliamentary Inquiry
Mr. HOLT. I have a parliamentary inquiry, Madam Speaker.
The SPEAKER. The gentleman may state his inquiry.
Mr. HOLT. In light of the fact that there are nonpartisan and
partisan lawsuits under way with regard to Florida's 13th Congressional
District and that the votes of 18,000 voters were not recorded on the
paperless electronic voting machines in an election decided by only 369
votes, may I ask for the record whether a notice of contest has been
filed with the Clerk on behalf of Christine Jennings pursuant to law
and what effect, if any, today's proceedings have on the pending
contests?
The SPEAKER. The Chair is advised by the Clerk that a notice of
contest pursuant to statute, section 382 of title 2, United States
Code, has been filed with the Clerk. Under section 5 of article I of
the Constitution and the statute, the House remains the judge of the
elections of its Members. The seating of this Member-elect is entirely
without prejudice to the contest over the final right to that seat that
is pending under the statute and will be reviewed in the ordinary
course in the Committee on House Administration.
Mr. HOLT. I thank the Speaker.
Parliamentary Inquiry
Mr. PUTNAM. Parliamentary inquiry, Madam Speaker.
The SPEAKER. The gentleman may state his inquiry.
Mr. PUTNAM. Am I correct, Madam Speaker, that the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Buchanan) has been certified by the Secretary of State as
duly elected from the 13th District of Florida?
The SPEAKER. The gentleman is correct.
Mr. PUTNAM. I thank the Speaker.
The SPEAKER. If the Members-elect will rise, the Chair will now
administer the oath of office.
The Members-elect and Delegates-elect and the Resident Commissioner-
elect rose, and the Speaker administered the oath of office to them as
follows:
[[Page 6]]
Do you solemnly swear or affirm that you will support and defend the
Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and
domestic; that you will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;
that you take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or
purpose of evasion; and that you will well and faithfully discharge the
duties of the office on which you are about to enter, so help you God.
The SPEAKER. Congratulations. You are now Members of the 110th
Congress.
____________________
MAJORITY LEADER
Mr. EMANUEL. Madam Speaker, as chairman of the Democratic Caucus, I
have been directed to report to the House that the Democratic Members
have selected as majority leader the gentleman from Maryland, the
Honorable Steny H. Hoyer.
____________________
MINORITY LEADER
Mr. PUTNAM. Madam Speaker, as chairman of the Republican Conference,
I am directed by that conference to notify the House officially that
the Republican Members have selected as minority leader the gentleman
from Ohio, the Honorable John A. Boehner.
____________________
MAJORITY WHIP
Mr. EMANUEL. Madam Speaker, as chairman of the Democratic Caucus, I
have been directed to report to the House that the Democratic Members
have selected as majority whip the gentleman from South Carolina, the
Honorable James E. Clyburn.
____________________
MINORITY WHIP
Mr. PUTNAM. Madam Speaker, as chairman of the Republican conference,
I am directed by that conference to notify the House officially that
the Republican Members have selected as minority whip the gentleman
from Missouri, the Honorable Roy Blunt.
____________________
ELECTION OF CLERK OF THE HOUSE, SERGEANT AT ARMS, CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE
OFFICER AND CHAPLAIN
Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Madam Speaker, I offer a privileged
resolution (H. Res. 1) and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 1
Resolved, That Karen L. Haas of the State of Maryland, be,
and is hereby, chosen Clerk of the House of Representatives;
That Wilson S. Livingood of the Commonwealth of Virginia
be, and is hereby, chosen Sergeant at Arms of the House of
Representatives;
That James M. Eagen, III, of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania be, and is hereby, chosen Chief Administrative
Officer of the House of Representatives; and
That Father Daniel P. Coughlin of the State of Illinois,
be, and is hereby, chosen Chaplain of the House of
Representatives.
Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman
from Florida (Mr. Putnam) for the purpose of offering an amendment.
Mr. PUTNAM. Madam Speaker, I have an amendment to the resolution, but
before offering the amendment, I request that there be a division of
the question on the resolution so that we may have a separate vote on
the Chaplain.
The SPEAKER. The question will be divided.
The question is on agreeing to that portion of the resolution
providing for the election of the Chaplain.
That portion of the resolution was agreed to.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Putnam
Mr. PUTNAM. Madam Speaker, I offer an amendment to the remainder of
the resolution.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Putnam:
Strike all after the resolved clause and insert:
That Paula Nowakowski of the State of Michigan be, and is
hereby, chosen Clerk of the House of Representatives;
That Seth O. Webb of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts be,
and is hereby, chosen Sergeant at Arms of the House of
Representatives; and
That Brian Gaston of the State of Ohio be, and is hereby,
chosen Chief Administrative Officer of the House of
Representatives.
The SPEAKER. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Putnam).
The amendment was rejected.
The SPEAKER. The question is on the remainder of the resolution
offered by the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson).
The remainder of the resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
The SPEAKER. The Chair will now swear in the officers of the House.
The officers presented themselves in the well of the House and took
the oath of office as follows:
Do you solemnly swear or affirm that you will support and defend the
Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and
domestic; that you will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;
that you take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or
purpose of evasion; and that you will well and faithfully discharge the
duties of the office on which you are about to enter, so help you God.
The SPEAKER. Congratulations.
____________________
{time} 1445
NOTIFICATION TO THE SENATE
Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I offer a privileged resolution (H. Res. 2)
and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 2
Resolved, That the Senate be informed that a quorum of the
House of Representatives has assembled; that Nancy Pelosi, a
Representative from the State of California, has been elected
Speaker; and Karen L. Haas, a citizen of the State of
Maryland, has been elected Clerk of the House of
Representatives of the One Hundred Tenth Congress.
The resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
COMMITTEE TO NOTIFY PRESIDENT
Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I offer a privileged resolution (H. Res. 3)
and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 3
Resolved, That a committee of two Members be appointed by
the Speaker on the part of the House of Representatives to
join with a committee on the part of the Senate to notify the
President of the United States that a quorum of each House
has assembled and Congress is ready to receive any
communication that he may be pleased to make.
The resolution was agreed to.
A motion to consider was laid on the table.
____________________
APPOINTMENT AS MEMBERS OF COMMITTEE TO NOTIFY THE PRESIDENT, PURSUANT
TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 3
The SPEAKER. The Chair appoints as members of the committee on the
part of the House to join a committee on the part of the Senate to
notify the President of the United States that a quorum of each House
has been assembled, and that Congress is ready to receive any
communication that he may be pleased to make:
The gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), and
The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner).
____________________
AUTHORIZING THE CLERK TO INFORM THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF
THE ELECTION OF THE SPEAKER AND THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES
Mr. DINGELL. Madam Speaker, I offer a privileged resolution (H. Res.
4) and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 4
Resolved, That the Clerk be instructed to inform the
President of the United States
[[Page 7]]
that the House of Representatives has elected Nancy Pelosi, a
Representative from the State of California, Speaker; and
Karen L. Haas, a citizen of the State of Maryland, Clerk of
the House of Representatives of the One Hundred Tenth
Congress.
The resolution was agreed to.
The motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
RULES OF THE HOUSE
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged resolution (H. Res.
5) and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 5
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it
shall be in order to consider in the House the resolution (H.
Res. 6) adopting the Rules of the House of Representatives
for the One Hundred Tenth Congress. The resolution shall be
considered as read. The previous question shall be considered
as ordered on the resolution to its adoption without
intervening motion or demand for division of the question
except as specified in sections 2 through 4 of this
resolution.
Sec. 2. The question of adopting the resolution shall be
divided among five parts, to wit: each of its five titles.
The portion of the divided question comprising title I shall
be debatable for 30 minutes, equally divided and controlled
by the majority leader and the minority leader or their
designees. The portion of the divided question comprising
title II shall be debatable for 60 minutes, equally divided
and controlled by the majority leader and the minority leader
or their designees. The portion of the divided question
comprising title III shall be debatable for 60 minutes,
equally divided and controlled by the majority leader and the
minority leader or their designees. The portion of the
divided question comprising title IV shall be debatable for
60 minutes, equally divided and controlled by the majority
leader and the minority leader or their designees. The
portion of the divided question comprising title V shall be
debatable for 10 minutes, equally divided and controlled by
the majority leader and the minority leader or their
designees. Each portion of the divided question shall be
disposed of in the order stated.
Sec. 3. Pending the question of adopting the final portion
of the divided question, it shall be in order to move that
the House commit the resolution to a select committee with or
without instructions. The previous question shall be
considered as ordered on the motion to commit to its adoption
without intervening motion.
Sec. 4. During consideration of House Resolution 6 pursuant
to this resolution, notwithstanding the operation of the
previous question, the Chair may postpone further
consideration of the resolution to a time designated by the
Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hoyer). The gentlewoman from New York
(Ms. Slaughter) is recognized for 1 hour.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, for the purposes of debate only, I yield
the customary 30 minutes to the minority leader or his designee,
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose
of debate only.
The resolution that I am calling up on this historic day, H. Res. 5,
provides for the consideration of a rules package, H. Res. 6, that we
hope will begin to return this Chamber to its rightful place as the
home of democracy and deliberation in our great Nation.
The resolution we are now debating will allow the House to consider
and vote on the Democratic rules package in five separate parts. The
first title contains the rules package our Republican colleagues
adopted in the 109th Congress, while the second through fifth titles
contain amendments that will begin a reformation of this body that is
long overdue.
I also include for the Record at this time a detailed summary of the
changes H. Res. 6 will make to the standing House rules of the 109th
Congress.
Summary of House Rules Package, Opening Day of the 110th Congress,
Prepared by the Rules Committee, Louise M. Slaughter, Chairwoman-
Designate
TITLE I--ADOPTION OF 109TH RULES PACKAGE
This title adopts the standing rules that were in effect in
the 109th Congress. The subsequent adoption of the amendments
contained in Titles II-V will then make certain changes to
these rules.
TITLE II--ETHICS REFORMS
ending the K street project
(Rule XXIII--Code of Official Conduct) Prohibits Members
from threatening official retaliation against private firms
that hire employees who do not share the Member's partisan
political affiliation.
lobbyist gift ban
(Rule XXV, cl. 5(a)) Prohibits Members and employees from
accepting gifts from a registered lobbyist, from an agent of
a foreign principal, or an entity that employs or retains
these lobbyists and agents. Under the current gift rule,
Members and employees may accept gifts valued less than $50
(and a total of $100 per calendar year) from these lobbyists
and agents. The current gift ban exemptions in cl. 5(a)(3)
still apply.
(Rule XXV, cl. 5(a)) Adds language clarifying that for the
purposes of the gift rule, a ticket to a sporting event is
valued either at the face value of a ticket, or at the cost
of the ticket to the general public when (1) the ticket does
not have a face value or (2) when the face value of the
ticket does not reflect its economic value.
Lobbyist Travel Restrictions/One-Day Trips
(Rule XXV, cl. 5(b)) Prohibits Members and employees from
accepting travel reimbursements from a registered lobbyist,
from an agent of a foreign country, or from an entity that
employs or retains these lobbyists and agents. (Current rules
already prohibit lobbyists and agents of foreign principals
from reimbursing travel).
A new subsection to this rule clarifies that colleges and
universities are not subject to this prohibition. Another
subsection allows entities that employ lobbyists to reimburse
Member and employee travel to one-day events (e.g.
conventions, meetings). In general, travel to a one-day event
includes an overnight stay, although the Ethics Committee may
allow two-night stays in certain cases. These new
restrictions take effect on March 1, 2007.
(Rule XXV, new cl. 5(c)) Adds new language stating that
except in the case of trips sponsored by colleges and
universities, lobbyists may only play a de minimis role in
Member travel to one-day events that can be reimbursed by
entities that employ lobbyists.
new travel authorization and public disclosure requirements
(Rule XXV, new cl. 5(d)) Adds language stating that prior
to accepting reimbursed travel, Members and employees will be
required to obtain a certification from the entity paying for
the trip declaring that, except as permitted for universities
and one-day travel, lobbyists did not plan, organize,
request, arrange, or finance the travel. Members and
employees will be required to submit this certification to
the Ethics Committee and receive approval from the Ethics
Committee before taking the trip. These new requirements take
effect on March 1, 2007.
In connection with this new prior authorization
requirement, this new rule requires Members and employees to
submit their certifications, advance authorizations, and
other travel disclosure materials to the Clerk of the House
within 15 days after the travel is completed. The Clerk of
the House must make this information available to the public
as soon as possible. (Current rules allow 30 days for the
submission of travel disclosures).
(Rule XXV, new cl. 5(i)) Requires the Ethics Committee to
develop new standards for what constitutes a reasonable
expense by a private group for Member travel. The Ethics
Committee must also develop a new standard for determining
that the travel has a valid connection to Members' official
duties. In addition, it requires the Ethics Committee to
develop a process for the submission and approval of the
prior authorization requirements created in new cl. 5(d).
corporate jet ban
(Rule XXIII--Code of Official Conduct) Prohibits Members
from using official, personal, or campaign funds to pay for
the use of privately owned airplanes. (Members will still be
able to charter commercially available airplanes.)
Ethics Training
(Rule XI, cl. 3) Requires the Ethics Committee to offer
annual ethics training to Members and appropriate employees.
New employees must receive this training within 60 days of
beginning work in the House and other employees must certify
they take the course each year.
Committee Name Changes
(Rule X, cl. 1) Changes the names of the following House
committees: 1) the Committee on Education and the Workforce
becomes the ``Committee on Education and Labor,'' 2) the
Committee on International Relations becomes the ``Committee
on Foreign Affairs,'' 3) the Committee on Resources becomes
the ``Committee on Natural Resources,'' 4) the Committee on
Government Reform becomes the ``Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform,'' and 5) the Committee on Science becomes
the ``Committee on Science and Technology.''
TITLE III--CIVILITY
Holding Votes Open
(Rule XX, cl. 2) Prohibits the Speaker from holding votes
open for longer than the scheduled time for the sole purpose
of changing the outcome of the vote.
Conference Procedure
(Rule XXII, new cl. 12) Requires House conferees to insist
that conference committees
[[Page 8]]
operate in an open and fair manner and that House conferees
sign the final conference papers at one time and in one
place.
(Rule XXII, new cl. 13) Prohibits the consideration of a
conference report that has been altered after the time it was
signed by conferees.
TITLE IV--FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY
Fiscal Responsibility
(Rule XXI, new cl. 7) Prohibits the House from considering
budget resolutions or amendments to budget resolutions that
contain reconciliation instructions increasing the budget
deficit.
(Rule XXI, new cl. 8) Applies Budget Act rules against
bills that have not been reported by committees.
(Rule XXI, new cl. 10) Prohibits the consideration of any
legislation proposing direct spending or revenue changes that
would increase the budget deficit within a five-year or a
ten-year time frame (``Pay-as-You-Go'' point of order).
Earmark Reform
(Rule XXI, new cl. 9) Requires committees of jurisdiction
and conference committees to publish lists of the earmarks,
limited tax benefits, and limited tariff benefits contained
in all reported bills, unreported bills, manager's
amendments, and conference reports that come to the House
floor. These lists will be electronically available to the
public either through committee prints or printing in the
Congressional Record. In the case of a reported bill, the
single list contemplated by the rule may cross-reference
other parts of the report. If a measure does not contain any
earmarks, committees must publish a statement to this effect.
A Member may make a point of order (similar to the unfunded
mandates point of order) against the consideration of any
special rule that waives this requirement.
This new clause defines an earmark as any Member-requested
project that is targeted to a specific place and falls
outside a formula-driven or competitive award process.
Limited tax and tariff benefits are revenue provisions that
would benefit 10 or fewer persons.
(Rule XXIII--Code of Official Conduct) Prohibits trading
earmarks for votes and requires Members to disclose their
earmark requests and certify that they and their spouses have
no personal financial interest in the request.
TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS
(Rule X, cl. 4) Gives the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform authority to adopt a rule allowing
Committee Members and staff to conduct depositions in the
course of Committee investigations.
(Rule XIII, cl. 3) Shields Rules Committee reports from a
point of order if they are filed without a complete list of
record votes taken during the consideration of a special
rule. This provision allows the Rules Committee to publish
recorded votes taken during Committee hearings in committee
reports and/or through other means such as the Internet.
Makes a number of technical changes to the standing House
rules.
Allows for the consideration of several pieces of
legislation that are part of the ``First 100 Hours'' agenda
if special rules for those provisions are not separately
reported.
Continues the budget ``deeming'' resolution from the 2nd
Session of the 109th Congress until such time as a conference
report establishing a budget for the fiscal year 2008 is
adopted.
Renews the standing order approved during the 109th
Congress that prohibits registered lobbyists from using the
Members' exercise facilities.
Mr. Speaker, I consider it to be a great honor to have a chance to
address our House on the first day of the 110th Congress. That is what
serving as a Representative in this body is, an honor.
There are only 435 Members of Congress chosen from a population of
over 300 million. Our neighbors send us here to represent their
interests and defend their needs in Washington. What they give us is
their trust and the precious opportunity to improve the lives of
millions here in America, and in many cases around the world. I can't
think why anyone would want to squander that opportunity, Mr. Speaker;
and yet this body's previous leadership seemed too often to do just
that.
It should come as no surprise that just a few short weeks ago a
national poll found that only 11 percent of American voters gave the
outgoing Congress either a good or an excellent review. What was worse,
fully 74 percent thought that most of us here are more focused on
advancing our careers than we are on helping our fellow citizens.
Mr. Speaker, the history of the last several years has borne these
opinions out. On the first day of the 109th Congress, we debated a new
rules package, just as we are doing today. My fellow Democrats and I
spoke out against that package from the beginning because we saw what
it represented, a retreat from ethical conduct and an abandonment of
our real responsibilities. It rendered the Ethics Committee totally
powerless to meaningfully enforce the ethical standards of the House.
While its most egregious elements were abandoned, it did its job,
helping to pave the way to a Congress where unethical conduct would
soon find a new home.
By the time Democratic leaders from both the House and Senate joined
me to unveil our Honest Leadership and Open Government Act 1 year ago,
a great deal of damage had already been done. We had already seen a
Medicare bill that sold out America's seniors to the bottom lines of
the drug companies. We had seen an energy bill that did nothing to make
our Nation's energy supply more stable, but that made the balance books
of billion-dollar corporations solid as a rock, even though the CEOs of
some of those companies have admitted they did not want those tax cuts.
We had seen our homeland defenses imperiled and a war effort
undermined by huge contracts given not to the best and the brightest,
but to the most well-connected. Real, meaningful oversight of those
contracts never seemed to make it to the agenda. In one of the most
embarrassing series of revelations in our Nation's history, we had seen
top legislators bought and sold for their allegiance, traded for gifts,
trips, and parties, all worth so much less than the faith the American
people had freely given to them and which they had, by the end, lost.
But as I said at the time, the lobbyists who gave those gifts and
paid for those trips and hosted those parties, those lobbyists could
only knock on the doors of Congress. Members of Congress, the ones
inside, were the ones who let them in.
The culture of the last Congress came to be defined by a phrase now
common to America throughout the country: it was a ``culture of
corruption.'' Two months ago, the American people decided they had paid
nearly enough for that kind of leadership. They had sacrificed enough
peace of mind, lost enough hope, had their well-being imperiled far too
many times. They stated loud and clear that they were ready for a new
culture to take hold in Washington, a culture of commitment.
That is what my fellow Democrats and I are pledging to bring to this
body today, a commitment to the citizens who elected us, a commitment
to their needs, a commitment to their security, and a commitment to
their future. It may seem like a tall order, but we are already well on
the way. We have a new set of leaders here, Democrats who understand
the value of trust that has been placed in them.
Together we are going to usher in nothing less than a new way of
doing business in the House. While the necessary cultural shift is
already under way, a new legislative framework is needed as well. We
need rules in the House that will keep the body focused on the well-
being of the American people, in other words, keep us focused on our
job; and that is the framework that we begin to lay out today.
The political process by which bills are written and voted on often
seems arcane. It certainly receives little of the focus given to so
much else that goes on in Washington. Yet it is at the very heart of
what we do here. A broken political process undermines the Democratic
principles the House was built on, and it serves as a gateway to a
corrupted Congress.
By contrast, a responsible process acts as a powerful check against
the abuses and misuses of power so common in recent years. In so many
ways our Founding Fathers were visionaries. The rules that Thomas
Jefferson first wrote down two centuries ago provide for order and
discipline in the House. They provide for transparency and
accountability. If they are followed, corruption will be exposed before
it has a chance to take root.
Democrats are going to follow the long-established rules of the
House, instead of treating them as impediments to be avoided. We are
going to allow Members to read bills before voting on them and prevent
them from being altered at the last minute.
[[Page 9]]
We are not going to hold open votes for hours on end while arms are
twisted and favors are traded. We are going to conduct business
whenever possible during normal hours, instead of in the dead of night.
We are going to be open about the schedule we keep. In short, we are
going to restore basic civility to this body, and never again will any
Member of the Congress have to fight to find out where the conference
to which he or she has been appointed is meeting.
But we are going to do more. While the rules package of the 109th
Congress effectively embraced corrupt practices, this package stamps
them out. Today and tomorrow we are introducing a series of critical
new rules, legislation that will help guarantee that the unethical
practices of the past will have no place in our future.
Gifts and lobbyist-sponsored travel are banned by this rules package.
They have been used to grant select groups of people unfettered access
to Members of Congress. They have no place in this new Congress. The
rules package will finally shed light on an earmarking process that has
greased the wheels of corrupt House machinery. It requires the full
disclosure of earmarks on all bills and conference reports before
Members are asked to vote on them.
If a Member is convinced that a project is worth a Federal earmark,
they should have no problem attaching their name to that funding if the
project is sound and they have nothing to hide. This package will make
real fiscal responsibility a fundamental principle of the House, not a
rhetorical one. It will prohibit the consideration of any legislation
that would increase budget deficits without offsets.
Democrats are joined by so many Republicans in believing that it is
immoral to pass on the question of debt to our children and
grandchildren.
{time} 1500
Enough is enough. No more deficit spending.
Mr. Speaker, and my friends on both sides of the aisle, I know I am
joined by my fellow Democrats as well as many Republicans when I say
that I want a Congress that America can be proud of again.
I am tired of having to tell my grandchildren and school children in
my district that what they have learned in school about the ideals and
practices of a democracy isn't true anymore, and what they have learned
about how a bill is passed no longer stands here.
It is long past time that this House started living up to those ideas
and practices; that they started putting honesty, and integrity,
transparency and accountability ahead of everything else.
We must rededicate the People's House to the needs of its citizens.
We must return the keys of the government and this democracy to the
citizens whom they belong.
This body was created to serve as the battleground of ideas, not of
checkbooks or back-room deals or deceptions. It was created to serve
the people of the United States.
Today, the men and women of America have given us a very special
gift. We have the ability to leave our mark on the future of our
Nation. It is the only gift Members of Congress should ask for, and one
we must cherish for the good of all. Let us begin.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to reaffirm the
jurisdiction of the Committee on Small Business as contained in House
Rule X, clause 1(p). The Committee's jurisdiction includes the Small
Business Administration and its programs, as well as small business
matters related to the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the Paperwork
Reduction Act. Its jurisdiction under House Rule X, clause 1(p) also
includes other programs and initiatives that address small businesses
outside of the confines of those Acts.
This reaffirmation of the jurisdiction of the Committee on Small
Business will enable the House to ensure that it is properly
considering the consequences of its actions related to small business.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise as the designee of the Republican
leader.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from
California (Mr. Dreier).
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, we have spent a great deal of time this
afternoon focusing on the fact that we have the first female Speaker of
the United States House of Representatives in our Nation's history. And
I think it is also very important for us to note today that we have the
first female Chair of the House Rules Committee in my good friend, Ms.
Slaughter, and I would like everyone to join in extending
congratulations to Ms. Slaughter.
Now, let me say, Mr. Speaker, that I look forward to working in a
bipartisan way in the spirit that was outlined by Speaker Pelosi, and
I, of course, will treat the new Chair of the Rules Committee with the
dignity that she deserves.
I will say, Mr. Speaker, that I do rise with mixed emotions today. I
was very proud to join with you as we came down the center aisle
escorting the new Speaker of the House, my fellow Californian. And I am
very pleased that we have the first woman, the first Californian, and
the first Italian American as Speaker of the House of Representatives.
I have mixed emotions because, while I am very, very proud of Speaker
Pelosi, and the new Rules Chair, Ms. Slaughter, and others who are
assuming leadership positions, I also am very disappointed.
I am disappointed as I look at this package that we are about to
consider, because I do join with you, Mr. Speaker pro tempore, the
distinguished majority leader, and Speaker Pelosi, as we have discussed
privately and publicly, in our quest, and I think Speaker Pelosi put it
extraordinarily well, focusing on the priorities that we have. We are,
first and foremost, Americans. We are here to do the people's business
and they sent a very strong message last November, and I believe we
have an opportunity to do just that.
I will say that I remember very well the opening days of the 104th
Congress, 12 years ago. I remember the very heady feeling that came
from knowing that, for the first time, at that juncture, in almost half
a century, we Republicans were in the majority of the House of
Representatives, and we were going to do all that we had promised the
American people.
We were that optimistic, quite frankly, because we didn't know any
better. None of us had ever served in the majority and we were
blissfully unaware of the pressures and problems associated with trying
to govern this institution.
During the 109th Congress, the Democratic Caucus, many of whom
actually served in the majority before 1995, made a lot of promises
about how they would run this place if they ever achieved the majority
again. Of course, they, unlike Republicans in 1994, had the experience
of having run this place, having served in the majority. And I have a
great deal of admiration for my colleagues, because they know exactly
what they are facing. Knowing that, knowing exactly what they would
face in the majority, they made a commitment to minority rights, should
they regain the majority.
And that, Mr. Speaker, is why I said I am disappointed. The
resolutions before us bear very little resemblance to the rhetoric on
this floor and on the campaign trail. The much ballyhooed commitment to
minority rights is virtually nonexistent in the measures before us
today. They undermine minority rights that were constantly guaranteed
when we were in the majority. The rights of the minority are
undermined. Their promises are for a delivery date at some later point,
if we agree to be cooperative, according to one Member on the other
side of the aisle. And we have, as an IOU now, a wink and a nod and a
gentle ``trust us.''
Mr. Speaker, trust is something that is in short supply in this
House, and the actions of the incoming majority are, based on the
package that has been brought before us early last evening, certainly
less than 24 hours before we are considering it here on the House
floor, are not doing a lot to bolster our reserves when it comes to the
issue of trust. Despite an oft repeated commitment to provide Members
with, as I said, at least 24 hours to review legislation before voting
on the floor,
[[Page 10]]
we received this package at 6:15 last night, 6:15 only after that
package was delivered to our friends up in the press gallery.
Now, Mr. Speaker, despite Speaker Pelosi's principle that we need to
return to regular order for legislation, including a full committee
process of hearings and markups and, I quote Ms. Pelosi here when she
said we need an ``open, full and fair debate consisting of a full
amendment process that grants the minority the right to offer its
alternatives, including a substitute.''
Now, we, in spite of that great directive that came forward, we have
a rules package that actually self-executes closed rules for bills that
haven't even been introduced, and won't even be going through the
committee process. The section of the package that includes those
closed rules is debatable for just 10 minutes. This is the polar
opposite, the polar opposite of how the Republicans opened the 104th
Congress, when our priorities were considered in regular order and
under an open amendment process.
Mr. Speaker, also providing a stark contrast is the fact that we put
in place, from day one, a guaranteed bite at the apple for the minority
in the form of a motion to recommit. We felt so strongly about the fact
that when we were in the minority we were denied that chance. So that
is why at the beginning of the 104th Congress we put into place that
guarantee for the minority.
But I must remind my Democratic colleagues on the Rules Committee
that, time and time again, they have made clear their view that the
motion to recommit is an insufficient opportunity to articulate their
alternative. That argument was propounded constantly as we were dealing
with public policy questions. So you can imagine how surprised I was
when the Speaker recently replied to a reporter's question about
Republican alternatives to the Democratic priorities by saying,
``They'll have a motion to recommit.''
Even worse than five closed rules, Mr. Speaker, is the rollback of
one of the most essential elements of transparency that Republicans put
into place back at the beginning of the 104th Congress; that is, the
right to know how a member of a committee votes on legislation.
Mr. Speaker, this rules package exempts the Committee on Rules from
the requirement to publish the votes of its members on its committee
reports, something required of every other committee except the Ethics
Committee.
Now, in my 12 years as a member of the Rules Committee majority, we
took more than 1,300 votes in committee, every single one of which was
accurately reported in the committee's report.
Mr. Speaker, at best, this is a solution in search of a problem. At
worst, it is an attempt to shield the Rules Committee from the public
scrutiny of its actions.
We were told by the distinguished Chair of the Rules Committee that
ethics reform and rules reform were not just election year issues for
Democrats. Now, Mr. Speaker, sadly, this document says something quite
different than that. Promises were made, and they are not being kept.
That is the thing that I find to be most troubling. We intend to
explain the many inconsistencies for the record and as the debate moves
forward.
At the same time, Mr. Speaker, we want to work with our democratic
colleagues. Even with this treatment of minority rights, we stand here
determined to work in a bipartisan way to confront the challenges that
we all know face this country. Unfortunately, this rules package shuts
us out from the start. It is my hope that the promises made will,
indeed, be kept. But, Mr. Speaker, this package does not inspire a
great deal of hope in that they in any way will.
And so, Mr. Speaker, I rise with a great deal of disappointment and a
great deal of concern about the first actions that we are taking here.
Mr. Speaker, with that I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield myself about 30
seconds, 45 perhaps, just to respond for a moment, to remind my friend
that what we are voting on is the Republican package of the last term.
If it was so bad, we thought it was pretty bad then as well, but we
will have time to debate all these things. We will have open debate.
And what we have said about fairness is what we are dedicated to do.
General Leave
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, before I yield to the next speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days in which
to revise and extend their remarks on H. Res. 5 and H. Res. 6.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Clyburn). Is there objection to the
request of the gentlewoman from New York?
There was no objection.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased, for the purpose of debate
only, to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, on this historic day, the sun is shining
brightly in Washington outside and today, finally it is shining inside
this great Capitol building.
Normally, a New Year's resolution is a list you write for yourself.
But the ethics package that we Democrats are now adopting was written
by the American people at the ballot box in November. This January
resolution is possible only because of the November revolution by
voters who were, quite frankly, revolted by what they saw going on here
in Washington.
Under Democratic leadership, ``Spring Cleaning'' is getting an early
start here in January. We ban lobbyists-sponsored junkets and gifts and
the use of corporate jets from jet-setting lobbyists like the tobacco
company that even took one Member of Congress on a special flight to
his criminal arraignment.
In Congress, an earmark too often is a secret means for a Member to
funnel Federal dollars to special projects. Some are worthwhile, some
are dubious.
When I talk about earmarks to my rancher friends down in Texas, they
have a different earmark in mind. It is the mark you put on an ear of
your cattle to identify them. By their very nature, earmarks are
public, designed to identify ownership. I think we need some of that
Texas thinking here in Washington. If earmarks can identify a steer, we
are now able, through this new package, to know who is ``steering''
earmarks of federal tax dollars to some unworthy cause.
Ethics reform, of course, is not an end in and of itself. The goal of
reform is to improve the substance of the work that we do here. It is
to ensure that the priorities in Washington are genuinely the
priorities of hard working families in San Marcos, Bastrop, Kyle, and
many other communities across our country.
Because fiscal security is national security, we are also working to
cut the ballooning federal deficit with pay-as-you-go budgeting;
barring new spending provisions or tax changes that would increase our
soaring national debt.
Our reforms seek to curb the cost of corruption. It is a cost that
has been borne in the pocketbooks of our seniors who pay too much for
drugs because of a drug bill that was designed by the pharmaceutical
manufacturers, instead of designed to help those who needed help most.
It is the cost of corruption that is reflected in no-bid contracts in
Iraq and in the aftermath of the Hurricane Katrina debacle. And it is
reflected in the price that the jobless, the homeless, and the hopeless
are paying for the corruption within this administration.
Mr. Speaker, accountability, so long lacking from this administration
and the House leadership begins today.
{time} 1515
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, at this time I am happy to yield 2 minutes
to my very distinguished colleague on the Rules Committee, Mr. Lincoln
Diaz-Balart from Florida.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I thank my dear friend, and, Mr.
Speaker, I was very pleased that my friend and dear chairman of the
Rules Committee, Ms. Slaughter, pointed out as she spoke, I heard her
[[Page 11]]
speak that most of the ethics package was precisely the one that we had
proposed last year. What is very disturbing, however, and really
disappointing, Mr. Speaker, are a number of the items that have been
included that Mr. Dreier referred to previously.
It is extremely disappointing to see that one of the great
advancements of this Congress over the last two centuries, which has
been to bring a transparency to our votes, because you know, Mr.
Speaker, it used to be even on the floor of the House votes would take
place that were not roll call votes, they were not noted for the record
and, thus, for the people; yet we moved forward and we changed that.
And also in committee, votes had to be recorded. That has been one of
the great advancements in the last two centuries in this Congress.
And to see in the Committee on Rules, that I love so much, where we
now in this rules package are faced with such a reversal of that
progress and that great advancement of openness and transparency on the
record, the requirement that the people will be able to see how the
members of that committee vote, that has been eliminated, is being
eliminated in this package, that is extremely disturbing. And everyone,
Mr. Speaker, who loves this Congress should be saddened by what our
friends on the other side of the aisle have included, specifically what
I have just mentioned, that great reversal of progress in the rules
package that has been brought forward today.
So in the hope that that will be remedied and that our friends on the
other side of the aisle will realize how sad that is, I rise today with
great disappointment.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, for the purposes of debate only, I yield
2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor), one of our
brilliant freshmen and a new member of the Rules Committee.
Ms. CASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to offer, along with my
distinguished fellow Floridian, and the new rules chairwoman, Ms.
Slaughter, an ethics champion in her own right, this legislation
extending the rules of the 109th Congress, with ethics reforms to
follow in the 110th Congress. These rules will serve as a baseline for
the rules of the 110th Congress, and then we shall add the needed
ethics reforms, fiscal responsibility reforms, and rules on civility.
After recent tumultuous events, we can all agree that our neighbors
back home expect the highest ethical standards from the Members of
Congress, the people's House. This rules package includes some of the
very good rules changes made in the 109th Congress, including the end
of proxy voting in committees and the emergency power granted to the
Speaker to recess the House and convene in another location in the case
of a terrorist incident. But our Democratic package goes further,
instituting ethics reforms that prohibit Members from accepting gifts
from registered lobbyists, restricting Members' travel on corporate
airplanes, and offering ethics training to Members and staff.
I come to the House from local government; and like many of my
reform-minded freshmen colleagues, I championed ethics reform on the
local level, particularly in the Tampa Bay area, where it was needed in
the inner workings of county government. Well, it is needed here in the
Halls of Congress now more than ever.
The new rules will include a fair and open process for the Congress:
no holding open votes to change the outcome and clear guidelines for
the operation of conference committees and final conference committee
reports. Provisions for more stringent fiscal responsibility and pay-
as-you-go budgeting requirements ultimately will aid our neighbors back
home in reducing their own debt load while the Federal Government
begins to do its part to ease the financial crunch so many of us feel
across the country.
The proposed transparency in the earmark process and the additional
requirement that Members certify that neither their spouses nor their
relatives will have any personal financial interest in an earmark
request will show and assure our neighbors back home that Congress is
indeed operating in a way that best serves the needs and interests of
every American.
I am humble and proud to be part of this new historic Congress and am
glad to stand in support of the ethics reform package led by Ms. Pelosi
for high ethical standards in government.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I want to first congratulate Ms. Castor and
certainly welcome her to the Rules Committee and look forward to
serving with her.
Parliamentary Inquiry
Mr. DREIER. I have a parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.
My parliamentary inquiry is, may I ask of the Chair exactly what it
is we are debating and considering at this point. The Chair of the
Rules Committee stood up and said, after I gave my opening remarks,
that we were in the midst of a debate on the last year's rules package.
I was wondering if the Chair might enlighten us as to exactly what it
is that we are considering.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Clyburn). Pending is House Resolution 5,
proposing a special order of business for consideration of House
Resolution 6, adopting the Rules of the House for the One Hundred Tenth
Congress.
Mr. DREIER. For the consideration of the rules package for the 110th
Congress, am I correct?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. That is correct.
Mr. DREIER. Thank you very much for that clarification, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, at this time I am very happy to yield 2 minutes to the
very distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price).
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding,
and I want to commend the ranking member of the Rules Committee and the
former chairman for his comments because I think they bring some truth
and veracity to this discussion.
I am truly pleased to join my colleagues here who are interested in
good government, responsive government, but accountable government. And
as a matter of principle, as a matter of principle we believe it is
imperative that elected officials be held accountable for what they say
and what they do.
Now, while on the campaign trail, Democrats made the promise over and
over again that they wanted to have the most open and fair government
in history. In fact, the new Speaker said herself, ``More than 2 years
ago, I first sent Speaker Hastert proposals to restore civility in
Congress. I reiterate my support for these proposals today. We must
restore bipartisanship to the administration of the House, reestablish
regular order for considering legislation, and ensure the rights of the
minority, whichever party is in the minority. The voice of every
American has the right to be heard.''
And she is right. But far from regular order is what we are dealing
with here. There are a couple of items I want to present. We have heard
that these issues to be dealt with over the next 100 hours of debate
have already been vetted, already been through committee. In fact, the
freshmen, who are at least 39-strong Democrats, have not had any
opportunity. So there is no regular order there.
We also note that in the rules package under Democrat control, the
Rules Committee would become anything but transparent, being that the
votes that are required or will take place in the Rules Committee will
not be available to the public. I do not think that is what the
American people voted on when they voted in November.
A minority bill of rights is what we will propose in our previous
question amendment motion, and it is that kind of common sense and that
kind of accountability and fairness that Americans expect and that we
are asking for. Hearings, amendments to bills, 24 hours' notice, it is
that kind of thing we need because it is that process that ensures that
the House will work for all Americans to decrease taxes and to make
certain our security is maintained in solving the health care
challenges that we have.
Mr. Speaker, it appears that promises made on the campaign trail are
going to be promises broken in the majority.
[[Page 12]]
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I am pleased
to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the gentlewoman's courtesy in permitting
me to speak on this.
I am pleased, Mr. Speaker, that we are acting quickly in this
Congress on the unfinished business from the last Congress. In short
order we will be dealing with things like implementing the 9/11
Commission recommendations, we will have a clean, up-or-down vote on
the minimum wage unchanged after 10 years, and we will be able to deal
with promoting stem cell research and cutting interest rates on student
loans. Again, this is getting past the unfinished business left over
from the last Congress.
I am pleased that today, unlike how we started the last Congress, we
are not beginning by watering down the ethics rules or making it more
difficult for the minority.
I believe very strongly in the commitment that our caucus has made.
Our leadership has articulated that we are not going to treat the
Republican minority the way that we were treated. I think it is going
to be very important, Mr. Speaker, that we deal with the spirit with
which these rules are enforced. And I am absolutely certain that you
will find that the people on the Democratic side of the aisle are going
to make sure that the spirit is enforced to make sure that voting
machines are not kept open for hours in the middle of the night; making
sure that our commitment to have functioning conference committees,
where Republicans will be invited to attend conference committees, know
when they are there, be able to sign off on them, and not have things
parachuted in in the middle of the night in back rooms that nobody had
seen; There will be no effort to have the notorious K Street Project
turn the business lobby into a partisan tool.
Most important, I am interested in our progress to maintain and
enhance civil discourse on this floor. I look forward to a bipartisan
effort on an ethics panel that would be independent enforcement and
that issue will be reported back to Congress by March 15. I am
interested in working on a bipartisan basis to establish this
independent mechanism for ethics oversight.
The rules we are adopting today and that we will be refining are an
important first step to realize the promise of the new Congress. Most
important will be the spirit. And I, for one, pledge myself to work
with Rules Committee members on both sides of the aisle to make sure
that that spirit is maintained.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, at this time I am very happy to yield 2
minutes to the very distinguished gentleman from Cherryville, North
Carolina (Mr. McHenry).
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from
California for that warm introduction.
Today was a historic day for the House of Representatives: A new
Speaker, a new majority, and, in their words, a new time in Washington.
To use the new Speaker's words, this is about respect for every voice,
to work for every American, to seek common ground for the common good.
Those are high words and high values that we should seek here in the
House of Representatives that all Americans desire in their government.
And as a key part of what the Democrats campaigned on in the 2006
election, one of the key tenets was open and honest bipartisan
governance. But their first act on this House floor is to push down the
throats of this institution a closed rule that closes off debate, that
disallows dissenting voices, that simply waves off that open, fair, and
honest process.
To that end, I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question.
And if we defeat the previous question, I will be able to offer this
minority bill of rights, the Pelosi minority bill of rights. To use the
words of the new Speaker, the minority bill of rights includes
guidelines for bipartisan administration of the House and for the
regular Democratic order for legislation. The principles are fair and
will provide for the full and open debate that the American people
expect and deserve. Now, those are not my words. Those are the words of
the new Speaker. Then-Minority Leader Pelosi wrote those words in June
of 2004.
Now, while the new Speaker and I may not agree on much in terms of
policy, tax policy, or the policy on national defense, I think we have
the same values when it comes to fair and open and honest legislative
debate. And to that end I sought to outline her principles and put them
into the minority bill of rights. So let us defeat the previous
question so that we can vote on this minority bill of rights, the
Pelosi bill of rights.
{time} 1530
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield 2
minutes to the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen).
Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 5, to provide for the rules
package of the 110th Congress. I am proud that the first act of this
new Congress is to pass long-overdue ethics and lobbying reform.
Today, we end the era of Jack Abramoff and Tom DeLay, when the levers
of government were used less to help American families and more to
reward monied special interests. Today, we take a major step to
restoring Americans' trust in the legislative branch of government.
We will ban gifts from lobbyists, trips funded by lobbyists, and the
use of company planes. We will shut down the K Street Project. We will
force Members of Congress to take responsibility for their earmarks.
And we will ban arm-twisting for votes.
The need for reform is obvious. The alliance between the previous
leadership and K Street lobbyists came at a disastrous cost for
democracy, decency, and the public interest. The best example is the
industry-written Medicare D prescription drug bill passed in the middle
of the night. The majority leadership held the vote open for 3 hours as
they twisted arms and levied threats. Thousands of Maine seniors can
see today that the program was designed to serve the insurance and
pharmaceutical interests more than the people on Medicare.
I am pleased that the ethics package includes reforms that
Congressmen David Obey, Barney Frank, David Price, and I introduced 1
year ago. I thank Chairwoman Slaughter and Speaker Pelosi for
incorporating our ideas, simple ideas, like ensuring that we all have
time to read bills before they are voted on.
H. Res. 6 will restore the people's voice to the people's House.
Every American family will benefit by legislation that is advanced in
an open and transparent manner, rather than written by lobbyists behind
closed doors.
I urge the adoption of this resolution and the entire Democratic
rules and ethics reform package.
Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, may I inquire of the Chair how much time
is remaining on both sides.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Eshoo). The gentleman from California
has 14\1/2\ minutes remaining and the gentlelady from New York has 11
minutes remaining.
Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, at this juncture I am very pleased to
yield 2 minutes to a very, very hardworking Member of the House, the
Chair of the Republican Study Committee, the gentleman from Dallas (Mr.
Hensarling).
Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California
for yielding.
Madam Speaker, I rise today, and, unfortunately, I have to oppose
this particular rules package.
I listened very carefully to our new Speaker when she spoke of
fairness, and yet I see that the minority is not being given the
opportunity to offer amendments to this particular package when it
comes to the floor. We are being asked to vote on things we don't even
know what they are about, something that, Madam Speaker, your party
complained of when you were in the minority.
But I specifically am disturbed by what I see in supposedly the
fiscal responsibility portion that this rule
[[Page 13]]
package would allow. I heard our new Speaker talk about how important
it was to bring PAYGO to the floor of the House; and I agree, it is a
great concept.
Unfortunately, what is being offered, where the minority doesn't have
an opportunity to amend, is really false advertising, because what we
have, Madam Speaker, is, number one, this concept called baseline
budgeting, where these programs are going to grow automatically in what
we call discretionary spending, and yet this PAYGO doesn't apply to
this. Anything that the majority writes into the budget resolution
again is exempted from PAYGO. All of the entitlement spending, a
majority of the spending, which could bankrupt our children and our
grandchildren, once again is exempt.
What is covered, Madam Speaker? It is hard to find. But anything that
is, then the majority has 5 to 10 years apparently to put off the
costs, and somehow we are supposed to be convinced in 5 to 10 years
they are actually going to pay for it.
Again, this is false advertising. This isn't PAYGO; this is TAXGO.
All this is is a subterfuge to make sure that hardworking American
families are denied the tax relief that the Republicans and President
Bush brought, the tax relief that created 6 million new jobs, that
created the highest rate of homeownership in the history of our
country, that helped deficits fall, that ensured that real wages came
up. That is why we need to oppose this rule, Madam Speaker.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield
3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Meehan).
Mr. MEEHAN. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlelady for yielding me
time.
Madam Speaker, this is a historic day in this House: the first woman
ever elected Speaker; the first woman, Louise Slaughter, to be chairman
of the powerful Rules Committee. In addition to that, Ms. Slaughter and
Speaker Pelosi have put together a package that is indeed a historic,
comprehensive ethics package that deserves the support of each and
every Member of this body.
In the last Congress, we saw egregious abuses of power by Members of
Congress and lobbyists. These abuses tarnished the image of this great
institution and caused Americans to lose faith with their government.
In the face of these scandals, America had its midterm election and the
American people decided decisively to put a new party in charge here in
the House of Representatives. They sent a message loud and clear that
it was time to clean up the Congress, and in fact exit polls showed
that nearly 92 percent of the voters were concerned with the ethical
cloud hanging over Washington.
What did they ask for? They asked for honest leadership and open
government, and this package presented today by Ms. Slaughter, Ms.
Pelosi and the leadership is the most significant, comprehensive ethics
reform that has ever been presented on the first day of an opening of
this Congress.
This is a rules package that cuts the ties to the old culture of
corruption and in its place creates a new culture of disclosure, of
accountability, and of oversight. Starting today, there will be no more
lobbyist-funded junkets or vacations; starting today, no more corporate
jets, where Members of Congress can be flown to their indictment
arraignment; starting today, no more lobbyist-paid gifts; beginning
today, no more K Street Projects. All of this is over with the passage
of this package.
I have heard the other side say they had no idea what this party was
going to come up with for a rules package. We have been talking for
quite some time about the efforts to reform this institution, to get
transparency in earmarks, to have an institution where lobbyists can't
fund vacations. Now if a Member wants to take a trip, it has to be
approved in advance by the Ethics Committee.
As a matter of fact, nearly every public interest group in America
that has been fighting for reform over the last decade has stepped up
to the plate to say this package is the most significant reform of
ethics rules that we have had in a generation.
So the time has come for Democrats and Republicans to join together
to pass this comprehensive ethics reform package, because the American
people demanded it in the last election, and Speaker Pelosi and the new
leadership in this House are delivering on that request.
Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, at this time I am happy to yield 2 minutes
to the very distinguished gentleman from Marietta, Georgia (Mr.
Gingrey), a hardworking former member of the Rules Committee.
Mr. GINGREY. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman, the former
chairman of the Rules Committee, my colleague from California, and also
congratulate the new chairman of the Rules Committee, our friend from
New York (Ms. Slaughter).
I just want to point out to the gentleman from Massachusetts, the
gentleman that just spoke, this ethics reform package, which we are not
opposed to in the totality of it, but many, if not most of these
provisions, Madam Speaker, were a part of H.R. 4975, the Republican
ethics reform package which we passed in this House in May of this past
year with only eight, count them, Madam Speaker, eight votes from the
other side. There was total opposition to everything that we wanted to
do in regard to ethics reform.
I will remind my colleagues in regard to the so-called K Street
Project, that very provision, that is, Members not being able to put
pressure on companies in regard to hiring practices, in regard to
granting of any legislative favors, was part of that package. But yet
our colleagues in the majority party now want to come forward and say
``the K Street Project.''
Now, where is the sense of fairness and fair play and bipartisanship
in sticking it in the eye of the new minority, when we tried to change
that very thing that they voted against?
I would say furthermore in regard to this overall package of rules,
what is this business about not holding a vote open for the sole
purpose of changing a vote? If that is in fact a good policy, not being
able to do that, and I tend to agree with the new majority that we
shouldn't be able to break people's arms with favors for earmarks or
special committee assignments which may not be appropriate, then why
use the word ``sole?'' Putting in ``sole purpose'' would allow them or
anybody to lock a Member in the bathroom and say we are holding the
vote open because they are stuck in traffic. So I would suggest let's
eliminate ``sole'' and say for the purpose of pressuring a Member to
change their vote against their will.
Last and not least, and maybe the chairman of the Rules Committee,
Ms. Slaughter, can address this point of this unbelievable idea that
members of the Rules Committee, the new members, maybe to protect the
freshman members, are not allowed to have a roll call vote in the light
of day.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield
2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Lampson), and we welcome you
home.
Mr. LAMPSON. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlelady for yielding time.
I am awfully proud to be standing here again in the midst of this
distinguished body representing the people of the 22nd Congressional
District of Texas.
A wave of change rushed across America since I left office, a wave
that carried me back here to Washington, D.C., and I couldn't be
prouder to vote today on the very first day of the 110th Congress to
reform the rules and code of ethics by which this body operates; rules
that were abused and tore Texas and this country apart, and a code of
ethics that was disregarded and caused the American people to lose
confidence in us, their representatives. We can't afford to wait
another day to restore the trust and hope to those who sent us here to
represent them.
It is not about moving to the left or to the right, but about moving
this country forward. And now is the time to start working together by
reaching across the aisle that we allow to divide us. It is time to
conduct the people's business openly and honestly in the light of day.
[[Page 14]]
I urge all of you, my distinguished colleagues, to join together in
supporting these vital reforms. This is the first step toward restoring
pride in our democracy, and that means restoring fiscal responsibility.
Passing our massive debt on to our kids and grandkids is not a legacy
we want to leave. Those who elect us are our employers, and we must be
diligent in spending their hard-earned money which they entrust to us.
The number of earmarks alone increased nearly 400 percent and
spending doubled over the last decade. We must all make an effort,
Republicans and Democrats alike, to trim the fat from the budget. We
can once again have a balanced budget, fund important initiatives and
be diligent in our oversight of agencies of government, all without
raising taxes.
I am proud to cast one of my first votes in the 110th Congress in
favor of pay-as-you-go rules and aggressive reform of the earmark
process so that we can return to a government truly of, by, and for the
people.
I am honored to be back in this Chamber. I am proud that this
Congress is starting off on the right foot with the best interests of
every American on our minds, and I am proud to ask all of my colleagues
to support this significant package of rules, H. Res. 5 and 6.
Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, at this time I am happy to yield 2 minutes
to our very distinguished chief deputy whip, my good friend from
Richmond (Mr. Cantor).
Mr. CANTOR. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman.
Madam Speaker, first of all I would like to congratulate the
gentlelady from California on her election as Speaker and look forward
to serving with her.
I just ran into a reporter on the outside of the Chamber who asked me
about the tone of debate and what I thought the tone would be going
forward. I agree with Leader Boehner when he spoke in this Chamber just
a little bit earlier about the fact that we can debate, we can differ
in a nice way, and I think that is what the American people expect.
{time} 1545
But they also expect rigorous debate here on the floor of the House.
I am asking my colleagues to reject the previous question. Because if
we look at the message from this election, the American people spoke
out: They want change. They want us to change the way that Washington
does business. And in fact, a little less than 2 years ago, then
Minority Leader Pelosi saw fit to send a letter to the former Speaker
Hastert spelling out the way that she thought this House should run,
how we should change, a prescription to correct the so-called ills that
my friend from Massachusetts mentioned earlier of the 109th Congress.
So if we defeat the previous question, we in the House will be allowed
to bring up what has been called the minority bill of rights, and this
again was the recipe for change that then minority Leader Pelosi saw
fit that was the right prescription for the ills that affected this
institution or allegedly affected this institution.
So it just doesn't make sense for us to be here today and somehow in
spirit of bipartisanship, transparency, civility, to be going back on
that pledge to honor the rights of all Americans so that we can have an
open debate in this House. It doesn't make sense to follow the adage,
``Do as I say, not as I do.''
So I would urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question, allow
there to be light, allow there to be transparency, not just after we
pass the first 100 hours of this Congress.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 45 seconds.
I understand your pain, I understand the hurt, and I understand that
you are not really sure that we are going to be fair and honest. But if
you look back on the 40 years here before, and I remember on the Rules
Committee, that when a bill was coming up to rules, always the chairman
and the ranking member came together. They worked together on
everything. If it was an oversight committee, I recall that both the
chair and the ranking member signed the subpoenas. There was such a
series of cooperation we have never, as far as I know, dealt with
retribution or underhandedness or hatefulness.
We know we have an awful lot of work to do. We have got a country to
save; we have got a reputation to try to get back in the world; we have
got the worst deficit we have ever seen; and, we have got to do
something about a war. Let me pledge to you, we have no time for
vindication or revenge, and it would be so nice if all the Members in
this vote for a change would roll in the same direction.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DREIER. I yield myself such time as I may consume to respond that
I never used the words ``pain,'' I never said ``hurt.'' I said
``disappointment.'' I said disappointment, Madam Speaker, because I am
very disappointed.
I will tell you this: I am prepared at this moment to take my three
Republican colleagues and go right upstairs to the Rules Committee and
go to work at this moment so that we don't have closed rules in the
opening day rules package for consideration of measures that have not
gone through the committee process and have not had any opportunity to
even have our amendments denied in the Rules Committee.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. DREIER. I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. I simply want to say there is no point going up to
Rules. The Rules Committee has not been constituted yet. This is being
brought under privileged communication.
Mr. DREIER. Let me just say, we are prepared at this moment, Madam
Speaker, we will send a resolution right now so the Rules Committee can
begin meeting upstairs.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my friend from Nebraska (Mr.
Terry).
Mr. TERRY. Madam Speaker, I too am deeply disappointed today. I think
part of the message from the electorate was that they want us to work
together, that they want us to cooperate for the greater good. And,
yes, that people were, at least in Nebraska, very upset with the
examples of those who violated the public's trust.
We need to work together on an ethics plan. I am pleased that in this
rule there are ethics measures that, by the way, the Republicans helped
put together many months ago in reaction to the ethics violations we
have seen from some of our colleagues.
So, as the people want us to work together in a partnership and not
in partisanship, what we received was a partisan slap across the face.
It is the mismatch between words and actions of which we are speaking
today.
I have had a bill that was incorporated into the ethics package that
we passed last May that the Democrats almost en banc opposed because it
wasn't tough enough. The reality is that the package in today's rule,
which we had no participation in, is, in many ways, weaker. And one of
the examples is the fact that, as I worked on with our Speaker, that if
you have violated the rules of this House and the public trust and you
took money, you found $90,000 of cold hard cash or you took limousines
or whatever the violations were, that you shouldn't be able to leave in
the public disgust with the benefits of public service, i.e., a
pension. That was in the ethics package passed months ago but isn't in
this one. So this is a weaker package.
Now, I too wish I would have had the opportunity to take the bill
that I have introduced today and did last year and work with our
friends on the other side, but, in the partisan slap, have been denied
the ability to do so.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I will
yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McNerney), one of
the freshmen of which we are so proud.
Mr. McNERNEY. Madam Speaker, I am very honored to be part of the
historic 110th Congress.
It is entirely appropriate that the incoming Congress is making
ethics reform one of its first acts. This issue is personally important
to me and to all of Californians.
We need to provide Congress with a fresh start and improve the
strained relations that exist between voters and
[[Page 15]]
elected officials. Members of Congress should be held in the highest
regard by the people they represent, and the ethics changes will help
repair years of damage. We must reestablish positive relationships with
everyone we serve, and end this period of mistrust in our government.
Traveling throughout our State of California, I heard from many
people who simply want to believe and trust in their elected officials,
and today we are sending the message that we feel the same way.
I am confident also that this will be the first of very many steps
that will take back trust and civility in Congress, and I urge all of
my colleagues to vote for the ethics package.
Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, may I inquire of the Chair how much time
we have remaining?
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Eshoo). The gentleman from California
has 6 minutes; the gentlewoman from New York, 4\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I will yield an additional minute to the
gentleman from Cherryville, North Carolina who would like to be
recognized.
Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from California for
yielding, again, to restate what is very important about this coming
vote on the previous question.
If we defeat the previous question, we can then have an honest vote
on the Pelosi minority bill of rights package. It is a very important
thing for us to have an open, bipartisanship debate on opening day of
this new Congress, for the new majority to be able to say clearly to
the American people that their rhetoric is becoming reality on the
opening day of this Congress. For if they do not do that and they do
ram down the throats of all Members here on this floor this previous
question, then all people will be locked out from offering debates on
this House floor; and, from the Republican side, 140 million Americans
who voted for our side of the aisle, their voices will be stifled in
this process.
So, Madam Speaker, I encourage all Members, both Republicans and
Democrats to come together, defeat this previous vote, and then we can
move on to an open, fair debate on the minority bill of rights, the
Pelosi minority bill of rights. That is a fair thing to do.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, for the purposes of debate only, I am
pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina, the
chairman of the Budget Committee, Mr. Spratt.
Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, the package before us will be modified
tomorrow to include provisions that reinstate a practice that was
followed throughout the 1990s in the budget process called pay-as-you-
go.
Pay-as-you-go was first instituted in 1991 as part of the Budget
Enforcement Act when President Bush, the first President Bush, was the
President of this country. Pay-as-you-go simply provides that if you
want to cut taxes when you have a deficit, you can't make the deficit
worse; you have got to offset those tax cuts either with entitlement
cuts in an equivalent amount or with tax increases elsewhere in the Tax
Code. And, if you want to enhance an entitlement, you have to pay for
it with an identified revenue stream.
Our friends across the aisle are trying to imply that this PAYGO rule
is a sham. I will simply say to you that our PAYGO rule is the art of
the possible; it is what we can do at the present moment, and that is
we can amend the rules of the House today and tomorrow to include two
new PAYGO rules which we have provided for and which have been
published.
There is some dispute as to whether or not the baseline against which
to measure increases and decreases is going to be something that we can
manipulate in the Budget Committee. I would simply invite everybody to
read the language of the rule, and they will see that in this
particular case, the Committee on the Budget is bound to turn to the
Congressional Budget Office, which is traditional practice, and to use
the recent baseline estimates supplied by the CBO consistent with
section 257 of the Balanced Budget Act of 1985. That is what the rule
provides. We go to CBO for the baseline, we determine whether or not
the extent to which there will be an increase in spending or decrease
in revenues. It is a CBO function based upon the latest baseline. And
any other construction of this is a false construction.
Now, some may say this is just a rule of the House, it can be waived
by the Rules Committee because, as the other side well knows, points of
order of this kind traditionally have been mowed down by the Rules
Committee. But this is the best we can do with a rule of the House. We
can later come back and make a statutory change, but it will be good to
know if our opponents on the other side who support such a change.
Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, may I inquire of the distinguished Chair
of the Rules Committee now, are there any further speakers on the
majority side?
Ms. SLAUGHTER. There are not. And I will reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of the time.
Madam Speaker, I am actually very enthused and excited about the
great new opportunity that lies ahead for every single one of us. We
have heard speeches today from our distinguished Republican leader, and
we are all very proud that my fellow Californian has become the first
woman to preside over the greatest deliberative body known to man. And,
as I said earlier, I am particularly proud of the fact that I am being
succeeded by the distinguished chairwoman from New York (Ms.
Slaughter), as the first woman to chair the Rules Committee.
{time} 1600
I am enthused about the challenges that lie ahead, and I am very
encouraged by the words that we heard from our new Speaker about the
need for civility, about the need for us to make sure that we recognize
that we are first and foremost Americans, and that the message from
last November's election was a very clear one. It was a message that we
should come together, work together, Democrats and Republicans alike,
to solve the challenges that we face so that we can in fact do the
people's business.
We are very proud of the accomplishments that we have had over the
past 12 years, and I believe we can work with the new majority to build
on those successes, the successes of ensuring that we have an economy
that is second to none, an unemployment rate that is at near-record
lows at 4.5 percent, strong domestic product growth, more Americans
working than ever before in our Nation's history, more Americans owning
their own homes, and more minority Americans owning their own homes.
I also am particularly proud of the fact that working together, Madam
Speaker, we have been able to ensure that since that tragic day of
September 11, 2001, we have not faced another attack on our soil.
The fact that we have not faced another attack is not an accident. It
is because of good public policy and the leadership that we have had.
Now we do have a change in leadership here in this institution, and
there have been a wide range of promises that were made by Members who
formerly served in the majority and now are coming back to majority
status. As members of the minority, they talked about the need for
enhanced minority rights. And I believe many of those things are very,
very important. I believed them before, and I believe them now.
One of the things that I think is very important is for us to have an
opportunity for consideration of measures here on the House floor that
allow for a greater opportunity for Member participation. The thing
that troubles me most is if we don't defeat this previous question and
then defeat this rule that allows us to move forward, we will be
proceeding with a package that will bring forward five closed rules,
preventing the Rules Committee from having an opportunity to in any way
consider the chance to bring forward amendments.
Never before, never before in our Nation's history have we seen an
opening day Rules Committee that would allow for the consideration of
five closed
[[Page 16]]
rules in the opening-day package. And one of the things, of course,
that was discussed widely by our colleagues on the other side of the
aisle which we have strongly supported is the notion of transparency,
accountability, and disclosure.
One of the most troubling aspects of this measure is that we would
move to prevent the Record from showing the votes that are cast in the
Rules Committee.
We were very proud that we eliminated proxy voting when we came to
majority status. Why? Because we wanted Members to show up to work, and
we wanted the American people to see their work product.
Well, unfortunately, the American people understand what it means to
show up to work. They understand what it means for greater disclosure
and accountability and transparency. We heard the opening remarks
during this rule debate on letting the sunshine in. The sun is shining
outside today, and it is going to shine in. Under this provision, we
see a prevention for the opportunity for the sun to shine in the Rules
Committee, and I find it very troubling.
Madam Speaker, I will be asking Members to vote ``no'' on the
previous question so we can amend this rule to make in order to
consider the Speaker's minority bill of rights as was outlined on May
25, 2006, in her document ``New House Principles: A Congress For All
Americans.'' We need to give the new majority an opportunity to live up
to those commitments that were made.
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my
amendment and extraneous materials in the Record immediately prior to
the vote on the previous question.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Eshoo). Is there objection to the
request of the gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert in
the Record a jurisdictional memorandum of understanding between the
chairmen-designate from the Committee on Transportation and the
Committee on Homeland Security.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from New York?
There was no objection.
Memorandum of Understanding Between the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure and the Committee on Homeland Security
January 4, 2007.
On January 4, 2005, the U.S. House of Representatives
adopted H. Res. 5, establishing the Rules of the House for
the 109th Congress. Section 2(a) established the Committee on
Homeland Security as a standing committee of the House of
Representatives with specific legislative jurisdiction under
House Rule X. A legislative history to accompany the changes
to House Rule X was inserted in the Congressional Record on
January 4, 2005.
The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the
Committee on Homeland Security (hereinafter ``Committees'')
jointly agree to the January 4, 2005 legislative history as
the authoritative source of legislative history of section
2(a) of H. Res. 5 with the following two clarifications.
First, with regard to the Federal Emergency Management
Agency's, FEMA, emergency preparedness and response programs,
the Committee on Homeland Security has jurisdiction over the
Department of Homeland Security's responsibilities with
regard to emergency preparedness and collective response only
as they relate to terrorism. However, in light of the federal
emergency management reforms that were enacted as title VI of
Public Law 109-295, a bill amending FEMA's all-hazards
emergency preparedness programs that necessarily addresses
FEMA's terrorism preparedness programs would be referred to
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure; in
addition, the Committee on Homeland Security would have a
jurisdictional interest in such bill. Nothing in this
Memorandum of Understanding affects the jurisdiction of the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the Robert
T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act and
the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974.
Second, with regard to port security, the Committee on
Homeland Security has jurisdiction over port security, and
some Coast Guard responsibilities in that area fall within
the jurisdiction of both Committees. A bill addressing the
activities, programs, assets, and personnel of the Coast
Guard as they relate to port security and non-port security
missions would be referred to the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure; in addition, the Committee on Homeland
Security would have a jurisdictional interest in such bill.
This Memorandum of Understanding between the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on
Homeland Security provides further clarification to the
January 4, 2005 legislative history of the jurisdiction of
the Committees only with regard to these two specific issues.
The Memorandum does not address any other issues and does not
affect the jurisdiction of other committees.
James L. Oberstar,
Chairman-designate, Committee on Transportation &
Infrastructure.
Bennie G. Thompson,
Chairman-designate, Committee on Homeland Security.
The material previously referred to by Mr. Dreier is as follows:
Amendment to H. Res. 5 Offered by Mr. Dreier of California, Mr. McHenry
of North Carolina, and Mr. Price of Georgia
At the end of the resolution, add the following:
Sec. 5. Notwithstanding any other provision of this
resolution, the further amendments in section 6 shall be
considered as adopted.
Sec. 6. The amendments referred to in section 5 is as
follows:
Strike section 503.
At the end of title III, insert the following new sections:
``SEC. 304. BIPARTISAN ADMINISTRATION OF HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES.
``(a) In General.--The Rules of the House of
Representatives are amended by adding at the end the
following:
``RULE XXIX
``bipartisan administration of house
``1. (a) The elected leadership of the majority and
minority parties shall engage in regular consultations with
each other to discuss scheduling, administration, and
operations of the House.
``(b) The chair and ranking minority member of each
committee, as well as their staffs, shall have regular
meetings with each other.
``2. The House should have a predictable, professional,
family-friendly schedule that allows the legislative process
to proceed in a manner that ensures timely and deliberate
dispensation of the work of the Congress.''.
``(b) Allocation of Committee Expenses.--Clause 6 of rule X
of the Rules of the House of Representatives is amended by
adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(f) Of the amount provided to a committee under a primary
expense resolution or a supplemental expense resolution under
this clause, or during an interim funding period described in
clause 7, one-third of such amount, or such greater
percentage as may be agreed to by the chair and ranking
minority member of the committee, shall be paid at the
direction of the ranking minority member.''.
``SEC. 305. REGULAR ORDER FOR LEGISLATION.
``RULE XXX
``REGULAR ORDER FOR LEGISLATION
``1. Legislation shall be developed following full hearings
and open subcommittee and committee markups, with appropriate
referrals to other committees. Members should have at least
24 hours to examine any legislation before its consideration
at the subcommittee level.
``2. Legislation shall generally come to the floor under a
procedure that allows open, full, and fair debate consisting
of a full amendment process that grants the minority the
right to offer its alternatives, including a substitute.
``3. Members shall have at least 24 hours to examine bill
and conference report text prior to floor consideration.
Rules governing floor debate must be reported before 10 p.m.
for any legislation to be considered the following day.
``4. Floor votes shall be completed within 15 minutes, with
the customary 2-minute extension to accommodate Members'
ability to get to the House Chamber to cast their votes. No
vote shall be held open in order to manipulate the outcome.
``5. Conference committees shall hold regular meetings (at
least weekly) of all conference committee Members. All
managers appointed to a conference committee shall be
informed of the schedule of conference committee activities
in a timely manner, and given ample opportunity for input and
debate as decisions are made toward final language for the
conference report.
``6. The Suspension Calendar shall be restricted to non-
controversial legislation, and the ratio of legislation on
the Calendar which is sponsored by members of the minority
party shall be the same as the ratio of the number of members
of the party to the membership of the whole House.''.
[[Page 17]]
____
(The information contained herein was provided by Democratic Minority
on multiple occasions throughout the 109th Congress. Only political
affiliation has been changed.)
The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means
This vote, the vote on whether to order the previous
question on a special rule, is not merely a procedural vote.
A vote against ordering the previous question is a vote
against the Democratic majority agenda and a vote to allow
the opposition, at least for the moment, to offer an
alternative plan. It is a vote about what the House should be
debating.
Mr. Clarence Cannon's Precedents of the House of
Representatives, (VI, 308-311) describes the vote on the
previous question on the rule as ``a motion to direct or
control the consideration of the subject before the House
being made by the Member in charge.'' To defeat the previous
question is to give the opposition a chance to decide the
subject before the House. Cannon cites the Speaker's ruling
of January 13, 1920, to the effect that ``the refusal of the
House to sustain the demand for the previous question passes
the control of the resolution to the opposition'' in order to
offer an amendment. On March 15, 1909, a member of the
majority party offered a rule resolution. The House defeated
the previous question and a member of the opposition rose to
a parliamentary inquiry, asking who was entitled to
recognition. Speaker Joseph G. Cannon (R-Illinois) said:
``The previous question having been refused, the gentleman
from New York, Mr. Fitzgerald, who had asked the gentleman to
yield to him for an amendment, is entitled to the first
recognition.''
Because the vote today may look bad for the Democratic
majority they will say ``the vote on the previous question is
simply a vote on whether to proceed to an immediate vote on
adopting the resolution . . . [and] has no substantive
legislative or policy implications whatsoever.'' But that is
not what they have always said. Listen to the Republican
Leadership Manual on the Legislative Process in the United
States House of Representatives (6th edition, page 135).
Here's how the Republicans describe the previous question
vote in their own manual: Although it is generally not
possible to amend the rule because the majority Member
controlling the time will not yield for the purpose of
offering an amendment, the same result may be achieved by
voting down the previous question on the rule . . . . When
the motion for the previous question is defeated, control of
the time passes to the Member who led the opposition to
ordering the previous question. That Member, because he then
controls the time, may offer a amendment to the rule, or
yield for the purpose of amendment.''
Deschler's Procedure in the U.S. House of Representatives,
the subchapter titled ``Amending Special Rules'' states: ``a
refusal to order the previous question on such a rule [a
special rule reported from the Committee on Rules] opens the
resolution to amendment and further debate.'' (Chapter 21,
section 21.2) Section 21.3 continues: Upon rejection of the
motion for the previous question on a resolution reported
from the Committee on Rules, control shifts to the Member
leading the opposition to the previous question, who may
offer a proper amendment or motion and who controls the time
for debate thereon.''
Clearly, the vote on the previous question on a rule does
have substantive policy implications. It is one of the only
available tools for those who oppose the Democratic
majority's agenda and allows those with alternative views the
opportunity to offer an alternative plan.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time,
and I move the previous question on the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous
question.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 222,
nays 197, not voting 16, as follows:
[Roll No. 3]
YEAS--222
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castor
Chandler
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Giffords
Gillibrand
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Kagen
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Klein (FL)
Kucinich
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rangel
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Wexler
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
NAYS--197
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachmann
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
English (PA)
Everett
Fallin
Feeney
Ferguson
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gilchrest
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Hall (TX)
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hulshof
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Jindal
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
Keller
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Latham
LaTourette
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McHugh
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Norwood
Nunes
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Porter
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Saxton
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shays
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Tancredo
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--16
Bean
Brown (SC)
Buyer
Capuano
Gerlach
Gillmor
Inslee
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Lamborn
Lynch
Nadler
Rahall
Ryan (OH)
Shea-Porter
Swearing in of Members-Elect
The SPEAKER (during the vote). Will the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Gohmert), the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moran), and the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Rogers) kindly come to
[[Page 18]]
the well of the House and take the oath of office.
Messrs. Gohmert, Moran of Kansas, and Rogers of Michigan appeared at
the bar of the House and took the oath of office, as follows:
Do you solemnly swear or affirm that you will support and defend the
Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and
domestic; that you will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;
that you take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or
purpose of evasion; and that you will, well and faithfully, discharge
the duties of the office on which you are about to enter, so help you
God.
The SPEAKER. Congratulations.
{time} 1630
Mr. AKIN changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California and Mr. PRICE of North Carolina
changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the previous question was ordered.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Ms. SHEA-PORTER. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 3, I was unavoidably
detained.
Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''
Mr. INSLEE. Madam Speaker, I was absent from the House floor during
today's vote on the previous question that would allow for floor
consideration of a Minority Rules Package.
Had I been present, I would have voted to support the previous
question.
Stated against:
Mr. LAMBORN. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 3, I was inadvertently
detained.
Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.''
Mr. GERLACH. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 3, I was unable to make
it to the floor in time to vote.
Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.''
Motion to Commit Offered by Mr. Dreier
Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I offer a motion to commit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Eshoo). The Clerk will report the motion
to commit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Dreier moves to commit the resolution (H. Res. 5) to a
select committee composed of the Majority Leader and the
Minority Leader with instructions to report back the same to
the House forthwith with only the following amendment:
At the end of the resolution, add the following:
Sec. 5. Notwithstanding any other provision of this
resolution, the further amendment in section 6 shall be
considered as adopted.
Sec. 6. The amendment referred to in section 5 is as
follows:
At the end of title IV, add the following new section:
Sec. 406. Keeping Americans' Tax Dollars Safe.
At the end of clause 6(c) of rule XIII, strike the period,
insert a semicolon, and insert the following:
``(3) A rule or order waiving the requirement of clause 10
of rule XX; or,
``(4) A rule or order waiving the applicability of clause
5(b) or (c) of rule XXI.''
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida (during the reading). Madam Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that the motion to commit be considered as read and
printed in the Record.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Florida?
Mr. DREIER. I object.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk continued to read the motion to commit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion to commit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to commit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 199,
nays 232, not voting 3, as follows:
[Roll No. 4]
YEAS--199
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachmann
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
English (PA)
Everett
Fallin
Feeney
Ferguson
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Hall (TX)
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hulshof
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Jindal
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
Keller
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lamborn
Latham
LaTourette
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McHugh
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Norwood
Nunes
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Porter
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shays
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Tancredo
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NAYS--232
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castor
Chandler
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Giffords
Gillibrand
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Klein (FL)
Kucinich
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
[[Page 19]]
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Wexler
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--3
Brown (SC)
Buyer
Saxton
{time} 1650
Mr. OBEY, Mr. ELLSWORTH and Ms. SLAUGHTER changed their vote from
``yea'' to ``nay.''
So the motion to commit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Scott of Virginia). The question is on
the resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 235,
nays 195, not voting 4, as follows:
[Roll No. 5]
YEAS--235
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castor
Chandler
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Giffords
Gillibrand
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Klein (FL)
Kucinich
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Wexler
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
NAYS--195
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachmann
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
English (PA)
Everett
Fallin
Feeney
Ferguson
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Hall (TX)
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hulshof
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Jindal
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Keller
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lamborn
Latham
LaTourette
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McHenry
McHugh
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Norwood
Nunes
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Porter
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Saxton
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Tancredo
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--4
Brown (SC)
Buyer
McCrery
Rogers (KY)
{time} 1710
So the resolution was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the resolution just adopted, I
call up House Resolution 6 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The text of the resolution is as follows:
H. Res. 6
Resolved,
Title I. Adoption of Rules of One Hundred Ninth Congress
Sec. 101. The Rules of the House of Representatives of the
One Hundred Ninth Congress, including applicable provisions
of law or concurrent resolution that constituted rules of the
House at the end of the One Hundred Ninth Congress, are
adopted as the Rules of the House of Representatives of the
One Hundred Tenth Congress.
Title II. Ethics
Sec. 201. That the Rules of the House of Representatives of
the One Hundred Ninth Congress, including applicable
provisions of law or concurrent resolution that constituted
rules of the House at the end of the One Hundred Ninth
Congress, together with such amendments thereto in this
resolution as may otherwise have been adopted, are adopted as
the Rules of the House of Representatives of the One Hundred
Tenth Congress, with the following amendments:
SEC. 202. ENDING THE K-STREET PROJECT.
Rule XXIII is amended by redesignating clause 14 as clause
15, and by inserting after clause 13 the following new
clause:
``14. A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not,
with the intent to influence on the basis of partisan
political affiliation an employment decision or employment
practice of any private entity--
``(a) take or withhold, or offer or threaten to take or
withhold, an official act; or
``(b) influence, or offer or threaten to influence, the
official act of another.''.
SEC. 203. BAN ON GIFTS FROM LOBBYISTS.
(a) Clause 5(a)(1)(A) of rule XXV is amended by inserting
``(i)'' after ``(A)'' and adding at the end the following:
``(ii) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer,
or employee of the House may not knowingly accept a gift from
a registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign principal or from
a private entity that retains or employs registered lobbyists
or agents of a foreign principal except as provided in
subparagraph (3) of this paragraph.''.
(b) Clause 5(a)(1)(B) of rule XXV is amended by inserting
``not prohibited by subdivision (A)(ii)'' after the
parenthetical.
SEC. 204. VALUATION OF TICKETS TO SPORTING AND ENTERTAINMENT
EVENTS.
Clause 5(a)(1)(B) of rule XXV is further amended by
inserting ``(i)'' after ``(8)'' and adding at the end the
following:
``(ii) A gift of a ticket to a sporting or entertainment
event shall be valued at the face value of the ticket or, in
the case of a ticket without a face value, at the highest
cost of a ticket with a face value for the event. The price
printed on a ticket to an event shall be deemed its face
value only if it also is the price at which the issuer offers
that ticket for sale to the public.''.
[[Page 20]]
SEC. 205. RESTRICTION OF PRIVATELY FUNDED TRAVEL.
(a) Prohibition.--Clause 5(b)(1) of rule XXV is amended--
(1) in subdivision (A), by striking ``from a private
source'' and all that follows through ``prohibited by this
clause'' and inserting ``for necessary transportation,
lodging, and related expenses for travel to a meeting,
speaking engagement, factfinding trip, or similar event in
connection with his duties as an officeholder shall be
considered as a reimbursement to the House and not a gift
prohibited by this clause when it is from a private source
other than a registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign
principal or a private entity that retains or employs
registered lobbyists or agents of a foreign principal (except
as provided in subdivision (C))''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subdivision:
``(C) A reimbursement (including payment in kind) to a
Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee
of the House for any purpose described in subdivision (A)
also shall be considered as a reimbursement to the House and
not a gift prohibited by this clause (without regard to
whether the source retains or employs registered lobbyists or
agents of a foreign principal) if it is, under regulations
prescribed by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct
to implement this provision--
``(i) directly from an institution of higher education
within the meaning of section 101 of the Higher Education Act
of 1965; or
``(ii) provided only for attendance at or participation in
a one-day event (exclusive of travel time and an overnight
stay).
``Regulations prescribed to implement this provision may
permit a two-night stay when determined by the committee on a
case-by-case basis to be practically required to participate
in the one-day event.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on March 1, 2007.
SEC. 206. LOBBYIST ORGANIZATIONS AND PARTICIPATION IN
CONGRESSIONAL TRAVEL.
(a) In General.--Clause 5 of rule XXV is further amended by
redesignating paragraphs (c), (d), (e), and (f) as paragraphs
(e), (f), (g), and (h), respectively, and by inserting after
paragraph (b) the following:
``(c)(1)(A) Except as provided in subdivision (8), a
Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee
of the House may not accept a reimbursement (including
payment in kind) for transportation, lodging, or related
expenses for a trip on which the traveler is accompanied on
any segment by a registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign
principal.
``(B) Subdivision (A) does not apply to a trip for which
the source of reimbursement is an institution of higher
education within the meaning of section 101 of the Higher
Education Act of 1965.
``(2) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer,
or employee of the House may not accept a reimbursement
(including payment in kind) for transportation, lodging, or
related expenses under the exception in paragraph
(b)(1)(C)(ii) of this clause for a trip that is financed in
whole or in part by a private entity that retains or employs
registered lobbyists or agents of a foreign principal unless
any involvement of a registered lobbyist or agent of a
foreign principal in the planning, organization, request, or
arrangement of the trip is de minimis under rules prescribed
by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to
implement paragraph (b)(1)(C) of this clause.
``(3) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer,
or employee of the House may not accept a reimbursement
(including payment in kind) for transportation, lodging, or
related expenses for a trip (other than a trip permitted
under paragraph (b)(1)(C) of this clause) if such trip is in
any part planned, organized, requested, or arranged by a
registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign principal.''
``(d) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer,
or employee of the House shall, before accepting travel
otherwise permissible under paragraph (b)(1) of this clause
from any private source--
``(1) provide to the Committee on Standards of Official
Conduct before such trip a written certification signed by
the source or (in the case of a corporate person) by an
officer of the source--
``(A) that the trip will not be financed in any part by a
registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign principal;
``(B) that the source either--
``(i) does not retain or employ registered lobbyists or
agents of a foreign principal; or
``(ii) is an institution of higher education within the
meaning of section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965;
or
``(iii) certifies that the trip meets the requirements
specified in rules prescribed by the Committee on Standards
of Official Conduct to implement paragraph (b)(1)(C)(ii) of
this clause and specifically details the extent of any
involvement of a registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign
principal in the planning, organization, request, or
arrangement of the trip considered to qualify as de minimis
under such rules;
``(C) that the source will not accept from another source
any funds earmarked directly or indirectly for the purpose of
financing any aspect of the trip;
``(D) that the traveler will not be accompanied on any
segment of the trip by a registered lobbyist or agent of a
foreign principal (except in the case of a trip for which the
source of reimbursement is an institution of higher education
within the meaning of section 101 of the Higher Education Act
of 1965); and
``(E) that (except as permitted in paragraph (b)(1)(C) of
this clause) the trip will not in any part be planned,
organized, requested, or arranged by a registered lobbyist or
agent of a foreign principal; and
``(2) after the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct
has promulgated the regulations mandated in paragraph
(i)(1)(8) of this clause, obtain the prior approval of the
committee for such trip.''.
(b) Conforming Changes in Cross-References.--Clause 5 of
rule XXV is further amended by--
(1) in clause 5(a)(3)(E), striking ``paragraph (c)(3)'' and
inserting ``paragraph (e)(3)''; and
(2) in clause 5(e)(2) (as redesignated), striking
``paragraph (d)'' and inserting ``paragraph (f)'' .
(c) Timeliness of Information.--Clause 5(b)(1)(A)(ii) of
rule XXV is amended by striking ``30 days'' and inserting
``15 days''.
(d) Conforming Amendment.--Clause 5(b)(3) of rule XXV is
amended by striking ``of expenses reimbursed or to be
reimbursed''.
(e) Public Availability.--Clause 5(b)(5) of rule XXV is
amended to read as follows:
``(5) The Clerk of the House shall make all advance
authorizations, certifications, and disclosures filed
pursuant to this paragraph available for public inspection as
soon as possible after they are received.''.
(f) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect on March 1, 2007.
SEC. 207. FURTHER LIMITATION ON THE USE OF FUNDS FOR TRAVEL.
Rule XXIII is further amended by redesignating clause 15
(as earlier redesignated) as clause 16, and by inserting
after clause 14 the following new clause:
``15. (a) A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may
not use personal funds, official funds, or campaign funds for
a flight on a non-governmental airplane that is not licensed
by the Federal Aviation Administration to operate for
compensation or hire.
``(b) In this clause, the term `campaign funds' includes
funds of any political committee under the Federal Election
Campaign Act of 1971, without regard to whether the committee
is an authorized committee of the Member, Delegate, or
Resident Commissioner involved under such Act.''.
SEC. 208. EXPENSES FOR OFFICIALLY CONNECTED TRAVEL.
Clause 5 of rule XXV is further amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(i)(1) Not later than 45 days after the date of adoption
of this paragraph and at annual intervals thereafter, the
Committee on Standards of Official Conduct shall develop and
revise, as necessary--
``(A) guidelines on judging the reasonableness of an
expense or expenditure for purposes of this clause, including
the factors that tend to establish--
``(i) a connection between a trip and official duties;
``(ii) the reasonableness of an amount spent by a sponsor;
``(iii) a relationship between an event and an officially
connected purpose; and
``(iv) a direct and immediate relationship between a source
of funding and an event; and
``(B) regulations describing the information it will
require individuals subject to this clause to submit to the
committee in order to obtain the prior approval of the
committee for any travel covered by this clause, including
any required certifications.
``(2) In developing and revising guidelines under paragraph
(1 )(A), the committee shall take into account the maximum
per diem rates for official Government travel published
annually by the General Services Administration, the
Department of State, and the Department of Defense.''.
SEC. 209. ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURE.
Clause 5(b)(3) of rule XXV is further amended--
(a) by striking ``and'' after the semicolon at the end of
subdivision (E);
(b) by redesignating subdivision (F) as subdivision (G);
and
(c) by inserting after subdivision (E) the following new
subdivision:
``(F) a description of meetings and events attended; and''.
SEC. 210. CLERICAL CORRECTION.
Clause 5(f)(1) of rule XXV (as earlier redesignated) is
amended by striking ``are'' and inserting ``is''.
SEC. 211. ANNUAL ETHICS TRAINING FOR MEMBERS, OFFICERS AND
EMPLOYEES OF THE HOUSE.
(a) Training Program.--Clause 3(a) of rule XI is amended by
adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(6)(A) The committee shall offer annual ethics training
to each Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, and
employee of the House. Such training shall--
``(i) involve the classes of employees for whom the
committee determines such training to be appropriate; and
``(ii) include such knowledge of the Code of Official
Conduct and related House rules as
[[Page 21]]
may be determined appropriate by the committee.
``(B)(i) A new officer or employee of the House shall
receive training under this paragraph not later than 60 days
after beginning service to the House.
``(ii) Not later than January 31 of each year, each officer
and employee of the House shall file a certification with the
committee that the officer or employee attended ethics
training in the last year as established by this
subparagraph.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on March 1, 2007.
SEC. 212. DESIGNATING COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR.
(a) Clause 1 (e) of rule X is amended by striking
``Committee on Education and the Workforce'' and inserting
``Committee on Education and Labor''.
(b) Clause 3(d) of rule X is amended by striking
``Committee on Education and the Workforce'' and inserting
``Committee on Education and Labor''.
SEC. 213. DESIGNATING COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS.
(a) Clause 1 of rule X is amended by--
(1) redesignating the existing paragraphs (h) through (m),
as paragraphs (m), (i), (V), (h), (k), and (l), respectively
(inserting paragraph (h), as redesignated, after paragraph
(g)); and
(2) in paragraph (h), as redesignated, striking ``Committee
on International Relations'' and inserting ``Committee on
Foreign Affairs''.
(b) Clause 3 of rule X is amended by--
(1)redesignating the existing paragraphs (b) through (i) as
paragraphs (c), (e), (d), (i), (g), (f), (b) and (h),
respectively (inserting paragraph (b), as redesignated, after
paragraph (a); inserting paragraph (d), as redesignated,
after paragraph (c); and inserting paragraph (f), as
redesignated, after paragraph (e)); and
(2) in paragraph (f), as redesignated, striking ``Committee
on International Relations'' and inserting ``Committee on
Foreign Affairs''.
(c) Clause 11 (a)(1)(C) of rule X is amended by striking
``Committee on International Relations'' and inserting
``Committee on Foreign Affairs''.
(d) Clause 2(d) of rule XII is amended by striking
``Committee on International Relations'' and inserting
``Committee on Foreign Affairs''.
SEC. 214. DESIGNATING COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES.
(a) Clause 1 (I) of rule X (as earlier redesignated) is
amended by striking ``Committee on Resources'' and inserting
``Committee on Natural Resources''.
(b) Clause 3(h) of rule X (as earlier redesignated) is
amended by striking ``Committee on Resources'' and inserting
``Committee on Natural Resources''.
SEC. 215. DESIGNATING COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT
REFORM.
(a) Clause 1 of rule X is further amended by--
(1) inserting paragraph (m) (as earlier redesignated),
after paragraph (I) (as earlier redesignated); and
(2) in paragraph (m) (as earlier redesignated), striking
``Committee on Government Reform'' and inserting ``Committee
on Oversight and Government Reform''.
(b) Clause 2 of rule X is amended by--
(1) in paragraph (d)(1), striking ``Committee on Government
Reform' and inserting ``Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform''; and
(2) in paragraph (d)(2), striking ``Committee on Government
Reform'' and inserting ``Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform''.
(c) Clause 3 of rule X is further amended by--
(1) inserting paragraph (i) (as earlier redesignated) after
paragraph (h) (as earlier redesignated); and
(2) in paragraph (i), (as earlier redesignated), striking
``Committee on Government Reform'' and inserting ``Committee
on Oversight and Government Reform''.
(d) Clause 4 of rule X is amended by--
(1) in paragraph (c)(1), striking ``Committee on Government
Reform'' and inserting ``Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform''; and
(2) in paragraph (c)(2), striking ``Committee on Government
Reform'' and inserting ``Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform''.
(e) Clause 5(d)(2) of rule X is amended by striking
``Committee on Government Reform'' and inserting ``Committee
on Oversight and Government Reform''.
(f) Clause 4 of rule XV is amended by striking ``Committee
on Government Reform'' and inserting ``Committee on Oversight
and Government Reform''.
SEC. 216. DESIGNATING COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY.
(a) Clause 1 (o) of rule X is amended by striking
``Committee on Science'' and inserting ``Committee on Science
and Technology''.
(b) Clause 3(k) of rule X is amended by striking
``Committee on Science'' and inserting ``Committee on Science
and Technology''.
SEC. 217. SEPARATE ORDER: NUMBERING OF BILLS.
In the One Hundred Tenth Congress, the first 10 numbers for
bills (H.R. 1 through H.R. 10) shall be reserved for
assignment by the Speaker to such bills as she may designate.
Title III. Civility
Sec. 301. The Rules of the House of Representatives of the
One Hundred Ninth Congress, including applicable provisions
of law or concurrent resolution that constituted rules of the
House at the end of the One Hundred Ninth Congress, together
with such amendments thereto in this resolution as may
otherwise have been adopted, are adopted as the Rules of the
House of Representatives of the One Hundred Tenth Congress,
with the following amendments:
SEC. 302. PROPER CONDUCT OF VOTES.
Clause 2(a) of rule XX is amended by inserting after the
second sentence the following sentence: ``A record vote by
electronic device shall not be held open for the sole purpose
of reversing the outcome of such vote.''.
SEC. 303. FULL AND OPEN DEBATE IN CONFERENCE.
In rule XXII--
(a) clause 12(a) is amended by adding at the end the
following new subparagraphs:
``(3) In conducting conferences with the Senate, managers
on the part of the House should endeavor to ensure--
``(A) that meetings for the resolution of differences
between the two Houses occur only under circumstances in
which every manager on the part of the House has notice of
the meeting and a reasonable opportunity to attend;
``(B) that all provisions on which the two Houses disagree
are considered as open to discussion at any meeting of a
conference committee; and
``(C) that papers reflecting a conference agreement are
held inviolate to change without renewal of the opportunity
of all managers on the part of the House to reconsider their
decisions to sign or not to sign the agreement.
``(4) Managers on the part of the House shall be provided a
unitary time and place with access to at least one complete
copy of the final conference agreement for the purpose of
recording their approval (or not) of the final conference
agreement by placing their signatures (or not) on the sheets
prepared to accompany the conference report and joint
explanatory statement of the managers.''.
(b) add the following new clause at the end:
``13. It shall not be in order to consider a conference
report the text of which differs in any way, other than
clerical, from the text that reflects the action of the
conferees on all of the differences between the two Houses,
as recorded by their placement of their signatures (or not)
on the sheets prepared to accompany the conference report and
joint explanatory statement of the managers.''.
Title IV. Fiscal Responsibility
Sec. 401. The Rules of the House of Representatives of the
One Hundred Ninth Congress, including applicable provisions
of law or concurrent resolution that constituted rules of the
House at the end of the One Hundred Ninth Congress, together
with such amendments thereto in this resolution as may
otherwise have been adopted, are adopted as the Rules of the
House of Representatives of the One Hundred Tenth Congress,
with the following amendments:
SEC. 402. RECONCILIATION.
Rule XXI is amended by adding at the end the following new
clause:
``7. It shall not be in order to consider a concurrent
resolution on the budget, or an amendment thereto, or a
conference report thereon that contains reconciliation
directives under section 310 of the Congressional Budget Act
of 1974 that specify changes in law reducing the surplus or
increasing the deficit for either the period comprising the
current fiscal year and the five fiscal years beginning with
the fiscal year that ends in the following calendar year or
the period comprising the current fiscal year and the ten
fiscal years beginning with the fiscal year that ends in the
following calendar year. In determining whether
reconciliation directives specify changes in law reducing the
surplus or increasing the deficit, the sum of the directives
for each reconciliation bill (under section 310 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974) envisioned by that measure
shall be evaluated.
SEC. 403. APPLYING POINTS OF ORDER UNDER BUDGET ACT TO BILLS
AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS CONSIDERED UNDER SPECIAL
RULES.
Rule XXI is amended by adding at the end the following new
clause:
``8. With respect to measures considered pursuant to a
special order of business, points of order under title III of
the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 shall operate without
regard to whether the measure concerned has been reported
from committee. Such points of order shall operate with
respect to (as the case may be)--
``(a) the form of a measure recommended by the reporting
committee where the statute uses the term ``as reported'' (in
the case of a measure that has been so reported);
``(b) the form of the measure made in order as an original
bill or joint resolution for the purpose of amendment; or
[[Page 22]]
``(c) the form of the measure on which the previous
question is ordered directly to passage.''.
SEC. 404. CONGRESSIONAL EARMARK REFORM.
(a) Point of Order against Congressional Earmarks.--Rule
XXI is amended by adding at the end the following new clause:
``9. (a) It shall not be in order to consider--
``(1) a bill or joint resolution reported by a committee
unless the report includes a list of congressional earmarks,
limited tax benefits, and limited tariff benefits in the bill
or in the report (and the name of any Member, Delegate, or
Resident Commissioner who submitted a request to the
committee for each respective item included in such list) or
a statement that the proposition contains no congressional
earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits;
``(2) a bill or joint resolution not reported by a
committee unless the chairman of each committee of initial
referral has caused a list of congressional earmarks, limited
tax benefits, and limited tariff benefits in the bill (and
the name of any Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner
who submitted a request to the committee for each respective
item included in such list) or a statement that the
proposition contains no congressional earmarks, limited tax
benefits, or limited tariff benefits to be printed in the
Congressional Record prior to its consideration;
``(3) an amendment to a bill or joint resolution to be
offered at the outset of its consideration for amendment by a
member of a committee of initial referral as designated in a
report of the Committee on Rules to accompany a resolution
prescribing a special order of business unless the proponent
has caused a list of congressional earmarks, limited tax
benefits, and limited tariff benefits in the amendment (and
the name of any Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner
who submitted a request to the proponent for each respective
item included in such list) or a statement that the
proposition contains no congressional earmarks, limited tax
benefits, or limited tariff benefits to be printed in the
Congressional Record prior to its consideration; or
``(4) a conference report to accompany a bill or joint
resolution unless the joint explanatory statement prepared by
the managers on the part of the House and the managers on the
part of the Senate includes a list of congressional earmarks,
limited tax benefits, and limited tariff benefits in the
conference report or joint statement (and the name of any
Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or Senator who
submitted a request to the House or Senate committees of
jurisdiction for each respective item included in such list)
or a statement that the proposition contains no congressional
earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits.
``(b) It shall not be in order to consider a rule or order
that waives the application of paragraph (a). As disposition
of a point of order under this paragraph, the Chair shall put
the question of consideration with respect to the rule or
order that waives the application of paragraph (a). The
question of consideration shall be debatable for 10 minutes
by the Member initiating the point of order and for 10
minutes by an opponent, but shall otherwise be decided
without intervening motion except one that the House adjourn.
``(c) In order to be cognizable by the Chair, a point of
order raised under paragraph (a) may be based only on the
failure of a report, submission to the Congressional Record,
or joint explanatory statement to include a list required by
paragraph (a) or a statement that the proposition contains no
congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited
tariff benefits.
``(d) For the purpose of this clause, the term
`congressional earmark' means a provision or report language
included primarily at the request of a Member, Delegate,
Resident Commissioner, or Senator providing, authorizing or
recommending a specific amount of discretionary budget
authority, credit authority, or other spending authority for
a contract, loan, loan guarantee, grant, loan authority, or
other expenditure with or to an entity, or targeted to a
specific State, locality or Congressional district, other
than through a statutory or administrative formula-driven or
competitive award process.
``(e) For the purpose of this clause, the term `limited tax
benefit' means--
``(1) any revenue-losing provision that--
``(A) provides a Federal tax deduction, credit, exclusion,
or preference to 10 or fewer beneficiaries under the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, and
``(B) contains eligibility criteria that are not uniform in
application with respect to potential beneficiaries of such
provision; or
``(2) any Federal tax provision which provides one
beneficiary temporary or permanent transition relief from a
change to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
``(f) For the purpose of this clause, the term `limited
tariff benefit' means a provision modifying the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States in a manner that
benefits 10 or fewer entities.
(b) Related Amendment to Code of Official Conduct.--Rule
XXIII is amended--
(a) by redesignating clause 16 (as earlier redesignated) as
clause 18; and
(b) by inserting after clause 15 the following new clauses:
``16. A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not
condition the inclusion of language to provide funding for a
congressional earmark, a limited tax benefit, or a limited
tariff benefit in any bill or joint resolution (or an
accompanying report) or in any conference report on a bill or
joint resolution (including an accompanying joint explanatory
statement of managers) on any vote cast by another Member,
Delegate, or Resident Commissioner. For purposes of this
clause and clause 17, the terms `congressional earmark,'
`limited tax benefit,' and `limited tariff benefit' shall
have the meanings given them in clause 9 of rule XXI.
``17. (a) A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner who
requests a congressional earmark, a limited tax benefit, or a
limited tariff benefit in any bill or joint resolution (or an
accompanying report) or in any conference report on a bill or
joint resolution (or an accompanying joint statement of
managers) shall provide a written statement to the chairman
and ranking minority member of the committee of jurisdiction,
including--
``(1) the name of the Member, Delegate, or Resident
Commissioner;
``(2) in the case of a congressional earmark, the name and
address of the intended recipient or, if there is no
specifically intended recipient, the intended location of the
activity;
``(3) in the case of a limited tax or tariff benefit,
identification of the individual or entities reasonably
anticipated to benefit, to the extent known to the Member,
Delegate, or Resident Commissioner;
``(4) the purpose of such congressional earmark or limited
tax or tariff benefit; and
``(5) a certification that the Member, Delegate, or
Resident Commissioner or spouse has no financial interest in
such congressional earmark or limited tax or tariff benefit.
``(b) Each committee shall maintain the information
transmitted under paragraph (a), and the written disclosures
for any congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or
limited tariff benefits included in any measure reported by
the committee or conference report filed by the chairman of
the committee or any subcommittee thereof shall be open for
public inspection.''.
SEC. 405. PAY-AS-YOU-GO POINT OF ORDER.
Rule XXI is amended by adding at the end the following new
clause:
``10. It shall not be in order to consider any bill, joint
resolution, amendment, or conference report if the provisions
of such measure affecting direct spending and revenues have
the net effect of increasing the deficit or reducing the
surplus for either the period comprising the current fiscal
year and the five fiscal years beginning with the fiscal year
that ends in the following calendar year or the period
comprising the current fiscal year and the ten fiscal years
beginning with the fiscal year that ends in the following
calendar year. The effect of such measure on the deficit or
surplus shall be determined on the basis of estimates made by
the Committee on the Budget relative to--
(a) the most recent baseline estimates supplied by the
Congressional Budget Office consistent with section 257 of
the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985
used in considering a concurrent resolution on the budget; or
(b) after the beginning of a new calendar year and before
consideration of a concurrent resolution on the budget, the
most recent baseline estimates supplied by the Congressional
Budget Office consistent with section 257 of the Balanced
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.''.
Title V. Miscellaneous
Sec. 501. The Rules of the House of Representatives of the
One Hundred Ninth Congress, including applicable provisions
of law or concurrent resolution that constituted rules of the
House at the end of the One Hundred Ninth Congress, together
with such amendments thereto in this resolution as may
otherwise have been adopted, are adopted as the Rules of the
House of Representatives of the One Hundred Tenth Congress,
with the following amendments:
SEC. 502. DEPOSITION AUTHORITY.
Clause 4(c) of rule X is amended by adding at the end the
following new subparagraph:
``(3)(A) The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
may adopt a rule authorizing and regulating the taking of
depositions by a member or counsel of the committee,
including pursuant to subpoena under clause 2(m) of rule XI
(which hereby is made applicable for such purpose).
``(B) A rule adopted by the committee pursuant to this
subparagraph--
``(i) may provide that a deponent be directed to subscribe
an oath or affirmation before a person authorized by law to
administer the same; and
``(ii) shall ensure that the minority members and staff of
the committee are accorded equitable treatment with respect
to notice of and a reasonable opportunity to participate in
any proceeding conducted thereunder.
``(C) Information secured pursuant to the authority
described in subdivision (A) shall retain the character of
discovery until offered for admission in evidence before the
committee, at which time any proper objection shall be
timely.''.
[[Page 23]]
SEC. 503. RECORD VOTES IN THE COMMITTEE ON RULES.
The second sentence of clause 3(b) of rule XIII is amended
by inserting ``a report by the Committee on Rules on a rule,
joint rule, or the order of business or to'' after ``to''.
SEC. 504. CHANGES TO REFLECT INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY REFORM.
Clause 11 of rule X is amended by--
(a) in paragraph (b)(1)(A), striking ``Director of Central
Intelligence'' and inserting ``Director of National
Intelligence'';
(b) in paragraph (b)(1)(A), striking ``Foreign'';
(c) in paragraph (b)(1)(D)(i), striking ``Director of
Central Intelligence'' and inserting ``Director of National
Intelligence'';
(d) in paragraph (b)(1)(D)(i), striking ``Foreign'';
(e) in paragraph (c)(2), inserting ``the Director of
National Intelligence,'' before ``the Director of the Central
Intelligence Agency'';
(f) in paragraph (e)(2), striking ``Central'' and inserting
``National''; and
(g) in paragraph (i), striking subparagraphs (1) through
(6) and inserting in lieu thereof the following:
``(1) The activities of the Director of National
Intelligence and the Office of the Director of National
Intelligence.
``(2) The activities of the Central Intelligence Agency.
``(3) The activities of the Defense Intelligence Agency.
``(4) The activities of the National Security Agency.
``(5) The intelligence and intelligence-related activities
of other agencies and subdivisions of the Department of
Defense.
``(6) The intelligence and intelligence-related activities
of the Department of State.
``(7) The intelligence and intelligence-related activities
of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
``(8) The intelligence and intelligence-related activities
of all other departments and agencies of the executive
branch.''.
SEC. 505. TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING CHANGES.
(a) Clause 12(b) of rule I is amended to read as follows:
``(b)(1) To suspend the business of the House when notified
of an imminent threat to its safety, the Speaker may declare
an emergency recess subject to the call of the Chair.''
``(2) To suspend the business of the Committee of the Whole
House on the state of the Union when notified of an imminent
threat to its safety, the Chairman of the Committee of the
Whole may declare an emergency recess subject to the call of
the Chair.''.
(b) Clause 6(b) of rule XIII is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Pending the consideration of a report by the
Committee on Rules on a rule, joint rule, or the order of
business, the Speaker may entertain one motion that the House
adjourn but may not entertain any other dilatory motion until
the report shall have been disposed of.''.
(c) Clause 1(b) of rule XV is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Pending a motion that the House suspend the rules,
the Speaker may entertain one motion that the House adjourn
but may not entertain any other motion until the vote is
taken on the suspension.''.
(d) In clause 2(e) of rule XV, subparagraph (1) is amended
to read as follows:
``(1) If a motion prevails to discharge the Committee on
Rules from consideration of a resolution, the House shall
immediately consider the resolution, pending which the
Speaker may entertain one motion that the House adjourn but
may not entertain any other dilatory motion until the
resolution has been disposed of. If the resolution is
adopted, the House shall immediately proceed to its
execution.''.
SEC. 506. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: 9/11 SELECT PANEL.
Upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order
without intervention of any point of order to consider in the
House a resolution to enhance intelligence oversight
authority. The resolution shall be considered as read. The
previous question shall be considered as ordered on the
resolution to final adoption without intervening motion
except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled
by the Majority Leader and the Minority Leader or their
designees; and (2) one motion to recommit which may not
contain instructions.
SEC. 507. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: 9/11 RECOMMENDATIONS.
(a) Upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in
order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 1) to provide
for the implementation of the recommendations of the National
Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. All
points of order against the bill and against its
consideration are waived. The bill shall be considered as
read. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on
the bill to final passage without intervening motion except:
(1) three hours of debate equally divided and controlled by
the Majority Leader and the Minority Leader or their
designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
(b) During consideration of H.R. 1 pursuant to this
resolution, notwithstanding the operation of the previous
question, the Chair may postpone further consideration of the
bill to a time designated by the Speaker.
SEC. 508. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: MINIMUM WAGE.
(a) Upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in
order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2) to amend the
Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to provide for an increase
in the Federal minimum wage. All points of order against the
bill and against its consideration are waived. The bill shall
be considered as read. The previous question shall be
considered as ordered on the bill to final passage without
intervening motion except: (1) three hours of debate equally
divided and controlled by the Majority Leader and the
Minority Leader or their designees; and (2) one motion to
recommit.
(b) During consideration of H.R. 2 pursuant to this
resolution, notwithstanding the operation of the previous
question, the Chair may postpone further consideration of the
bill to a time designated by the Speaker.
SEC. 509. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: STEM CELL.
(a) Upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in
order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 3) to amend the
Public Health Service Act to provide for human embryonic stem
cell research. All points of order against the bill and
against its consideration are waived. The bill shall be
considered as read. The previous question shall be considered
as ordered on the bill to final passage without intervening
motion except: (1) three hours of debate equally divided and
controlled by the Majority Leader and the Minority Leader or
their designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
(b) During consideration of H.R. 3 pursuant to this
resolution, notwithstanding the operation of the previous
question, the Chair may postpone further consideration of the
bill to a time designated by the Speaker.
SEC. 510. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: PRESCRIPTION DRUGS.
(a) Upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in
order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 4) to amend
part D of title XVIII of the Social Security Act to require
the Secretary of Health and Human Services to negotiate lower
covered part D drug prices on behalf of Medicare
beneficiaries. All points of order against the bill and
against its consideration are waived. The bill shall be
considered as read. The previous question shall be considered
as ordered on the bill to final passage without intervening
motion except: (1) three hours of debate equally divided and
controlled by the Majority Leader and the Minority Leader or
their designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
(b) During consideration of H.R. 4 pursuant to this
resolution, notwithstanding the operation of the previous
question, the Chair may postpone further consideration of the
bill to a time designated by the Speaker.
SEC. 511. SEPARATE ORDERS.
(a) Budget Matters.--(1) During the One Hundred Tenth
Congress, references in section 306 of the Congressional
Budget Act of 1974 to a resolution shall be construed in the
House of Representatives as references to a joint resolution.
(2) During the One Hundred Tenth Congress, in the case of a
reported bill or joint resolution considered pursuant to a
special order of business, a point of order under section 303
of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 shall be determined
on the basis of the text made in order as an original bill or
joint resolution for the purpose of amendment or to the text
on which the previous question is ordered directly to
passage, as the case may be.
(3) During the One Hundred Tenth Congress, a provision in a
bill or joint resolution, or in an amendment thereto or a
conference report thereon, that establishes prospectively for
a Federal office or position a specified or minimum level of
compensation to be funded by annual discretionary
appropriations shall not be considered as providing new
entitlement authority under section 401 of the Congressional
Budget Act of 1974.
(4)(A) During the One Hundred Tenth Congress, pending the
adoption of a concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal
year 2008, the provisions of House Concurrent Resolution 376
of the One Hundred Ninth Congress, as adopted by the House,
shall have force and effect in the House as though the One
Hundred Tenth Congress has adopted such a concurrent
resolution.
(B) The chairman of the Committee on the Budget (when
elected) shall submit for printing in the Congressional
Record--
(i) the allocations contemplated by section 302(a) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to accompany the concurrent
resolution described in subparagraph (A), which shall be
considered to be such allocations under a concurrent
resolution on the budget; and
(ii) ``Accounts Identified for Advance Appropriations,''
which shall be considered to be the programs, projects,
activities, or accounts referred to in section 401(b) of
House Concurrent Resolution 376 of the One Hundred Ninth
Congress, as adopted by the House.
(5)(A) During the One Hundred Tenth Congress, except as
provided in subsection (C), a motion that the Committee of
the Whole rise and report a bill to the House shall not be in
[[Page 24]]
order if the bill, as amended, exceeds an applicable
allocation of new budget authority under section 302(b) of
the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as estimated by the
Committee on the Budget.
(B) If a point of order under subsection (A) is sustained,
the Chair shall put the question: ``Shall the Committee of
the Whole rise and report the bill to the House with such
amendments as may have been adopted notwithstanding that the
bill exceeds its allocation of new budget authority under
section 302(b) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974?''.
Such question shall be debatable for 10 minutes equally
divided and controlled by a proponent of the question and an
opponent but shall be decided without intervening motion.
(C) Subsection (A) shall not apply--
(i) to a motion offered under clause 2(d) of rule XXI; or
(ii) after disposition of a question under subsection (B)
on a given bill.
(D) If a question under subsection (B) is decided in the
negative, no further amendment shall be in order except--
(i) one proper amendment, which shall be debatable for 10
minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and
an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not
be subject to a demand for division of the question in the
House or in the Committee of the Whole; and
(ii) pro forma amendments, if offered by the chairman or
ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or
their designees, for the purpose of debate.
(b) Certain Subcommittees.--Notwithstanding clause 5(d) of
rule X, during the One Hundred Tenth Congress--
(1) the Committee on Armed Services may have not more than
seven subcommittees;
(2) the Committee on Foreign Affairs may have not more than
seven subcommittees; and
(3) the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure may
have not more than six subcommittees.
(c) Exercise Facilities for Former Members.--During the One
Hundred Tenth Congress--
(1) The House of Representatives may not provide access to
any exercise facility which is made available exclusively to
Members and former Members, officers and former officers of
the House of Representatives, and their spouses to any former
Member, former officer, or spouse who is a lobbyist
registered under the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 or any
successor statute or agent of a foreign principal as defined
in clause 5 of rule XXV. For purposes of this section, the
term ``Member of the House of Representatives'' includes a
Delegate or Resident Commissioner to the Congress.
(2) The Committee on House Administration shall promulgate
regulations to carry out this subsection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 5, the question
shall be divided among each of the five titles of House Resolution 6.
The previous question is ordered on each portion of the divided
question, except as specified in sections 2 through 4 of House
Resolution 5.
The portion of the divided question comprising title I is now
debatable for 30 minutes.
The gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) and the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. Boehner) each will control 15 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Maryland.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
First, Mr. Speaker, let me say, this is truly a proud and historic
moment for this institution, the people's House in our Nation. Today,
for the first time in our history, the Members of this great body have
elected a woman, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), to serve
as our Speaker. I want to offer my heartfelt congratulations to Speaker
Pelosi, as well as her husband Paul, and her children and all of her
family.
Last November 7, the American people delivered a resounding message
that was heard in every corner of this Nation. They want change and a
new direction in our Nation. Today, as we open this new 110th Congress,
with hope and great optimism, we will take the first steps in offering
the voters precisely that by changing the way business is done in
Washington.
As we open this new chapter in American history, we will seek to
elevate results over rhetoric and put progress before partisanship as
we affirm our commitment to transparency, accountability, and civility.
Mr. Speaker, this rules package includes sweeping ethics reforms that
begin to address some of the most egregious transgressions of the
recent past. Among other things, we will ban gifts, including meals and
tickets, from lobbyists and the organizations that employ them. We will
ban lobbyists and the organizations that employ them from financing
travel for Members or their staffs, except for one-day travel to visit
a site, attend a forum, participate in a panel, or give a speech, all
obviously in the pursuance of the Members' duties. We will require
Members and staff to obtain preapproval from the Ethics Committee for
permitted travel; and, Mr. Speaker, we will end the K Street Project, a
practice that brought shame on this House when some Members promised
access in return for patronage hiring.
Now let me say, very frankly, as importantly as these rules changes
are, they alone will not ensure the integrity of this institution.
Rather, the Members of this House will ensure the integrity of this
institution when we conduct ourselves with integrity and hold
accountable those who fail to abide by these rules and the highest
ethical standards.
{time} 1715
Thus during the next 2 years, we have an obligation, each and every
one of us, to ensure that the Ethics Committee does the job that it was
constituted to perform. The implementation of rules, while vital, must
be followed by effective, real enforcement.
Through this rules package, Mr. Speaker, we also signal our sincere
intent to foster an environment in which civility, consensus, and
compromise are nurtured. The American people are tired of partisanship.
They are rightfully demanding progress on the critical priorities that
face our Nation. Surely we will disagree on many issues, but that does
not require us to be disagreeable, and we surely can disagree without
impugning or questioning the motives, the character of our colleagues.
In addition, Mr. Speaker, this rules package restores fiscal
discipline by reinstating the budget rules that helped us produce
record budget surpluses in the 1990s and which previously were
supported on a bipartisan basis.
Mr. Speaker, we simply cannot continue on our current fiscal course.
In the last 72 months, our Nation has turned a projected 10-year budget
surplus of $5.6 trillion into a deficit of more than $3 trillion. It
is, in my opinion, Mr. Speaker, immoral of this generation of Americans
to force our children and grandchildren to pay our bills. Our current
course threatens our economic as well as our national security. Pay-as-
you-go budget rules will help us restore the fiscal discipline that the
American people demand. These measures represent the foundation of our
mission and the basis for the good work we will do together as one body
with the best interests of those we serve at heart.
Mr. Speaker, we have a profound responsibility to fulfill and make
hard choices. However, we also share an extraordinary opportunity that
is distinctive in the American experience, to heal a deeply divided
Nation, to conquer national doubt and restore public confidence in the
United States Congress. I look forward, Mr. Speaker, to working with
each and every one in this body in our pursuit of that progress.
In conclusion, let me leave you with the words of our 35th President,
John Kennedy, who said this: ``Let us not seek the Republican answer or
the Democratic answer, but the right answer. Let us not seek to fix the
blame for the past. Let us accept our own responsibility for the
future.''
Mr. Speaker, let us now embrace our responsibility and fulfill the
trust that the American people have placed in us to lead, to govern
effectively, and to make the greatest Nation on Earth even greater. I
urge my colleagues to support this resolution.
Mr. Speaker, at this time I would ask unanimous consent that the
remaining time allocated to me be controlled by Mr. Hastings of
Florida, a member of the Rules Committee.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Scott of Virginia). Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from Maryland?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from
[[Page 25]]
California (Mr. Dreier) as the designee of the minority leader.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I would like to begin by extending my compliments to my very good
friend from Maryland, the distinguished majority leader, Mr. Hoyer. In
fact, Mr. Hoyer just quoted John F. Kennedy and I believe that he was
right on target in focusing on that brilliant quote of President
Kennedy's where he said that we should not seek the Republican answer,
we should not seek the Democratic answer, we should seek the right
answer. I was struck with that, Mr. Speaker, and I believe that we
should join in strong support of this resolution, of support of this
title; and I am going to urge my colleagues to join in voting in
support of this title which uses the rules base of the 109th Congress
as the basis for which these proposed changes are being offered.
But I think it is very important for us to note that if we are going
to, in fact, seek the right answer as opposed to the Republican answer
or the Democratic answer, we need to do that by vigorously pursuing the
deliberative process about which we all speak. And I know that during
the past several years, my very distinguished colleagues on the other
side of the aisle raised concerns about a lack of deliberation that
existed in this House and the fact that more amendments could have been
made in order. I will acknowledge that we could have made more
amendments in order. That was clearly an option there. But as my
friend, having served in the majority, knows very well, there are
challenges that need to be addressed when you are in the majority,
challenges of managing this institution. I see him sitting there very
comfortably and I am glad that he is comfortable at this point, but I
know full well that he, Mr. Speaker, is going to face many management
challenges in the days and weeks and months ahead.
But during the past couple of years, what we have heard is a
commitment to minority rights made by those who were formerly in the
majority, who were in the minority at that time and are now back in the
majority. And so I would argue that the words of President Kennedy can
best be implemented if we in fact do increase the level of
deliberation, and that is why as we look at the proposed changes that
we are going to be considering, I have to say that when it comes to the
actual management, I am concerned. I am concerned about the prospect
of, for the first time in the history of this institution, taking
prospectively five closed rules and placing that in the opening-day
rules package.
Similarly, Mr. Speaker, I am concerned about the prospect of taking
this issue of transparency, accountability, and disclosure about which
we on both sides of the aisle regularly talk because we are here to
represent all of the American people, the notion of now saying again
for the first time in the history of this great institution that we are
going to create an opportunity whereby we will not have accountability
and transparency in our very important deliberations that will take
place in the Rules Committee.
And so again I would say in response to the brilliant words of
President John F. Kennedy, as outlined by our distinguished majority
leader, Mr. Hoyer, that we do seek the right answer; and I believe that
the best way to seek the right answer is through enhanced deliberation,
and we have a chance to do that.
Now, I will when it comes to this vote urge my colleagues to vote in
favor of title I. Title I, as you know, Mr. Speaker, simply provides a
chance to use the opening rules package of the 109th Congress, and I
think that that is a correct thing for us to do; and I hope the
Democrats and Republicans alike, and the majority leader has just
called for support of title I and I will urge the colleagues on our
side of the aisle to join so that again we will be coming together and
I think having the right answer on that.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida has 9\1/2\
minutes remaining.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the majority leader for
yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, House rules allowing for cosponsors have yet to be
adopted. Therefore, I would submit this list of cosponsors for House
Resolution 6 for the Record.
Pursuant to clause 7 of Rule XII of the Rules of the House
of Representatives, the following sponsors are hereby added
to H. Res. 6.
Louise Slaughter, David Obey, John Spratt, Zach Space,
Chris Carney, Baron Hill, Heath Shuler, Steny Hoyer, James
Clyburn, Rahm Emanuel, John Larson, Xavier Becerra, Chris Van
Hollen, Rosa DeLauro, George Miller, Jim McGovern, Alcee
Hastings, Doris Matsui, Kathy Castor, Betty Sutton, Peter
Welch.
Gary Ackerman, Tom Allen, Jason Altmire, Rob Andrews,
Michael Arcuri, Joe Baca, Brian Baird, Tammy Baldwin, Melissa
Bean, Shelley Berkley, Howard Berman, Marion Berry, Tim
Bishop, Earl Blumenauer, Madeleine Bordallo, Leonard Boswell,
Nancy Boyda, Robert Brady, Bruce Braley.
G.K. Butterfield, Lois Capps, Mike Capuano, Dennis Cardoza,
Russ Carnahan, Ben Chandler, Donna Christensen, Yvette
Clarke, Emanuel Cleaver, Steve Cohen, John Conyers, Jim
Cooper, Joe Courtney, Joe Crowley, Henry Cuellar, Elijah
Cummings, Susan Davis, Danny Davis, Artur Davis, Lincoln
Davis.
Peter DeFazio, Diana DeGette, Bill Delahunt, Norm Dicks,
John Dingell, Lloyd Doggett, Joe Donnelly, Mike Doyle, Keith
Ellison, Brad Ellsworth, Anna Eshoo, Bob Etheridge, Eni
Faleomavaega, Sam Farr, Chaka Fattah, Bob Filner, Barney
Frank, Gabby Giffords, Kirsten Gillibrand, Bart Gordon.
Al Green, Gene Green, Raul Grijalva, John Hall, Phil Hare,
Jane Harman, Stephanie Herseth, Brian Higgins, Maurice
Hinchey, Mazie Hirono, Paul Hodes, Tim Holden, Michael Honda,
Darlene Hooley, Jay Inslee, Steve Israel, Jesse Jackson,
Sheila Jackson-Lee, Eddie Bernice Johnson, Hank Johnson.
Steve Kagen, Marcy Kaptur, Patrick Kennedy, Dale Kildee,
Ron Kind, Ron Klein, Dennis Kucinich, Nick Lampson, Jim
Langevin, Tom Lantos, Richard Larsen, Barbara Lee, Sander
Levin, John Lewis, Dan Lipinski, Dave Loebsack, Zoe Lofgren,
Stephen Lynch, Tim Mahoney, Carolyn Maloney.
Ed Markey, Carolyn McCarthy, Betty McCollum, Jim McDermott,
Mike McIntyre, Jerry McNerney, Mike McNulty, Martin Meehan,
Kendrick Meek, Michael Michaud, Juanita Millender-McDonald,
Harry Mitchell, Dennis Moore, Jim Moran, Chris Murphy,
Patrick Murphy, Jerry Nadler, Grace Napolitano, Eleanor
Holmes Norton, James Oberstar.
John Olver, Frank Pallone, Bill Pascrell, Ed Pastor, Donald
Payne, Ed Perlmutter, Collin Peterson, Earl Pomeroy, David
Price, Nick Rahall, Charlie Rangel, Silvestre Reyes, Ciro
Rodriguez, Mike Ross, Steve Rothman, Lucille Roybal-Allard,
Dutch Ruppersberger, Bobby Rush, Tim Ryan, John Salazar.
Linda Sanchez, John Sarbanes, Jan Schakowsky, Adam Schiff,
Allyson Schwartz, David Scott, Jose Serrano, Joe Sestak,
Carol Shea-Porter, Brad Sherman, Albio Sires, Ike Skelton,
Adam Smith, Vic Snyder, Hilda Solis, Pete Stark, Ellen
Tauscher, Bennie Thompson, Mike Thompson, John Tierney.
Stephanie Tubbs Jones, Mark Udall, Tom Udall, Nydia
Velazquez, Tim Walz, Debbie Wasserman Shultz, Maxine Waters,
Diane Watson, Henry Waxman, Anthony Weiner, Robert Wexler,
Charlie Wilson, Lynn Woolsey, David Wu, Al Wynn, John
Yarmuth, Rush Holt, Bobby Scott.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I enjoyed listening to my colleague and good friend, and he is my
good friend, former chairman of the Rules Committee, speak about closed
rules. Since he is the master of closed rules, I know he knows of what
he speaks.
Title I of our rules package is, or at least should be, the least
controversial part, as the ranking member has said, of what we are
going to discuss over the next few hours. Title I is very simply the
rules of the 109th Congress. We are taking the Republican rules from
the last Congress and using this as our base. The changes we will make
to improve on the previous Congress's rules will come later and will be
discussed by the members of the Rules Committee. This section of the
House rules package makes it clearer that the former chairperson of the
Rules Committee, my friend from California, was being just a bit
disingenuous when he said the other day that, and I quote him, we have
not received even a draft, unquote, of the Democrats' rules. Of course
he had, Mr. Speaker. They were the rules of the House that he helped
draft as Chair of the Rules Committee
[[Page 26]]
2 years ago. All we have done is taken the old House rules and improved
them to make the House a more ethical, more democratic, more open
institution.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Of course I will yield to my friend.
Mr. DREIER. I thank my friend for yielding. I really am very hesitant
to interrupt the brilliance of my good friend from Fort Lauderdale.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Now that you have.
Mr. DREIER. Now that I have interrupted it, I just couldn't hesitate
to interrupt when I heard that I somehow had a draft by virtue of
knowing what the rules package that was put into place for the
operation of the 109th Congress was? That was all we had. We had
nothing whatsoever beyond the rules of the House and that is it.
I thank my friend for yielding.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Well, you helped make those rules, my good
friend. Perhaps you didn't utilize the fact that you did as a draft.
But in either event, I take it that I have made my point and you have
made yours.
Frankly, Mr. Speaker, many of the changes to House rules that our
Republican colleagues did make in 1995 and subsequently, in my opinion,
were good ones and some of them we have kept. Proxy voting in
committees was eliminated. That was an excellent reform. We have kept
it. It is in our rules package. You gave the Speaker emergency power to
recess the House and convene in another place in case of a terrorist
incident. That was a good reform, and it is in the package that we have
offered. You prohibited public works projects being named for serving
Members of Congress. That always kind of bothered me, and I am glad
that you got rid of it, and it was a good reform and it is in our
package.
So, Mr. Speaker, title I, I think, is pretty straightforward. I think
we should all be able to agree on it, and the distinguished ranking
member of the Rules Committee has indicated he agrees. They are the
Republican rules of last Congress that today's majority agrees with,
draft or no draft. We will get to the changes later. But title I are
the rules that today's minority wrote 2 years ago.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, before I yield to my good friend from Pasco,
I would simply like to ask unanimous consent to enter into the Record
at this point a copy of the draft that we received that is dated
January 2, 2007. The time stamp on that is 5:45 p.m. I was informed
that we had it last night at 6:10 p.m., and it had already been
circulated to those in the press gallery by that point.
I would be happy to yield to my friend.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I am glad my friend yields. You do agree
that the rules that you wrote are the rules that are being adopted in
this section that we are talking about?
Mr. DREIER. The section that we are talking about right now is simply
implementation----
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Can I get a yes or no?
Mr. DREIER. It is simply implementation of the rules that have
existed for the 109th Congress. I clearly was talking about the rules
for the 110th Congress. In fact, if the gentleman was here when I had
an exchange with the distinguished new Chair of the Rules Committee
when she tried to argue that we somehow were debating the rules for the
109th Congress, the Chair confirmed the fact that we are in fact
considering in toto the package for the 110th Congress using as base
text the 109th.
What I have here and if I am able to gain unanimous consent for this,
Mr. Speaker, to include in the Record, is the draft which uses the
109th base text and has the proposed changes, the different titles for
the proposed changes for the rules of the 110th Congress.
I would ask unanimous consent to include this draft with the date and
the time on it showing that it did not fall within the 24-hour
notification period of time that my friends have consistently insisted
on.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I object, and I reserve the right to object.
Mr. DREIER. The gentleman objects to my including the draft?
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I reserve the right to object.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman reserves the right to object
and is recognized under his reservation.
{time} 1730
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I just wish to share with Mr. Dreier in the
spirit of bipartisanship that mincing words with reference to whether
or not you knew that this portion of the draft of the 109th rules are
those of the 110th actually don't even get to the level of substance
that we ought be dealing with, with something as important as the
rules.
You know the rules. I agree with you that that draft that you are
talking about came from the 109th; but all I am suggesting to you is
that you are not surprised by anything in title I, because you
participated in writing it and, therefore, I think that the record
should reflect that, notwithstanding the fact.
Now, I assure you, having served on the Rules Committee with you with
distinction and respecting you greatly, that you can reasonably expect
that you are not only going to have 24 hours notice, you are going to
have a lot of notice regarding a lot of measures that we were never
accorded. And, toward that end, in the spirit of bipartisanship, I will
not object to your offer.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, the simple point that I am trying to make is
that we all know what the rules for the 109th Congress were. We have
lived under those rules for the last 2 years. Yes, I was proud to have
crafted those, working with my colleagues on this side of the aisle,
and we passed those at the beginning of the Congress and we are going
to have a chance in just a few minutes to vote on those again.
The point is, it is not the rules of the 109th Congress that we
didn't have a draft of. We did not have a draft until January 3 at 5:45
p.m., which clearly did not comply with that 24-hour requirement that
has been put forward. And that is the only point that I am trying to
make.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Reclaiming my time, I think the gentleman
has made his point.
Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Frank of Massachusetts). Is there
objection to the request of the gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
January 3, 2007--5:45 p.m.
H. Res. 6
Resolved,
TITLE I. ADOPTION OF RULES OF ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
Sec. 101. The Rules of the House of Representatives of the
One Hundred Ninth Congress, including applicable provisions
of law or concurrent resolution that constituted rules of the
House at the end of the One Hundred Ninth Congress, are
adopted as the Rules of the House of Representatives of the
One Hundred Tenth Congress.
TITLE II. ETHICS
Sec. 201. That the Rules of the House of Representatives of
the One Hundred Ninth Congress, including applicable
provisions of law or concurrent resolution that constituted
rules of the House at the end of the One Hundred Ninth
Congress, together with such amendments thereto in this
resolution as may otherwise have been adopted, are adopted as
the Rules of the House of Representatives of the One Hundred
Tenth Congress, with the following amendments:
SEC. 202. ENDING THE K-STREET PROJECT.
Rule XXIII is amended by redesignating clause 14 as clause
15, and by inserting after clause 13 the following new
clause:
``14. A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not,
with the intent to influence on the basis of partisan
political affiliation an employment decision or employment
practice of any private entity--
``(a) take or withhold, or offer or threaten to take or
withhold, an official act; or
``(b) influence, or offer or threaten to influence, the
official act of another.''.
SEC. 203. BAN ON GIFTS FROM LOBBYISTS.
(a) Clause 5(a)(1)(A) of rule XXV is amended by inserting
``(i)'' after ``(A)'' and adding at the end the following:
``(ii) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer,
or employee of the House
[[Page 27]]
may not knowingly accept a gift from a registered lobbyist or
agent of a foreign principal or from a private entity that
retains or employs registered lobbyists or agents of a
foreign principal except as provided in subparagraph (3) of
this paragraph.''.
(b) Clause 5(a)(1)(B) of rule XXV is amended by inserting
``not prohibited by subdivision (A)(ii)'' after the
parenthetical.
SEC. 204. VALUATION OF TICKETS TO SPORTING AND ENTERTAINMENT
EVENTS.
Clause 5(a)(1)(B) of rule XXV is further amended by
inserting ``(i)'' after ``(B)'' and adding at the end the
following:
``(ii) A gift of a ticket to a sporting or entertainment
event shall be valued at the face value of the ticket or, in
the case of a ticket without a face value, at the highest
cost of a ticket with a face value for the event. The price
printed on a ticket to an event shall be deemed its face
value only if it also is the price at which the issuer offers
that ticket for sale to the public.''.
SEC. 205. RESTRICTION OF PRIVATELY FUNDED TRAVEL.
(a) Prohibition.--Clause 5(b)(1) of rule XXV is amended--
(1) in subdivision (A), by striking ``from a private
source'' and all that follows through ``prohibited by this
clause'' and inserting ``for necessary transportation,
lodging, and related expenses for travel to a meeting,
speaking engagement, factfinding trip, or similar event in
connection with his duties as an officeholder shall be
considered as a reimbursement to the House and not a gift
prohibited by this clause when it is from a private source
other than a registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign
principal or a private entity that retains or employs
registered lobbyists or agents of a foreign principal (except
as provided in subdivision (C))''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subdivision:
``(C) A reimbursement (including payment in kind) to a
Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee
of the House for any purpose described in subdivision (A)
also shall be considered as a reimbursement to the House and
not a gift prohibited by this clause (without regard to
whether the source retains or employs registered lobbyists or
agents of a foreign principal) if it is, under regulations
prescribed by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct
to implement this provision--
``(i) directly from an institution of higher education
within the meaning of section 101 of the Higher Education Act
of 1965; or
``(ii) provided only for attendance at or participation in
a one-day event (exclusive of travel time and an overnight
stay).
``Regulations prescribed to implement this provision may
permit a two-night stay when determined by the committee on a
case-by-case basis to be practically required to participate
in the one-day event.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on March 1, 2007.
SEC. 206. LOBBYIST ORGANIZATIONS AND PARTICIPATION IN
CONGRESSIONAL TRAVEL.
(a) In General.--Clause 5 of rule XXV is further amended by
redesignating paragraphs (c), (d), (e), and (f) as paragraphs
(e), (f), (g), and (h), respectively, and by inserting after
paragraph (b) the following:
``(c)(1)(A) Except as provided in subdivision (B), a
Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee
of the House may not accept a reimbursement (including
payment in kind) for transportation, lodging, or related
expenses for a trip on which the traveler is accompanied on
any segment by a registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign
principal.
``(B) Subdivision (A) does not apply to a trip for which
the source of reimbursement is an institution of higher
education within the meaning of section 101 of the Higher
Education Act of 1965.
``(2) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer,
or employee of the House may not accept a reimbursement
(including payment in kind) for transportation, lodging, or
related expenses under the exception in paragraph
(b)(1)(C)(ii) of this clause for a trip that is financed in
whole or in part by a private entity that retains or employs
registered lobbyists or agents of a foreign principal unless
any involvement of a registered lobbyist or agent of a
foreign principal in the planning, organization, request, or
arrangement of the trip is de minimis under rules prescribed
by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to
implement paragraph (b)(1)(C) of this clause.
``(3) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer,
or employee of the House may not accept a reimbursement
(including payment in kind) for transportation, lodging, or
related expenses for a trip (other than a trip permitted
under paragraph (b)(1)(C) of this clause) if such trip is in
any part planned, organized, requested, or arranged by a
registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign principal.''
``(d) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer,
or employee of the House shall, before accepting travel
otherwise permissible under paragraph (b)(1) of this clause
from any private source--
``(1) provide to the Committee on Standards of Official
Conduct before such trip a written certification signed by
the source or (in the case of a corporate person) by an
officer of the source--
``(A) that the trip will not be financed in any part by a
registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign principal;
``(B) that the source either--
``(i) does not retain or employ registered lobbyists or
agents of a foreign principal; or
``(ii) is an institution of higher education within the
meaning of section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965;
or
``(iii) certifies that the trip meets the requirements
specified in rules prescribed by the Committee on Standards
of Official Conduct to implement paragraph (b)(1)(C)(ii) of
this clause and specifically details the extent of any
involvement of a registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign
principal in the planning, organization, request, or
arrangement of the trip considered to qualify as de minimis
under such rules;
``(C) that the source will not accept from another source
any funds earmarked directly or indirectly for the purpose of
financing any aspect of the trip;
``(D) that the traveler will not be accompanied on any
segment of the trip by a registered lobbyist or agent of a
foreign principal (except in the case of a trip for which the
source of reimbursement is an institution of higher education
within the meaning of section 101 of the Higher Education Act
of 1965); and
``(E) that (except as permitted in paragraph (b)(1)(C) of
this clause) the trip will not in any part be planned,
organized, requested, or arranged by a registered lobbyist or
agent of a foreign principal; and
``(2) after the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct
has promulgated the regulations mandated in paragraph
(i)(1)(B) of this clause, obtain the prior approval of the
committee for such trip.''.
(b) Conforming Changes in Cross-References.--Clause 5 of
rule XXV is further amended by--
(1) in clause 5(a)(3)(E), striking ``paragraph (c)(3)'' and
inserting ``paragraph (e)(3)''; and
(2) in clause 5(e)(2) (as redesignated), striking
``paragraph (d)'' and inserting ``paragraph (f)''.
(c) Timeliness of Information.--Clause 5(b)(1)(A)(ii) of
rule XXV is amended by striking ``30 days'' and inserting
``15 days''.
(d) Conforming Amendment.--Clause 5(b)(3) of rule XXV is
amended by striking ``of expenses reimbursed or to be
reimbursed''.
(e) Public Availability.--Clause 5(b)(5) of rule XXV is
amended to read as follows:
``(5) The Clerk of the House shall make all advance
authorizations, certifications, and disclosures filed
pursuant to this paragraph available for public inspection as
soon as possible after they are received.''.
(f) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect on March 1, 2007.
SEC. 207. FURTHER LIMITATION ON THE USE OF FUNDS FOR TRAVEL.
Rule XXIII is further amended by redesignating clause 15
(as earlier redesignated) as clause 16, and by inserting
after clause 14 the following new clause:
``15. (a) A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may
not use personal funds, official funds, or campaign funds for
a flight on a non-governmental airplane that is not licensed
by the Federal Aviation Administration to operate for
compensation or hire.
``(b) In this clause, the term `campaign funds' includes
funds of any political committee under the Federal Election
Campaign Act of 1971, without regard to whether the committee
is an authorized committee of the Member, Delegate, or
Resident Commissioner involved under such Act.''.
SEC. 208. EXPENSES FOR OFFICIALLY CONNECTED TRAVEL.
Clause 5 of rule XXV is further amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(i)(1) Not later than 45 days after the date of adoption
of this paragraph and at annual intervals thereafter, the
Committee on Standards of Official Conduct shall develop and
revise, as necessary--
``(A) guidelines on judging the reasonableness of an
expense or expenditure for purposes of this clause, including
the factors that tend to establish--
``(i) a connection between a trip and official duties;
``(ii) the reasonableness of an amount spent by a sponsor;
``(iii) a relationship between an event and an officially
connected purpose; and
``(iv) a direct and immediate relationship between a source
of funding and an event; and
``(B) regulations describing the information it will
require individuals subject to this clause to submit to the
committee in order to obtain the prior approval of the
committee for any travel covered by this clause, including
any required certifications.
``(2) In developing and revising guidelines under paragraph
(1)(A), the committee shall take into account the maximum per
diem rates for official Government travel published annually
by the General Services Administration, the Department of
State, and the Department of Defense.''.
SEC. 209. ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURE.
Clause 5(b)(3) of rule XXV is further amended--
(a) by striking ``and'' after the semicolon at the end of
subdivision (E);
[[Page 28]]
(b) by redesignating subdivision (F) as subdivision (G);
and
(c) by inserting after subdivision (E) the following new
subdivision:
``(F) a description of meetings and events attended; and''.
SEC. 210. CLERICAL CORRECTION.
Clause 5(f)(1) of rule XXV (as earlier redesignated) is
amended by striking ``are'' and inserting ``is''.
SEC. 211. ANNUAL ETHICS TRAINING FOR MEMBERS, OFFICERS AND
EMPLOYEES OF THE HOUSE.
(a) Training Program.--Clause 3(a) of rule XI is amended by
adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(6)(A) The committee shall offer annual ethics training
to each Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, and
employee of the House. Such training shall--
``(i) involve the classes of employees for whom the
committee determines such training to be appropriate; and
``(ii) include such knowledge of the Code of Official
Conduct and related House rules as may be determined
appropriate by the committee.
``(B)(i) A new officer or employee of the House shall
receive training under this paragraph not later than 60 days
after beginning service to the House.
``(ii) Not later than January 31 of each year, each officer
and employee of the House shall file a certification with the
committee that the officer or employee attended ethics
training in the last year as established by this
subparagraph.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on March 1, 2007.
SEC. 212. DESIGNATING COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR.
(a) Clause 1(e) of rule X is amended by striking
``Committee on Education and the Workforce'' and inserting
``Committee on Education and Labor''.
(b) Clause 3(d) of rule X is amended by striking
``Committee on Education and the Workforce'' and inserting
``Committee on Education and Labor''.
SEC. 213. DESIGNATING COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS.
(a) Clause 1 of rule X is amended by--
(1) redesignating the existing paragraphs (h) through (m),
as paragraphs (m), (i), (j), (h), (k), and (l), respectively
(inserting paragraph (h), as redesignated, after paragraph
(g)); and
(2) in paragraph (h), as redesignated, striking ``Committee
on International Relations'' and inserting ``Committee on
Foreign Affairs''.
(b) Clause 3 of rule X is amended by--
(1) redesignating the existing paragraphs (b) through (i)
as paragraphs (c), (e), (d), (i), (g), (f), (b) and (h),
respectively (inserting paragraph (b), as redesignated, after
paragraph (a); inserting paragraph (d), as redesignated,
after paragraph (c); and inserting paragraph (f), as
redesignated, after paragraph (e)); and
(2) in paragraph (f), as redesignated, striking ``Committee
on International Relations'' and inserting ``Committee on
Foreign Affairs''.
(c) Clause 11(a)(1)(C) of rule X is amended by striking
``Committee on International Relations'' and inserting
``Committee on Foreign Affairs''.
(d) Clause 2(d) of rule XII is amended by striking
``Committee on International Relations'' and inserting
``Committee on Foreign Affairs''.
SEC. 214. DESIGNATING COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES.
(a) Clause 1(l) of rule X (as earlier redesignated) is
amended by striking ``Committee on Resources'' and inserting
``Committee on Natural Resources''.
(b) Clause 3(h) of rule X (as earlier redesignated) is
amended by striking ``Committee on Resources'' and inserting
``Committee on Natural Resources''.
SEC. 215. DESIGNATING COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT
REFORM.
(a) Clause 1 of rule X is further amended by--
(1) inserting paragraph (m) (as earlier redesignated),
after paragraph (l) (as earlier redesignated); and
(2) in paragraph (m) (as earlier redesignated), striking
``Committee on Government Reform'' and inserting ``Committee
on Oversight and Government Reform''.
(b) Clause 2 of rule X is amended by--
(1) in paragraph (d)(1), striking ``Committee on Government
Reform'' and inserting ``Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform''; and
(2) in paragraph (d)(2), striking ``Committee on Government
Reform'' and inserting ``Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform''.
(c) Clause 3 of rule X is further amended by--
(1) inserting paragraph (i) (as earlier redesignated) after
paragraph (h) (as earlier redesignated); and
(2) in paragraph (i), (as earlier redesignated), striking
``Committee on Government Reform'' and inserting ``Committee
on Oversight and Government Reform''.
(d) Clause 4 of rule X is amended by--
(1) in paragraph (c)(1), striking ``Committee on Government
Reform'' and inserting ``Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform''; and
(2) in paragraph (c)(2), striking ``Committee on Government
Reform'' and inserting ``Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform''.
(e) Clause 5(d)(2) of rule X is amended by striking
``Committee on Government Reform'' and inserting ``Committee
on Oversight and Govemment Reform''.
(f) Clause 4 of rule XV is amended by striking ``Committee
on Government Reform'' and inserting ``Committee on Oversight
and Government Reform''.
SEC. 216. DESIGNATING COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY.
(a) Clause 1(o) of rule X is amended by striking
``Committee on Science'' and inserting ``Committee on Science
and Technology''.
(b) Clause 3(k) of rule X is amended by striking
``Committee on Science'' and inserting ``Committee on Science
and Technology''.
SEC. 217. SEPARATE ORDER: NUMBERING OF BILLS
In the One Hundred Tenth Congress, the first 10 numbers for
bills (H.R. 1 through H.R. 10) shall be reserved for
assignment by the Speaker to such bills as she may designate.
TITLE III. CIVILITY
Sec. 301. The Rules of the House of Representatives of the
One Hundred Ninth Congress, including applicable provisions
of law or concurrent resolution that constituted rules of the
House at the end of the One Hundred Ninth Congress, together
with such amendments thereto in this resolution as may
otherwise have been adopted, are adopted as the Rules of the
House of Representatives of the One Hundred Tenth Congress,
with the following amendments:
SEC. 302. PROPER CONDUCT OF VOTES.
Clause 2(a) of rule XX is amended by inserting after the
second sentence the following sentence: ``A record vote by
electronic device shall not be held open for the sole purpose
of reversing the outcome of such vote.''.
SEC. 303. FULL AND OPEN DEBATE IN CONFERENCE.
In rule XXII--
(a) clause 12(a) is amended by adding at the end the
following new subparagraphs:
``(3) In conducting conferences with the Senate, managers
on the part of the House should endeavor to ensure--
``(A) that meetings for the resolution of differences
between the two Houses occur only under circumstances in
which every manager on the part of the House has notice of
the meeting and a reasonable opportunity to attend;
``(B) that all provisions on which the two Houses disagree
are considered as open to discussion at any meeting of a
conference committee; and
``(C) that papers reflecting a conference agreement are
held inviolate to change without renewal of the opportunity
of all managers on the part of the House to reconsider their
decisions to sign or not to sign the agreement.
``(4) Managers on the part of the House shall be provided a
unitary time and place with access to at least one complete
copy of the final conference agreement for the purpose of
recording their approval (or not) of the final conference
agreement by placing their signatures (or not) on the sheets
prepared to accompany the conference report and joint
explanatory statement of the managers.''.
(b) add the following new clause at the end:
``13. It shall not be in order to consider a conference
report the text of which differs in any way, other than
clerical, from the text that reflects the action of the
conferees on all of the differences between the two Houses,
as recorded by their placement of their signatures (or not)
on the sheets prepared to accompany the conference report and
joint explanatory statement of the managers.''.
TITLE IV. FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY
Sec. 401. The Rules of the House of Representatives of the
One Hundred Ninth Congress, including applicable provisions
of law or concurrent resolution that constituted rules of the
House at the end of the One Hundred Ninth Congress, together
with such amendments thereto in this resolution as may
otherwise have been adopted, are adopted as the Rules of the
House of Representatives of the One Hundred Tenth Congress,
with the following amendments:
SEC. 402. RECONCILIATION.
Rule XXI is amended by adding at the end the following new
clause:
``7. It shall not be in order to consider a concurrent
resolution on the budget, or an amendment thereto, or a
conference report thereon that contains reconciliation
directives under section 310 of the Congressional Budget Act
of 1974 that specify changes in law reducing the surplus or
increasing the deficit for either the period comprising the
current fiscal year and the five fiscal years beginning with
the fiscal year that ends in the following calendar year or
the period comprising the current fiscal year and the ten
fiscal years beginning with the fiscal year that ends in the
following calendar year. In determining whether
reconciliation directives specify changes in law reducing the
surplus or increasing the deficit, the sum of the directives
for each reconciliation bill (under section 310 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974) envisioned by that measure
shall be evaluated.
[[Page 29]]
SEC. 403. APPLYING POINTS OF ORDER UNDER BUDGET ACT TO BILLS
AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS CONSIDERED UNDER SPECIAL
RULES.
Rule XXI is amended by adding at the end the following new
clause:
``8. With respect to measures considered pursuant to a
special order of business, points of order under title III of
the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 shall operate without
regard to whether the measure concerned has been reported
from committee. Such points of order shall operate with
respect to (as the case may be)--
``(a) the form of a measure recommended by the reporting
committee where the statute uses the term ``as reported'' (in
the case of a measure that has been so reported);
``(b) the form of the measure made in order as an original
bill or joint resolution for the purpose of amendment; or
``(c) the form of the measure on which the previous
question is ordered directly to passage.'' .
SEC. 404. CONGRESSIONAL EARMARK REFORM.
(a) Point of Order against Congressional Earmarks.--Rule
XXI is amended by adding at the end the following new clause:
``9. (a) It shall not be in order to consider--
``(1) a bill or joint resolution reported by a committee
unless the report includes a list of congressional earmarks,
limited tax benefits, and limited tariff benefits in the bill
or in the report (and the name of any Member, Delegate, or
Resident Commissioner who submitted a request to the
committee for each respective item included in such list) or
a statement that the proposition contains no congressional
earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits;
``(2) a bill or joint resolution not reported by a
committee unless the chairman of each committee of initial
referral has caused a list of congressional earmarks, limited
tax benefits, and limited tariff benefits in the bill (and
the name of any Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner
who submitted a request to the committee for each respective
item included in such list) or a statement that the
proposition contains no congressional earmarks, limited tax
benefits, or limited tariff benefits to be printed in the
Congressional Record prior to its consideration;
``(3) an amendment to a bill or joint resolution to be
offered at the outset of its consideration for amendment by a
member of a committee of initial referral as designated in a
report of the Committee on Rules to accompany a resolution
prescribing a special order of business unless the proponent
has caused a list of congressional earmarks, limited tax
benefits, and limited tariff benefits in the amendment (and
the name of any Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner
who submitted a request to the proponent for each respective
item included in such list) or a statement that the
proposition contains no congressional earmarks, limited tax
benefits, or limited tariff benefits to be printed in the
Congressional Record prior to its consideration; or
``(4) a conference report to accompany a bill or joint
resolution unless the joint explanatory statement prepared by
the managers on the part of the House and the managers on the
part of the Senate includes a list of congressional earmarks,
limited tax benefits, and limited tariff benefits in the
conference report or joint statement (and the name of any
Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or Senator who
submitted a request to the House or Senate committees of
jurisdiction for each respective item included in such list)
or a statement that the proposition contains no congressional
earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits.
``(b) It shall not be in order to consider a rule or order
that waives the application of paragraph (a). As disposition
of a point of order under this paragraph, the Chair shall put
the question of consideration with respect to the rule or
order that waives the application of paragraph (a). The
question of consideration shall be debatable for 10 minutes
by the Member initiating the point of order and for 10
minutes by an opponent, but shall otherwise be decided
without intervening motion except one that the House adjourn.
``(c) In order to be cognizable by the Chair, a point of
order raised under paragraph (a) may be based only on the
failure of a report, submission to the Congressional Record,
or joint explanatory statement to include a list required by
paragraph (a) or a statement that the proposition contains no
congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited
tariff benefits.
``(d) For the purpose of this clause, the term
`congressional earmark' means a provision or report language
included primarily at the request of a Member, Delegate,
Resident Commissioner, or Senator providing, authorizing or
recommending a specific amount of discretionary budget
authority, credit authority, or other spending authority for
a contract, loan, loan guarantee, grant, loan authority, or
other expenditure with or to an entity, or targeted to a
specific State, locality or Congressional district, other
than through a statutory or administrative formula-driven or
competitive award process.
``(e) For the purpose of this clause, the term `limited tax
benefit' means--
``(1) any revenue-losing provision that--
``(A) provides a Federal tax deduction, credit, exclusion,
or preference to 10 or fewer beneficiaries under the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, and
``(B) contains eligibility criteria that are not uniform in
application with respect to potential beneficiaries of such
provision; or
``(2) any Federal tax provision which provides one
beneficiary temporary or permanent transition relief from a
change to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
``(f) For the purpose of this clause, the term 'limited
tariff benefit' means a provision modifying the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States in a manner that
benefits 10 or fewer entities.
(b) Related Amendment to Code of Official Conduct.--Rule
XXIII is amended--
(a) by redesignating clause 16 (as earlier redesignated) as
clause 18; and
(b) by inserting after clause 15 the following new clauses:
``16. A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not
condition the inclusion of language to provide funding for a
congressional earmark, a limited tax benefit, or a limited
tariff benefit in any bill or joint resolution (or an
accompanying report) or in any conference report on a bill or
joint resolution (including an accompanying joint explanatory
statement of managers) on any vote cast by another Member,
Delegate, or Resident Commissioner. For purposes of this
clause and clause 17, the terms `congressional earmark,'
`limited tax benefit,' and `limited tariff benefit' shall
have the meanings given them in clause 9 of rule XXI.
``17. (a) A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner who
requests a congressional earmark, a limited tax benefit, or a
limited tariff benefit in any bill or joint resolution (or an
accompanying report) or in any conference report on a bill or
joint resolution (or an accompanying joint statement of
managers) shall provide a written statement to the chairman
and ranking minority member of the committee of jurisdiction,
including--
``(1) the name of the Member, Delegate, or Resident
Commissioner;
``(2) in the case of a congressional earmark, the name and
address of the intended recipient or, if there is no
specifically intended recipient, the intended location of the
activity;
``(3) in the case of a limited tax or tariff benefit,
identification of the individual or entities reasonably
anticipated to benefit, to the extent known to the Member,
Delegate, or Resident Commissioner;
``(4) the purpose of such congressional earmark or limited
tax or tariff benefit; and
``(5) a certification that the Member, Delegate, or
Resident Commissioner or spouse has no financial interest in
such congressional earmark or limited tax or tariff benefit.
``(b) Each committee shall maintain the information
transmitted under paragraph (a), and the written disclosures
for any congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or
limited tariff benefits included in any measure reported by
the committee or conference report filed by the chairman of
the committee or any subcommittee thereof shall be open for
public inspection.''.
SEC.405. PAY-AS-YOU-GO POINT OF ORDER.
Rule XXI is amended by adding at the end the following new
clause:
``10. It shall not be in order to consider any bill, joint
resolution, amendment, or conference report if the provisions
of such measure affecting direct spending and revenues have
the net effect of increasing the deficit or reducing the
surplus for either the period comprising the current fiscal
year and the five fiscal years beginning with the fiscal year
that ends in the following calendar year or the period
comprising the current fiscal year and the ten fiscal years
beginning with the fiscal year that ends in the following
calendar year. The effect of such measure on the deficit or
surplus shall be determined on the basis of estimates made by
the Committee on the Budget relative to--
(a) the most recent baseline estimates supplied by the
Congressional Budget Office consistent with section 257 of
the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985
used in considering a concurrent resolution on the budget; or
(b) after the beginning of a new calendar year and before
consideration of a concurrent resolution on the budget, the
most recent baseline estimates supplied by the Congressional
Budget Office consistent with section 257 of the Balanced
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.''.
TITLE V. MISCELLANEOUS
Sec. 501. The Rules of the House of Representatives of the
One Hundred Ninth Congress, including applicable provisions
of law or concurrent resolution that constituted rules of the
House at the end of the One Hundred Ninth Congress, together
with such amendments thereto in this resolution as may
otherwise have been adopted, are adopted as the Rules of the
House of Representatives of the One Hundred Tenth Congress,
with the following amendments:
SEC. 502. DEPOSITION AUTHORITY.
Clause 4(c) of rule X is amended by adding at the end the
following new subparagraph:
``(3)(A) The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
may adopt a rule authorizing and regulating the taking of
depositions by a member or counsel of the committee,
including pursuant to subpoena
[[Page 30]]
under clause 2(m) of rule XI (which hereby is made applicable
for such purpose),
``(B) A rule adopted by the committee pursuant to this
subparagraph--
``(i) may provide that a deponent be directed to subscribe
an oath or affirmation before a person authorized by law to
administer the same; and
``(ii) shall ensure that the minority members and staff of
the committee are accorded equitable treatment with respect
to notice of and a reasonable opportunity to participate in
any proceeding conducted thereunder.
``(C) Information secured pursuant to the authority
described in subdivision (A) shall retain the character of
discovery until offered for admission in evidence before the
committee, at which time any proper objection shall be
timely.''.
SEC. 503. RECORD VOTES IN THE COMMITTEE ON RULES.
The second sentence of clause 3(b) of rule XIII is amended
by inserting ``a report by the Committee on Rules on a rule,
joint rule, or the order of business or to'' after ``to''.
SEC. 504. CHANGES TO REFLECT INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY REFORM.
Clause 11 of rule X is amended by--
(a) in paragraph (b)(1)(A), striking ``Director of Central
Intelligence''; and inserting ``Director of National
Intelligence'';
(b) in paragraph (b)(1)(A), striking ``Foreign'';
(c) in paragraph (b)(1)(D)(i), striking ``Director of
Central Intelligence'' and inserting ``Director of National
Intelligence'';
(d) in paragraph (b)(1)(D)(i), striking ``Foreign'';
(e) in paragraph (c)(2), inserting ``the Director of
National Intelligence,'' before ``the Director of the Central
Intelligence Agency'';
(f) in paragraph (e)(2), striking ``Central'' and inserting
``National''; and
(g) in paragraph (i), striking subparagraphs (1) through
(6) and inserting in lieu thereof the following:
``(1) The activities of the Director of National
Intelligence and the Office of the Director of National
Intelligence.
``(2) The activities of the Central Intelligence Agency.
``(3) The activities of the Defense Intelligence Agency.
``(4) The activities of the National Security Agency.
``(5) The intelligence and intelligence-related activities
of other agencies and subdivisions of the Department of
Defense.
``(6) The intelligence and intelligence-related activities
of the Department of State.
``(7) The intelligence and intelligence-related activities
of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
``(8) The intelligence and intelligence-related activities
of all other departments and agencies of the executive
branch.''.
SEC. 505. TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING CHANGES.
(a) Clause 12(b) of rule I is amended to read as follows:
``(b)(1) To suspend the business of the House when notified
of an imminent threat to its safety, the Speaker may declare
an emergency recess subject to the call of the Chair.''
``(2) To suspend the business of the Committee of the Whole
House on the state of the Union when notified of an imminent
threat to its safety, the Chairman of the Committee of the
Whole may declare an emergency recess subject to the call of
the Chair.''.
(b) Clause 6(b) of rule XIII is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Pending the consideration of a report by the
Committee on Rules on a rule, joint rule, or the order of
business, the Speaker may entertain one motion that the House
adjourn but may not entertain any other dilatory motion until
the report shall have been disposed of.''.
(c) Clause 1(b) of rule XV is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Pending a motion that the House suspend the rules,
the Speaker may entertain one motion that the House adjourn
but may not entertain any other motion until the vote is
taken on the suspension.''.
(d) In clause 2(e) of rule XV, subparagraph (1) is amended
to read as follows:
``(1) If a motion prevails to discharge the Committee on
Rules from consideration of a resolution, the House shall
immediately consider the resolution, pending which the
Speaker may entertain one motion that the House adjourn but
may not entertain any other dilatory motion until the
resolution has been disposed of. If the resolution is
adopted, the House shall immediately proceed to its
execution.''.
SEC. 506. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: 9/11 SELECT PANEL.
Upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order
without intervention of any point of order to consider in the
House a resolution to enhance intelligence oversight
authority. The resolution shall be considered as read. The
previous question shall be considered as ordered on the
resolution to final adoption without intervening motion
except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled
by the Majority Leader and the Minority Leader or their
designees; and (2) one motion to recommit shich may not
contain instructions.
SEC. 507. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: 9/11 RECOMMENDATIONS.
(1) Upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in
order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 1) to provide
for the implementation of the recommendations of the National
Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. All
points of order against the bill and against its
consideration are waived. The bill shall be considered as
read. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on
the bill to final passage without intervening motion except;
(1) three hours of debate equally divided and controlled by
the Majority Leader and the Minority Leader or their
designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
(b) During consideration of H.R. 1 pursuant to this
resolution, notwithstanding the operation of the previous
question, the Chair may postpone further consideration of the
bill to a time designated by the Speaker.
SEC. 508. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: MINIMUM WAGE.
(a) Upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in
order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2) to amend the
Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to provide for an increase
in the Federal minimum wage. All points of order against the
bill and against its consideration are waived. The bill shall
be considered as read. The previous question shall be
considered as ordered on the bill to final passage without
intervening motion except: (1) three hours of debate equally
divided and controlled by the Majority Leader and the
Minority Leader or their designees; and (2) one motion to
recommit.
(b) During consideration of H.R. 2 pursuant to this
resolution, notwithstanding the operation of the previous
question, the Chair may postpone further consideration of the
bill to a time designated by the Speaker.
SEC. 509. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: STEM CELL.
(a) Upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in
order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 3) to amend the
Public Health Service Act to provide for human embryonic stem
cell research. All points of order against the bill and
against its consideration are waived. The bill shall be
considered as read. The previous question shall be considered
as ordered on the bill to final passage without intervening
motion except: (1) three hours of debate equally divided and
controlled by the Majority Leader and the Minority Leader or
their designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
(b) During consideration of H.R. 3 pursuant to this
resolution, notwithstanding the operation of the previous
question, the Chair may postpone further consideration of the
bill to a time designated by the Speaker.
SEC. 510. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: PRESCRIPTION DRUGS.
(a) Upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in
order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 4) to amend
part D of title XVIII of the Social Security Act to require
the Secretary of Health and Human Services to negotiate lower
covered part D drug prices on behalf of Medicare
beneficiaries. All points of order against the bill and
against its consideration are waived. The bill shall be
considered as read. The previous question shall be considered
as ordered on the bill to final passage without intervening
motion except: (1) three hours of debate equally divided and
controlled by the Majority Leader and the Minority Leader or
their designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
(b) During consideration of H.R. 4 pursuant to this
resolution, notwithstanding the operation of the previous
question, the Chair may postpone further consideration of the
bill to a time designated by the Speaker.
SEC. 511. SEPARATE ORDERS.
(a) Budget Matters.--(1) During the One Hundred Tenth
Congress, references in section 306 of the Congressional
Budget Act of 1974 to a resolution shall be construed in the
House of Representatives as references to a joint resolution.
(2) During the One Hundred Tenth Congress, in the case of a
reported bill or joint resolution considered pursuant to a
special order of business, a point of order under section 303
of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 shall be determined
on the basis of the text made in order as an original bill or
joint resolution for the purpose of amendment or to the text
on which the previous question is ordered directly to
passage, as the case may be.
(3) During the One Hundred Tenth Congress, a provision in a
bill or joint resolution, or in an amendment thereto or a
conference report thereon, that establishes prospectively for
a Federal office or position a specified or minimum level of
compensation to be funded by annual discretionary
appropriations shall not be considered as providing new
entitlement authority under section 401 of the Congressional
Budget Act of 1974.
(4)(A) During the One Hundred Tenth Congress, pending the
adoption of a concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal
year 2008, the provisions of House Concurrent Resolution 376
of the One Hundred Ninth Congress, as adopted by the House,
shall have force and effect in the House as though the One
Hundred Tenth Congress has adopted such a concurrent
resolution.
(B) The chairman of the Committee on the Budget (when
elected) shall submit for printing in the Congressional
Record--
[[Page 31]]
(i) the allocations contemplated by section 302(a) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to accompany the concurrent
resolution described in subparagraph (A), which shall be
considered to be such allocations under a concurrent
resolution on the budget; and
(ii) ``Accounts Identified for Advance Appropriations,''
which shall be considered to be the programs, projects,
activities, or accounts referred to in section 401(b) of
House Concurrent Resolution 376 of the One Hundred Ninth
Congress, as adopted by the House.
(5)(A) During the One Hundred Tenth Congress, except as
provided in subsection (C), a motion that the Committee of
the Whole rise and report a bill to the House shall not be in
order if the bill, as amended, exceeds an applicable
allocation of new budget authority under section 302(b) of
the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as estimated by the
Committee on the Budget.
(B) If a point of order under subsection (A) is sustained,
the Chair shall put the question: ``Shall the Committee of
the Whole rise and report the bill to the House with such
amendments as may have been adopted notwithstanding that the
bill exceeds its allocation of new budget authority under
section 302(b) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974?''.
Such question shall be debatable for 10 minutes equally
divided and controlled by a proponent of the question and an
opponent but shall be decided without intervening motion.
(C) Subsection (A) shall not apply--
(i) to a motion offered under clause 2(d) of rule XXI; or
(ii) after disposition of a question under subsection (B)
on a given bill.
(D) If a question under subsection (B) is decided in the
negative, no further amendment shall be in order except--
(i) one proper amendment, which shall be debatable for 10
minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and
an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not
be subject to a demand for division of the question in the
House or in the Committee of the Whole; and
(ii) pro forma amendments, if offered by the chairman or
ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or
their designees, for the purpose of debate.
(b) Certain Subcommittees.--Notwithstanding clause 5(d) of
rule X, during the One Hundred Tenth Congress--
(1) the Committee on Armed Services may have not more than
seven subcommittees;
(2) the Committee on Foreign Affairs may have not more than
seven subcommittees; and
(3) the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure may
have not more than six subcommittees.
(c) Exercise Facilities for Former Members.--During the One
Hundred Tenth Congress--
(1) The House of Representatives may not provide access to
any exercise facility which is made available exclusively to
Members and former Members, officers and former officers of
the House of Representatives, and their spouses to any former
Member, former officer, or spouse who is a lobbyist
registered under the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 or any
successor statute or agent of a foreign principal as defined
in clause 5 of rule XXV. For purposes of this section, the
term ``Member of the House of Representatives'' includes a
Delegate or Resident Commissioner to the Congress.
(2) The Committee on House Administration shall promulgate
regulations to carry out this subsection.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Pasco, Washington.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I thank the gentleman for yielding. And I
will say right up front I intend to support title I and the rules
package, and I take literally what the gentleman, my friend from
Florida, talked about what we can expect from the Rules Committee when
we restructure, hopefully next week, as to the timing and so forth of
the business that we take up.
But I want to talk about one issue that is not addressed in the
proposed changes for the 110th that is in the 109th package, and that
is, the requirement to have recorded votes in the Rules Committee.
What the provision in the bill and the proposed changes say is that
the Rules members now will comply as the Ethics Committee does. I was
the chairman of the Ethics Committee in the last Congress and the
ranking member in this Congress, and we have recorded votes in those
committees, but we have the option of making them public or not.
Under the proposed rules packages, for the life of me, I cannot
understand why that needs to be extended to the Rules Committee. It is
obvious for the Committee on Official Standards, it is obvious there.
But why it is in the Rules Committee is beyond what I can understand.
Now, I do understand one of the reasons is that if there are errors,
then you would certainly want to be able to correct those errors.
My first term was the 104th Congress, and that is when we made some
major changes in voting. Since that time, there have been 1,304
recorded votes in the Rules Committee; the number of errors in the
rules report in those 12 years is zero. And I think one of the reasons
why is because this is a committee of only 13. There are nine Democrats
and there are four Republicans in this Congress. It was the reverse in
the last Congress. As a matter of fact, I would suggest that you could
probably, on most of those votes, predict what the outcome is going to
be.
So why, for the life of me, we would want to take the transparency of
the Rules Committee away from public knowledge is absolutely beyond me.
It just simply doesn't make any sense.
So I enthusiastically support adopting the rules of the 109th
Congress. It would be my wish that that would be the rules for the
110th Congress, but we are going to debate that later and we will see
what happens. But, again, why we want to take transparency out of votes
in the Rules Committee, and I understand there will be new members on
your side, why they won't want to stand the transparency for their
constituency is beyond me.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the
distinguished chairman of the Agriculture Committee.
Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, some of us that have big huge
districts use our airplanes to fly around the district to get to
meetings just like some people use their automobiles, and there is
concern amongst the few of us that do this about a provision in here.
So, Mr. Hastings, could you clarify for me that it is not the intent of
section 207 of House Resolution 6 to prohibit a Member to use his or
her own airplane; specifically, that is not intended to apply to the
use of the Members' representational allowance to reimburse a Member
for mileage on his or her own airplane?
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I want to assure my colleagues that this is
not the intent of this provision. It is not intended to apply to a
Member who is using her or his own airplane, whether or not it is on
his personal campaign or official business. Specifically, it is not
intended to apply to the use of the Members' representational allowance
to reimburse a Member for mileage on his or her own airplane. We will
work closely with the Ethics Committee and the Committees on House
Administration to ensure that this is how these committees will
interpret the rule.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only,
I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Florida, my
good friend, Kathy Castor, who is the first new Member to speak in the
110th Congress.
Ms. CASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I thank my fellow Floridian very much. And I
am proud to stand here with many other new Members who are very reform-
minded, and let me assure you we are ready to chart the new direction
for America.
The election is over, and it is time for us to keep our commitment
for honest leadership and open government rules changes. During this
first 100 hours of the 110th Congress, all of us in this Congress must
work together to pass key measures affecting the everyday lives of all
Americans. We will begin by adopting the rules of the 109th Congress.
This is the baseline proposal that is before us now. But then we shall
continue on, on other proposals to clean up Washington, to sever
unethical ties between lawmakers and lobbyists. We will start by
banning travel and gifts from lobbyists, requiring full transparency to
end the abuse of special interest earmarks, and ending the abusive
processes that have undermined democracy in this House. These measures
are the first steps to ensure that the Congress upholds the highest
ethical standards.
Americans have paid the cost of corruption in Washington with
skyrocketing prices at the pump, spiraling drug costs, and the waste
and fraud of no bid contracts in the Gulf and Iraq.
[[Page 32]]
No more. Reform is a top priority for this House because reform is a
top priority for the American people.
As our first responsibility in fulfilling the mandate of this
critical election, the Democrats are offering an aggressive reform
package to restore the public trust. So, let's begin.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of the time.
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased that we can, in fact, join in a
bipartisan way in supporting implementation of title I of this
provision. And I believe that it is great that my friend from Florida
(Mr. Hastings) began heaping praise on the many accomplishments of the
104th Congress when we implemented things like an end to proxy voting,
term limits on committee chairmen, and the other items which we have
which go on and on and on, increased transparency and accountability
and disclosure.
I will say that, as I have said, I am very, very troubled and
saddened by the inconsistency when it comes to the issue of
transparency and disclosure in light of the discussion that Mr.
Hastings of Pasco, Washington and I have had about closing down
transparency in the Rules Committee now.
My friend from Florida mentioned the fact that I may be the champion
of closed rules. I will admit that as chairman of the Rules Committee,
I did bring more than a few closed rules here, primarily on bills that
related to tax issues, which was done under the Democratic majorities
of the past and I suspect will be done in the future as well. But I
will say this: Never before, never before have I, as chairman of the
Rules Committee, prevented the Rules Committee from having an
opportunity to deliberate and including in an opening day rules package
five closed rules. I am concerned as we move forward with that. We will
have that debate later on. But I look forward to urging my colleagues
to join in support of title I.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, at this time I am very pleased
to yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Florida,
who is my neighbor, Mr. Ron Klein, who I believe is speaking for the
first time.
Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida
and my new friend from California. My name is Ron Klein, and today I am
proudly sworn in as all of us were in the new Congress, and I represent
Florida's 22nd district. I believe I can speak on behalf of all my
fellow freshmen colleagues today in saying that we are all truly
honored to be here to represent the value of America's families.
It is time to bring a new direction to Washington and promote
honesty, integrity, and real leadership in the United States Congress.
That is why we have introduced an ethics reform package that will
restore the public's trust and confidence in Congress. Those of us who
were just recently on the campaign trail heard that frequently, and we
know we need to do something about it.
One of these reforms has been introduced by my colleague, Zack Space
from Ohio's 18 district, and it is a measure banning Members of
Congress and their staff from accepting gifts from lobbyists. This bill
will also put a stop to the common but inappropriate practice of
allowing Members of Congress to use money from their campaign coffers
to pay for corporate jets for travel purposes.
{time} 1745
Letting special interests run the Congress is simply not right, and
we have a responsibility to put a stop to this unscrupulous practice.
Simply put, it is time to return Congress to the people's House, not
the auction house. I congratulate Speaker Pelosi, and all of the
Members of Congress who were sworn in today, and I ask all Members to
join us in these new policy changes.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 5, the previous
question is ordered on the portion of the divided question comprising
title I.
The question is on that portion of the divided question.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 426,
nays 0, not voting 8, as follows:
[Roll No. 6]
YEAS--426
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Carter
Castle
Castor
Chabot
Chandler
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cubin
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, David
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Lincoln
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doolittle
Doyle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Edwards
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Everett
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Feeney
Ferguson
Filner
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Granger
Graves
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hare
Harman
Hastert
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jefferson
Jindal
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Jordan
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lamborn
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Mahoney (FL)
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Musgrave
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Nunes
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pearce
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sali
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
[[Page 33]]
Tiberi
Tierney
Towns
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--8
Brown (SC)
Buyer
Davis (KY)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Maloney (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCrery
Norwood
{time} 1811
Mr. KING of Iowa changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So that portion of the divided question was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Mr. McCAUL of Texas. Madam Speaker, on Rollcall No. 6 with family in
town I was given insufficient notice of the vote. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``yea.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Frank of Massachusetts). The portion of
the divided question comprising title II is now debatable for 60
minutes.
The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) and the gentleman
from California (Mr. Dreier) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 4 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, it may seem like the November elections took place ages
ago, but the sentiments that created new majorities in the House and
Senate are still strong.
The American people spoke loud and clear on November 7. Together,
Republicans and Democrats and independents from across this great
Nation voted for change. They voted to end the cycle of corruption, pay
to play, and junkets.
Today, Mr. Speaker, the new Democratic majority is fulfilling the
pledge we made to the voters. We are going to clean up Washington, D.C.
We are going to give the people their House back.
Two years ago my friends on the other side of the aisle brought
forward a rules package that, in my opinion, did not go nearly far
enough in upholding the highest ethical standards. Today we offer a
package that is based on real change. Members of Congress are elected
to serve the American people, not their own individual private
interests. And I am proud to say that today, this House of
Representatives will enact a reform package that ends the culture of
corruption once and for all. The days of the K Street project are over.
No longer will Members of this House be able to dictate to any private
entity the hiring or firing of anyone based on their political
affiliation.
This rules package prohibits Members of Congress from traveling on
corporate jets. My constituents in Massachusetts don't have the
opportunity to get cheap travel on corporate jets and neither should
Members of Congress.
{time} 1815
Mr. Speaker, this rules package also changes the way Members of
Congress and staff can travel for official business. I strongly believe
that overseas trips and other travel can be important tools to helping
Members of Congress understand complex domestic and international
issues.
But the days of lobbyist-sponsored golf junkets will be relics of the
past. The actions this package takes are simple and straightforward: no
more junkets, no more gifts from lobbyists, no more travel on corporate
jets.
This rules package is comprehensive, and it is historic. We are going
to change the way this place is run, and we are going to change the way
people look at the Congress. The American people don't want to pick up
their morning newspapers and read about golf junkets to St. Andrews.
They don't want to hear stories about how their Congressman or
Congresswoman was wined and dined with $100 steak dinners.
Mr. Speaker, this is not complicated. These are commonsense items
that should have been dealt with years ago. The time has come to do
what is right, to hold Members of this House to the highest ethical
standards.
With the election of Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House, the first
woman Speaker in the history of the United States, Democrats are
ushering in a new era and putting an end to the culture of corruption.
We are changing the tone in Washington, and we are changing the way we
conduct business.
Now, I know full well that the ethical problems of the past were not
limited to one side of the aisle, and the solutions to those problems
can and should come from both Democrats and Republicans. I know that
many of my Republican friends agree that change is needed, and they
wish that their leadership in the past would have moved forward on some
of these changes. I look forward to working closely with them in the
weeks and the months ahead.
Mr. Speaker, the American people demand, and they deserve, a higher
standard of conduct from their elected officials. Today, we are raising
the bar for how Members of the 110th Congress will carry out their
duties and do their jobs.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this package. Once again, I think
we will have an opportunity for bipartisanship. The issue of ethics and
lobbying reform is something that we believe is very, very important.
As I sit here today, I am reminded of the fact that 1 year ago this
month, Speaker Hastert and I stood right upstairs in the press gallery
and unveiled a package for lobbying and ethics reform, which was
maligned by many of our colleagues, unfortunately.
But I will say that I am very pleased with the fact that we were
ultimately able to pass out of the House our measure, which did a
number of things that I am happy to see are incorporated in this
provision that is coming forward from the new majority.
The thing that troubles me most, Mr. Speaker, is the fact that this
was done in a unilateral way. We are all very proud of the fact that we
have a working, strong, vibrant bipartisan Ethics Committee. It would
have been great if we could have had the Ethics Committee come forward
with these recommendations.
There has been no consultation whatsoever between the majority and
the minority, although I will say, again, I congratulate those Members
of the new majority for including, including many of the items that
were either incorporated in H.R. 4975, which was our lobbying and
disclosure act that we passed out of the House last year, and some of
the provisions that Speaker Hastert and I outlined a year ago this
month: free clearance of travel, a ban on travel and an end to gifts.
An end to the K Street Project. These are all very important reforms
that I do think are essential.
I will say this, Mr. Speaker, as I listen to my very good friend from
Massachusetts, and I congratulate him on his new position in the
majority on the Rules Committee, what happens between today and March 1
of this year? Well, let us see, we have the month of January and the
month of February, and, guess what, under this package, the status quo
in the 110th Congress, under the Democratic majority, remains in place
without any kind of reform or change.
So I have got to ask rhetorically, anyone who wants to answer as to
why we are waiting until March 1 before we see any kind of
implementation here. They want to see guidelines put forward, maybe by
the Ethics Committee. If that is what they would like to do, why don't
we impose an immediate ban until they come up with recommended
guidelines?
So I will say that as I listen to these proposals, they are
interesting, I am very pleased that they have incorporated them. I
don't believe they go far enough. In a few minutes, my colleagues, Mr.
Kirk and Mr. Shadegg, will be talking about concern on the pension
issue, which unfortunately has been left out of this, but I do believe
[[Page 34]]
that by and large this is a measure that is going to be worthy of
bipartisan support, and I am going to urge my colleagues to support it.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, let me just say to my good friend from California, whom
I have a lot of respect for, there is a big difference between what his
leadership proposed in terms of higher ethical standards and what is
being proposed here today. I have got to say to the gentleman that we
include a little bit more than just banning lobbyists from the locker
rooms. They are banned from the locker rooms in this bill, but there is
a heck of a lot more.
Mr. DREIER. Will the gentleman yield? If you will recall, we passed
H.R. 4975.
Mr. McGOVERN. I am in the middle of my statement. I would also say to
the gentleman that his party has been in control for 12 years, and
there has been ample opportunity to change the status quo. The
gentleman's party not only embraced the status quo, but we saw a
proliferation of the culture of corruption, and that is what this is a
response to. In answer to the gentleman's question as to this March 1
deadline, that is to give the Committee on Standards of Official
Conduct ample time to put the rules and regulations and the disclosure
requirements into place so that this can be an effective change.
So this is real historic change. We are going to end the culture of
corruption in this Congress today. I am glad that the gentleman has
said that he is going to support it. I hope that this is a bipartisan
vote.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes, for the purpose of debate, to the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Space).
Mr. SPACE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask you to support this
historic rules package. The winds of change have brought me here. I
don't think it is too much to say that my very presence before you
constitutes a message to this body, a message sent from the good people
of Ohio's 18th District. By these presence, I wish to deliver this
message on behalf of my constituents.
The message is that the legislative process is broken. Rather than
serving the needs of working families, this Congress has shown through
past actions a preference for serving interests of the privileged few.
Nowhere has this been more clear than in the influence wielded by
lobbyists. The influence of lobbyists has compromised the reputation
and even the health of this body.
In order to restore the integrity to this Chamber and restore
America's faith in its elected officials, we must undertake substantial
ethics reform. Our actions today will not only enhance the most
fundamental principles of a democratic society; they will remind our
constituents that we are a body of the people and not above the people.
The package before you will breach the circle of deceit between
lobbyists, their wealthy clients, and this body. It represents long
overdue real ethics reform. It bans House Members and their employees
from accepting gifts from lobbyists and the organizations that hire
them. It prohibits lobbyists from paying for or organizing Member
travel, and it eliminates the all-too-common practice of legislative
jet-setting. In short, the ethics package is the first step toward
restoring integrity and beginning the process necessary to restore
faith in our system of government.
Coming from a district whose previous Congressman became mired, and
then consumed, by scandal, my fellow district residents and I
understand all too intimately the perils associated with weak and
loosely monitored ethics regulations.
We have suffered the frustration, disappointment, and anger
associated with betrayal. We have suffered from not having a Member of
Congress available to attend to the needs of the citizens of our
district. But we are not alone. Other districts have suffered similar
letdowns. That is inexcusable, and it is unconscionable.
At a moment in time when our Nation needs truly heroic leadership, as
the challenges of the changing world continue to grow, this body has
failed to step up and lead. The institution of Congress has failed to
make clear its commitment to the principles of democracy; and it has
frustrated, disappointed, and angered the American public.
The winds of change have, indeed, blown many among us into this
Chamber, and there is much work to do.
We cannot begin our work in good faith without this declaration today
that we are of, and not above, the American people. The time to act is
now. We have an extraordinary burden to prove to those who have given
us this honor. We must make clear to them that we are representing
their interests, not bartering legislative favors in order to gain
gifts and trips.
I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this important ethics
reform package.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Omaha, Nebraska (Mr. Terry).
Mr. TERRY. Thank you, I appreciate this opportunity.
Mr. Speaker, to the gentleman from Ohio, the new Member who just
spoke, I appreciate and respect his point of view. I will add, though,
that the disgust, the frustration with the ethics violation, the
disregard for the public's trust in this body because of a few of our
colleagues isn't relegated to one side of the aisle or the other, nor
one district or the other.
I think all of us in this institution today that took the oath of
office are disgusted by the past; and that is why this body that last
May passed a comprehensive ethics bill, which mostly was incorporated
in this one, ironically, I think, it is fairly humorous, that most of
our colleagues on the other side voted against it because it was not
good enough, yet substantially similar to the one that is brought
forward without our input into the process today.
Now I stand here today saying this isn't good enough. We could have
done a better job of tightening down with lobbyists and gifts. Frankly,
I don't know how to interpret the plane part, but I am concerned about
establishing the public trust when someone accepts bribes.
In our package that was voted against by a lot of our colleagues from
the other side of the aisle that are pounding their chests today, in
that was saying that you cannot receive the fruits that you earned
during your tenure in this office if you have violated the public's
trust.
That is not part of the bill that stands before us today. If you have
accepted a bribe, you are convicted of a felony and are sitting in
jail, you should not be able to accept the part of the government-
funded pension or other government-funded benefits that you earned
while you were here. You just simply cannot do that.
My folks back in Nebraska think that is absolutely absurd. I just
wish we had a process in place where we could have worked in a
partnership to improve this bill, to make it better. But we didn't have
that opportunity, and I don't have the opportunity on behalf of my
Nebraskans, who feel that it is absurd that you have cash in a freezer,
that you can accept bribes like we had in a California or in an Ohio
district, and still accept your pension. I think it is absurd that we
don't have that opportunity today.
Frankly, the fact that those folks that voted against a comprehensive
ethics reform package introduced one without Republican input to
improve the bill smacks of partisanship to me. I thought we were going
to clear the decks of that and start working together for the public
good, and it just doesn't seem like it is happening today.
That is a poor start for civility in this body.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Let me just educate the gentleman that the change that he is asking
for requires a statutory change. Today we are dealing with the House
rules. I will assure the gentleman and his constituents in Nebraska and
people all over
[[Page 35]]
the United States who agree with him that we will have the opportunity
to do that. We will go through House Administration and you will have
the opportunity to do that. We will hopefully have a unanimous vote on
that.
{time} 1830
I am also happy to hear the gentleman and others on the other side of
the aisle all of a sudden speak in favor of ethics reform and real
change and ending the culture of corruption in this House. It is
amazing what an election will do.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Ohio (Ms. Sutton), a new member of the Rules Committee.
Ms. SUTTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman for
yielding me this time.
I rise in strong support of the rules package.
Trust is a fragile thing. It is difficult to win, but easy to lose.
It finds its hold on promises kept and honesty sustained and
unquestionable integrity.
As the representative of the 13th District of Ohio, I am honored to
rise on this historic day to speak for the first time on the floor of
the people's House.
And in so rising, I am proud that I do so to keep the faith with the
people who sent me here to serve.
With our actions today, on this first day of the reform Congress, we
begin to fulfill the awesome responsibility entrusted to us by the
American people.
We have heard the call for change and it shall be heeded. Today, we
sever the links between those who would buy influence on Capitol Hill
and those who would willingly sell it.
We act to clean up the corruption which has eroded the public trust
and resulted in far too many policies that benefit the well connected
and the privileged few, at the expense of the greater good.
Title II of our rules package does just this. We end the K Street
Project, which took peddling of access and influence to soaring new
heights. We act to eradicate the cronyism and corruption. We cut off
the gifts, the perks and travel wielded by special interests. We take
the darkest inner workings of government and sanitize them with the
light of day.
We will work to adopt this set of anti-corruption reforms to
dismantle the dark corridors and backrooms and avenues to abuse that
have allowed corruption to grow and flourish.
We will beat back the culture and abuses that have hurt the American
people, both in policy and in spirit.
Today, we heed the call to put a halt to the corruption that has
tarnished this House.
Trust is a fragile, sacred thing. And we, in the new 110th Congress,
will protect it with all the power of our office.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, let me, again, say that we look forward to
supporting this package, much of which, the items that the gentlewoman
just outlined, were included in H.R. 4975, which passed this House last
May with strong bipartisan support.
Mr. Speaker, with that, I yield 2 minutes to my very good friend from
Highland Park, Illinois (Mr. Kirk).
Mr. KIRK. Mr. Speaker, this House needs more ethics reforms, rather
than less. And the package before the House makes a positive step, but
falls short in several key areas.
The most important ethics reform that is missing from this package
concerns taxpayer-funded pensions for Members of Congress convicted of
a felony. Under current law, both Congressmen Traficant of the
Democratic Party and Cunningham of the Republican Party would still be
eligible to collect a taxpayer-funded pension, even after being
indicted and convicted beyond a shadow of a doubt by a jury of their
peers of a felony.
Stopping taxpayer funded pensions for lawmakers who break the law is
not a new issue. My home State of Illinois, a State not known for its
clean government, in that State, we, at least, kill pensions for
lawmakers who break the law, and we have done so for 30 years.
Ten years ago, Speaker Pelosi voted for H.R. 4011. That would have
killed pensions for Congressmen for a conviction on any one of 21
separate felonies. She was right then, and it would be right now to
terminate taxpayer-funded pensions for lawbreakers.
Mr. Speaker, Democratic Congressman Brad Sherman and I joined to
support these very reforms in the last Congress. And we, at least,
passed limited reforms and allowed the Senate at least to consider
them.
But today, the 100 hours fails to take up this issue. None of these
pension killing reforms are in the package or are currently scheduled.
I take what the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) says very
seriously, that he has made a commitment to bring up legislation to
kill pensions for Members of Congress convicted of a felony.
I have introduced legislation, H.R. 14, to do exactly that, modeled
after the legislation supported by former Speaker Hastert as well as
Speaker Pelosi. These are commonsense reforms, already part of the law
of the land in the land of Lincoln, and long ago should be part of the
ethics reforms of this House.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, let me just respond to the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Kirk) by saying I know I am from Massachusetts, and you
may think I have a funny accent and you have trouble understanding me.
But let me repeat what I said before. In order to make the changes on
the pension issue that he is asking for, which we all support, it
requires a statutory change. And I think the staff over there will help
clarify that. We are all for that.
In H.R. 4011, which Ms. Pelosi supported that you mentioned was a
statute. We are going to do that.
Let me just say one other thing to the gentleman. You keep on
referring to your ethics reform package as if it was some kind of this
monumental change and reform.
You didn't ban the K Street Project, which has really resulted in so
much outrage across the country. You had a temporary suspension on the
issue of travel, and you had no ban on lobbyists' gifts.
This is real reform. We are going to end the culture of corruption.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of debate only 2
minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Gillibrand).
Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. Speaker, the honorable Member from my
neighboring district, I am honored to be here. My new colleagues, thank
you for the opportunity to speak on such an important issue.
The voters of my district and this Nation were very clear about this
past election. They want change. They want real ethics reform, and they
want our country to be placed in a new direction. This is what we are
here to do today. We are going to restore the ethics and integrity back
to Congress.
I am honored to be here today to have the opportunity to help do that
restoration and take an important step to end the influence and
corruption in Congress that special interests have over the legislative
process.
The honest leadership package that we are voting on today and
tomorrow specifically addresses the concerns that the American people
have had about the legislative process and about our elected leaders.
This legislation will end the practice of privately funded trips from
lobbyists. If I take an official trip, my congressional budget will pay
for it. If I take a vacation, I will pay for it. That is how it should
be for everyone.
I also pledge to my constituents, and will vote as part of this
legislation, to never accept any gifts from lobbyists, nor will my
staff.
My job, and all of our jobs, is to represent the citizens of our
districts. And this is the only group that I will be answerable to.
I encourage my colleagues to join me in voting in favor of ending the
culture of corruption and providing the environment where we can get
back to what is most important, working for the people of the United
States.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to speak on this very
important issue to the constituents of my 20th Congressional District
of New York.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, let me just, before yielding to the
gentleman from Marietta, say very quickly again, the legislation that
passed the House,
[[Page 36]]
H.R. 4975, specifically banned the K Street Project. Look at the
language. It is virtually identical. We focused on the issue of
lobbyist travel and gifts. And I believe that we can come together in a
bipartisan way. We want to work in a civil tone, as was outlined by
Speaker Pelosi today.
Mr. Speaker, with that I am happy to yield 3 minutes to my very good
friend, former member of the Rules Committee, the gentleman from
Marietta, Dr. Gingrey.
Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I was surprised when reading title II of
this resolution, as it looks conspicuously like the ethics package
passed by the Republican majority last Congress; the ethics package
that only eight Democrats voted to support. I suspect today more than
eight Democrats will finally agree with the Republicans that meaningful
ethics reform is a priority of the American people.
In fact, the most obvious change in the Democratic package is the
overly partisan and adversarial tone, adding headlines like ``Ending
the K Street Project'' to language that was included in the Republican
legislation. And for what purpose other than a partisan poke in the
minority's eye?
Democrats campaigned on the promise of a more open and inclusive
government, assuring us of their bipartisan intentions. Well, today, on
the first day of the 110th, that promise has been broken. Indeed, it
has been smashed.
Additionally, as the focus of title II is on fostering a spirit of
civility, I find it particularly troubling that the Democrats have
decided to allow only 10 minutes of debate, 5 minutes on each side, on
title V of this resolution, which we will take up tomorrow.
During this brief 10 minutes of debate, we will dramatically change
the way the Rules Committee does business and outline the process by
which five bills, including stem cell research, the 9/11 Commission
recommendation, and minimum wage legislation will be considered. That
is not even 2 minutes per proposal.
So this is hardly, Mr. Speaker, the tone of civility my colleagues on
the other side of the aisle are promising to foster in the 110th
Congress.
The American people and the Members of this body expect more from the
Democrats. Their false promises of bringing a new age of bipartisanship
and transparency to the halls of this Congress have clearly not
materialized, despite the insistence on this by my former colleague,
Mr. McGovern, while a minority member of the Rules Committee who
stated, on September 28, 2006, while discussing the Electronic
Surveillance Modernization Act, and I quote, ``If my Republican friends
want that trend of closed rules and no amendments, of no democracy in
the House to continue, then, by all means, vote for this. Just go along
to get along. But if you believe, as I do, that the monopoly on good
ideas is not held by a few members of the leadership in a closed room,
then vote ``no.'' Have the guts to vote ``no.'' End quote.
Mr. Speaker, I know why the Democratic leadership is trying to limit
debate on these liberal bills, but the American people deserve to have
a voice in this process, the voice of their elected representatives.
Today, it is clear we have been denied that voice.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Let me just say, respond to my good friend from Georgia (Mr.
Gingrey), who I am going to miss on the Rules Committee, if he thinks
that the Republican reform package was meaningful reform, I will lend
you my bifocals so you can read it more carefully. What ended up
happening, what you ended up enacting essentially, after 12 years in
the majority, was banning lobbyists from the locker room. That is all
that became law.
You controlled the House of Representatives. You controlled the
Congress. And you controlled the United States Senate, and that is
basically all that you did.
So I would just say to the gentleman, if he wants to vote ``no'' on
this, he can go right ahead and vote ``no'' on it. But that is
defending the status quo.
I think the American people made it very clear during the last
election that they are sick of the culture of corruption; that they
want a ban on lobbyists' gifts; that they want an end to the K Street
Project. They want a ban on Members using corporate jets to fly around
the country. And so if you want to vote for the status quo, vote ``no''
on this. If you want to vote for real meaningful change, vote ``yes.''
Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Hodes).
Mr. HODES. Mr. Speaker, thank you to the gentleman from Massachusetts
for yielding time.
Dear colleagues, it is my great privilege to rise today for the first
time as the Representative for New Hampshire's Second District. It is
humbling to serve with so many men and women I have admired for so long
and to stand in this Chamber, hallowed by American history as the
people's House.
But while today is dedicated, in part, to celebration, there is no
time to waste in fixing the ills that have plagued this House in recent
years.
Traveling across my State of New Hampshire this fall, I heard one
clear, consistent message from voters--from Democrats, Independents and
Republicans. We are fed up with the mess in Washington. Go down there
and fix it.
Mr. Speaker, while most Americans see Congress as somewhat distant
from their lives, they probably couldn't rattle off the names of
Congressional leadership, for example, or quote bill numbers, they do
understand with absolute clarity when Members of Congress are working
for them or when Members of Congress are working for themselves.
{time} 1845
Now, the Democratic ethics reform package is much needed and it is
long overdue. While some in this body may bristle at its stringency,
and some are now heard to complain, apparently, that it doesn't go far
enough, as a new Member, I can tell you that it is only logical and
only just to make these changes to the House rules, starting today and
starting now.
We must ban gifts and travel from lobbyists, we must put a stop to
the pernicious K Street Project, we must reform the way we spend
taxpayers' money and the way we write and pass the bills meant to
protect taxpayers' interests.
I strongly support the adoption of the Democratic rules package. I
urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote ``yes.''
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to
congratulate the gentleman from New Hampshire. We welcome him here.
Unfortunately, this package doesn't start today and start now. It
starts March 1 of 2007, 2 months from now.
I also want to say to my very good friend from Massachusetts once
again that if you look at the package that we passed in May of last
year, it is a package that enjoyed bipartisan support. It is one of
which we are very proud. And I believe that if you look at the fact
that we did go beyond preventing registered lobbyists from coming onto
the House floor and the gym, we are doing many of those same things
here. It has been done before.
And that is why we are proud to be here in support of this effort,
which, again, some of us believe does not go far enough and there are
some problems with it, but we do believe it is a positive step. Why?
Because it is a reaffirmation of what Speaker Hastert led us to last
year.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to yield 4 minutes to my good
friend from Arizona (Mr. Shadegg).
Mr. SHADEGG. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I want to
express my concern about the tone of this debate. Let me make it clear:
I compliment my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. Ethics
reform is needed here, and today you are making a good first step. But
please listen carefully to those of us on this side of the aisle who
will vote with you for this package when we implore you to go further
and when we take some credit for the efforts of the past.
It is true that we passed as a law through this House, sadly the
Senate did not follow suit, a bill that corrected many of these things.
Your bill,
[[Page 37]]
in some respects, goes further, but some of us are concerned that it
needs to go even further. And it is not because we are revisionists.
I have campaigned in this body and out of this body throughout my
career for reform. I believe it is not enough just to do so-called
lobbyist reform. We must direct our ethics reform at the Members of
this institution. And one way to do that is a way that was recognized
by our new Speaker a decade ago, and that is to say that the Hiss Act,
passed clear back in 1954, which said a Member of Congress who was
convicted of bribery would lose his or her pension, should be
reinstituted, because it was repealed in 1961.
Over a year ago, watching what I was disappointed in in the criminal
conduct of some Members of this body, I introduced a bill with 57
cosponsors saying that any Member, any Member, Republican, Democrat or
otherwise, convicted of bribery in connection with their office ought
to, at an absolute minimum, lose their pension. And I believe that is
the standard we owe the American people, and no less.
My colleague says this is just a rules package, but this is your
first hundred hours. There is no rule that says you could not have
brought a statute, and I implore the gentleman and tell him that I will
join with him, as will my colleague from Illinois and my colleague from
Nebraska, each of whom had introduced bills a year ago or more seeking
to prohibit Members from collecting a taxpayer-funded pension when they
have, as the gentleman from Massachusetts pointed out, used this office
not as one of public trust but one of public abuse to benefit
themselves.
There is no time for delay. Pass a reform now punishing Members who
misuse their office. Take away their pensions and do it now.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume,
and I will commit to the gentleman from Arizona that we are going to
enter into that exchange, and I look forward to having that statute on
the floor where he can speak in favor of it and we can speak in favor
of it too.
Let me also, Mr. Speaker, correct the record. The distinguished
former chairman of the Rules Committee said none of this ethics reform
takes place for 4 months. That is true on the travel, and I clarified
that earlier as to why that is the case, so we had time to implement
the rules and regulations of disclosure. But everything else, I will
assure him, takes place immediately.
So once this ethics package passes, I would urge my colleague from
California not to go out to dinner with any of his lobbyist friends
because he might be breaking the law.
Mr. Speaker, I yield for purposes of debate only 2 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mahoney).
Mr. MAHONEY of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today representing
Florida's 16th District and a voice in support of title II of the rules
of the House relating to ethics reform in the House of Representatives.
Today, Democrats, and I hope with the support of our Republican
colleagues, will pass an aggressive reform package that keeps our
promise to the American people and reforms how we do business here in
Washington. These ethics reforms mark an end to a tragic era in
American history where the pursuit of power has cost us the faith of
the American people.
We are here today to rebuild America's trust and make a promise that
never again will special interest trump the interest of this great
Nation. As Americans communicated on election day, they want political
debate and they want the ability to choose. They are not interested in
monopolies by either party on political power.
As we move forward, we can only solve the key challenges facing this
great Nation by reestablishing the credibility, our credibility, to the
American people. Under the new House leadership, the era of special
interest politics will end and hardworking families, not lobbyists,
will have a voice in Congress again.
I urge my colleagues to support these important changes to the House
ethics rules.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire of the Chair how much time is
remaining on both sides.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California has 14\1/2\
minutes remaining, and the gentleman from Massachusetts has 9\1/2\
minutes remaining.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, at this time it is my privilege to yield 2
minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Sarbanes).
Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to address
the body and speak to the issue of finance, ethics, and other reform
that is before the body; and I do it in support of those you have
already heard today, many of whom represent the outrage, as has been
mentioned, of their constituencies because of situations that were
faced by those that they ran against. It is an opportunity that we had
to send a clear and positive message to the American people that what
they called for in this past election is going to be carried out.
The exit polls all across this country reflected that the number one
issue, the number one issue on which the voters cast their vote in the
election of 2006 was concern about ethics and reforming ethics. We owe
it to the American people, we owe it to all those in this body, and I
sincerely recognize that everyone in this body is committed to this. We
owe it to all of those to articulate and enact a rules package that
incorporates this significant reform.
It is a privilege and an honor for me to stand in support of this
package and in support of the ethics reforms being called for by the
American people.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to
say that I do congratulate my colleagues. I want to begin by saying as
a Californian that I am very proud of the fact that California has
provided the first female Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Similarly, I have congratulated our colleague, Ms. Slaughter, who will
be the first woman to chair the Rules Committee in our Nation's
history.
This has been a historic day and I believe a very exciting day for
us. I am pleased that we have been able to do a number of things
already in a bipartisan way, and I think this issue of ethics and
lobbying reform, building on the reforms that we passed in the 109th
Congress, utilizing those very positive provisions, is exactly what we
are about to vote on here in just a few minutes; and I think that it is
a time when we can be civil.
And I will say to all of my friends on both sides of the aisle, the
American people want us to deal with these problems, and I will
reaffirm my commitment to my colleagues on the Rules Committee that I
will continue to strive to comport myself in the most dignified way
possible in dealing with my colleagues, and I urge support of this very
important measure.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I want to say to my colleague from
California (Mr. Dreier) that I appreciate his words of cooperation and
bipartisanship, and I do hope, and it is my belief, that you will see a
change in terms of more outreach across the aisle and more respect,
quite frankly, for the opinions of every single Member of this House.
I agree this is a historic day. This is not only a historic day
because we have elected the first woman Speaker of the House in the
history of the United States of America, but this is also a historic
day for what we are about to vote on. We are about to change the way we
do business here in Washington. We are responding to what the American
people made very clear on election day, that they are tired of the
ethical lapses of their leaders in government; that they want an end to
the culture of corruption; that they want a government that has high
ethical standards; that they want Members of Congress to adhere to
those high ethical standards and, if they do not, that they will be
held accountable. So what we are doing today in this ethics package, I
think, is also an important moment in our history.
[[Page 38]]
What we are doing is we are doing what is right. We are holding the
Members of this House to the very highest ethical standards. And I want
to say to my colleague from Arizona (Mr. Shadegg) that I agree with him
on the pension issue. So do, I think, everybody on our side of the
aisle. And we are going to address that and we are going to hopefully
get a unanimous vote on that issue, because he is right on that issue.
But, again, we are not dealing with that. That requires a statutory
change, and today we are dealing with the House rules.
Mr. Speaker, what we are doing here today, I will remind my
colleagues again, is very important. We are ending gifts by lobbyists
to Members of Congress, we are banning the use of corporate jets for
Members of Congress for a minimal price so that they can take a
corporate jet and fly anywhere in this country. No one else can do
that, yet that has been a practice by too many Members in this
Congress. That will be banned.
We will end the lobbyist-sponsored golf junkets. They will be relics
of the past. This is a new day. This is a day where ethics and where
integrity are going to hold a very, very high place. We are going to
end the culture of corruption with this vote, and I urge my colleagues
on both sides of the aisle to vote ``yes'' on that.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of
Title II of H.R. 6, the Rules of the House of Representatives for the
110th Congress. With the adoption of this title, we begin to make good
on our pledge to ``drain the swamp'' and end the ``culture of
corruption'' that pervaded the 109th Congress.
Mr. Speaker, it is critically important that we adopt the ethics
rules contained in Title II because Americans are paying for the cost
of corruption in Washington with skyrocketing prices at the pump,
spiraling drug costs, and the waste, fraud and no-bid contracts in the
Gulf Coast and Iraq, for Administration cronies like Halliburton.
Ethics and legal scandals plagued the Republican Congress--from the
resignation of Reps. Tom DeLay and Duke Cunningham to the admission of
illegal or improper conduct by Reps. Bob Ney and Mark Foley.
The cozy relationship between Congress and special interests we saw
during the 109th resulted in serious lobbying scandals, such as those
involving Republican super lobbyist Jack Abramoff. In this scandal, a
former congressman pleaded guilty to conspiring to commit fraud--
accepting all-expense-paid trips to play golf in Scotland and accepting
meals, sports and concert tickets, while providing legislative favors
for Abramoff's clients.
But that is not all. Under the previous Republican leadership of the
House, lobbyists were permitted to write legislation, 15-minute votes
were held open for hours, and entirely new legislation was sneaked into
signed conference reports in the dead of night.
The American people registered their disgust at this sordid way of
running the Congress last November and voted for reform. Democrats
picked up 30 seats held by Republicans and exits polls indicated that
74 percent of voters cited corruption as an extremely important or a
very important issue in their choice at the polls.
Ending the culture of corruption and delivering ethics reform is one
of the top priorities of the new majority of House Democrats. That is
why as our first responsibility in fulfilling the mandate of this
critical election, Democrats are offering an aggressive ethics reform
package. We seek to end the excesses we witnessed under the Republican
leadership and to restore the public's trust in the Congress of the
United States.
Mr. Speaker, I commend Chairman Slaughter and the members of the
Rules Committee for their excellent work in preparing this ethics
reform package. The reforms contained in the package are tough but not
nearly too tough for persons elected to represent the interests of the
600,000 constituents in their congressional districts. Indeed, similar
bipartisan lobbying and government reform proposals were debated and
passed by the House and Senate in 2006 but the Congress failed to
reconcile the two versions.
Mr. Speaker, I support each element of the ethics reform package,
which bans gifts from lobbyists; bans lobbyist financed trips and
travel; requires pre-approval and certification for travel financed by
outside groups; prohibits use of corporate aircraft; ends the notorious
K Street Project; and mandates ethics training for all House employees.
bans gifts from lobbyists
Members of Congress are paid enough by the taxpayers to afford to pay
for their own meals. Lobbyists can make their case by providing Members
of Congress accurate, reliable, and persuasive information. Thus, it is
appropriate that the House rules should ban gifts, including meals and
tickets, from lobbyists and the organizations that employ them, and
require that tickets to sporting and other events given to Members and
staff by non-lobbyists are valued at market price.
bans lobbyist travel
Another reform that I support is the ban on lobbyists and the
organizations that employ them from financing travel for Members or
staff, except for one-day travel to visit a site, attend a forum,
participate in a panel, or give a speech. As the scandal involving Jack
Abramoff revealed, lobbyist financed travel led to serious abuse. The
new rules do not ban such travel altogether but directs the Committee
on Standards of Official Conduct to develop guidelines for minimal
lobbyist involvement for one-day/one-night travel. It should be noted,
however, that travel provided by a private university is not to be
affected by anything in the rules package.
requires certification and pre-approval for travel paid for by outside
groups
I also support the travel certification and pre-approval provisions.
The new ethics rules require sponsors of all other permitted travel to
certify that they have abided by all restrictions on lobbyist
involvement and requires Members and staff to obtain pre-approval from
the ethics committee for travel to ensure trips are connected to
official duties, the amount spent is limited to reasonable expenses,
and the destination is related to the purpose of the trip. The rules
require the full disclosure of all travel within 15 days after the
trip. Travel provisions take effect beginning on March 1, 2007.
prohibits use of company planes
Next, the new rules prohibit the use of official, personal or
campaign funds to pay for the use of non-commercial, corporate jets.
This provision does not apply to charter plane services or to airplanes
owned by Members.
ends the k street project
Clarifies that no Member can take or withhold an official act, or
influence, or offer or threaten to influence, the official act of
another with the intent to influence on the basis of partisan political
affiliation an employment decision or employment practice of any
private entity.
mandates ethics training
Finally, and effective March 1, 2007, the new rules require the
Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to offer annual ethics
training to members, delegates, the resident commissioner, officers and
employees of the House. This training would be required to involve the
classes of employees deemed appropriate by the committee and must
include the aspects of the Code of Official Conduct and related House
rules deemed appropriate.
The required training is to be provided to new officers or employees
within 60 days of their employment, and each officer or employee is to
file a certification with the committee by January 31 certifying that
they have attended training in the past year.
Conclusion
Mr. Speaker, it is wholly fitting and proper that the Members of this
House, along with all of the American people, paid fitting tribute to
the late President Gerald R. ``Jerry'' Ford, a former leader in this
House, who did so much to heal our Nation in the aftermath of
Watergate. Upon assuming the presidency, President Ford assured the
Nation: ``My fellow Americans, our long national nightmare is over.''
By his words and deeds, President Ford helped turn the country back on
the right track. He will be forever remembered for his integrity, good
character, and commitment to the national interest.
This House today faces a similar challenge. To restore public
confidence in this institution we must commit ourselves to being the
most honest, most ethical, most responsive Congress in history. We can
end the nightmare of the last 6 years by putting the needs of the
American people before those of the lobbyists and special interests. To
do that, we must start by adopting Title II of H.R. 6, the ethics
reforms to the Rules of the House of Representatives for the 110th
Congress.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Honest
Leadership and Open Government rules package currently before the
House.
Reform of the way this House conducts its business is not an option.
It is an absolute necessity. A recent poll found that only 37 percent
of Americans approve of how Congress is doing its job. Does anyone here
doubt that the ethical scandals and procedural abuses of recent years
are a major factor for this low public approval rating? In 2006 alone,
four Members of the House resigned their seats
[[Page 39]]
under a cloud. Two of these former Members have already been convicted
for unethical and illegal ties to lobbyists.
I do not believe that these specific abuses represent the majority of
Members, but I do believe it is the responsibility of the Majority
party to set out strong rules that can begin to regain the trust of the
American people in their institution of Congress.
For many years now, our constituents have been bombarded by media
reports of cozy relationships between Congress and special interests
lobbyists. They are incensed by news reports of Members accepting all-
expense-paid trips to play golf in Scotland, the flagrant abuse of
House rules to hold I5-minute votes open for hours for the sole purpose
of affecting the outcome, the widening Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal,
and the lack of accountability and transparency in how congressional
earmarks are awarded.
I mentioned that our constituents learned about these abuses from the
media, in their morning newspapers and on the nightly news. Too often
in recent years, it is also from the media that rank-and-file Members
of Congress have learned about special interest provisions that were
secretly inserted into legislation in the dead of night and brought up
for a vote before Members had an opportunity to read what they were
being asked to vote on. This form of secret legislating has got to
stop, and it will stop under this reform package.
The reform package before the House will also curb a large number of
the other abuses that have come to light. These reforms will ban gifts
from lobbyists, expand and tighten the restrictions on congressional
travel paid for by outside groups, prohibit travel on corporate jets,
and require greater public disclosure of targeted special interest
legislation. The reforms will also prohibit the practice of holding
votes open for the sole purpose of affecting the outcome.
There are many other needed reforms contained here, but the one I
want to single out is the provision that restores pay-as-you-go
budgeting. Pay-as-you-go budgeting simply means that Congress will not
consider any legislation to boost entitlement spending or cut taxes
unless it is fully paid for. Before they were abandoned in 2002, the
pay-as-you-go rules helped to turn record deficits into record
surpluses in the 1990s. Since abandoning pay-as-you-go, the cumulative
deficit for the past four years has totaled over $1.36 trillion. We
simply cannot continue to pile up more and more debt and pass it along
to our children and grandchildren.
For all these reasons, I urge all my colleagues to join me in voting
for the House rules reform package before the House.
Mr. SIRES. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6.
Throughout history, there has been an ongoing struggle to put the
people's interest ahead of special interests. With this legislation, we
put an end to this age-old struggle. The 110th Congress has been given
a mandate by the people and make sure their's are the voices that are
heard.
To do this, we must ban gifts and meals from lobbyists and the
organizations that they represent. We must ban lobbyists from planning,
organizing, financing and participating in travel for Members or staff.
We must protect the American taxpayer by requiring full disclosure of
earmarks so that they know how their money is being spent. We must
ensure that the business of the people is completed in a fair and open
way.
As we start the 110th Congress, we must govern our own chamber in a
manner that represents the interests of our constituents. This is why I
proudly rise in support of this measure and urge my colleagues to do
the same.
Mr. TERRY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my deep
disappointment in the rules package we are considering today.
The message from the American public last fall was ``we want
Republicans and Democrats to work together.'' We all had high
expectations for a ``new way of doing business in Washington.''
This past week during the Nation's remembrance of former President
Gerald Ford, we were all reminded of the way Republicans and Democrats
were able to find common ground to solve the country's problems. There
was a time when the two parties could come together in the national
interest.
Where, Mr. Speaker, did all of those grand and high-minded promises
of bipartisanship go? I hope this is not a precedent for how the House
will operate during the rest of the 110th Congress. Our constituents
expect us to work together and get things done for the good of the
country.
Included in this rules package are a number of ethics reforms, but
they do not go far enough. We must have tougher and stronger ethics
reform.
Today, there are Members serving in the House who have contributed to
the American public's loss of confidence in this body. One Member was
found to have $90,000 in cash in his freezer; another Member of the
Appropriations Committee established separate entities that were
recipients of appropriation funds. Yet, this rules package and the
ethics reforms in it do nothing to punish such behavior.
We must adopt tougher and stronger measures if we are going to regain
the trust of the American public. In my District, Nebraskans sent a
clear message that said if Members take bribes and abuse the public's
trust, they should not be protected and should not be allowed to reap
the benefits of their House service such as a pension paid for by the
taxpayers. Under this new Congressional leadership, Nebraska's voice
will not be heard. I won't be allowed to even offer an amendment to be
denied by the Rules Committee.
Mr. Speaker, I am introducing today legislation that I introduced
last year--to deny pension benefits to any Member or government
official who is convicted of a crime that violates the public trust.
Because of the lack of a fair and open process in this House, I have
been denied the opportunity to offer this legislation as an amendment.
This is not what American voters wanted to see after last fall's
election. We are being denied the chance to work together. We need to
restore the public's confidence in this House and one way to do that is
to work together to solve the problems facing this Nation.
Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to stand before you today to speak
in support of the rules changes proposed by our new Speaker, Ms.
Pelosi, that will bring enhanced ethics, transparency, and
accountability to the House of Representatives. These measures are long
overdue, and I applaud our leadership team for making this the first
order of business in the 110th Congress.
It has become clear to all Americans that the ethical safeguards here
in our Nation's Capital are broken. Rogue lobbyists such as Jack
Abramoff were allowed to run amok for years, leaving behind a vast web
of corruption in their wake. Wayward Members of Congress were swayed by
the offers of expensive gifts, travel, and campaign contibutions that
came their way. The maintenance of power became more important than
responsible government, as we now see in the spiraling budget deficits,
tax breaks for specific companies and industries, and legislation
inserted into bills in the dark of night.
With our vote here today, we in the people's house say enough is
enough. Today we begin to set our ship right and rebuild the trust of
the American people.
Today we will prevent lobbyists from buying access and favor from
lawmakers. While they will retain their constitutional right to
petition government and share valuable information, they will no longer
be allowed to buy meals, give gifts, or provide lavish trips. Corporate
officials will no longer be able to buy exclusive access by offering
the service of their private corporate jets. The powerful Washington
elite will now be placed back on a more equal footing with other
citizens who cannot afford such luxuries.
Additionally, all House employees will be required to attend annual
ethics training to ensure that all members and staff know the rules and
agree to follow them.
These changes, along with additional reporting requirements that will
be enacted through subsequent legislation and more vigorous oversight
by the Ethics Committee, will assure the American public that their
elected officials are working for them and not for the special
interests.
While some degree of corruption inevitably will always accompany
power, these first steps are both valuable and necessary. I sincerely
believe in the integrity of this great institution and its ability to
live up to the highest expectations of its founding fathers. Those of
us in this chamber have been given a tremendous opportunity to do good,
and with that comes great responsibility.
It is my great hope that we all may move beyond the transgressions of
the past with our sense of duty and our determination restored, and
that the American people will once again believe in us. As a Nation
defined by its democracy, we must accept nothing less.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 6, and
commend Speaker Pelosi, the majority leader, the chairman of the
Democratic Caucus, and the Rules Committee for bringing this
comprehensive reform package to the floor. Indeed, with this
resolution, the new Democratic majority says with one, clear voice that
we are prepared to change the way Congress does business--to make good
on our pledge--and restore open, honest government to Congress.
With this legislation, we take the critical steps necessary to
preserving the integrity of
[[Page 40]]
this institution, its Members and, indeed, the democratic process in
this country. This November, the American people, weary from scandal
after scandal, said ``enough.'' They said it was time to clean up
Washington--to sever ties between lawmakers and lobbyists and elect a
Congress engaged in the people's business--in improving people's lives,
not 1 in securing perks and privileges for themselves. They want
Members of Congress who are accountable for their actions.
With this Congress--and this rules package--that is exactly what they
will get. This resolution closes the curtain on an era in which
legislation in this body was written not by lawmakers representing
their constituents, but lobbyists paid for by special interests. It
puts an end to the gifts from those lobbyists--to the free meals,
tickets, and the trips and vacations they paid for. It requires
complete transparency for any travel paid for by outside groups. And it
tells Members of Congress that when they have to fly somewhere, they
can do so not on corporate Jets, but on a commercial airline, just like
other Americans.
In so doing, this legislation says clearly to the American people,
``We are here to do work on your behalf, not ours.''
Mr. Speaker, it is a new day in Washington, DC. And with war, budget
deficits, and the skyrocketing cost of health care and energy, there is
so much we need to do to get this country back on track. But it starts
with restoring the public trust in this institution, so that the
American people understand that when we cast our votes, we do so with
the utmost integrity. That is what this new House rules package
ensures, and I am proud to support it.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
{time} 1900
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. McNulty). Pursuant to House Resolution
5, the previous question is ordered on the portion of the divided
question comprising title II.
The question is on that portion of the divided question.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 430,
nays 1, not voting 4, as follows:
[Roll No. 7]
YEAS--430
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Carter
Castle
Castor
Chabot
Chandler
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cubin
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doolittle
Doyle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Edwards
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Everett
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Feeney
Ferguson
Filner
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Granger
Graves
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hare
Harman
Hastert
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jindal
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Jordan
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lamborn
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Musgrave
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Nunes
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sali
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Towns
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NAYS--1
Burton (IN)
NOT VOTING--4
Brown (SC)
Buyer
Davis, Lincoln
Norwood
{time} 1929
So that portion of the divided question was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Mr. LINCOLN DAVIS of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 7, had I
been present, I would have voted ``yea.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. McNulty). Pursuant to section 4 of House
Resolution 5, further proceedings will be postponed.
____________________
MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE
A message from the Senate by Ms. Curtis, one of its clerks, announced
that the Senate has passed resolutions of the following titles in which
the concurrence of the House is requested:
S. Res. 2
Resolved, That the Secretary inform the House of
Representatives that a quorum of the Senate is assembled and
that the Senate is ready to proceed to business.
S. Res. 5
Resolved, That the House of Representatives be notified of
the election of the Honorable Robert C. Byrd as President of
the Senate pro tempore.
S. Res. 10
Resolved, That the House of Representatives be notified of
the election of the Honorable Nancy Erickson as Secretary of
the Senate.
S. Res. 13
Resolved, That the House of Representatives be notified of
the election of the Honorable Terrance W. Gainer as Sergeant
at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate.
[[Page 41]]
The message also announced that pursuant to Public Law 95-521, the
Chair, on behalf of the President pro tempore, appoints Patricia Mack
Bryan, of Virginia, as Deputy Senate Legal Counsel, for a term of
service to expire at the end of the 111th Congress.
The message also announced that pursuant to Public Law 95-521, the
Chair, on behalf of the President pro tempore, appoints Morgan J.
Frankel, of the District of Columbia, as Senate Legal Counsel, for a
term of service to expire at the end of the 111th Congress.
____________________
FURTHER MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE
A further message from the Senate by Ms. Curtis, one of its clerks,
announced that the Senate has passed a bill of the following title in
which the concurrence of the House is requested:
S. 159. An act to redesignate the White Rocks National
Recreation Area in the State of Vermont as the ``Robert T.
Stafford White Rocks National Recreation Area''.
____________________
{time} 1930
ELECTION OF MAJORITY MEMBERS TO CERTAIN STANDING COMMITTEES OF THE
HOUSE
Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Democratic Caucus, I
offer a privileged resolution (H. Res. 7) and ask for its immediate
consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 7
Resolved, That the following named Members be and are
hereby elected to the following standing committees of the
House of Representatives:
(1) Committee on agriculture.--Mr. Peterson of Minnesota,
Chairman.
(2) Committee on appropriations.--Mr. Obey, Chairman; Mr.
Murtha, Mr. Dicks, Mr. Mollohan, Ms. Kaptur, Mr. Visclosky,
Mrs. Lowey, Mr. Serrano, Ms. DeLauro, Mr. Moran of Virginia,
Mr. Olver, Mr. Pastor, Mr. Price of North Carolina, Mr.
Edwards, Mr. Cramer, Mr. Kennedy of Rhode Island, Mr.
Hinchey, Ms. Roybal-Allard, Mr. Farr, Mr. Jackson of
Illinois, Ms. Kilpatrick of Michigan, Mr. Boyd of Florida,
Mr. Fattah, Mr. Rothman, Mr. Bishop of Georgia, Mr. Berry,
Ms. Lee, Mr. Udall of New Mexico, Mr. Schiff, Mr. Honda, Ms.
McCollum of Minnesota, Mr. Israel, Mr. Ryan of Ohio, Mr.
Ruppersberger, Mr. Chandler, Ms. Wasserman Schultz, Mr.
Rodriguez.
(3) Committee on armed services.--Mr. Skelton, Chairman.
(4) Committee on the budget.--Mr. Spratt, Chairman.
(5) Committee on education and labor.--Mr. George Miller of
California, Chairman.
(6) Committee on energy and commerce.--Mr. Dingell,
Chairman; Mr. Waxman, Mr. Markey, Mr. Boucher, Mr. Towns, Mr.
Pallone, Mr. Gordon of Tennessee, Mr. Rush, Ms. Eshoo, Mr.
Stupak, Mr. Engel, Mr. Wynn, Mr. Gene Green of Texas, Ms.
DeGette, Mrs. Capps, Mr. Doyle, Ms. Harman, Mr. Allen, Ms.
Schakowsky, Ms. Solis, Mr. Gonzalez, Mr. Inslee, Ms. Baldwin,
Mr. Ross, Ms. Hooley, Mr. Weiner, Mr. Matheson, Mr.
Butterfield, Mr. Melancon, Mr. Barrow, Mr. Hill.
(7) Committee on financial services.--Mr. Frank of
Massachusetts, Chairman.
(8) Committee on foreign affairs.--Mr. Lantos, Chairman.
(9) Committee on homeland security.--Mr. Thompson of
Mississippi, Chairman.
(10) Committee on house administration.--Ms. Millender-
McDonald, Chairman.
(11) Committee on the judiciary.--Mr. Conyers, Chairman.
(12) Committee on natural resources.--Mr. Rahall, Chairman.
(13) Committee on oversight and government reform.--Mr.
Waxman, Chairman.
(14) Committee on rules.--Ms. Slaughter, Chairman.
(15) Committee on science and technology.--Mr. Gordon of
Tennessee, Chairman.
(16) Committee on small business.--Ms. Velazquez, Chairman.
(17) Committee on standards of official conduct.--Mrs.
Jones of Ohio, Chairman.
(18) Committee on transportation and infrastructure.--Mr.
Oberstar, Chairman.
(19) Committee on veterans' affairs.--Mr. Filner, Chairman.
(20) Committee on ways and means.--Mr. Rangel, Chairman;
Mr. Stark, Mr. Levin, Mr. McDermott, Mr. Lewis of Georgia,
Mr. Neal of Massachusetts, Mr. McNulty, Mr. Tanner, Mr.
Becerra, Mr. Doggett, Mr. Pomeroy, Mrs. Jones of Ohio, Mr.
Thompson of California, Mr. Larson of Connecticut, Mr.
Emanuel, Mr. Blumenauer, Mr. Kind, Mr. Pascrell, Ms. Berkley,
Mr. Crowley, Mr. Van Hollen, Mr. Meek of Florida, Ms.
Schwartz of Pennsylvania, Mr. Davis of Alabama.
Mr. EMANUEL (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous
consent that the resolution be considered as read and printed in the
Record.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Illinois?
There was no objection.
The resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
ELECTION OF MINORITY MEMBERS TO CERTAIN STANDING COMMITTEES OF THE
HOUSE
Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Republican Conference, I
offer a privileged resolution (H. Res. 8) and ask for its immediate
consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 8
Resolved, That the following named Members be and are
hereby elected to the following standing committees of the
House of Representatives:
(1) Committee on agriculture.--Mr. Goodlatte.
(2) Committee on appropriations.--Mr. Lewis of California,
Mr. Young of Florida, Mr. Regula, Mr. Rogers of Kentucky, Mr.
Wolf, Mr. Walsh of New York, Mr. Hobson, Mr. Knollenberg, Mr.
Kingston, Mr. Frelinghuysen, Mr. Wicker, Mr. Tiahrt, Mr.
Wamp, Mr. Latham, Mr. Aderholt, Mrs. Emerson, Ms. Granger,
Mr. Peterson of Pennsylvania, Mr. Goode, Mr. Doolittle, Mr.
LaHood, Mr. Weldon of Florida, Mr. Simpson, Mr. Culberson,
Mr. Kirk, Mr. Crenshaw, Mr. Rehberg, Mr. Carter, Mr.
Alexander.
(3) Committee on armed services.--Mr. Hunter.
(4) Committee on the budget.--Mr. Ryan of Wisconsin.
(5) Committee on education and labor.--Mr. McKeon.
(6) Committee on energy and commerce.--Mr. Barton of Texas.
(7) Committee on financial services.--Mr. Bachus.
(8) Committee on foreign affairs.--Ms. Ros-Lehtinen.
(9) Committee on homeland security.--Mr. King of New York.
(10) Committee on house administration.--Mr. Ehlers, Mr.
Daniel E. Lungren of California, Mr. McCarthy of California.
(11) Committee on the judiciary.--Mr. Smith of Texas.
(12) Committee on natural resources.--Mr. Young of Alaska.
(13) Committee on oversight and government reform.--Mr. Tom
Davis of Virginia.
(14) Committee on rules.--Mr. Dreier, Mr. Lincoln Diaz-
Balart of Florida, Mr. Hastings of Washington, Mr. Sessions.
(15) Committee on science and technology.--Mr. Hall of
Texas.
(16) Committee on small business.--Mr. Chabot.
(17) Committee on standards of official conduct.--Mr.
Hastings of Washington.
(18) Committee on transportation and infrastructure.--Mr.
Mica.
(19) Committee on veterans' affairs.--Mr. Buyer.
(20) Committee on ways and means.--Mr. McCrery, Mr. Herger,
Mr. Camp of Michigan, Mr. Ramstad, Mr. Sam Johnson of Texas,
Mr. English of Pennsylvania, Mr. Weller of Illinois, Mr.
Hulshof, Mr. Lewis of Kentucky, Mr. Brady of Texas, Mr.
Reynolds, Mr. Ryan of Wisconsin, Mr. Cantor, Mr. Linder, Mr.
Nunes, Mr. Tiberi, Mr. Porter.
Mr. PUTNAM (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent
that the resolution be considered as read and printed in the Record.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Florida?
There was no objection.
The resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
COMPENSATION OF CERTAIN MINORITY EMPLOYEES
Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, I offer a resolution (H. Res. 9) and I ask
unanimous consent for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 9
Resolved, That pursuant to the Legislative Pay Act of 1929,
as amended, the six minority employees authorized therein
shall be the following named persons, effective January 3,
2007, until otherwise ordered by the House, to-wit: Jo-Marie
St. Martin, Mike Sommers, Dave Schnittger, Brian Kennedy,
George Rogers, and Jay Cranford, each to receive gross
compensation pursuant to the provisions of House Resolution
119, Ninety-fifth Congress, as enacted into permanent law by
section 115 of Public Law 95-94. In addition, the Minority
Leader may appoint and set the
[[Page 42]]
annual rate of pay for up to three further minority
employees.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Florida?
There was no objection.
The resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
DAILY HOUR OF MEETING
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged resolution (H. Res.
10) and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 10
Resolved, That unless otherwise ordered, before Monday, May
14, 2007, the hour of daily meeting of the House shall be 2
p.m. on Mondays; noon on Tuesdays; and 10 a.m. on all other
days of the week; and from Monday, May 14, 2007, until the
end of the first session, the hour of daily meeting of the
House shall be noon on Mondays; 10 a.m. on Tuesdays,
Wednesdays, and Thursdays; and 9 a.m. on all other days of
the week.
The resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
REGARDING CONSENT TO ASSEMBLE OUTSIDE THE SEAT OF GOVERNMENT
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged concurrent
resolution (H. Con. Res. 1) and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the concurrent resolution, as follows:
H. Con. Res. 1
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
concurring), That pursuant to clause 4, section 5, article I
of the Constitution, during the One Hundred Tenth Congress
the Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of the
Senate or their respective designees, acting jointly after
consultation with the Minority Leader of the House and the
Minority Leader of the Senate, may notify the Members of the
House and the Senate, respectively, to assemble at a place
outside the District of Columbia if, in their opinion, the
public interest shall warrant it.
The concurrent resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
EXPRESSING PROFOUND REGRET AND SORROW OF THE HOUSE ON THE DEATH OF
GERALD R. FORD, 38TH PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged resolution (H. Res. 11)
and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 11
Resolved, That the House of Representatives has learned
with profound regret and sorrow of the death of Gerald R.
Ford, thirty-eighth President of the United States of
America.
Resolved, That the House tenders its deep sympathy to the
members of the family of the former President in their
bereavement.
Resolved, That the Clerk communicate these resolutions to
the Senate and transmit a copy of the same to the family of
the former President.
Resolved, That when the House adjourns today, it adjourn as
a further mark of respect to the memory of the former
President.
Moment of Silence
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The House will observe a moment of silence
in honor of former President Ford.
The resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
HOUR OF MEETING ON TOMORROW
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House
adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 9:30 a.m. tomorrow.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Maryland?
There was no objection.
____________________
AUTHORIZING SPEAKER, MAJORITY LEADER, AND MINORITY LEADER TO ACCEPT
RESIGNATIONS AND MAKE APPOINTMENTS DURING THE 110TH CONGRESS
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during the 110th
Congress, the Speaker, majority leader, and minority leader be
authorized to accept resignations and to make appointments authorized
by law or by the House.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Maryland?
There was no objection.
____________________
GRANTING MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE PRIVILEGE TO EXTEND REMARKS AND INCLUDE
EXTRANEOUS MATERIAL IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD DURING THE 110TH
CONGRESS
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during the 110th
Congress, all Members be permitted to extend their remarks and to
include extraneous material within the permitted limit in that section
of the Record entitled ``Extensions of Remarks.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Maryland?
There was no objection.
____________________
MAKING IN ORDER MORNING HOUR DEBATE
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during the first
session of the 110th Congress:
(1) on legislative days of Monday when the House convenes pursuant to
House Resolution 10, the House shall convene 90 minutes earlier than
the time otherwise established by the resolution solely for the purpose
of conducting morning hour debate; and
(2) on legislative days of Tuesday when the House convenes pursuant
to House Resolution 10:
(A) before May 14, 2007, the House will convene for morning hour
debate 90 minutes earlier than the time otherwise established by that
resolution; and
(B) after May 14, 2007, the House shall convene for morning hour
debate 1 hour earlier than the time otherwise established by that
resolution; and
(3) on legislative days of Monday or Tuesday, when the House convenes
for morning hour debate pursuant to an order other than House
Resolution 10, the House shall resume its session 90 minutes after the
time otherwise established by that order;
(4) the time for morning hour debate shall be limited to the 30
minutes allocated to each party, except that on Tuesdays after May 14,
2007, the time shall be limited to 25 minutes allocated to each party
and may not continue beyond 10 minutes before the hour appointed for
the resumption of the session of the House; and
(5) the form of proceeding for morning hour debate shall be as
follows:
(a) the prayer by the Chaplain, the approval of the Journal and the
Pledge of Allegiance to the flag shall be postponed until resumption of
the session of the House;
(b) initial and subsequent recognitions for debate shall alternate
between the parties;
(c) recognition shall be conferred by the Speaker only pursuant to
lists submitted by the majority leader and by the minority leader;
(d) no Member may address the House for longer than 5 minutes, except
the majority leader, the minority leader, or the minority whip; and
(e) following morning hour debate, the Chair shall declare a recess
pursuant to clause 12(a) of rule I until the time appointed for the
resumption of the session of the House.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Maryland?
There was no objection.
____________________
REPORT OF COMMITTEE TO NOTIFY THE PRESIDENT
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, your committee appointed on the part of the
House to join a like committee on the part of the Senate to notify the
President of the United States that a quorum of each House has been
assembled and is ready to receive any communication that he may be
pleased to make has performed that duty.
[[Page 43]]
____________________
COMMUNICATION FROM THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE
The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following
communication from the Clerk of the House of Representatives:
Office of the Clerk,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC, January 4, 2007.
Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
The Speaker, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Madame Speaker: Under Clause 2(g) of Rule II of the
Rules of the U.S. House of Representatives, I herewith
designate Ms. Marjorie C. Kelaher, Deputy Clerk, and Mr.
Jorge E. Sorensen, Deputy Clerk, to sign any and all papers
and do all other acts for me under the name of the Clerk of
the House which they would be authorized to do by virtue of
this designation, except such as are provided by statute, in
case of my temporary absence or disability.
This designation shall remain in effect for the 110th
Congress or until modified by me.
With best wishes, I am,
Sincerely,
Karen L. Haas,
Clerk of the House.
____________________
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING COMMISSION
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 2001, and the order of
the House of today, the Chair announces the Speaker's appointment of
the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) and the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. Boehner) as members of the House Office Building Commission to
serve with herself.
____________________
LIEUTENANT (JG) GERALD FORD
(Mr. POE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1
minute.)
Mr. POE. Mr. Speaker, during the great World War II, the U.S.
aircraft carrier Monterey faced its fiercest naval battle, not with the
Imperial Japanese Navy, but the storm of the sea, Typhoon Cobra.
A naval lieutenant (jg) answering the call to action motivated the
crew to combat against the Cobra's bone-crushing waves, torrential
rains, and consuming fires it caused on board the ship.
Refusing the order to abandon the ship, this warrior valiantly went
below, marching into the mouth of the fire, rescuing those trapped
within its grasp. He ignored the searing heat of the flames and the
blackness of the smoke. Hour upon hour this man led others in the
charge to extinguish the demon fire, saving fellow sailors and
officers.
He did not seek recognition in the darkness of 1944; it sought him.
When it called, this naval officer answered in a manner of all American
patriots, with courage, valor, and victory.
Twenty-nine years later, this same individual helped rescue an entire
Nation from the fire of corruption and war. And he brought peace. His
name was President Gerald Ford, and we thank him.
And that's just the way it is.
____________________
ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under clause 5(d) of rule XX, the Chair
announces to the House that the whole number of the House is 435.
____________________
SPECIAL ORDERS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
following Members will be recognized for 5 minutes each.
____________________
{time} 1945
LANCE CORPORAL LUKE YEPSEN, TEXAS WARRIOR
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. POE. Mr. Speaker, it has been said, ``We are United States
Marines, and for two and a quarter centuries we have defined the
standards of courage, spirit, and military prowess.''
These are words spoken by United States Marine Corps General James
Jones. This describes the elitism of those chosen few who wear the
title of United States Marines.
Luke Yepsen was one man whose life was making a difference at a very
young age. He personified the core values of the United States Marine
Corps of honor, courage, commitment.
He was from Kingwood, Texas, a close-knit community near Houston,
Texas. He was a graduate of Kingwood High School, and he was known for
his big heart and ability to live life to its fullest extent. He
enjoyed travel and he was proud of the fact that he had already
traveled to 20 different foreign countries in his short lifetime.
Luke deeply cared about his family back home in Texas and his
military family. His fellow Marines said he was more than just a
friend; he was a brother, a brother to everyone who knew him.
Like many Texans, especially those Texans who go to war, Luke chose
to enroll in Texas A&M after high school. During his freshman year, he
made a decision to leave Texas A&M University. Gary Yepsen, Luke's
father, asked him why he didn't want to graduate college and then enter
the United States Marine Corps as an officer. Luke said, ``I don't want
to go into the Marines to tell people what to do. I want to go into the
Marines so they can tell me what to do.''
Here is what President Ronald Reagan said about the Marines: ``Some
people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference in
the world. But the Marines, they don't have that problem.''
Luke Yepsen was one of those Marines. With faith in God and country,
at 18 Luke enrolled in the United States Marine Corps. He was an
assaultman, later a mechanic, which came easy to him because of his
love of cars. ``He had so much courage and pride, you can't even
imagine. You could hear it in his voice how proud he was,'' said Luke's
brother, Kyle. In October of 2006, Luke was deployed to Iraq with the
1st Tank Battalion, 1st Marine Division, 1st Marine Expeditionary
Force. Amid the violence and anarchy in Iraq, Luke's thoughts never
waned from the security of home and American freedom. When told by his
college roommate that he was praying for him, Luke quickly responded,
``Well, I'm praying for you.''
On December 14, 2006, at the age of 20, Luke, while fighting the
forces of evil, was killed by enemy action in Iraq. For his military
service, he was awarded the Purple Heart, the Combat Action Ribbon, the
National Defense Service Medal, and the Iraq Campaign Medal, the Global
War on Terrorism Medal, and the Sea Service Deployment Ribbon.
On the morning of December 22, 2006, hundreds of Kingwood, Texas,
residents lined the streets of this community paying tribute to the
family of this patriot. Many of those on the streets carried flags,
yellow ribbons. Many held banners saying ``Proud of You,'' ``Proud to
be an American.'' Some said, ``Thank You.'' As the funeral procession
made its way to the church, the residents of Kingwood, with tearful
eyes and grateful hearts, saluted the Yepsen family.
Mr. Speaker, I want to tell you that patriotism is alive and well in
the United States. And as the Kingwood, Texas, community mourns the
loss of America's son, Luke Yepsen, and all those who came before him
and all those that will come after him, we know that freedom is not
free, and we thank this fearless Marine for dedicating his life to
America.
Luke's sacrifice will be etched in the catalogue of history as
another Marine who was always faithful. A sacrifice made for his
parents, Sheila and Gary; his brother, Kyle; and his fiancee, Sandra
Bruman; the Kingwood community; and this great Nation.
As we honor the life of Luke Yepsen, reflect on those timeless words
from the Marine Corps Hymn that say:
``In many a strife
We've fought for life
And never lost our nerve.
If the army and the navy
Ever look on heaven's scenes,
They will find the streets are guarded
By United States Marines.''
Mr. Speaker, I suspect that Lance Corporal Luke Yepsen is patrolling
the
[[Page 44]]
streets of heaven tonight and guarding the pearly gates.
So Semper Fi, Lance Corporal Yepsen. Semper Fi.
And that's just the way it is.
____________________
HONORING DEREK RYAN KEHOE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Dent) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. DENT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak of a courageous young
man from my district, and of his friends and family and supporters, who
are trying to use his untimely demise to help make the world a better
place.
Derek Ryan Kehoe graduated from Nazareth High School in 2005, which
this high school is located in Nazareth, Pennsylvania. And he was a
star player on the school's basketball team, a team he led to the
District 11 Tournament in 2005.
He was a freshman at Albright College when, in April of 2006, he
discovered a lump on his back. The lump turned out to be
leiomyosarcoma, or LMS as it is better known, a rare and deadly form of
cancer. LMS currently has no cure. And though Derek was a strong,
healthy 19-year-old, the disease overcame him, and he passed on on
October 28, 2006.
Throughout his illness, Derek was cheerful and encouraging, more
concerned with the feelings of those who came to see him than of his
own condition. On January 5, 2007, Derek's life will be commemorated at
half time of the Nazareth High-Northampton High boys basketball game. A
full house is expected, and 150 of Derek's classmates are returning for
the event. All proceeds from the game will be earmarked to fight this
dreaded disease of LMS that took Derek away from us way too soon.
I want to extend my condolences to Derek's parents, Maureen Kehoe and
Kevin Kehoe. I also want to express my support for all the people who
have put together this event, including the Kehoes, the administration
of Nazareth Area High School, and the Nazareth High School Booster
Club. I also want to convey a special word of thanks to Nazareth
basketball coach Joe Arndt, who loved Derek as he would a son and who
played a key role in making this event a reality.
Mr. Speaker, I will insert a copy of these words into the
Congressional Record this 4th day of January, 2007, as part of the
effort to commemorate for all time the life of Derek Ryan Kehoe.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak of a courageous young man from my
District, and of his friends, family, and supporters who are trying to
use his untimely demise to help make the world a better place.
Derek Ryan Kehoe graduated from Nazareth High School in 2005 (in
Nazareth, PA) and was a star player on the school's basketball team, a
team he led to the District 11 Tournament in 2005. He was a freshman at
Albright College when, in April of 2006, he discovered a lump on his
back. The lump turned out to be leiomyosarcoma (LMS), a rare and deadly
form of cancer. LMS currently has no cure, and though Derek was a
strong, healthy 19-year old, the disease overcame him, and he passed on
October 28, 2006.
Throughout his illness, Derek was cheerful and encouraging, more
concerned with the feelings of those who came to see him than with his
own condition. On January 5, 2007, Derek's life will be commemorated at
the halftime of the Nazareth High-Northampton High boys basketball
game. A full house is expected, and 150 of Derek's classmates are
returning for the event. All proceeds from the game will be earmarked
to fight this dreaded disease of LMS that took Derek away from us way
too soon.
I want to extend my condolences to Derek's parents, Maureen Kehoe and
Kevin Kehoe. I also want to express my support for all the people who
have put together this event, including the Kehoes, the administration
of Nazareth Area High School, and the Nazareth High Booster Club. I
also want to convey a special word of thanks to Nazareth basketball
coach Joe Arndt, who loved Derek as he would a son, and who played a
key role in making this event a reality.
Mr. Speaker, I ask that a copy of these words be inserted into the
Congressional Record this 4th day of January 2007, as part of the
effort to commemorate, for all time, the life of Derek Ryan Kehoe.
____________________
CLEAN ENERGY
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee)
is recognized for 60 minutes.
Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor this evening on truly
what is a historic day, the beginning of this Congress. Historic, I
will mention two reasons: One, the first woman Speaker of the United
States House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, something that certainly
has caused a lot of joy here and across the country and it is something
worthy of noting. But a second historic event arises from Speaker
Pelosi's first address as Speaker of the House today that I think marks
a pivotal moment in our future of the country when it comes to our
energy policy.
Speaker Pelosi today, in some of her very first comments, made a
commitment to the country that our Nation would start a titanic and
historic shift from old technologies associated with fossil fuels that
are now putting massive amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere
and towards the use of new technologies that can produce our mode of
power for our cars and our planes and our buses and our homes and our
computers, and even our hair dryers in a way that does not contribute
to global warming. And this is her commitment and her very first
comment, I think it was telling, that this House will pass a measure in
very short order, in the next several weeks, that will shift a huge
amount of our national resources away from work in these fossil fuels
that are now contributing to global warming and put that money into a
fund that will be dedicated to the use of new high-technological energy
sources that can free us from Middle Eastern oil, create jobs in our
country, and stop global warming.
This is certainly a three-fer. And the way that she has made a
commitment that this House will do is that we basically will repeal
some of the less prudent activities of the former Congress that gave $7
billion of taxpayer money to the oil and gas industry, a very imprudent
move, an industry that is in tip-top form financially, making profits
hand over fist, the most profitable corporation in American history,
indeed, world history. And yet the last Congress saw fit to give
billions of dollars of tax relief to these organizations.
And these organizations are good organizations. They have good people
in them. But there was no reason to give that money away when it has
higher purpose. And that higher purpose that Speaker Pelosi talked
about today is to take those billions of dollars, those tax goodies
given away to these corporations, repeal those giveaways and shift that
money, shift those public resources, into a pool of funds that will be
used to develop new high-tech, clean energy sources that we can go
forward to build energy independence and reduce our contributions of
carbon dioxide and other gases that are contributing to global warming.
And I think this is a fundamental shift in American history.
We have had a steam revolution starting with American ingenuity, with
Fulton and others. We had an industrial revolution led by American
inventors, Ford and others. We have had an IT revolution led by many
people in the software business. Many of them in my district in North
Seattle and Redmond, Washington.
And now we are heading into a fourth revolution in the industrial
base of America, and that is an energy revolution, where we make a
transition from dirty fuels to clean fuels, many of which we will talk
about tonight, and we will do it in a smart, prudent, fiscally sound
way of using funds that are being wasted essentially on these old dirty
technologies and shift them over, starting today with Speaker Pelosi's
wise comments, towards these new technologies.
And in doing so, we will use the most fundamental character of
Americans, which is technological brilliance, innovation, creativity,
tinkering. We are the greatest tinkerers and inventors, not speaking
personally but our country, in human history. And now starting today,
we are taking the first step what I call the road down to new Apollo.
We had the first Apollo project with
[[Page 45]]
John F. Kennedy where we went to the moon.
Today, with Speaker Pelosi's comments, we took the first step on the
road to a new Apollo clean energy future for this country to move these
resources into a clean energy future. And I am very excited about it
because it will build upon the scientific prowess of America.
I would like to yield now to one of the Members of Congress who is a
leader in the scientific community, a physicist with a history at
Princeton, who personifies what science can do for this country, who
has been a leader on these clean energy issues, for some comments on
this issue, Rush Holt of New Jersey.
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the gentleman from
Washington (Mr. Inslee). And I look forward to joining him again in the
Apollo energy legislation as I did in the last Congress, and this time
I hope we will get it through because the way we produce and use energy
in the United States is the greatest insult to our planet.
There are a lot of things that we do that are dangerous, unclean,
unproductive. But the way we produce and use energy is the greatest
insult. And I think what we want to talk about is the word
``sustainable.'' We should be in this for the long haul for centuries
to come.
As we look back on a day like today when we celebrate the ongoing
experiment of the American republic, we should be thinking, as those
who wrote the Constitution were thinking, about something that would
last for centuries. We should be embarking on a sustainable energy
path. Not just clean energy, not just renewable energy, but a
sustainable energy path that is environmentally sustainable, that is
economically sustainable, and that is climactically sustainable.
One of the big changes that has occurred, and I think Mr. Inslee
would agree, in the last year or 2 is here in Washington, and I think
around the country, we have come to the conclusion, some of us years
ago, but most people very recently, have come to the conclusion that
global climate change, human induced global climate change, is real.
They have come to the conclusion that it is real and they have come to
the conclusion that it is serious.
They have not yet come to the conclusion that it is harmful. I would
argue that it is costly and deadly. They have not come to the
conclusion that there is something that we can do about it. But,
indeed, I would argue that there is a great deal we can do about it.
Some damage has been done.
{time} 2000
There is much more we can do.
Mr. INSLEE. We want to turn to the things that can be done, because
one of the messages of the new Apollo Project is that we have a clear
path to use technology to solve this problem. But before we launch into
a discussion now, I just wanted to note three conversations on this
issue about global warming I have had in the last two weeks, that I
want to note about why this is so compelling to have new energy.
The first conversation I had last week was with a woman who was a
leader in the first city in the United States that is being relocated
as a result of global warming. That is the village of Shishmaref in
Alaska; it is on the Arctic coast of Alaska. This woman told me that
last week the city voted to move their city, I think it is about 13
miles off of a coastal barrier island, that is disappearing because sea
levels are rising, the tundra is melting, and the ice that serves as a
barrier protecting their village is melting, and their island is
disappearing, right literally underneath them.
They are having to move their whole city at a cost of $150 million,
onto an inland area, that is Shishmaref, Alaska. When we have to start
moving cities in this country to start dealing with global warming, it
is time to have a new energy policy.
Second, I had a conversation with the president of the Marshall
Islands. It is an independent nation in the South Pacific of 60,000
people. The president of the Marshall Islands told me that they are in
an emergency situation because of the rising seas and the increasing
frequency of big storms which are literally overtopping their islands,
which are just a few feet. They are built on coral reefs. Their coral
reefs are dying because the oceans are becoming warmer and more acidic
due to global warming. We have a whole country that may go under water
as a result of global warming.
The third conversation I had last week was with a woman who was a
climatologist, I may have butchered that word, meteorologist. She is an
expert on the Arctic, basically. The University of Washington just
published a study that said with a fairly high degree of probability
the Arctic ice pack will have disappeared in months of September,
disappeared with just marginal little bits of it hanging on to the
coastline by the year 2050, with all of the changes that portends,
including the disappearance of the polar bear, that even the current
administration under George Bush agrees should be listed as a
threatened species because the Arctic ice is going to disappear.
I just note these because since Mr. Holt and I last discussed this in
the last Congress 2 months ago, these three changes have taken place.
This is a dramatically rapidly changing climate we have that demands an
answer to energy policy.
So I just want to set the urgency for taking steps, the first step.
Mr. HOLT. The gentleman makes a very good point, but this is not just
a matter of the frost line moving a little bit north or spring coming a
little bit earlier so you can get your tomatoes out sooner. No, it is
much more serious than that. The pattern of storms, the pattern of
droughts, even the pattern of freezes will change. Ocean currents are
already showing signs of changing. That is what I mean when I say this
is very costly and even deadly.
It is not just inconvenient. It does not just mean that, well, they
are going to start growing sugar cane in Minnesota as the climate warms
up. No, it means that lives will be lost and huge expenses will be
incurred.
So that is the point. Let me just finish the two further steps we
need to take in public understanding and, I would say, in legislative
understanding. Once we recognize that human-induced climate changes,
that it is real, that it is serious, that it is costly, and that
something can be done, we have to figure out what those things are, and
the new Apollo Energy Act of the last Congress that we will get in
shape for this Congress will give you some of those ideas, I think. But
then we have to convince ourselves that it is worth doing these things,
that the benefits will be greater than the cost.
Well, I can assure you the cost will be great. But even more, we can
make this a winner by stopping climate change, and we are in the best
position in the world of all countries to do that because we have set
the pattern for energy use for a century, and we can set the pattern
for the coming century.
We are behind other countries, are doing more, we are buying
windmills from Europe, not the United States, just to take one example,
but we can go on and on. We could take the lead, and I can assure you,
I can assure the gentleman from Washington, and anyone else, that it
will be better to sell these technologies to the world than to buy
them, and there is going to be a huge market for alternative
sustainable technologies.
Mr. INSLEE. That point of being able to sell American technology to
the world, I want to mention two companies, their CEOs I have talked to
in the last month. One I talked to this morning is called Greenpoint
Energy. It is a company in Boston that has developed a way to take coal
and to process it into natural gas, then burn the natural gas in a way
that eliminates the mercury emissions that typically come out of a coal
stack, eliminates the sulfur dioxide that comes out of a smokestack and
most importantly reduces carbon dioxide, the global warming gas by 60
to 65 percent.
Now, when I asked this young entrepreneur, who formerly did very well
in the software industry, and is now into energy, what he saw as the
future of this, he said it is unlimited. The reason it is unlimited is
that we can take this
[[Page 46]]
technology that we build here, we can build these plants and sell them
to China.
China is building one dirty coal plant a week, a 500-megawatt coal
plant a week in China, which is creating massive CO2
contributing to global warming gas. Here is a company right now, they
have got 25 employees right now, and 20 subcontractors, they can have
thousands at some point when we start selling this technology to the
Chinese.
Another company called Nanosolar in Silicon Valley, California, they
developed a way to make a solar cell using a thin cell material that
can increase the efficiency, or at least decrease the cost at least by
40 to 50 percent of solar energy, using a thin cell that is about 5
percent of the current thickness of a silicone-based solar cell. They
want to sell this technology when we develop it. We have the first 450-
megawatt capacity plant they are building right now, as we speak
tonight. They want to start selling these around the world.
So here is a tremendous opportunity for America to reverse our
balance-of-payments problem and start selling things to the world
rather than buying them.
Mr. HOLT. The Chinese will be buying technology. There is no
question. They would prefer not to pollute their skies. They are trying
to clean up for the Olympics; but they are growing fast, they need the
power, they would welcome cleaner power. As evidence of that, I would
say that their auto fleet is already more efficient than ours.
Because the technology is available, that is what they are buying. It
would apply across the board in energy technologies, China, Southeast
Asia, India, yes, and Europe.
The gentleman from Washington spoke about American ingenuity. You
know we in Jersey call it Yankee ingenuity, but no aspersions on those
from Southern States or Western States. That is what it was known as,
or good old American know-how. We can do it.
The new Apollo Energy legislation that I joined the gentleman in the
last Congress, talked about incentives, demonstration projects and
investments and research and development. They are, indeed, investments
that would pay off big.
Mr. INSLEE. You mentioned transportation. I just want to note what I
consider to be a very exciting development in the last 7 days in this
country in transportation. I want to yield to a real leader in there,
Mr. Blumenauer.
But when it comes to cars, we have not improved the efficiency of our
cars in 25 years. We get less mileage today in our cars than we did 25
years ago. But in the last 30 days something very dramatic happened in
the auto industry.
General Motors announced that they were going to start developing a
plug-in vehicle in the next 5 years where you can go home at night,
plug in your car, charge your batteries off your electrical grid from
one to two cents, effectively, a mile, you are now spending ten to
fifteen. For one to two cents a mile off the grid, you can run your car
for, we hope, for the first 20 miles. Then after you run out of juice,
if you drive more than 20 miles, and 60 percent of our trips a day are
less than 20 miles, but if you go more than 20 miles then you start
burning either the gas or the ethanol that you got from corn and
soybeans and rye grass. You have a flex-fuel vehicle, you plug it in at
night, you are off to the races. That is the first thing.
The second thing is the Department of Energy last week issued a study
which concluded that there is enough energy-generating capacity in the
United States, excuse me, it was a Pacific Northwest laboratory out in
Washington State, actually, an arm of the Department of Energy. They
concluded there was enough electrical generating capacity today to fuel
85 percent of our cars and trucks using a plug-in battery system and
not build a single new generating plant.
In other words, we could fuel 85 percent of all of our cars once we
get a plug-in battery system developed without building a single new
dirty plant coal or even a clean coal, for that matter, because you
have all of this excess capacity at night that is sitting there that we
don't use. We have all these plants that just sit there unused at
night. We can use them to charge our cars. These are two very exciting
developments using home-grown technology if Congress acts to move these
subsidies away from the oil and gas industry, as Speaker Pelosi pledged
to do today, and move them into support for these new businesses and
consumers to get the new end higher energy.
I want to yield to Mr. Earl Blumenauer, who has been a real leader in
trying to bring transportation, particularly public transit which is a
very, very effective way of reducing our pollution and making our
transportation more efficient.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate your courtesy, Mr. Inslee, in permitting
me to speak on this. I appreciate your continued leadership in
spotlighting issues of global warming, energy efficiency, and the
difference it will make for Americans across the country.
I too was impressed today with the clear, articulate vision set forth
by our new Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, reemphasizing the commitment that the
Democratic leadership and our caucus has to deal meaningfully with
problems of global warming, energy independence and efficiency.
Having an opportunity this evening to focus on this is important
because for the first time in a dozen years we won't just be talking
about this. We have legislative leadership that is committed to action,
to dealing with the redirection of vast subsidies that have been given
to people who need them the least, and, instead, rationalizing
investments in areas that you have championed with alternative energy,
wind, solar, biomass and, particularly, conservation.
You are right, tracking the problems of transportation is central to
dealing with greenhouse gases, global warming and our alarming
dependence on oil imported from increasingly unstable areas of the
world.
I appreciate the conversation that you and Mr. Holt have had about
the positive impact, the President and the Republican leadership in the
last half dozen years have been baring their head, claiming that we
can't deal with problems of global warming, climate change, energy
conservation because of the economic disruption.
You have cited examples from our Pacific Northwest where there are
entrepreneurs ready to go, rolling up their sleeves, with things that
will make a difference, creating jobs in this country, that will, in
fact, conserve resources and save money.
{time} 2015
Our ability to invest in wise, diverse transportation choices for the
American public has the opportunity to put money in the pockets of
Americans while it fights greenhouse gas. We consume approximately 10
percent of the world's petroleum supply each year driving our SUVs to
work and back. The commitment to make sure that the Arctic wildlife
refuge is the last place we drill, not the next, that makes energy
conservation more available to Americans, and unlocks the economic
potential of a whole array of new technologies and products.
I look forward to continuing our conversation here over the next few
minutes. I, personally, am committed to continuing, as I have in both
of your districts in the past. I know you both have constituents that
are concerned about transportation choices. This Congress might be able
to do something to provide equity, for instance, for cyclists, people
who burn calories instead of petroleum, but are treated differently in
our Tax Code for their commuting costs, for instance. I look forward to
working with you to make these a reality and make a difference to
enhance the planet, protect our national security and put money in the
pockets of the American taxpayer.
Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Holt.
Mr. HOLT. If the gentleman would yield, I would like to elaborate on
a point that Mr. Blumenauer made about transportation. Not only do we
use a lot of energy going to and from work, we waste a lot of energy
that no one wants to use sitting in congestion. There are some parts of
the country,
[[Page 47]]
we certainly see it in my State of New Jersey, where an enormous amount
of energy is lost. And if we could avoid that congestion, it would make
everyone happier, I can assure you, not just at a sense of savings, but
it would remove the aggravation.
Well, it is a whole lot easier to move electrons than it is to move
chunks of metal. Smart transportation systems that take account of
where the traffic is and where it can go, and compute in real time
where you should go, rather than you running a car-sized computer
system where you are trying this and you are trying that and you have
got a million cars in this computer system in real-time trying to
figure out the best routes. You can do that with smart transportation
system cheap, relatively, save energy, save money, save aggravation.
That is just one example of what we should do.
Mr. INSLEE. I would like to point out a shining example of what Mr.
Holt is talking about, and that is in Portland, Oregon, in part,
because of the leadership of Mr. Blumenauer, Portland, Oregon achieved
two very significant milestones in the last year. First, it was the
first city ever to essentially meet the Kyoto targets for reduction of
carbon dioxide. This proves it can be done.
A smart transportation policy and a smart energy policy can be both
good for your economy and meet these targets to reduce carbon dioxide.
Portland, Oregon has achieved that, and one of the reasons is because
of their second accomplishment, the first city in the last 30 years in
America, has had less miles driven per individual in the last several
decades. It is the first city that has ever accomplished that by
developing a very sophisticated public transportation system and
developing a living system that can reduce the need for some of our
long commutes. And I want to point out Portland's success on this has
been an enormous benefit to its economy, because Portland, Oregon's
economy has been booming. The value of property has been booming as a
result of these smart energy choices it has made, and people want to
live there. And it is because of some of the smart choices that have
been made in order to use energy more efficiently.
Mr. HOLT. If I may just insert, some of those choices have been made
by our now-colleague, Mr. Blumenauer. Much of the success of Portland
traces back to some of the decisions that he had a part in some years
ago.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. If the gentleman would yield
Mr. INSLEE. Yes.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate your positive words about our community.
And I do take pride in essentially having reached 1990, emission levels
for carbon dioxide and actually having reductions in per capita
emissions for each of the last 4 years. And it has been done, not at
the expense of economic development and choice, but rather, as a result
of providing it. And this is a point, I guess, that I am eager for us
to pursue. And I appreciate the leadership that you gentlemen have
exercised, both in terms of looking and investigating what's going on
in Oregon and providing leadership in your own States and in your own
communities.
The average American family, today, pays more for transportation than
anything else in their budget, except for housing. And for Americans
who make less than $40,000 a year, typically, they pay more for
transportation than for housing. So our being able to have sensible
development patterns where people can live closer to where they work,
employing what Mr. Holt was talking about in terms of smarter
technology to let people know what they are getting into in terms of
congestion, and giving people choices. This is not about saying you
can't drive a car.
But when I go to other communities, and since I have been in
Congress, I have been in more than 200 communities across the country
working on issues of transportation, land use and affordable housing.
What I find is that people are complaining not that we are trying to
take away their choices, but because they have no choice. Too many
communities, people can only drive to work in a single occupant
vehicle. In many of these communities, 90 percent of the children
cannot go to school safely on their own by bicycle or walking. And what
we are talking about here is giving back choices to the American public
about where they live, how they travel, choices that will not only
reduce congestion, improve air pollution, it will put money in the
pockets of American families.
Mr. INSLEE. If I can allude to a choice, another sort of choice, I
think that is a very fundamental principle that we want to give people
choices in their uses of energy. But I want to allude to a choice, if
you do decide to drive a car, what kind of fuel you use. And it is a
Democratic Party principle now under the leadership of Speaker Pelosi
that Americans are going to have more choices about what fuel you use
because as part of our effort to move money away from this giveaway to
the oil and gas industry that have enslaved Americans, you are a slave
to the oil and gas industry if you have got a car right now, to move it
over to give more fuel choices to Americans. We intend to develop a
vision for this country that you have the same freedom that Brazilians
have, because in Brazil today when you pull up to the pump you are not
a slave to the oil and gas industry, you are the boss because when you
pull up to a pump in Brazil you decide whether you want gasoline or
whether you want domestically manufactured ethanol made from sugar cane
in Brazil and soon to be made through cellulosic ethanol, through corn
and wheat and corn stovers and switch grass and who knows what kind of
products we are going to develop so that consumers can decide what
product they are going to put into the tank. And when we do that, we
are going to create thousands of jobs across the country, particularly
in the agricultural belt.
I got an e-mail just as I was walking over here tonight about a
little article about a company in Wisconsin that are building sort of
the foundations for wind turbines. They can't hire people fast enough.
Right down the road, at the Chippewa Valley co-op they are brewing
ethanol in Minnesota to give people a choice to put ethanol in their
tank rather than gasoline, and they have created source of jobs in this
little town in Minnesota that was sort of a declining town at the time.
We want to give choices to people.
And we have another leader here tonight on those issues,
Representative Kaptur from the great State of Ohio, that has been a
leader in an effort to make a transition from just an oil and gas
economy to one based on biofuels. And I have to tell you that I am very
excited about this because I have been talking to scientists who tell
me that we now have the possibility of having two to four times more
bio fuels per acre than we even have today, and with our corn usage
today that is certainly being successful with a consequent reduction of
carbon dioxide that Representative Kaptur can tell us about. I would
like to yield to Representative Kaptur.
Ms. KAPTUR. I want to thank Representative Inslee for taking this
special order tonight on the very first night of the new Congress, the
110th Congress which is going to be so historic. And Speaker Pelosi's
remarks today about energy independence for our country just rang so
true. In a district like ours, which is a major new solar manufacturer,
as well as wind turbine manufacturer and research region of the
country. Coming from the auto belt, you don't think about that. But yet
we are a biofuels leader. We have four plants being built now, both soy
diesel and corn-based ethanol within our radius of 25 miles of our
major community of Toledo, and in fact, some of them right in Toledo.
And I wanted to just take a few minutes, if I might, and I thank
Congressman Blumenauer and Congressman Holt. These gentlemen who are
with us tonight are really the new age energy thinkers for our country,
and I am really so happy to join you on this first night that we are
here together.
And I just wanted to put on the record some interesting information
that I have been sharing in the committees that I serve on. This
particular chart talks about total petroleum consumption in our
country, and looks at
[[Page 48]]
the growing share of imported petroleum as a percentage of everything
that we consume.
And of course, since the beginning of the Bush administration,
America is consuming one billion more barrels of oil per year, largely
imported. Imports now constitute nearly three-quarters of what we use
in this economy. Americans need to understand that. And over a period
of time, from the beginning of the 90s, the share of imports has just
risen until where now it comprises a majority of what we consume. This
is a diminishing resource. Actually it is a dirty resource.
And I wish to place on the record tonight an article that was in The
Financial Times back in December that lists the major companies in the
world that are privately held. And I won't read the whole list tonight,
except to say, of the top 20 companies, three-quarters are all oil
companies, and they are not based in the United States. So all this
money that the United States is spending on an imported product could
be invested here at home in the new technologies that these fine
gentlemen and I are talking about tonight.
Just to give you an idea, Saudi Aramco is number one on the list. Its
value, estimated market value, is three-quarters of $1 trillion. $781
billion. And of course, Saudi Arabia has been a very important back up
supplier to our country. I wish it were not so, but we have become very
addicted to that supplier.
Petroleos Mexicanos, that oil and gas company worth $415 billion, our
hard earned dollars flowing to that privately held company.
I won't go through all of them, but the next, Number 3 on the list,
and the gentleman discussed Latin America, is Venezuelan Petroleum,
valued at $388 billion.
Go down to Kuwait Petroleum, Number 4, $378 billion. Malaysian
Petroleum, $232 billion. The idea is you go down and then you get into
the companies financing this import, such as the Carlisle Group which
has moved up now at $71 billion to Number 22 on the list. So I would
like to submit this to the Record. The top three-quarters of these
companies, the top 20 largest privately held companies in the world are
all oil and gas. I wanted to make sure this was placed on the Record
tonight, and to say that as the author of the first title in any farm
bill in American history, a biofuels title, Title IX, we have been
incentivizing at a very small level, about $23 million, not billion,
$23 million dollars a year, efforts to try to help agriculturalists
across this country own the future. It has been such a fight. And I
heard the gentleman saying earlier this evening, finally, I think Mr.
Blumenauer said, after 12 years, we finally have a chance to uncork
this really developing answer for our Nation. And we hope that with the
new farm bill and with the leadership of Congressman Colin Peterson,
who is the right man at the right time in the right committee in the
right country, from the Red River Valley of Minnesota, in the farm bill
that will be produced this year, that we will be able to piece together
the solutions that we know exist.
FT NON-PUBLIC 150
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated
Market
Company Country Sector Value as of Type Type (1)
Dec 2005
($bn)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1....... Saudi Aramco....... Saudi Arabia....... Oil gas............ 781 S State owned
2....... Petroleos Mexicanos Mexico............. Oil gas............ 415 S State owned
(Pemex).
3....... Petroleos de Venezuela.......... Oil gas............ 388 S State owned
Venezuela SA.
4....... Kuwait Petroleum Kuwait............. Oil gas............ 378 S State owned
Corporation.
5....... Petroliam Nasional Malaysia........... Oil gas............ 232 S State owned
Berhad (Petronas).
6....... Sonatrach.......... Algeria............ Oil gas............ 224 S State owned
7....... National Iranian Iran............... Oil gas............ 220 S State owned
Oil Company.
8....... Japan Post......... Japan.............. Postal services.... 156 S State owned
9....... Pertamina.......... Indonesia.......... Oil gas............ 140 S State owned
10...... Nigerian National Nigeria............ Oil gas............ 120 S State owned
Petroleum
Corporation.
11...... Abu Dhabi National UAE................ Oil gas............ 103 S State owned
Oil Company
(ADNOC).
12...... INOC............... Iraq............... Oil gas............ 102 S State owned
13...... Libya National Oil Libya.............. Oil gas............ 99 S State owned
Company.
14...... Sparkassen- Germany............ Banking............ 98 P Association
Finanzgruppe*.
15...... State Grid China.............. Electric utilities. 87 S State owned
Corporation of
China.
16...... Nippon Life Japan.............. Insurance.......... 87 P Mutual
Insurance Company.
17...... Kohlberg Kravis United States...... Private equity..... 83 P Partnership
Roberts Co.
18...... Qatar Petroleum.... Qatar.............. Oil gas............ 78 S State owned
19...... State Farm Mutual United States...... Insurance.......... 76 P Mutual
Automobile
Insurance Company.
20...... European Investment Luxembourg......... Banking............ 73 S State owned
Bank.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ms. KAPTUR. I will attest and sort of end with this. In our district
today, Dr. Al Campaan, the head of Physics at the University of Toledo,
has a solar-powered house from equipment made in Toledo. He takes his
truck, with six batteries home, maybe eight, every night. He drives it
from the university back home and he plugs it into his house. The
technology exists in Toledo, Ohio. He drives it the next morning, a
fully charged truck, back into the University of Toledo.
As we move to develop the technology of future, I would just
recommend to those who are listening tonight, here in the Chamber and
elsewhere, a wonderful book by a former decorated CIA agent, Robert
Baer, for whom I have great admiration. He retired. He is in his 50s.
We have probably had no better human intelligence officer throughout
the Middle East and Central Asia. He wrote a book, Sleeping with the
Devil.
{time} 2030
When I read that book, I thought I have to meet this man, because he
is speaking my language. The life he lived is very different than the
life that we have lived, but he looked the problem straight in the eye.
The subtitle of the book is: ``How Washington Became Addicted to Saudi
Crude.''
And I think it is important to note that the American people know
this. They want us to do something. They want us to help transform the
country. And I thank all my dear colleagues for allowing me these few
minutes on the floor this evening. I was not intending to come here,
but you have hit sort of the bull's eye of what this Member of Congress
has been involved in for several years, and you could not be on a more
important job creation, environmentally right set of initiatives for
this country, and it will be a joy to be here working with you on this.
Mr. INSLEE. We appreciate the gentlewoman from the State of Ohio. We
know the State of Ohio is going to do some great work on energy under
the leadership of the new governor, Ted Strickland, who is committed to
this agenda. And he would have been here tonight, but he is serving as
governor, or will be in about a week.
I want to make two comments on the transition to a biofuels economy
in the United States. First off, some people have said, well, we should
not use fiber or plants for fuel. We have to use it only for food. I
want to point out the fallacy of that argument. Right now we are
exporting an enormous percentage of the foodstuffs we grow. We send it
around the world and they send us the cash. What do we do? We take the
cash and send it to Saudi Arabia.
Let us cut out the middleman. Let us grow our own. This is time to
grow our own. We are sending it all over the world and then sending the
cash to
[[Page 49]]
Ridya and Saudi Arabia. Let us keep it right here. Let us grow our own
fuel.
By the way, this is no pie in the sky. The Department of Agriculture
has concluded we could have 30 percent of our fuel easily in the next
20 years, easily, using very conservative efforts. This is a very
achievable goal.
The second point I want to make is that this may happen eventually
without Congress's help, but it will be too late. Brazil took 30 years
to make this transition to an energy independent condition using their
biofuels. They use sugar cane there. They took 30 years. We do not have
30 years to wait. We have a problem with al-Qaeda tonight, we have
trouble with global climate change tonight, and we have trouble with a
loss of a manufacturing base in America tonight. We do not have 30
years. So we need to act and we need to do some things that the past
Congresses and the current administration have not done.
Let me just mention three of them. Number one, they have not given
loan guarantee assistance to get some of these plants going. The first
cellulosic plant in the world, commercial cellulosic plant in the world
is a company called Iogen. They are ready to build a plant. They have
contracts with 300 farmers to grow a plant using the leavings of wheat
to use cellulosic ethanol in Idaho, but they can not get the loan
guarantee to get the job done.
We want to get that job done and get that plant up and running in
Idaho. And this is going to be three or four more times effective per
acre with increasing profits to farmers as a consequence.
Second, to give Americans this freedom to choose what fuel to use,
they have to have cars that burn both gasoline and ethanol and,
frankly, the industry has not been willing to do that. So we need to
have some requirement to make sure that they make cars that burn
gasoline or ethanol. They make a car for less than $100 to burn either
one, so it is basically nothing to the manufacturers. We need to
require that to be done. Now, they say they are going to do more of
them in years, but we do not have years.
Third, we need the pumps that pump either gasoline or ethanol made
from midwestern corn or wheat or biodiesel. But the folks in Brazil
will tell you that companies do not like putting those pumps in,
because now you're competing with their gas and oil. They have a
monopoly on gas and oil, and they are not crazy about putting in a pump
that competes with them.
So we are going to need to require that Americans be given a choice
in pumps. Maybe we start by saying 10 percent of the stations have to
have an alternative pump of ethanol, if you have 25 stations. We do not
want the moms and pops that have to do this, if they cannot afford it.
But if you have a big chain, why not have 10 percent of your stations
at least have one ethanol pump so Americans can have that choice.
We took the first step in this journey tonight when Speaker Pelosi
said we are going to start making a shift from giveaways to oil and gas
towards these new clean energy futures, and I am looking forward to
making progress.
And I yield to Mr. Blumenauer.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you. And I am intrigued with the conversation,
the way that it is going at this point. We talked a moment ago about
giving Americans more choices as to how they transport themselves. We
can avoid the disastrous policies of this administration and the past
congressional leadership of picking winners and losers and picking the
wrong ones to win.
What you have described I have seen in my own State. There are people
going gung ho in terms of biomass, in terms of wave energy, and
technology that is emerging around the country in colleges and
universities, in small businesses and large to take advantage of the
opportunity.
If we just level the playing field, if we shift the massive subsidies
away from the people who do not need it and do not deserve it, and help
level the playing field for these emerging technologies dealing with
biomass from any of a variety of fuel stocks, of dealing with
electrical, solar, wind, wave, if we level the playing field, if we
give them a fair and predictable tax treatment, which we do not do now,
we can take these subsidies that are frankly not buying us anything.
It was interesting, the report that was suppressed by the
administration for a year, that revealed we actually would have done
more for energy supplies in this country, rather than lavishing tax
breaks on the most profitable corporations in the world, the oil
companies, selling the most profitable product, oil and gas, we would
have been farther ahead just buying it up.
By our redirecting these investments, we can help this nascent
technology grow around the country and we can have unleashed the
potential of making a difference and allowing the free market to work
after we level the playing field, after we enable them.
As you indicated, we are probably going to need to have some rules of
the game to be able to jump-start these markets. But I really
appreciate what you are talking about here.
I was in over a dozen States this last fall working on behalf of a
number of our new colleagues, including in Ohio. I am intrigued that
they to a person are concerned about global warming, to a person they
understand before they become Members of this body what you are talking
about here, and it makes me think that we have a real opportunity to
tap some creative energy in this body to finally, as I say, stop
talking about it and actually do something.
Mr. INSLEE. I would like to note that when Mr. Blumenauer talks about
leveling the playing field, I think that is very, very important.
Because when you look at these entrepreneurs, small businessmen and
women that maybe have 10, 15, or 20 employees who are working out of
their garage or a little warehouse they have rented somewhere and they
are developing some new way. For instance, there is a company called
Fiber Forge in Colorado, and they are developing a new way to use
composites to build the body of an automobile that can be four times
stronger than steel and weigh 30 to 40 percent as much.
Now, the challenge in doing this, we are building a composite
airplane, the first one ever, the Boeing 787, but the challenge is how
do you do that quickly in mass manufacturing, because it takes a lot of
hand labor right now. Well, here is a little company called Fiber Forge
and they are developing a way to manufacture this using mass production
methods that will decrease the cost so you can build cars someday, the
body of a car, out of composites that are stronger and weighs about
half as much. Do not hold me to that exact number, but significantly
less. But they are not getting subsidies, tax breaks, or help, whereas
the giant oil companies of the world are getting those huge tax write-
offs given to them by Congress.
I want to mention two other subsidies the oil and gas companies have
that these new competitor businesses do not have. Subsidy number one.
Probably a third of our defense budget is dedicated to the protection
of our oil lanes to protect the oil these companies get and then sell
to us at $3 or $2.50 a gallon. That is a multibillion dollar subsidy to
the oil and gas industry that solar, wind, biofuels, clean coal that we
can dig up and hopefully someday burn cleanly, they do not get that
subsidy at all. That is number one.
Subsidy number two. The solar people, the wind people, the clean coal
people, the wave power people, the transit people, people who do not
put carbon dioxide in the air, they are competing with a company that
is using the atmosphere as a free dump. The oil and gas companies
today, and those using dirty coal today, are using the atmosphere as a
free dumping ground to put their carbon dioxide in and they are not
paying a penny for it. These other business people do not have that
subsidy.
We have to do something about that so that there is some cost
associated with using the air we breathe as a private dumping facility.
When you go to the garbage dump now it costs us 25 bucks to dump a
bunch of stuff out of your pickup into the dump, but these industries
can put it into our air for free.
[[Page 50]]
Now, we fixed that with sulfur dioxide and we fixed that with nitrous
oxide, we have a cap and trade system, but there is a giant loophole, a
giant loophole that these companies use for carbon dioxide. It is the
most serious pollutant in the world today, but there is a loophole in
our laws that does not impose any cost associated with putting that
pollutant into our atmosphere. That needs to get fixed as well.
Now, we are going to have a long discussion about the best way to do
that, but we have to do it.
I would yield to Ms. Kaptur.
Ms. KAPTUR. I want to agree with what the gentleman is saying, and
look back at the last century, which was the century of hydrocarbons.
This century will be the century of carbohydrates and unlocking the
power of the carbohydrate molecule in a way we have never understood it
before.
Those who came before us were on this track but got derailed from it.
In the early part of the 20th century, in our district, we had a car
that was kind of famous called the Clyde car. It was built by the Clyde
Bicycle Works, and it was built around 1898 or 1902, somewhere in
there. You see this Clyde car and you look at the steering wheel and it
has two levers on it. One lever is for alcohol-based fuel. You know,
they knew how to build stills back then. And the other is for
petroleum-based fuel. And I have been amazed to open the trunk of the
car and see two different fuel tanks and think, my gosh, how did we
move from that, which was what the gentleman was talking about, choice
at the pumps and choice of vehicles, and where we are today. Because
certain people made certain choices.
I just mention that particular example and say that as our industries
and our small businesses try to bring up these new technologies, what
the gentlemen are saying tonight, Mr. Inslee, Mr. Blumenauer, and Mr.
Holt about financing and the tax aspects of this, if you look at
certain farmers in Ohio who have tried let's say to raise the capital
to build a plant, amazing things are happening that are not so good out
there.
The big buck players come in and they offer people on the board money
so they never bring up that production, because there is an effort by
those who are currently big buck dealers, in alcohol-based fuels, let's
say, to want to control the market just like the oil companies are
controlling the market. We see that some farmers do not have the
organizational structure that they need in order to own some of this so
that our rural communities across America will be able to find new
value added and lift themselves to a new economic future.
I think, and I am not sure that everyone on the Agriculture Committee
agrees with me on this yet, but we need some type of loan guarantee
program or long-term financing in a structure like the Federal Land
Banks or our Rural Electrics, which we started years ago, so that we
have a system that is long term and permits them to stay in business so
that some big buck operator does not come in, drive the price down in a
given small market, and not permit them to be able to bring up and let
this industry flower.
So the tax and financing aspects that we have been talking about are
very, very important.
I also just wanted to say something about the science, as a member of
the Agriculture Committee. It is amazing that in 2007, we do not know,
in terms of row crop production, how to get the most yield out of a
carbohydrate-based plant and a planting system that does the least
damage to the atmosphere and yields the most combustible product.
{time} 2045
For example, everyone is into ethanol from corn because we have
subsidized corn up to here. But what about beans that have more oil?
What about canola? What about castor? We stopped growing castor beans
because of the by-product of ricin. But could we biogenetically take
ricin out of castor beans and get more oil per acre?
We have got to do the science of planting, and we are just at the
beginning of that age. We only have a glimmer of what that could be
like. This is a major area for research where we could make a huge
difference.
Mr. INSLEE. I just want to comment on that. I think basically a way
to say this is that our current biofuels economy, which is very
productive, and I believe is at least a small improvement on net
CO2, is really a first generation of biofuels. We have a
second and third generation that are very close to coming.
One of them is this cellulosic ethanol that I have talked about.
There is a company called Logen, there are several other companies
doing this, to use a cellulosic method in an enhanced way of breaking
open the cell to get at the carbohydrates. When we do this, this second
generation of biofuels is really going to kick in and make this
competitive.
I want to mention one thing before I yield to Mr. Holt, and that is
we have just Democrats participating in this discussion. But our fellow
Republicans are also involved in this discussion. I, myself, and others
are talking to some of our Republican colleagues, developing a bill to
try to enhance this second generation of ethanol.
We do want to make this, and believe we can make this, a bipartisan
effort now that we have new leadership that will free us from the
chains of the oil and gas companies that have shackled the Congress to
date. We are going to have some colleagues on the other side of the
aisle work with us, too.
I yield to Mr. Holt.
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. For years, ethanol was
dismissed as a net energy loser. It cost more energy to grow the crops
and ferment them and produce useful fuel; it took more fuel than it
provided. It was a net energy user. So it was easy to dismiss that and
not invest much money in distribution systems and so forth.
Then, because there were not distribution systems, there was not much
motivation to develop more efficient catalytic processes, to work with
the waste, as you would be doing with cellulosic ethanol, for example.
It really was, if we may mix an agricultural metaphor here, a chicken
and egg problem, and we need to step in.
This is the sort of thing that the government can do at low cost
without picking winners and losers by actually providing more choice,
by making it possible for people to distribute the fuel as the new
technology makes it economical and efficient to produce that fuel. It
is a matter of investment in research and investment in infrastructure.
Some of this is done through incentives, some of it is done through
demonstration projects, some of it is done through direct investment of
research and development. We can break out of this self-defeating
chicken and egg cycle, or chicken and egg restriction.
Mr. INSLEE. I want to note too, as we do that, we want to do in a way
that is fiscally responsible. One of the things we have done is to pay
for these things by repealing some of these tax breaks that have gone
to the oil and gas companies, and then shifting them over to these
investments, to do this in a fiscally responsible way.
We also want to do it in a way that helps businesses rather than
hurts them. Some of the incentive programs that have been done in the
past have been done in a way to ensure their failure.
For instance, some previous Congresses have been in the terrible
habit when they do tax incentives that are intended to help businesses
grow, they have done it for one year at a time or two years at a time;
and venture capitalists, and I have talked to many of them, say we are
not going to make multibillion dollar investments, realizing the rug
can be pulled out from under us.
That has been done because Congress has tried to hide the deficit, so
they have tried to make these things seem like they are short term.
We only have about two more minutes. I would just like to yield to
anyone who has a closing comment.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. If I could briefly comment, I appreciate what you
have each indicated in terms of the new generation of dealing with
biofuels. I think this is an example of how we move forward.
[[Page 51]]
You are absolutely right in terms of being able to zero in on the
research, to squeeze out of this, to have tax incentives that are
uniform, predictable and deal with the second and third generation of
ethanol development and dealing with what might happen in terms of
unlocking the power of biology here.
I have been struck by how there are many opportunities for us in the
new farm bill to redirect, what is it, $23 billion of subsidy at this
point that flows increasingly to a very small number of farmers, often
corporate farms or large ones in a small limited area in a small,
limited number of crops. We have an opportunity to unlock that, help
farmers with their energy production, allow more farmers into it and
find out how we unlock the power of this ingenuity.
Mr. INSLEE. We just have a few seconds. I would like to just make a
closing comment.
First, I would thank my colleagues and say that I really do believe
this is a historic moment for the industrial base and agricultural base
of America, which is today's date, to start to move to a new base away
from just a dirty fossil fuel-based system to a clean energy system. We
are starting to do this starting today. We are going to join
Republicans, hopefully, in finding a bipartisan way to do it.
We can tell people that the genius of Americans is in these new wind
sources, wind turbines, solar cells, transit, flex-fuel vehicles, plug-
in vehicles, cellulosic ethanol, wave power, geothermal, fuel efficient
appliances, energy efficient homes; this job is going to get done by a
new Congress and it is a bright day for the country.
____________________
THE OFFICIAL TRUTH SQUAD
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Boucher). The gentleman from Georgia
(Mr. Price) is recognized for 60 minutes.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate once again the
opportunity to come to the floor of the House, and I am pleased to do
it on the first day of the 110th Congress. It is an exciting day, a
historic day.
I want to thank the leadership for allowing me the opportunity to
host an hour of the Official Truth Squad. We started this 2 years ago,
and did so because there were many of us who were concerned about the
fact that on the floor of the House oftentimes the words that were
spoken and the presentations made oftentimes bore little resemblance to
the truth. So we began 2 years ago to institute the Official Truth
Squad, to try to come to the floor like this every so often and try to
do it at least once a week to bring light to issues of concern to the
American people.
Today is no different. This is a historic day, the first day of the
110th Congress. It was an exciting day. The first day is always
exciting. It is full of families and celebration and children on the
floor of the House sharing the remarkable experiences of Members being
sworn in, oftentimes new Members, of which we have today, Mr. Speaker,
as you know, over 50 new Members in the House of Representatives. So it
is an important occasion.
We heard a lot of discussion leading up to today, and that discussion
was culminated in November by a vote by the American people, and the
American people voted and changed the majorities in the House of
Representatives. And in terms of the American people's decision, it was
the right decision for them because it was the decision that they made
at the polls. It was important for us, it is important for all of us to
appreciate that, yes, they did, the American people spoke.
I think one of the things that they said is that they want a
different process here. They were tired of some of the things that had
gone on here in the past, so they spoke and said a different process is
needed.
Many of my friends on the other side of the aisle, Mr. Speaker, as
you well know, talked as we led up to the November elections about the
need for civility in Congress, which we believe wholeheartedly, about
the need for openness, which is imperative for us to have in our system
of government, openness, and then fiscal responsibility, kind of three
tenets that they brought to the American people. I would concur with
each and every one of those.
I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, that those principles by the now-
majority party ought to last longer than one day of speeches. So we
have some concerns about what has occurred and some disappointments
already, and we would like to share some of those with the American
people as we are presenting things to the House of Representatives this
evening.
Now, in pointing these out, the purpose is not to say how good it was
when we were in the majority, because it can always be better. As many
of us talked in the election process, the campaign process, we talked
about the kinds of improvements that we would like to see. The purpose
is to shed light on both word and deed, and it is important, because
what folks say and what they do, it is important for the American
people to know that those two things are the same.
In our system of government, we have elections where people go to the
polls and vote. They vote based on a lot of things, but probably most
importantly they base their vote on the fact that they believe that the
person that they voted for and what they said they were going to do was
in fact what they were going to do. So when individuals say things that
they are going to do once they get into office and then they break
those promises, then it is important for people to be held accountable.
The American people do that time and again.
It is also important as a Member of now the minority party for us to
hold the majority party accountable. One of the responsibilities we
have in our dynamic form of government is to hold them accountable, and
we do this as a matter of principle. It is a matter of principle, and
we believe it is a matter of principle that elected officials ought to
be held accountable for not just what they say, but also what they do.
To that end, I would like to share, Mr. Speaker, some quotes. We are
going to talk a fair amount tonight about what individuals have said in
the past, oftentimes the recent past, and what we have some concerns
with in terms of their action.
This first quote is from the ``Declaration on Honest Leadership and
Open Government,'' which was one of the Democrat Party's publications
that they had prior to the election. The quote there is from the now-
Speaker. It says: ``Our goal is to restore accountability, honesty and
openness at all levels of government.'' It is a noble goal. It is a
noble goal. We would agree with that. It is just important that when
one says that that is your goal and that is your purpose that, in fact,
you comply with that.
The Washington Post on December 17, 2006, said Speaker Pelosi is
determined to try to return the House to what it was in an earlier era
``where you debated ideas and listened to each other's arguments.''
Where you debated ideas and listened to each other's arguments. That is
important as we go through the process of what is of concern to many of
us here in the House of Representatives about how the process is
already being implemented.
This is a quote from July of 2005 from Representative Rahm Emanuel,
now the chairman of the Democrat Caucus, and he voiced some frustration
about the inability to have either an amendment or a vote on the floor.
He said, ``Let us have an up and down vote. Don't be scared. Don't hide
behind some little rule. Come on out here. Put it on the table and let
us have a vote. So don't hide behind the rule. If this is what you want
to do, let us have an up and down vote.''
It is important to remember that the purpose of that was to say that
every Member of the House of Representatives ought to have the
opportunity to in fact offer amendments and have their opportunity for
people to say, yes, I agree with you and your amendment or your bill,
or, no, I don't.
Here is a quote from Representative Steny Hoyer, now the majority
leader, in October of 2005. The one that I would like to highlight here
is a quote where he said these provisions are an outrage, talking about
the rules that were in
[[Page 52]]
place: ``These provisions are an outrage and this process is an
outrage. As one Member of this body complained, once again the vast
majority of Americans are having their representatives in Congress
gagged by the closed rule committee.''
{time} 2100
Now, we will talk a fair amount this evening about what a closed rule
is and why Representative Hoyer in October 2005 would have made that
comment, saying that the representatives were being in effect
disenfranchised in the House of Representatives.
This quote comes from our now Speaker, Speaker Pelosi, who, in a
letter to then-Speaker Denny Hastert in October of 2006 said, and this
is an important quote, because this is one of those promises that were
made prior to the election and that I believe affected individuals all
across this Nation and what they were going to do when they went to the
polls in November.
This, again, is from now-Speaker Pelosi to then-Speaker Hastert. And
what this says is, ``More than two years ago, I first sent you
Democratic proposals to restore civility to the Congress. I reiterate
my support for these proposals today. We must restore bipartisanship to
the administration of the House, reestablish regular order for
considering legislation,'' and we will talk about what that means,
``and ensure the rights of the minority, whichever party is in the
minority.'' Restore the rights of the minority, whichever party is in
the minority. ``The voice of every American has a right to be heard.''
We would certainly concur with that. And, again, we will point out
some of the concerns and disappointments that many of us have about the
process that we have already seen in place today.
This quote here, Mr. Speaker, is from a Washington Post article of
January 2, 2007, 2 days ago. And it says, ``As they prepare to take
control of Congress this week and face up to the campaign pledges to
restore bipartisanship and openness, Democrats are planning to largely
sideline Republicans from the first burst of lawmaking. Instead of
allowing Republicans to fully participate in deliberations as promised
after the Democrats victory in the November 7 midterm elections,
Democrats now say they will use House rules to prevent the opposition
from offering alternative measures.''
And so we think it is important for people to be held accountable for
what they say and what they do. We also think it is important, Mr.
Speaker, as a matter of principle for people to do what they say they
are going to do, especially elected officials.
So, Mr. Speaker, I place into the Record an article which appeared in
The Washington Post on January 2 that included this quote, in addition
to that an editorial which appeared in the Washington Post yesterday
entitled, ``A Fairer House, But Not Quite Yet.''
[From the Washington Post, Jan. 2, 2007]
Democrats To Start Without GOP Input: Quick Passage of First Bills
Sought
(By Lyndsey Layton and Juliet Eilperin)
As they prepare to take control of Congress this week and
face up to campaign pledges to restore bipartisanship and
openness, Democrats are planning to largely sideline
Republicans from the first burst of lawmaking.
House Democrats intend to pass a raft of popular measures
as part of their well-publicized plan for the first 100
hours. They include tightening ethics rules for lawmakers,
raising the minimum wage, allowing more research on stem
cells and cutting interest rates on student loans.
But instead of allowing Republicans to fully participate in
deliberations, as promised after the Democratic victory in
the Nov. 7 midterm elections, Democrats now say they will use
House rules to prevent the opposition from offering
alternative measures, assuring speedy passage of the bills
and allowing their party to trumpet early victories.
Nancy Pelosi, the Californian who will become House
speaker, and Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, who will become
majority leader, finalized the strategy over the holiday
recess in a flurry of conference calls and meetings with
other party leaders. A few Democrats, worried that the party
would be criticized for reneging on an important pledge,
argued unsuccessfully that they should grant the Republicans
greater latitude when the Congress convenes on Thursday.
The episode illustrates the dilemma facing the new party in
power. The Democrats must demonstrate that they can break
legislative gridlock and govern after 12 years in the
minority, while honoring their pledge to make the 110th
Congress a civil era in which Democrats and Republicans work
together to solve the nation's problems. Yet in attempting to
pass laws key to their prospects for winning reelection and
expanding their majority, the Democrats may have to resort to
some of the same tough tactics Republicans used the past
several years.
Democratic leaders say they are torn between giving
Republicans a say in legislation and shutting them out to
prevent them from derailing Democratic bills.
``There is a going to be a tension there,'' said Rep. Chris
Van Hollen (Md.), the new chairman of the Democratic
Congressional Campaign Committee. ``My sense is there's going
to be a testing period to gauge to what extent the
Republicans want to join us in a constructive effort or
whether they intend to be disruptive. It's going to be a work
in progress.''
House Republicans have begun to complain that Democrats are
backing away from their promise to work cooperatively. They
are working on their own strategy for the first 100 hours,
and part of it is built on the idea that they might be able
to break the Democrats' slender majority by wooing away some
conservative Democrats.
Democrats intend to introduce their first bills within
hours of taking the oath of office on Thursday. The first
legislation will focus on the behavior of lawmakers, banning
travel on corporate jets and gifts from lobbyists and
requiring lawmakers to attach their names to special spending
directives and to certify that such earmarks would not
financially benefit the lawmaker or the lawmaker's spouse.
That bill is aimed at bringing legislative transparency that
Democrats said was lacking under Republican rule.
Democratic leaders said they are not going to allow
Republican input into the ethics package and other early
legislation, because several of the bills have already been
debated and dissected, including the proposal to raise the
minimum wage, which passed the House Appropriations Committee
in the 109th Congress, said Brendan Daly, a spokesman for
Pelosi.
``We've talked about these things for more than a year,''
he said. ``The members and the public know what we're voting
on. So in the first 100 hours, we're going to pass these
bills.''
But because the details of the Democratic proposals have
not been released, some language could be new. Daly said
Democrats are still committed to sharing power with the
minority down the line. ``The test is not the first 100
hours,'' he said. ``The test is the first 6 months or the
first year. We will do what we promised to do.''
For clues about how the Democrats will operate, the
spotlight is on the House, where the new 16-seat majority
will hold absolute power over the way the chamber operates.
Most of the early legislative action is expected to stem from
the House.
``It's in the nature of the House of Representatives for
the majority party to be dominant and control the agenda and
limit as much as possible the influence of the minority,''
said Ross K. Baker, a political scientist at Rutgers
University. ``It's almost counter to the essence of the place
for the majority and minority to share responsibility for
legislation.''
In the Senate, by contrast, the Democrats will have less
control over business because of their razor-thin 51-to-49-
seat margin and because individual senators wield substantial
power. Senate Democrats will allow Republicans to make
amendments to all their initiatives, starting with the first
measure--ethics and lobbying reform, said Jim Manley,
spokesman for the incoming majority leader, Harry M. Reid (D-
Nev.).
Those same Democrats, who campaigned on a pledge of more
openness in government, will kick off the new Congress with a
closed meeting of all senators in the Capitol. Manley said
the point of the meeting is to figure out ways both parties
can work together.
In the House, Louise M. Slaughter (D-N.Y.), who will chair
the Rules Committee, said she intends to bring openness to a
committee that used to meet in the middle of the night. In
the new Congress, the panel--which sets the terms of debate
on the House floor--will convene at 10 a.m. before a roomful
of reporters.
``It's going to be open,'' Slaughter said of the process.
``Everybody will have an opportunity to participate.''
At the same time, she added, the majority would grant
Republicans every possible chance to alter legislation once
it reaches the floor. ``We intend to allow some of their
amendments, not all of them,'' Slaughter said.
For several reasons, House Democrats are assiduously trying
to avoid some of the heavy-handed tactics they resented under
GOP rule. They say they want to prove to voters they are
setting a new tone on Capitol Hill. But they are also
convinced that Republicans lost the midterms in part because
they were perceived as arrogant and divisive.
``We're going to make an impression one way or the other,''
said one Democratic leadership aide. ``If it's not positive,
we'll be out in 2 years.''
[[Page 53]]
House Republicans say their strategy will be to offer
alternative bills that would be attractive to the
conservative ``Blue Dog'' Democrats, with an eye toward
fracturing the Democratic coalition. They hope to force some
tough votes for Democrats from conservative districts who
will soon begin campaigning for 2008 reelection and will have
to defend their records.
``We'll capitalize on every opportunity we have,'' said one
GOP leadership aide, adding that Republicans were preparing
alternatives to the Democrats' plans to raise the minimum
wage, reduce the interest on student loans, and reduce the
profits of big oil and energy companies.
Several Blue Dog Democrats said they do not think
Republicans can pick up much support from their group.
``If they've got ideas that will make our legislation
better, we ought to consider that,'' said Rep. Allen Boyd Jr.
(D-Fla.), leader of the Blue Dogs. ``But if their idea is to
try to split a group off to gain power, that's what they've
been doing for the past 6 years, and it's all wrong.''
To keep her sometimes-fractious coalition together, Pelosi
has been distributing the spoils of victory across the
ideological spectrum, trying to make sure that no group
within the Democratic Party feels alienated.
Blue Dogs picked up some plum committee assignments, with
Jim Matheson (Utah) landing a spot on Energy and Commerce and
A.B. ``Ben'' Chandler (Ky.) getting an Appropriations seat.
At the same time, members of Black and Hispanic caucuses
obtained spots on these panels, as Ciro Rodriguez (Tex.) was
given a seat on Appropriations and Artur Davis (Ala.) took
the place of Democrat William J. Jefferson (La.) on Ways and
Means.
Democrats acknowledge that if they appear too extreme in
blocking the opposing party, their party is sure to come
under fire from the Republicans, who are already charging
they are being left out of the legislative process.
``If you're talking about 100 hours, you're talking about
no obstruction whatsoever, no amendments offered other than
those approved by the majority,'' said Rutgers's Baker. ``I
would like to think after 100 hours are over, the Democrats
will adhere to their promise to make the system a little more
equitable. But experience tells me it's really going to be
casting against type.''
``The temptations to rule the roost with an iron hand are
very, very strong,'' he added. ``It would take a majority
party of uncommon sensitivity and a firm sense of its own
agenda to open up the process in any significant degree to
minority. But hope springs eternal.''
____
[From the Washington Post, Jan. 3, 2007]
A Fairer House: But Not Quite Yet
The new Democratic House majority has an ambitious plan for
its first 100 hours in power, from increasing the minimum
wage to strengthening ethics rules to having the federal
government negotiate prescription drug prices. Unfortunately,
its plans don't include getting those provisions passed in
the democratic fashion that the Democrats promised to adhere
to once in the majority. When Republicans took over in 1995,
they at least went through the motions of putting their
``Contract With America'' proposals through the normal
committee process. Democrats under Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-
Calif.) have decided not to bother with that, nor to let
Republicans offer amendments on the floor, nor even to put a
GOP alternative up for a vote. This is exactly the kind of
high-handed mistreatment that Democrats complained about,
justifiably, when they were in the minority.
Democrats offer various rationales for their about-face.
They say the streamlined process is necessary because they've
pledged to accomplish so much in their first 100 legislative
hours. But what makes living up to that self-imposed
deadline--which will stretch on for weeks, in any event--more
important than living up to their promise of procedural
fairness? And why, even if that deadline is sacrosanct,
couldn't Republicans at least be offered an opportunity to
offer alternatives on the floor?
Democrats also argue that their proposals have been fully
vetted and debated, but in fact many of them involve complex
policy choices and some are new proposals. Democrats howled
when Republicans moved unilaterally to change the rules
governing the operations of the House ethics committee; why
is it different for them to move unilaterally to change
ethics rules? Questions such as whether the minimum wage
increase should be combined with tax breaks for small
businesses and whether the federal government should be the
only party negotiating Medicare prescription prices ought to
be put up for discussion and a vote. If that causes a
fracture in the Democratic caucus, so be it.
Republicans, who were only too happy to strong-arm and
ignore Democrats when the GOP was in the majority, are now,
of course, moaning about being abused. In a nice bit of
political theater, they plan to offer Ms. Pelosi's own
``Minority Bill of Rights'' from 2004, which would provide
for, among other things, ``open, full and fair debate
consisting of a full amendment process.''
Democrats say that they'll adhere to their previous
promises once their first flurry of business is finished. We
look forward to that. But if they don't reconsider, they will
set an unfortunate precedent that fairness will be offered on
sufferance, when the majority finds it convenient, and not as
a matter of principle. That would not be a good start for the
110th Congress.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased tonight to be joined in our discussion
about truthfulness and our discussion about keeping promises and our
discussion about the rules process by a couple of my colleagues, and
others may join. And I would like to ask first for a comment or two
from Congressman McHenry from North Carolina.
Congressman McHenry is an individual that came to Congress with me
after the 2004 election, and has shown just great perspective and great
work ethic in making certain that he understands and appreciates all of
the nuances of the House and, as a matter of fact, has championed
ethics reform in this House. And so I thank you so much for joining us
tonight for the Official Truth Squad and look forward to your comments
on the ethics that we have seen so far and also on the minority bill of
rights that we have co-authored together.
Mr. McHENRY. Thank you, Congressman Price. I appreciate your
leadership, friendship, and support in our first term in Congress and
as we begin our second. And I appreciate you pulling together the
Official Truth Squad and taking this from an idea and actually making
it into reality. After all, that is what this legislative process and
indeed this House of Representatives is all about, is taking an idea, a
powerful idea and making it happen for the American people.
To that end, the Official Truth Squad is here to make sure that the
American people know what happens here in these hallowed halls of
Congress. And I think it is important, what you point out today from
the Democrat leaders' words and actions on their opening day and the
lead-up to taking control of this new Congress. It is indeed a new day
here, and the American people know that. And I think what the American
people see is that the Democrats worked very hard in the campaign and
were rewarded by taking control of this wonderful Congress of us, the
people's House, and they campaigned on a number of things. But one of
the key tenants and key principles upon which they ran their campaigns
and the rhetoric they used during the campaign was about openness,
honesty, and fairness.
This openness idea, it is a wonderful thing to talk about and I think
it is something that I stand for and I know my colleague from Georgia
does as well, and we have worked very hard during our times in public
service to provide this for the American people. But it was their
number one tenant in the campaign, their number one principle,
openness.
Well, on the opening day of Congress, we were hoping as the new
minority that this new Democrat majority would ensure openness and
fairness. And that is why Congressman Price and I, along with some of
my other colleagues, joined together to offer the minority bill of
rights. And what the minority bill of rights is, in essence, is what
all fifth graders in America are taught: It is the legislative process
that, when you file a bill in this House, it goes to committee or
subcommittee, and it is heard, it is debated, it is amended, it is
crafted, and there is compromise in the process. All sides, Democrats,
Republicans, conservatives, moderates, liberals, they are all heard.
And then it comes to this House floor, where it again goes through that
very same process of compromise and input. Well, that is what the
minority bill of rights is all about. And what we offered as the
minority bill of rights and what we offered here on the House floor
today with our two procedural votes today, was ensuring that these
principles, which then minority leader Nancy Pelosi, now Speaker
Pelosi, advocated just 3 years ago.
So what we offered was, in fact, the Pelosi minority bill of rights.
It is not simply a Republican idea, it is actually the minority leader,
now the Speaker, her ideas on the way this place should be governed.
And when we offered it
[[Page 54]]
here on the floor, it was flatly rejected. So it became clear here on
the opening day, the opening hours of this new Democrat majority, the
campaign on openness, that they really advocated closed process and
they only want their ideas, their few ideas heard. They don't want any
input or any dissenting opinion.
The bottom line is that Speaker Pelosi thinks that Minority Leader
Pelosi was wrong. I think some people call that hypocrisy, some call it
ironic to campaign on that. I think it is ridiculous on the opening day
of Congress, after a new majority is elected on openness, that they
cram down the throats of all the Members of this House a closed rule
that does not allow for input, does not allow for amendment, doesn't
allow for full, open, and fair debate, on their opening day of their
first act as a majority. That is what is so egregious about what we saw
here on the House floor.
In fact, this type of abuse has never happened before in the history
of the U.S. House of Representatives, the idea that you put a rule out,
a rule forward that closes off debate on an unknown bill. We can't even
see the text of the bills that they are offering in their 100-hour
proposal. They have closed it off from minority view. Simply because I
have an ``R'' beside my name, they believe that I am not able to view
it.
Well, I have got news for them. I have got news for this new Democrat
majority. 140 million Americans voted for a Republican for U.S.
Congress. They are not simply silencing a Member of Congress from North
Carolina or a Member of Congress from Georgia; they are silencing the
constituents who elected me. That is not fair. That is not openness.
That is not a new way of operating. In fact, it is a very old way of
operating that the Democrats used when they were in the majority
before.
So I think that we should set aside the first day and be hopeful for
a second day and a new beginning. We like second chances as Americans.
Let's give the Democrats a second chance for true openness, input, and
dialogue in a bipartisanship basis; not simply use it as a rhetorical
device during the campaign, but to actually govern that way, to
actually do it, make sure it happens here on this House floor, not for
us as Members of Congress, but for our constituents and for the
American people.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I appreciate those comments so much, because
they really bring into focus and clarity exactly what happened today.
As I mentioned before, the purpose of this is not to say to folks,
well, it was better when we were in the majority. The purpose is to say
the promises that were made to the American people and decisions that
the American people made upon those promises are not being followed.
They are not being followed. And when they are not being followed, what
that means when it comes to rules, it means that the individuals who
represent those 140 million people are not allowed a voice, which means
in essence that those 140 million people have no voice in the House of
Representatives as it relates to the rules that have been put in place.
I also think it is important to talk about the fact that it never
happened before. There is kind of this general sense by some that this
is just business as usual. Well, it is not business as usual. And one
of my colleagues who knows better than most, who understands and
appreciates that, is my good friend from Georgia, fellow colleague from
Georgia, Congressman Gingrey, who is a former member of the Rules
Committee, who I think has a wonderful perspective on the rule that
will enact bills in place on this floor of the House without any review
by committee, any review by anybody other than potentially, I guess the
Speaker, and that may be it.
So, I am so pleased that you joined us this evening to talk about
what is a closed rule within a closed rule and to talk about the bills
and the consequences of that for the American people. I welcome my good
friend, Congressman Gingrey.
Mr. GINGREY. I thank my colleague from Georgia (Dr. Price) for
yielding, and I thank my friend from North Carolina (Mr. McHenry), the
two co-authors of the minority bill of rights. I am a proud co-sponsor
of that, and I am proud of their ethics in regard to that.
And also, Mr. Speaker, let it be known to our colleagues that this
Official Truth Squad of the former freshman Members, now sophomore
Members, this is not something they just dreamed up tonight. This is
something that they have been doing for the entire 109th Congress and
putting some sunshine out there on a lot of these issues and shining
that light of day, and this is, of course, part of a continuing
process.
Dr. Price and Mr. McHenry are exactly right; I was enjoying very much
being on that select powerful, powerful Rules Committee, and had that
opportunity to go home and tell the folks back home that I am a member
of the powerful Rules Committee. And as a member, many times I had an
opportunity to hear the minority, the current chairman, Ms. Slaughter,
the vice chairman, Mr. McGovern, the senior members, Mr. Hastings and
Ms. Matsui, talk about the process and talk about this idea, the
appalling idea of a closed rule as Congressman Price points out, and
what they are doing in this rules of the House package that they are
sort of forcing upon us in asking us to vote on with much less than 24-
hour notice.
Just listen to some of the quotes of the former four minority members
of the Rules Committee who are now running the show and driving this
package that contains not one significant piece of legislation, but
five pieces of legislation, including the minimum wage bill, the stem
cell research bill, which indeed is truly life and death issues, the 9/
11 Commission Report, completing the recommendations of the 9/11
Commission. I mean, these are not naming of post offices, Mr. Speaker
and my colleagues. We all know that and we know the significance. But
listen to what my colleagues would say and did say many times in regard
to one piece of legislation.
First of all, let me quote Ms. Slaughter: ``If we want to foster
democracy in this body, we should take the time and thoughtfulness to
debate all major legislation under an open rule, Mr. Speaker, not just
appropriations bills which are already restricted. An open process
should be the norm and not the exception.'' This is from the
Congressional Record of June 14, 2005.
{time} 2115
Listen to what my good friend, Mr. McGovern, had to say on September
28, 2006: ``If the Republican leadership does not agree with the
bipartisan substitute, then they should defeat it on the House floor
after a full and open debate. Instead, they cower behind procedural
tricks, parliamentary sleight of hand and closed rules. No wonder the
American people are disgusted with Congress. If my Republican friends
want this trend of closed rules, of no amendments, of no democracy in
the House to continue, then by all means vote for this rule. Just go
along to get along. But if you believe, as I do, that the monopoly on
good ideas is not held by a few members of the leadership in a closed
room, then vote 'no.' Have the guts to vote `no.'''
That was Representative Jim McGovern.
Listen to what our good friend, a senior member on the Rules
Committee, Mr. Alcee Hastings, had to say on September 28, 2006: ``I
have said it before: the way the majority runs the House is shameful.
It is hypocritical, it is un-American, it is undemocratic, and it
happens every single day that we have a closed rule, and in other
circumstances as well.'' He goes on to say ``closed rules are an
affront to our democracy. We should stop it now. My outrage and the
outrage of all on this side is as much about process as it is about
policy. Pure partisan politics never produces sound public policy.''
Congressional Record, July 12, 2005.
Finally, the gentlewoman from California, Ms. Matsui: ``The American
people want to hear practical, well-thought ideas from their elected
representatives. Today we could have had that honest, engaged and
realistic debate. These proposals and ideas deserve to come to the
floor. They deserve to
[[Page 55]]
be debated, and they deserve a vote. Unfortunately, under the rule
reported out, this will not happen. Instead, we will have a gripping
session that yields no results. Congress is part of this government. In
fulfillment of its responsibilities, this House should reject this rule
and bring real policy to the floor.'' Congressional Record, June 15,
2006.
Mr. Speaker, I could go on, but I think you get my drift. They are
doing exactly what they railed against us about. The righteous
indignation that we heard on a continuing basis in the Rules Committee,
and here they come with the rules of the House, and they include in it
five pieces of legislation with no rule whatsoever. What do we get? A
motion to recommit.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman's quotes are quite
illuminating about the rhetoric that the Democrat Members used versus
their actions on opening day. Your expertise on the Rules Committee is
quite prescient.
There are three additional quotes that come to mind from earlier
today. In the new Speaker's speech today, her rather elaborate speech
today about the agenda for this new Congress, she said three things
that are of importance to what we are talking about here. She said
first, respect for every voice. That is what their new majority is
about. And it is also to work for all of America. And, finally, it is
for common ground for the common good.
Those are wonderful things and wonderful ideals that this House
should live up to. But as my colleague from Georgia said, it shouldn't
be simply a speech. It shouldn't simply be rhetoric; it should be
reality. It should be the practice of this House to seek common ground
to work for all of America, even those that didn't vote for the
Democrat majority, all of America, and respect every voice, even if you
have an ``R'' beside your name, respect for every idea that comes out
of this place so that we can do what is best and right for America. It
is not simply about process.
I think my colleague from Georgia said that very well. It is not
about process. It is about the effects that that process have on public
policy and the outcomes. If you rig the process, which I think there
are countries around the world that rig their voting process, that is
not true democracy. Fairness and openness, that is what brings about
the best result for all of America. It is not about a Democrat idea or
a Republican idea; it is about doing what is right on a bipartisan
basis for the American people.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I appreciate those comments, and I appreciate
the comments of the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).
I think it is appropriate now to ask my good friend, the gentlewoman
from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx), to make some comments about civility.
Congresswoman Foxx is a dear friend and has had great concern about the
level of discourse in this House of Representatives, has participated
actively in the Official Truth Squad. I know you had some comments that
you wanted to make about the level of civility and the importance of
that in this House.
Ms. FOXX. I want to thank you, Congressman Price, for bringing the
Truth Squad back. It is unfortunate that we had to do it on the first
day of session, but it was necessary to do that. As some folks know who
may have seen us in the 109th Congress, and you know to me it seems
like it was only yesterday we were here. It does not seem like a while
ago.
We began the Official Truth Squad because our colleagues on the other
side of the aisle were constantly saying things that we knew were not
true, and we felt that somebody needed to respond to them. It fell to a
group of primarily freshmen Members to form the Truth Squad, although
we had great help from some of our colleagues, some of whom are here
tonight, to talk about the truth.
Unfortunately, a lot of what our colleagues said in the 109th
Congress, some of those things that were not true were believed by the
American people, and they believed a lot of the things that they said
that were not true about the economy, about things that were happening
in the government; but they believed them on their promises of what
they said they would do.
They offered to make changes, and we know that there were some
Republicans who didn't do all that they should have done, not just in
the last Congress but in others. And so the American people have held
our feet to the fire on this. I think we came back here, though, with a
very positive spirit and we all came in today knowing it was going to
be a very historic day, but we were going to celebrate the very
positive day that we have here.
All of us are very grateful for the wonderful opportunity to serve in
the Congress of the United States, and we came here with the idea that
we were going to solve problems that all Americans face. We see that
happening in our communities every day. We see Democrats and
Republicans working together side by side in many different ways.
I marvel every time I go to a parade or to some fair or some event
that is put on by a community and how the people have worked together
to do that, very often without any support from any government body
because they put aside political differences for the good of the
community. That is obviously what we Republicans want to be happening
in the 110th Congress.
We believe that the American people are united in their desire for
peace and national security. They want solutions to problems, not
partisan bickering that only creates deadlocks and no solutions.
Again, the people in our communities do that every day, and so we
looked forward to the goal and the promise of the new majority to
restore the House to civility, to restore open debate so that ideas can
be examined, always reviewed and respected. And as Leader Boehner said
today in his speech, ``May the best idea win.''
We are here to debate ideas. We want to put the best ideas out there
and know that if we put our good ideas out there and get them up for a
vote, many times they are going to win; and many times we are going to
vote for the ideas that the Democrats bring up. But we should be united
in a common goal, although they are different perspectives. All Members
agree they should be able to voice their opinions on behalf of their
constituents and the constituents that sent them here to represent
them.
We are going to hold the Democrats accountable to their promises,
just as the Truth Squad during the 109th Congress came in and brought
in the facts. And we are not going to compromise our ideals or
principles, but we are going to do everything we can to make America
better.
We want open debate on legislation. We want Members to be able to
voice their concerns, their opinions, offer amendments in
subcommittees, full committee and in consideration of any legislation
on the floor. There should be plenty of time to review legislation and
every Member should be allowed the opportunity to participate. After
all, this is the people's House. It doesn't belong to the Members of
Congress; it does belong to the American people. We are here not for a
lifetime but temporarily to serve the people who sent us here.
As we are reminded again today, this House has been here for a long
time and will be here for a long time to come. We want to make sure
that it is strengthened and not weakened in what we do.
I don't believe there was a direct mandate in this last election.
Folks lost races and won races for lots of different reasons; but I do
believe the American people want change in the way we operate.
As I said the other day in our conference, as I have heard the
rhetoric and seen the actions of our Democratic colleagues, the North
Carolina State motto just kept going over and over in my head. The
North Carolina State motto is ``esse quam videri'' which means: to be
rather than to seem.
What we want to make sure is that our Democratic colleagues don't try
to pull the wool over the eyes of the American people by seeming rather
than being. And what we have seen on the first day is the seeming
rather than the being.
So we want to do what I think the American people want us to do, to
find
[[Page 56]]
solutions to the problems we face. We don't think that is going to be
done behind closed doors and legislation ramrodded through here because
of the majority. We don't want Members stripped of the ability to
address the House with their ideas, principles and amendments. Those
things don't affect us individually as much as they affect our
constituents.
So I am going to remind our colleagues over and over and over again
of the North Carolina State motto and say to them we hold you to the
principles of doing what you said you were going to do and being rather
than seeming.
Again, I want to thank my colleague from Georgia for organizing the
Truth Squad in the 110th Congress, and I look forward to working with
you, although I hope we are not going to have to be here too many
nights a week.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I thank the gentlewoman from North Carolina and
the wonderful words and focus that you bring to the need for civility
and appropriateness in terms of word and deed on the floor of the House
and in actions throughout our careers as elected officials.
I am so pleased to be joined by another good friend and colleague
from Tennessee, Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn, who has participated
actively in the Official Truth Squad. I guess I share the gentlewoman
from North Carolina's lament in having to be here on the first day
because there is some straightening out in terms of bringing truth to
the issue that has occurred even on this first day. We welcome you and
look forward to your comments as they relate to the issues that have
already occurred in this 110th Congress.
Mrs. BLACKBURN. I thank the gentleman from Georgia for his work on
this issue and for his work on the Truth Squad.
Today is a historic day, as my colleagues have mentioned. I commend
my colleagues from both sides of the aisle on their collegiality and
their tone as we have approached this day, and have recognized the
historic importance and the significance of the first female taking the
position of Speaker of this wonderful body which is the people's House.
You know, as the gentleman was saying, it is so important that we
note, we are not here to complain. We are not here to gripe. What we
are here to do is to highlight for our constituents some of the content
of a rules package that seems to be hastily pulled together that did
not go through the committee process, that didn't have hearings, and
was brought to the floor for a vote.
I think it is important that our constituents know, because we have a
lot of new Members of this body, and those voters that voted in the
elections this fall did not go to the ballot box voting to have a
government that was going to be carried out in the shadows. They went
to the ballot boxes saying we want government that is more accountable.
We want government that is more open. We want government that is more
responsive to the needs of our constituents. We want government that is
going to work more effectively and more efficiently for the American
people.
{time} 2130
And the very first vote that is taken on the rules package presented
in the people's House today is a vote that would eliminate recorded
votes in the Rules Committee.
Now, in my great State of Tennessee, we have had this discussion, and
in our general assembly in the great State of Tennessee, we have had
this debate, and people said over and over again we want those votes
recorded. We want sunshine. We want openness. And that is something
that needs to be highlighted with our constituents. They need to
realize the format that they are wanting to push forward would deny the
minority the opportunity to hear, have their amendments heard in the
Rules Committee. Dr. Gingrey has highlighted some of the provisions,
and he does such a wonderful job with our Rules Committee and the
concerns that we have with the format that would go before the Rules
Committee that would deny recording some of these votes, which means
there is less accountability. So it is our responsibility to come and
highlight those things.
You know another thing that the people did not vote for this November
was to raise their taxes. They did not go to the poll and vote saying,
``Representatives, we want you to make it easier to raise the taxes on
us.'' And one of the things that we find with the PAYGO rules is that
it is basically pay as you go on a spending spree. Even the Concord
Coalition has estimated that this 100 hours would cost $800 billion
over 10 years if everything was funded. That is $80 billion a year for
10 years, $80 billion a year additional, additional, new spending.
Now, I can tell you one thing for certain. I don't know a lot, but
one thing I do know is that the people of the Seventh District of
Tennessee do not want to be forking over another $80 billion a year.
What they did vote for this November was to see government spending
reduced, and that is where they want our emphasis to be. And it is
important that we spell this out for our constituents, for the American
people, for them to know what is transpiring as we come into the 110th
Congress.
Words are important and it is important that we provide the
clarification that is there and that is needed. And as I have viewed
the package that we have debated some today and will debate tomorrow, I
have come to realize that one of the things our colleagues across the
aisle, the Democrats, have said is they want to go back to the way
things were. I even said maybe Barbara Streisand's ``The Way We Were''
should be their theme song because that is how they want to go back to
doing business where it is closed. This is what people voted against
with the revolution in 1994. They voted then for more openness.
This past November, people thought they were going to see more action
and more openness, and the first votes that are being taken are closing
that process and are excluding people, excluding representatives of as
many as 140 million Americans from participation in that process.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I wanted to
highlight the new rule for the Rules Committee, which says that votes
don't have to be recorded, and I appreciate so much your bringing that
up because nobody at home, none of my constituents, believe that any
Member of Congress ought to be able to come here and vote and not have
their constituents be able to look and see what they have done.
And, in fact, part of this rules package that I think breaks a number
of promises that were made by our friends in the majority as they ran
up to the election, part of this package says that those votes don't
have to be recorded. And I would be happy to yield to you, but for the
life of me, I can't think of a reason that one would want to do that.
Mrs. BLACKBURN. If the gentleman would yield and also yield to Dr.
Gingrey, who is on the Rules Committee, but having served in a State
legislative body, that is one of the things that our constituents who
were tuned into watching so closely would say, how in the world can you
represent me and then not tell me how you voted and try to keep that a
secret? I am having a difficult time finding words to say how egregious
that is and how offensive it is to our constituents.
Mr. GINGREY. I thank the gentleman from Georgia for yielding and
giving me an opportunity to talk about that a little bit because at the
beginning of my remarks, I talked about the powerful Rules Committee.
And, Mr. Speaker, it is a powerful Rules Committee in that you decide
how long you can talk on an issue. That is, you limit the time of
debate. You have the power to make amendments in order to give a Member
on either side of the aisle, majority or minority, an opportunity to
come and talk about their amendment on the floor. They may get beat
434-1, but they have that opportunity.
As an all powerful member of the Rules Committee, as Representative
[[Page 57]]
Price was just saying, all of a sudden, in this rules package, they are
saying that one of these all powerful members can make these votes, can
set this time of debate, can deny the amendment opportunity for Members
on either side of the aisle and then not take a public vote, not take a
roll call vote, and not go home and face their constituents, these all
powerful members of the Rules Committee, not answer to their
constituents for why they denied maybe a Member of their own party a
good idea to debate on the House floor, their body.
And I am going to tell you the rhetorical question Dr. Price asked,
was why would this new majority do this? I can offer a suggestion. They
now, of course, have nine members. The four that were in the minority
are now the majority including the chairman of the Rules Committee and
the vice chairman of the Rules Committee, but they also have an
additional five seats, which they are filling with some of their newly
elected freshmen Democrats who can go home in these marginal districts,
these red Bush districts, if you will, and say that I am an all
powerful member of the Rules Committee, re-elect me, but yet not have
to answer for these difficult votes that they took probably in
opposition to what their constituents would want them to do.
So I thank you for giving me the opportunity to explain the
rhetorical question of why they might want to do that.
Mrs. BLACKBURN. And if the gentleman would yield, if my memory is
correct, in 1995, when Speaker Gingrich and the House Republicans set
the rules, that was at the time that they started recording those
votes; is that not correct?
Mr. GINGREY. I think the gentlewoman from Tennessee is absolutely
correct on that.
Mrs. BLACKBURN. And before that, the votes were not recorded and it
was the process. That is why I say we are returning to the way we were,
the way they were. And it is different from the way business was
conducted from 1995 until now. And I think that is an important
distinction for our constituents who have stopped us on the campaign
trail and stopped us as we have prepared to come in and take our solemn
oath of office today and have said we want to be certain that this
Congress is going to function in an open, accountable manner. We want
to know what is happening in the people's House, and it is your charge
to keep with us to keep us informed.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I thank the gentlewoman and I thank my good
friend from Georgia for his answer to my rhetorical question, because
the answer was the only thing that can be possible as a reason to do it
is politics. That is it. That is the only thing that can be possible.
There can be no good reason, from a process standpoint, for this House
of Representatives not to record those votes. So I appreciate so much
your enlightening me and helping me understand why that would have been
done.
I do know that constituents at home are tired, are tired of decisions
that are made up here in Washington based solely on politics. And, in
fact, I would suggest to my friends on the other side of the aisle who
now find themselves in the majority that decisions like that and being
held accountable for those decisions make it so that lives in
majorities can sometimes be very, very short.
So I appreciate your comments and appreciate your input and would be
happy to yield if either of you had anything else to comment regarding
the rules.
If not, I do want to comment a little bit about the process and about
why discussion of the process is important. My good friends know and
most Americans know we live in the longest surviving democracy ever in
the history of man, ever in the history of man. And there is a reason
for that. I think people can conjecture about why that is the case, but
I think one of the reasons for that is that we as a Nation have
respected the process by which we develop policy. And the reason it is
important is because everybody that is an elected official, is a
representative of the people, has an opportunity to have input into the
process, and that process itself not only produces the best product
because as you have more people involved who represent more diverse
areas, I think you get a better product, but what it does do is it
ensures that people trust the outcome.
They trust the outcome of not just elections, but they trust the
outcome of the process of legislation. And when that process gets
truncated or gets cut down or is closed, we use that term ``closed
rule'' here, when the American people hear about a closed rule, what
that means is that it does not allow your representative at home to be
able to offer amendments, be able to have input into what the ultimate
work product is, what the ultimate bill, what the ultimate law is.
So, Mr. Speaker, many individuals across this Nation who went to the
polls and voted in November have elected people who because of changes
in these rules today will not be able to have input into very, very
important issues like 9/11 Commission recommendations and whether or
not they are adopted; like stem cell research and whether that goes
forward paid for with Federal taxpayer money; minimum wage, an
important issue, but it ought to be debated, ought to have opportunity
for amendment; and then something that is near and dear to my heart as
a physician in my former life along with Dr. Gingrey and my other
colleagues is the issue of prescription drugs and the Medicare part D
prescription drug program. An extremely complex issue. Extremely
complex issue.
And today, what the majority party did was say that we will bring
within the next week to the floor of this House a bill that has never
been discussed in committee. It has never had a hearing. It has never
had anybody in this body be able to offer an amendment officially and
have folks vote on it and say ``yes'' or ``no,'' they believe that that
is the case, that has never been through that process that results in
the best work product that is available for a bill and for ultimately a
law. And from the rumors that we hear, and we only hear rumors because
we don't have the legislative language, because we do not know what is
going to be in that bill, but from the rumors that we hear, the result
of that bill will be a decrease in the kinds of medications that are
available to the American people.
That may go into effect, Mr. Speaker, if the majority party goes
forward with the rule that they adopted today. That may go into effect
without anybody in this House of Representatives ever having an
opportunity to affect that outcome.
{time} 2145
Some on the majority side would say, well, it has been talked about
for a long time. It was voted on, the Medicare prescription drug
program was voted on in 2003, got a lot of hearings then. There were a
lot of people that talked about it and voiced their opinion on it at
that time.
That is true, Mr. Speaker, but what hasn't happened is that every
single freshman Member of this House was duly elected in their
districts and has a right, a right, under our system of government to
have input into a bill that comes out of the House of Representatives.
Every single freshman will have no input into that bill or into the
bill as it relates to minimum wage, as it relates to stem cell research
or anything else that was included in the rules package today. Never.
That has never been done, as my colleagues said before, never been
done in the history, in the history of this Nation, to have that kind
of substantive legislation dealt with in a way that does not allow that
kind of input.
Mr. Speaker, that kind of rule, that kind of process, which is
difficult to get your arms around, but that kind of process, I would
suggest to you, is an abuse of majority power. Our job, on the minority
side, is to hold people accountable for their actions and for their
decisions.
It is important that the American people understand and appreciate
that these decisions that were made on the very first day, which, by
and large, are
[[Page 58]]
procedural issues, that are difficult to get folks interested in, but
they not only set the tone for this Congress, but they set the rules
under which we make major decisions that will affect the American
people as it relates to their income, as it relates to their security,
and as it relates to their health. Nothing, nothing could be more
important.
Mr. Speaker, this is indeed a historic day. But it is also a day of
concern. It is a day of concern, because what goes on here is extremely
important. Within these walls we can effect change that will benefit
citizens all across our Nation. We can also effect change that will
harm citizens all across our Nation. If we work together, we will do
much more of the former and very little of the latter.
Let me close by just saying, Mr. Speaker, as I have said before, the
challenges that we face in this Nation are huge. They are immense. But
they are not Republican challenges, and they are not Democrat
challenges. They are American challenges.
If we work together as a body of elected representatives from all
across this wonderful and glorious Nation, we will come up with the
best product, the best legislation, the best laws that will result in
the most amount of benefit to our citizens all across this Nation. So I
challenge, I challenge my Democrat colleagues to fulfill the promises
that they made on the election, during the election campaign, to
fulfill the promises that they made, to fulfill the promises that they
made when they talked to citizens in their districts all across this
Nation about openness and about civility and about fiscal
responsibility. That challenge, that challenge making certain that you
fulfill those promises is what will ring true to the American people.
I appreciate once again, Mr. Speaker, the opportunity to come to the
floor tonight.
____________________
SPECIAL ORDERS GRANTED
By unanimous consent, permission to address the House, following the
legislative program and any special orders heretofore entered, was
granted to:
(The following Members (at the request of Mr. Inslee) to revise and
extend their remarks and include extraneous material:)
Mr. DeFazio, for 5 minutes, today.
Mr. Pallone, for 5 minutes, today.
Ms. Woolsey, for 5 minutes, today.
Mr. Schiff, for 5 minutes, today.
Mr. Stupak, for 5 minutes, today.
(The following Members (at the request of Mr. Price of Georgia) to
revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material:)
Mr. Poe, for 5 minutes, today and January 5.
Mr. Dent, for 5 minutes, today.
Mr. Jones of North Carolina, for 5 minutes, January 9, 10, and 11.
Mr. Paul, for 5 minutes, January 5.
____________________
SENATE BILL REFERRED
A bill of the Senate of the following title was taken from
the Speaker's table and, under the rule, referred as follows:
S. 159. An act to redesignate the White Rocks National
Recreation Area in the State of Vermont as the ``Robert T.
Stafford White Rocks National Recreation Area''; To the
Committee on Natural Resources.
____________________
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now
adjourn.
The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 9 o'clock and 49 minutes
p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until tomorrow,
Friday, January 5, 2007, at 9:30 a.m. as a further mark of respect to
the memory of the late Honorable Gerald R. Ford, 38th President of the
United States.
____________________
EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, ETC.
Under clause 8 of rule XII, executive communications were taken from
the Speaker's table and referred as follows:
1. A letter from the Chairman and President, Export-Import
Bank, transmitting a report on transactions involving U.S.
exports to Mexico pursuant to Section 2(b)(3) of the Export-
Import Bank Act of 1945, as amended; to the Committee on
Financial Services.
2. A letter from the Director, Office of Standards,
Regulations and Variances, Department of Labor, transmitting
the Department's final rule -- Emergency Mine Evacuation
(RIN: 1219-AB46) received December 13, 2006, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Education and Labor.
3. A letter from the Director, Defense Security Cooperation
Agency, transmitting reports in accordance with Section 36(a)
of the Arms Export Control Act, pursuant to 22 U.S.C.
2776(a); to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
4. A letter from the Secretary, Department of Commerce,
transmitting a six-month report prepared by the Department of
Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security on the national
emergency declared by Executive Order 13222 of August 17,
2001, and continued on August 14, 2002, August 7, 2003, and
August 6, 2004 to deal with the threat to the national
security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States
caused by the lapse of the Export Administration Act of 1979,
pursuant to 50 U.S.C. 1641(c); to the Committee on Foreign
Affairs.
5. A letter from the Assistant Secretary for Legislative
Affairs, Department of State, transmitting a report on the
status of consular training with respect to travel or
identity documents, pursuant to Section 7201(d) of the
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004,
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 2155(b)(2); to the Committee on Foreign
Affairs.
6. A letter from the Assistant Secretary for Legislative
Affairs, Department of State, transmitting pursuant to
section 36(d) of the Arms Export Control Act, certification
regarding the proposed manufacturing license agreement for
the manufacture of significant military equipment in the
Government of the United Kingdom (Transmittal No. DDTC 063-
06); to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
7. A letter from the Assistant Secretary for Legislative
Affairs, Department of State, transmitting consistent with
the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq
Resolution of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-243), the Authorization for
the Use of Force Against Iraq Resolution (Pub. L. 102-1), and
in order to keep the Congress fully informed, a report
prepared by the Department of State for the October 12, 2006
-- December 20, 2006 reporting period including matters
relating to post-liberation Iraq under Section 7 of the Iraq
Liberation Act of 1998 (Pub. L. 105-338); to the Committee on
Foreign Affairs.
8. A letter from the Assistant Secretary for Legislative
Affairs, Department of State, transmitting pursuant to
Section 620(q) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as
amended, waiving restrictions on assistance to the Democratic
Republic of Congo resulting from the country's default on
certain U.S. loans; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
9. A letter from the Deputy Secretary, Department of
Defense, transmitting the semiannual report of the Inspector
General for the period April 1, 2006 through September 30,
2006, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. app. (Insp. Gen. Act) section
5(b); to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
10. A letter from the White House Liaison, Department of
Education, transmitting a report pursuant to the Federal
Vacancies Reform Act of 1998; to the Committee on Oversight
and Government Reform.
11. A letter from the Presidential Appointments Officer,
Department of State, transmitting a report pursuant to the
Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998; to the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform.
12. A letter from the Presidential Appointments Officer,
Department of State, transmitting a report pursuant to the
Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998; to the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform.
13. A letter from the Presidential Appointments Officer,
Department of State, transmitting a report pursuant to the
Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998; to the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform.
14. A letter from the Presidential Appointments Officer,
Department of State, transmitting a report pursuant to the
Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998; to the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform.
15. A letter from the Presidential Appointments Officer,
Department of State, transmitting a report pursuant to the
Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998; to the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform.
16. A letter from the Presidential Appointments Officer,
Department of State, transmitting a report pursuant to the
Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998; to the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform.
17. A letter from the Chair, Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission, transmitting the semiannual report on the
activities of the Inspector General and management's report
for the period ending September 30, 2006, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. app. (Insp. Gen. Act) section 5(b); to the Committee
on Oversight and Government Reform.
18. A letter from the Chairman and General Counsel,
National Labor Relations Board, transmitting the semiannual
report on the
[[Page 59]]
activities of the Office of Inspector General of the National
Labor Relations Board for the period April 1, 2006 through
September 30, 2006, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. app. (Insp. Gen.
Act) section 8G(h)(2); to the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform.
19. A letter from the Secretary, Postal Rate Commission,
transmitting a report pursuant to the Federal Vacancies
Reform Act of 1998; to the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform.
20. A letter from the Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives,
transmitting list of reports pursuant to clause 2, Rule II of
the Rules of the House of Representatives, pursuant to Rule
II, clause 2(b), of the Rules of the House; (H. Doc. No. 110-
4); to the Committee on House Administration and ordered to
be printed.
21. A letter from the Acting Assistant Attorney General,
Department of Justice, transmitting the 2005 Annual Report of
the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), pursuant to 42
U.S.C. 3766(c) and 3789e; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
22. A letter from the Regulations Coordinator, CMS,
Department of Health and Human Services, transmitting the
Department's ``Major'' final rule -- Final Rules for
Nondiscrimination and Wellness Programs in Health Coverage in
the Group Market (RIN: 0938-AI08) received December 13, 2006,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Ways
and Means.
23. A letter from the Assistant Secretary for Legislative
Affairs, Department of State, transmitting a copy of
Presidential Determination No. 2007-5, pursuant to Section
574(d) of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing and
Related Program Apporpriations Act of 2006, Pub. L. 109-102;
jointly to the Committees on Foreign Affairs and
Appropriations.
PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AFTER SINE DIE ADJOURNMENT
OF THE 109TH CONGRESS 2D SESSION AND FOLLOWING PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL
EDITION OF THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD OF THE 109TH CONGRESS 2D SESSION
COMMUNICATION FROM THE HON. CURT WELDON, MEMBER OF CONGRESS, AFTER SINE
DIE ADJOURNMENT
December 14, 2006.
Hon. J. Dennis Hastert,
Speaker, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Speaker: This is to formally notify you, pursuant
to Rule VIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives,
that a grand jury subpoena for documents, issued by the U.S.
District Court for the District of Columbia and addressed to
``Custodian of Records, Office of Congressman Wayne Curtis
Weldon,'' has been delivered to my congressional office.
Because the ``Office of Congressman Wayne Curtis Weldon'' is
not a legal entity, I have treated the subpoena as directed
to me and have designated a member of my staff as my
Custodian of Records for purposes of gathering documents that
are potentially responsive to the subpoena.
After I consult with counsel, I will make the
determinations required by Rule VIII of the Rules of the
House.
Respectfully,
Curt Weldon.
____________________
COMMUNICATION FROM THE CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
AFTER SINE DIE ADJOURNMENT
Committee on Ways and Means,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC, January 2, 2007.
Hon. J. Dennis Hastert,
Speaker of the House, U.S. Capitol, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Speaker: Pursuant to Section 11142(c)(1)(B) of the
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity
Act: A Legacy for Users (Public Law 109-59), I appoint the
following people to serve on the National Surface
Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission:
1. Zack Scrivner, Councilman, City of Bakersfield, Contact
information: 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93301,
(661) 304-4065.
2. Dr. Adrian Moore, Vice President of Research, Reason
Foundation, Contact information: 3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.,
Suite 400, Los Angeles, CA 90034 (310) 391-2245.
Best regards,
Bill Thomas,
Chairman.
____________________
COMMUNICATION FROM STAFF MEMBER OF THE HON. CHRIS CHOCOLA, MEMBER OF
CONGRESS, AFTER SINE DIE ADJOURNMENT
December 20, 2006.
Hon. J. Dennis Hastert,
Speaker, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Speaker: This is to formally notify you, pursuant
to Rule VIII of the House of Representatives, that I have
been served with a grand jury subpoena for testimony issued
by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
California.
After consulting with the Office of General Counsel, I have
determined that compliance with the subpoena is consistent
with the privileges and rights of the House.
Sincerely,
Rebecca Kuhn.
____________________
BILLS PRESENTED TO THE PRESIDENT AFTER SINE DIE ADJOURNMENT
Karen L. Haas, Clerk of the House reports that on January 3, 2007,
she presented to the President of the United States, for his approval,
the following bills.
H.R. 482. To provide for a land exchange involving Federal
lands in the Lincoln National Forest in the State of New
Mexico, and for other purposes.
H.R. 486. To provide for a land exchange involving private
land and Bureau of Land Management land in the vicinity of
Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico, for the purpose of
removing private land from the required safety zone
surrounding munitions storage bunkers at Holloman Air Force
Base.
H.R. 1245. To provide for programs to increase the
awareness and knowledge of women and health care providers
with respect to gynecologic cancers.
H.R. 4588. To reauthorize grants for and require applied
water supply research regarding the water resources research
and technology institutes established under the Water
Resources Research Act of 1984.
H.R. 4709. To amend title 18, United States Code, to
strengthen protections for law enforcement officers and the
public by providing criminal penalties for the fraudulent
acquisition or unauthorized disclosure of phone records.
H.R. 4997. To extend for 2 years the authority to grant
waivers of the foreign country residence requirement with
respect to certain international medical graduates.
H.R. 5483. To increase the disability earning limitation
under the Railroad Retirement Act and to index the amount of
allowable earnings consistent with increases in the
substantial gainful activity dollar amount under the Social
Security Act.
H.R. 5946. To amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act to authorize activities to
promote improved monitoring and compliance for high seas
fisheries, or fisheries governed by international fishery
management agreements, and for other purposes.
H.R. 5948. To reauthorize the Belarus Democracy Act of
2004.
H.R. 6060. To authorize certain activities by the
Department of State, and for other purposes.
H.R. 6164. To amend title IV of the Public Health Service
Act to revise and extend the authorities of the National
Institutes of Health, and for other purposes.
H.R. 6338. To amend title 18, United States Code, to
prevent and repress the misuse of the Red Crescent
distinctive emblem and the Third Protocol (Red Crystal)
distinctive emblem.
H.R. 6345. To make a conforming amendment to the Federal
Deposit Insurance Act with respect to examinations of certain
insured depository institutions, and for other purposes.
[[Page 60]]
____________________
HOUSE BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS APPROVED BY THE PRESIDENT AFTER SINE
DIE ADJOURNMENT
The President, after sine die adjournment of the second session,
109th Congress, notified the Clerk of the House that on the following
dates, he had approved and signed bills and joint resolutions of the
following titles:
December 21, 2006:
H.R. 1492. An act to provide for the preservation of the
historic confinement sites where Japanese Americans were
detained during World War II, and for other purposes.
H.R. 3248. An act to amend the Public Health Service Act to
establish a program to assist family caregivers in accessing
affordable and high-quality respite care, and for other
purposes.
H.R 5076. An act to amend title 49, United States Code, to
authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2007 and 2008, and
for other purposes.
H.R. 6342. An act to amend title 38, United States Code, to
extend certain expiring provisions of law administered by the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs, to expand eligibility for the
Survivors' and Dependants' Educational Assistance program,
and for other purposes.
H.R 6429. An act to treat payments by charitable
organizations with respect to certain firefighters as exempt
payments.
December 22, 2006:
H.J. Res. 101. Joint Resolution appointing the day for the
convening of the first session of the One Hundred Tenth
Congress.
December 29, 2006:
H.R. 5782. An act to amend title 49, United States Code, to
provide for enhanced safety and environmental protection in
pipeline transportation, to provide for enhanced reliability
in the transportation of the Nation's energy products by
pipeline, and for other purposes.
H.R. 6344. An act to reauthorize the Office of National
Drug Control Policy Act.
____________________
SENATE BILLS APPROVED BY THE PRESIDENT AFTER SINE DIE ADJOURNMENT
The President, after sine die adjournment of the second session,
109th Congress, notified the Clerk of the House that on the following
dates, he had approved and signed bills of the following titles:
December 21, 2006:
S. 2370. An act to promote the development of democratic
institutions in areas under the administrative control of the
Palestinian Authority, and for other purposes.
December 22, 2006:
S. 214. An act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior
to cooperate with the States on the order with Mexico and
other appropriate entities in conducting a hydrogeologic
characterization, mapping, and modeling program for priority
transboundary aquifers, and for other purposes.
S. 362. An act to establish a program within the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the United States
Coast Guard to help identify, determine sources of, assess,
reduce, and prevent marine debris and its adverse impacts on
the marine environment and navigation safety, in coordination
with non-Federal entities, and for other purposes.
S. 707. An act to reduce preterm labor and delivery and the
risk of pregnancy-related deaths and complications due to
pregnancy, and to reduce infant mortality caused by
prematurity.
S. 895. An act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior
to carry out a rural water supply program in the Reclamation
States to provide a clean, safe, affordable, and reliable
water supply to rural residents.
S. 1096. An act to amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to
designate portions of the Musconetcong River in the State of
New Jersey as a component of the National Wild and Scenic
Rivers System, and for other purposes.
S. 1378. An act to amend the National Historic Preservation
Act to provide appropriation authorization and improve the
operations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.
S. 1529. An act to provide for the conveyance of certain
Federal land in the city of Yuma, Arizona.
S. 1608. An act to enhance Federal Trade Commission
enforcement against illegal spam, spyware, and cross-border
fraud and deception, and for other purposes.
S. 2125. An act to promote relief, security, and democracy
in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
S. 2150. An act to direct the Secretary of the Interior to
convey certain Bureau of Land Management Land to the city of
Eugene, Oregon.
S. 2205. An act to direct the Secretary of the Interior to
convey certain parcels of land acquired for the Blunt
Reservoir and Pierre Canal features of the initial stage of
the Oahe Unit, James Division, South Dakota, to the
Commission on Schools and Public Lands and the Department of
Game, Fish, and Parks of the State of South Dakota for the
purpose of mitigating lost wildlife habitat, on the condition
that the current preferential leaseholders shall have an
option to purchase the parcels from the Commission, and for
other purposes.
S 2653. An act to direct the Federal Communications
Commission to make efforts to reduce telephone rates for
Armed Forces personnel deployed overseas.
S. 2735. An act to amend the National Dam Safety Program
Act to reauthorize the national dam safety program, and for
other purposes.
S. 3421. An act to amend title 38, United States Code, to
repeal certain limitations on attorney representation of
claimants for benefits under laws administered by the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs, to expand eligibility for the
Survivors' and Dependants' Educational Assistance Program, to
otherwise improve veterans' benefits, memorial affairs, and
health-care programs, to enhance information security
programs of the Department of Veterans Affairs, and for other
purposes.
S. 3546. An act to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act with respect to serious adverse event reporting
for dietary supplements and nonprescription drugs, and for
other purposes.
S. 3821. An act to authorize certain athletes to be
admitted temporarily into the United States to compete or
perform in an athletic league, competition, or performance.
S. 4042. An act to amend title 18, United States Code, to
prohibit disruptions of funerals of members or former members
of the Air Force.
S. 4091. An act to provide authority for restoration of the
Social Security Trust Funds from the effects of a clerical
error, and for other purposes.
S. 4092. An act to clarify certain land use in Jefferson
County, Colorado.
S. 4093. An Act to amend the Farm Security and Rural
Investment Act of 2002 to extend a suspension of limitation
on the period for which certain borrowers are eligible for
guaranteed assistance.
[[Page 61]]
SENATE--Thursday, January 4, 2007
The fourth day of January being the day prescribed by House Joint
Resolution 101 for the meeting of the 1st Session of the 110th
Congress, the Senate assembled in its Chamber at the Capitol and at 12
noon was called to order by the Vice President [Mr. Cheney].
______
prayer
The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, offered the following prayer:
Let us pray.
Eternal Spirit, whom to find is life and whom to miss is death, from
age to age you provide hope to those who trust you. In a changing
world, you are changeless. Lord, you have given us the gift of a new
year, with all of its possibilities and promises.
Empower the Members of this new 110th Congress to use this season of
opportunity for Your glory. As they labor with You, help them to place
our country's needs ahead of perceived political advantages. Lead them
from mistrust to trust. Use them to help bring peace to our world. Show
them the priorities that best honor You and inspire them to act
promptly. May they strive to achieve and maintain ethical and moral
fitness. When they feel discouragement, remind them that You are
working for the good of those who love You. As a challenging and
promising future beckons, guide their steps and supply their needs.
Lead the new leaders of our legislative branch with Your sure hand. May
they follow You without hesitation.
We pray in Your Sovereign Name. Amen.
____________________
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The VICE PRESIDENT led the Pledge of Allegiance, as follows:
I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of
America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
____________________
CERTIFICATES OF ELECTION AND CREDENTIALS
The VICE PRESIDENT. The Chair lays before the Senate the certificates
of election of 33 Senators elected for 6-year terms beginning January
3, 2007. All certificates, the Chair is advised, are in the form
suggested by the Senate or contain all the essential requirements of
the form suggested by the Senate. If there be no objection, the reading
of the above-mentioned letters and certificates will be waived, and
they will be printed in full in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
State of Hawaii
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the 7th day of November, 2006,
Daniel K. Akaka, was duly chosen by the qualified electors of
the State of Hawaii a Senator from said State to represent
said State in the Senate of the United States for the term of
six years, beginning on the 3rd day of January, 2007.
Witness: Her excellency our Governor Linda Lingle, and our
seal hereto affixed at Honolulu, Hawaii this 27th day of
November, in the year of our Lord, 2006.
By the Governor:
Linda Lingle,
Governor.
____
State of New Mexico
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the 7th day of November, 2006,
Jeff Bingaman, was duly chosen by the qualified electors of
the State of New Mexico a Senator from said State to
represent said State in the Senate of the United States for
the term of six years, beginning on the 3rd day of January,
2007.
Witness: His excellency our Governor Bill Richardson, and
our seal hereto affixed at Santa Fe this 30th day of
November, in the year of our Lord, 2006.
By the Governor:
Bill Richardson,
Governor.
____
State of Ohio
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the 7th day of November, 2006,
Sherrod Brown was duly chosen by the qualified electors of
the State of Ohio a Senator from said State to represent said
State in the Senate of the United States for the term of six
years, beginning on the 3rd day of January, 2007.
In Witness Whereof, I have hereto subscribed my name and
caused the Great Seal of the State of Ohio to be affixed at
Columbus, this 8th day of December, in the year Two Thousand
and Six.
Bob Taft,
Governor.
____
State of West Virginia
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the seventh day of November,
2006, Robert C. Byrd was duly chosen by the qualified
electors of the State of West Virginia, a Senator from said
State to represent said State in the Senate of the United
States for the term of six years, beginning on the third day
of January, 2007.
Witness: His excellency our governor Joe Manchin III, and
our seal hereto affixed at Charleston this 22nd day of
November, in the year of our Lord 2006.
By the Governor:
Joe Manchin, III,
Governor.
____
State of Washington
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify, that at the General Election held in
the State of Washington on the 7th day of November, 2006,
Maria Cantwell was duly chosen by the qualified electors of
the State of Washington as Senator from said State of
Washington to represent said State of Washington in the
Senate of the United States for the term of six years,
beginning on the 3rd day of January, 2007.
Witness: Her excellency our Governor Christine Gregoire,
and our seal hereto affixed at Olympia, Washington this 21st
day of December, 2006.
By the Governor:
Christine Gregoire,
Governor.
____
State of Maryland
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the 7th day of November, 2006,
Benjamin L. Cardin was duly chosen by the qualified voters of
the State of Maryland a Senator from said State to represent
said State in the Senate of the United States for the term of
six years, beginning on the 3rd day of January, 2007.
Witness: His Excellency our Governor Robert L. Ehrlich,
Jr., and our seal hereto affixed at the City of Annapolis,
this 8th day of December, in the Year of Our Lord Two
Thousand and Six.
Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr.
Governor.
____
State of Delaware
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the 7th day of November, 2006,
Thomas R. Carper was duly chosen at an election, in due
manner held according to the form of the Act of the General
Assembly of the State of Delaware and of the Act of Congress,
a Senator from said State to represent said State in the
Senate of the United States for the term of six years,
beginning noon on the 3rd day of January 2007.
Given under my hand and the Great Seal of the said State,
at Dover, this 27th day of November in the year of our Lord
Two Thousand Six, and of the Independence of the United
States of America Two Hundred Thirty.
By the Governor:
Ruth Ann Minner,
Governor.
____
State of Pennsylvania
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the seventh day of November,
2006, Bob Casey, Jr. was duly chosen by the qualified
electors of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania as a United
States Senator to represent Pennsylvania in the Senate of the
United States for a term of six years, beginning on the third
day of January, 2007.
[[Page 62]]
Witness: His excellency our Governor, Edward G. Rendell,
and our seal hereto affixed at Harrisburg this fifteenth day
of December, in the year of our Lord, 2006.
By the Governor:
Edward G. Rendell,
Governor.
____
State of New York
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the seventh day of November, two
thousand six, Hillary Rodham Clinton was duly chosen by the
qualified electors of the State of New York a Senator from
said State to represent said State in the Senate of the
United States for a term of six years, beginning on the third
day of January two thousand seven.
Witness: His excellency our Governor George E. Pataki, and
our seal hereto affixed at Albany, New York, this twenty-
sixth day of December in the year two thousand six.
By the Governor:
George E. Pataki,
Governor.
____
State of North Dakota
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the 7th day of November 2006,
Kent Conrad was duly chosen by the qualified electors of the
State of North Dakota to represent North Dakota in the Senate
of the United States for the term of six years, beginning on
the 3rd day of January 2007.
In witness whereof, we have set our hands at the Capitol
City of Bismarck this 21st day of November 2006, and affixed
the Great Seal of the State of North Dakota.
John Hoeven,
Governor.
____
State of Tennessee
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the 7th day of November 2006,
Bob Corker was duly chosen by the qualified electors of the
State of Tennessee a Senator from said State to represent
said State in the Senate of the United States for the term of
six years, beginning on the 3rd day of January 2007.
Witness: His excellency our governor Phil Bredesen, and our
seal hereto affixed at Nashville this 7th day of December in
the year of our Lord 2006.
By the governor:
Phil Bredesen,
Governor.
____
State of Nevada
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that at a general election held in the
State of Nevada on Tuesday, the seventh day of November, two
thousand six John E. Ensign was duly elected a Member of the
United States Senate, in and for the State of Nevada, for the
term of six years from and after the third day of January,
two thousand seven: Now, therefore, I Kenny C. Guinn,
Governor of the State of Nevada, by the authority in me
vested in the Constitution and laws thereof, do hereby
commission him, the said John E. Ensign as a Member of the
United States Senate for the State of Nevada, and authorize
him to discharge the duties of said office according to law,
and to hold and enjoy the same, together with all powers,
privileges and emoluments thereunto appertaining.
In Testimony Thereof, I have hereunto set my hand and
caused the Great Seal of the State of Nevada to be affixed at
the State Capitol at Carson City, Nevada this twenty sixth
day of December, two thousand six.
Kenny C. Guinn,
Governor.
____
State of California
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the 7th day of November, 2006,
Dianne Feinstein was duly chosen by the qualified electors of
the State of California as a Senator from said State to
represent said State in the Senate of the United States for
the term of six years, beginning on the 3rd day of January,
2007.
In Witness Whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused
the Great Seal of the State of California to be affixed this
6th day of December, 2006.
Arnold Schwarzenegger,
Governor.
____
State of Utah
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the seventh day of November,
2006, Orrin G. Hatch was duly chosen by the qualified
electors of the State of Utah a Senator from said State to
represent said State in the Senate of the United States for
the term of six years, beginning at noon on the third day of
January, 2007.
In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand at Salt
Lake City, this 27th day of November, 2006.
Jon M. Huntsman, Jr.,
Governor.
____
State of Texas
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the 7th day of November, 2006,
Kay Bailey Hutchison was duly chosen by the qualified
electors of the State of Texas, a Senator from said State to
represent said State in the Senate of the United States for
the term of six years, beginning on the 3rd day of January,
2007.
Witness: His excellency our governor Rick Perry, and our
seal hereto affixed at Austin, Texas this 6th day of
December, in the year of our Lord 2006.
By the Governor:
Rick Perry,
Governor.
____
State of Massachusetts
Certificate of Election for Six-year Term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the seventh day of November, two
thousand and six, Edward M. Kennedy was duly chosen by the
qualified electors of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts a
Senator from said Commonwealth to represent said Commonwealth
in the Senate of the United States for the term of six years,
beginning on the third day of January, two thousand and
seven.
Witness: Her Honor, the Lieutenant Governor, Acting
Governor, Kerry Healey, and our seal hereto affixed at
Boston, this sixth day of December in the year of our Lord
two thousand and six.
By Her Honor, the Lieutenant Governor, Acting Governor
Kerry Healey,
Lieutenant Governor,
Acting Governor.
____
State of Minnesota
Certificate of Election For Six-Year Term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the Seventh day of November
2006, Amy Klobuchar was duly chosen by the qualified electors
of the State of Minnesota, a Senator from said State to
represent said State in the Senate of the United States for
the term of six years, beginning on the 3rd day of January,
2007.
Witness: His excellency our Governor Tim Pawlenty, and our
seal hereto affixed at St. Paul, Minnesota this 11th day of
December, in the year of our Lord 2006.
By the Governor:
Tim Pawlenty,
Governor.
____
State of Wisconsin
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the 7th of November, 2006, Herb
Kohl was duly chosen by the qualified electors of the State
of Wisconsin a Senator from said State to represent said
State in the Senate of the United States for the term of six
years, beginning on the 3rd day of January, 2007.
Witness: His excellency our governor Jim Doyle, and our
seal hereto affixed at Madison this 12th day of December
2006.
By the Governor:
Jim Doyle,
Governor.
____
State of Connecticut
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to Certify that on the seventh day of November, two
thousand and six, Joe Lieberman was duly chosen by the
qualified electors of the State of Connecticut Senator from
said State to represent said State in the Senate of the
United States for the term of six years, beginning on the
third day of January two thousand and seven.
Witness: Her Excellency our Governor; M. Jodi Rell and our
seal hereto affixed at Hartford, this twenty-ninth day of
November, in the year of our Lord two thousand six.
M. Jodi Rell,
Governor.
____
State of Arizona
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the 7th day of November 2006,
Jon Kyl was duly chosen by the qualified electors of the
State of Arizona a Senator from said State to represent said
State in the Senate of the United States for the term of six
years, beginning on the 3rd day of January 2007.
Witness: Her excellency the Governor of Arizona, and the
Great Seal of the State of Arizona hereto affixed at the
Capitol in Phoenix this 4th day of December 2006.
Janet Napolitano,
Governor.
[[Page 63]]
____
State of Mississippi
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to Certify that on the 7th day of November, 2006,
the Honorable Trent Lott was duly chosen by the qualified
electors of the State of Mississippi, a Senator from said
State to represent said State in the Senate of the United
States for the term of six years, beginning on the 3rd day of
January, 2007.
Witness: His Excellency our Governor Haley Barbour, and the
Great Seal of the State of Mississippi hereto affixed at
Jackson, Hinds County, Mississippi this 19th day of December,
in the year of our Lord 2006.
Haley Barbour,
Governor.
____
State of Indiana
Certificate of Election for a Six-Year Term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the seventh day of November
2006, Richard G. Lugar was duly chosen by the qualified
electors of the State of Indiana a Senator from said State to
represent said State in the Senate of the United States for
the term of six years, beginning on the 3rd day of January,
2007.
Witness: His excellency our Governor Mitchell E. Daniels,
Jr., and our seal hereto affixed at Indianapolis, this the
thirteenth day of December, in the year, 2006.
By the Governor:
M. E. Daniels, Jr.,
Governor.
____
State of Missouri
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the 7th day of November, 2006,
Claire McCaskill was duly chosen by the qualified electors of
the State of Missouri, a Senator from said State to represent
said State in the Senate of the United States for the term of
six years, beginning on the 3rd day of January, 2007.
Witness: His Excellency our Governor Matt Blunt, and our
seal hereto affixed at the City of Jefferson this 30th day of
November, in the year of our Lord 2006.
By the Governor:
Matt Blunt,
Governor.
____
State of New Jersey
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the 7th day of November, 2006,
Robert Menendez, was duly chosen by the qualified electors of
the State of New Jersey, a Senator from said State to
represent said State in the Senate of the United States for
the term of six years, beginning on the third day of January,
2007.
By the Governor:
Given, under my hand and the Great Seal of the State of New
Jersey, this 11th day of December, two thousand and six.
Jon Corzine,
Governor.
____
State of Florida
CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION FOR SIX-YEAR TERM
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the 7th day of November, 2006,
Bill Nelson, was duly chosen by the qualified electors of the
State of Florida a Senator from said State to represent said
State in the Senate of the United States for the term of six
years, beginning on the 3rd day of January, 2007.
Witness: His excellency our Governor, Jeb Bush, and our
seal hereto affixed at Tallahassee, the Capitol, this 22st
day of November, in the year of our Lord 2006.
By the Governor:
Jeb Bush,
Governor.
____
State of Nebraska
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the 7th day of November, 2006,
E. Benjamin Nelson was duly chosen by the qualified electors
of the State of Nebraska from said State to represent said
State in the Senate of the United States for the term of six
years, beginning on the 3rd day of January, 2007.
Witness: His excellency our governor Dave Heineman, and our
seal hereto affixed at Lincoln, Nebraska this 11th day of
December, in the year of our Lord 2006.
By the Governor:
Dave Heineman,
Governor.
____
State of Vermont
Certificate of Election for Six-year Term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the 7th day of November, 2006,
Bernard Sanders was duly chosen by the qualified electors of
the State of Vermont a Senator from said State to represent
said State in the Senate of the United States for the term of
six year, beginning on the 3rd day of January, 2007.
Witness: His Excellency our Governor James H. Douglas, and
our seal hereto affixed at Montpelier this 16th day of
November, in the year of our Lord 2006.
By the Governor:
James H. Douglas,
Governor.
____
State of Michigan
certificate of election for six-year term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the 7th day of November, 2006,
Debbie Stabenow was duly chosen by the qualified electors of
the State of Michigan a Senator from the State of Michigan to
represent the State of Michigan in the Senate of the United
States for the term of six years, beginning on the 3rd day of
January, 2007.
Given under my hand and the Great Seal of the State of
Michigan this 27th day of November, in the year of our Lord,
two thousand and six.
By the Governor:
Jennifer M. Granholm,
Governor.
____
State of Maine
CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION FOR SIX-YEAR TERM
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the Seventh day of November, in
the year Two Thousand and Six, Olympia J. Snowe was duly
chosen by the qualified electors of the State of Maine a
Senator from said State to represent said State in the Senate
of the United States for the term of six years, beginning on
the third day of January, in the year Two Thousand and Seven.
Witness: His excellency our Governor, John E. Baldacci, and
our seal hereto affixed at Augusta, Maine this twenty-seventh
day of November, in the year of our Lord Two Thousand and
Six.
By the Governor:
John E. Baldacci,
Governor.
____
State of Montana
CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION FOR SIX-YEAR TERM
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
I, Brad Johnson, Secretary of State of the State of
Montana, do hereby certify that Jon Tester was duly chosen on
November 7th, 2006, by the qualified electors of the State of
Montana as a United States Senator from said State to
represent said State in the United States Senate. The six
year term commences on January 3rd, 2007.
Witness: His excellency our Governor, Brian Schweitzer, and
the official seal hereunto affixed at the City of Helena, the
Capital, this 27th day of November, in the year of our Lord
2006.
By the Governor:
Brian Schweitzer,
Governor.
____
State of Wyoming
Certificate of Election for Six-Year Term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the 7th day of November 2006,
Craig Thomas was duly chosen by the qualified electors of the
State of Wyoming, a Senator from said State to represent said
State in the Senate of the United States for the term of six
years, beginning on the 3rd day of January 2007.
Witness: His excellency our Governor, Dave Freudenthal, and
our seal hereto affixed at the Wyoming State Capitol,
Cheyenne, Wyoming, this 15th day of November, in the year of
our Lord 2006.
Dave Freudenthal,
Governor.
____
State of Virginia
Certificate of Election For Six-Year Term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the 7th day of November, 2006,
an election was held in the Commonwealth of Virginia and
James H. ``Jim'' Webb, Jr., was duly chosen by the qualified
electors of the Commonwealth of Virginia as a Senator to
represent the Commonwealth of Virginia in the Senate of the
United States for the term of six years, beginning on the 3rd
day of January, 2007.
In Testimony Whereof our Governor has hereunto signed his
name and affixed the Lesser Seal of the Commonwealth at
Richmond, this 8th day of December, 2006, and in the two
hundred thirty-first year of the Commonwealth.
By the Governor:
Timothy M. Kaine,
Governor.
____
State of Rhode Island
Certificate of Election For Six-Year Term
To the President of the Senate of the United States:
This is to certify that on the 7th day of November, 2006,
Sheldon Whitehouse duly chosen by the qualified electors of
the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations,
[[Page 64]]
Senator from said State to represent said State in the Senate
of the United States for a term of six years, beginning at
noon on the 3rd day of January, 2007.
Witness: His Excellency our Governor Donald L. Carcieri and
our seal affixed on this 8th day of December, in the year of
our Lord 2006.
Donald L. Carcieri,
Governor.
____________________
ADMINISTRATION OF OATH OF OFFICE
The VICE PRESIDENT. If the Senators to be sworn will now present
themselves at the desk in groups of four as their names are called in
alphabetical order, the Chair will administer their oaths of office.
The clerk will read the names of the first group.
The legislative clerk called the names of Mr. Akaka, Mr. Bingaman,
Mr. Brown, and Mr. Byrd.
These Senators, escorted by Mr. Reid, Mr. Domenici, former Senator
Glenn, and Mr. Rockefeller, respectively, advanced to the desk of the
Vice President, the oath prescribed by law was administered to them by
the Vice President, and they severally subscribed to the oath in the
Official Oath Book.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Congratulations.
(Applause, Senators rising.)
The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will read the names of the next group.
The legislative clerk called the names of Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Cardin,
Mr. Carper, and Mr. Casey.
These Senators, escorted by Mrs. Murray, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Biden, and
Mr. Specter, respectively, advanced to the desk of the Vice President,
the oath prescribed by law was administered to them by the Vice
President, and they severally subscribed to the oath in the Official
Oath Book.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Congratulations.
(Applause, Senators rising.)
The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will read the names of the next group.
The legislative clerk called the names of Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Conrad,
Mr. Corker, and Mr. Ensign.
These Senators, escorted by Mr. Schumer, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Frist, and
Mr. Reid, respectively, advanced to the desk of the Vice President, the
oath prescribed by law was administered to them by the Vice President,
and they severally subscribed to the oath in the Official Oath Book.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Congratulations.
(Applause, Senators rising.)
The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will read the names of the next group
of Senators.
The legislative clerk called the names of Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Hatch,
Mrs. Hutchison, and Mr. Kennedy.
These Senators, escorted by Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Cornyn, and
Mr. Kerry, respectively, advanced to the desk of the Vice President,
the oath prescribed by law was administered to them by the Vice
President, and they severally subscribed to the oath in the Official
Oath Book.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Congratulations.
(Applause, Senators rising.)
The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will read the next group of Senators.
The legislative clerk called the names of Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Kohl,
Mr. Kyl, and Mr. Lieberman.
These Senators, escorted by Mr. Coleman, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Feingold,
Mr. McCain, and Mr. Dodd, respectively, advanced to the desk of the
Vice President, the oath prescribed by law was administered to them by
the Vice President, and they severally subscribed to the oath in the
Official Oath Book.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Congratulations.
(Applause, Senators rising.)
The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will call the names of the next group
of Senators.
The legislative clerk called the names of Mr. Lott, Mr. Lugar, Mrs.
McCaskill, and Mr. Menendez.
These Senators, escorted by Mr. Cochran, Mr. Bayh, Mr. Bond, Mrs.
Carnahan, and Mr. Lautenberg, respectively, advanced to the desk of the
Vice President, the oath prescribed by law was administered to them by
the Vice President, and they severally subscribed to the oath in the
Official Oath Book.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Congratulations.
(Applause, Senators rising.)
The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will call the names of the next group
of Senators.
The legislative clerk called the names of Mr. Nelson of Florida, Mr.
Nelson of Nebraska, Mr. Sanders, and Ms. Snowe.
These Senators, escorted by Mr. Martinez, Mr. Byrd, Mr. Hagel, Mr.
Leahy, and Ms. Collins, respectively, advanced to the desk of the Vice
President, the oath prescribed by law was administered to them by the
Vice President, and they severally subscribed to the oath in the
Official Oath Book.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Congratulations.
(Applause, Senators rising.)
The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will call the names of the next group
of Senators.
The legislative clerk called the names of Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Tester,
Mr. Thomas, and Mr. Webb.
These Senators, escorted by Mr. Levin, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Melcher, Mr.
Enzi, Mr. Robb, and Mr. Warner, respectively, advanced to the desk of
the Vice President, the oath prescribed by law was administered to them
by the Vice President, and they severally subscribed to the oath in the
Official Oath Book.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Congratulations.
(Applause, Senators rising.)
The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will call the names of the last group
of Senators.
The legislative clerk called the name of Mr. Whitehouse.
This Senator, escorted by Mr. Reed, advanced to the desk of the Vice
President, the oath prescribed by law was administered to him by the
Vice President, and he subscribed to the oath in the Official Oath
Book.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Congratulations.
(Applause, Senators rising.)
____________________
RECOGNITION OF THE MAJORITY LEADER
The VICE PRESIDENT. The majority leader is recognized.
____________________
CALL OF THE ROLL
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The VICE PRESIDENT. The absence of a quorum having been suggested,
the clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
[Quorum No. 1 Leg.]
PRESENT--89
Akaka
Alexander
Allard
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Brown
Bunning
Burr
Byrd
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Chambliss
Clinton
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Corker
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Dodd
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Ensign
Enzi
Feingold
Feinstein
Grassley
Hagel
Harkin
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lott
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
McCaskill
McConnell
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson, Florida
Nelson, Nebraska
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sanders
Schumer
Shelby
Snowe
Specter
Stabenow
Stevens
Sununu
Tester
Thomas
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse
ABSENT--11
Brownback
Dole
Graham
Gregg
Inouye
Johnson
Murkowski
Roberts
Sessions
Smith
Wyden
The VICE PRESIDENT. A quorum is present.
____________________
LIST OF SENATORS BY STATES
ALASKA
Ted Stevens and Lisa Murkowski
[[Page 65]]
ALABAMA
Richard C. Shelby and Jeff Sessions
ARIZONA
John McCain and Jon Kyl
ARKANSAS
Blanche L. Lincoln and Mark L. Pryor
CALIFORNIA
Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer
COLORADO
Wayne Allard and Ken Salazar
CONNECTICUT
Christopher J. Dodd and Joseph I. Lieberman
DELAWARE
Joseph R. Biden, Jr., and Thomas R. Carper
FLORIDA
Bill Nelson and Mel Martinez
GEORGIA
Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson
HAWAII
Daniel K. Inouye and Daniel K. Akaka
IDAHO
Larry E. Craig and Mike Crapo
ILLINOIS
Richard Durbin and Barack Obama
INDIANA
Richard G. Lugar and Evan Bayh
IOWA
Chuck Grassley and Tom Harkin
KANSAS
Sam Brownback and Pat Roberts
KENTUCKY
Mitch McConnell and Jim Bunning
LOUISIANA
Mary L. Landrieu and David Vitter
MAINE
Olympia J. Snowe and Susan M. Collins
MARYLAND
Barbara A. Mikulski and Benjamin L. Cardin
MASSACHUSETTS
Edward M. Kennedy and John F. Kerry
MICHIGAN
Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow
MINNESOTA
Norm Coleman and Amy Klobuchar
MISSISSIPPI
Thad Cochran and Trent Lott
MISSOURI
Christopher S. Bond and Claire McCaskill
MONTANA
Max Baucus and Jon Tester
NEBRASKA
Chuck Hagel and Benjamin E. Nelson
NEVADA
Harry Reid and John Ensign
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Judd Gregg and John E. Sununu
NEW JERSEY
Frank R. Lautenberg and Robert Menendez
NEW MEXICO
Pete V. Domenici and Jeff Bingaman
NEW YORK
Charles E. Schumer and Hillary Rodham Clinton
NORTH CAROLINA
Elizabeth H. Dole and Richard Burr
NORTH DAKOTA
Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan
OHIO
George Voinovich and Sherrod Brown
OKLAHOMA
James M. Inhofe and Tom Coburn
OREGON
Ron Wyden and Gordon H. Smith
PENNSYLVANIA
Arlen Specter and Robert P. Casey, Jr.
RHODE ISLAND
Jack Reed and Sheldon Whitehouse
SOUTH CAROLINA
Lindsey Graham and Jim DeMint
SOUTH DAKOTA
Tim Johnson and John Thune
TENNESSEE
Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker
TEXAS
Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn
UTAH
Orrin G. Hatch and Robert F. Bennett
VERMONT
Patrick J. Leahy and Bernard Sanders
VIRGINIA
John Warner and Jim Webb
WASHINGTON
Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell
WEST VIRGINIA
Robert C. Byrd and John D. Rockefeller IV
WISCONSIN
Herb Kohl and Russell D. Feingold
WYOMING
Craig Thomas and Michael B. Enzi
The VICE PRESIDENT. The majority leader is recognized.
____________________
INFORMING THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES THAT A QUORUM OF EACH
HOUSE IS ASSEMBLED
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I send a resolution to the desk and ask for
its consideration.
The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 1) informing the President of the
United States that a quorum of each House is assembled.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, the resolution is considered
and agreed to.
The resolution (S. Res. 1) was agreed to, as follows:
S. Res. 1
Resolved, That a committee consisting of two Senators be
appointed to join such committee as may be appointed by the
House of Representatives to wait upon the President of the
United States and inform him that a quorum of each House is
assembled and that the Congress is ready to receive any
communication he may be pleased to make.
Mr. REID. I move to reconsider the vote by which the resolution was
adopted.
Mr. McCONNELL. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
____________________
APPOINTMENT BY THE VICE PRESIDENT
The VICE PRESIDENT. Pursuant to S. Res. 1, the Chair appoints the
Senator from Nevada, Mr. Reid, and the Senator from Kentucky, Mr.
McConnell, as a committee to join the committee on the part of the
House of Representatives to wait upon the President of the United
States and inform him that a quorum is assembled and that the Congress
is ready to receive any communication he may be pleased to make.
The majority leader is recognized.
____________________
INFORMING THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES THAT A QUORUM OF THE SENATE IS
ASSEMBLED
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I send a resolution to the desk.
The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 2) informing the House of
Representatives that a quorum of the Senate is assembled.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, the resolution is considered
and agreed to.
The resolution (S. Res. 2) was agreed to, as follows:
S. Res. 2
Resolved, That the Secretary inform the House of
Representatives that a quorum of the Senate is assembled and
that the Senate is ready to proceed to business.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. McCONNELL. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
____________________
ELECTION OF THE HONORABLE ROBERT C. BYRD AS PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I send a resolution to the desk.
The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 3) to elect Robert C. Byrd, a Senator
from the State of West Virginia, to be President pro tempore
of the Senate of the United States.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, the resolution is considered
and agreed to.
The resolution (S. Res. 3) was agreed to, as follows:
S. Res. 3
Resolved, That Robert C. Byrd, a Senator from the State of
West Virginia, be, and he is hereby, elected President of the
Senate pro tempore.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. McCONNELL. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Senator Byrd will be escorted to the desk.
Senator Robert C. Byrd, escorted by Mr. Reid, Mr. McConnell, and Mr.
[[Page 66]]
Rockefeller, respectively, advanced to the desk of the Vice President,
and he subscribed to the oath in the Official Oath Book.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Congratulations.
[Applause, Senators rising.]
____________________
NOTIFYING THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF THE ELECTION OF A
PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I send a resolution to the desk.
The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 4) notifying the President of the
United States of the election of a President pro tempore.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, the resolution is considered
and agreed to.
The resolution (S. Res. 4) was agreed to, as follows:
S. Res. 4
Resolved, That the President of the United States be
notified of the election of the Honorable Robert C. Byrd as
President of the Senate pro tempore.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. McCONNELL. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
____________________
NOTIFYING THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE ELECTION OF A PRESIDENT
PRO TEMPORE OF THE U.S. SENATE
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I send a resolution to the desk.
The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 5) notifying the House of
Representatives of the election of a President pro tempore.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, the resolution is considered
and agreed to.
The resolution (S. Res. 5) was agreed to, as follows:
S. Res. 5
Resolved, That the House of Representatives be notified of
the election of the Honorable Robert C. Byrd as President of
the Senate pro tempore.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. McCONNELL. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
____________________
EXPRESSING THE THANKS OF THE SENATE TO SENATOR TED STEVENS AND
DESIGNATION AS PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE EMERITUS
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I send a resolution to the desk.
The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 6) expressing the thanks of the
Senate to the Honorable Ted Stevens for his service as
President pro tempore of the United States Senate and to
designate Senator Stevens as President pro tempore emeritus
of the United States Senate.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, the resolution is agreed to.
The resolution (S. Res. 6) was agreed to, as follows:
S. Res. 6
Resolved, That the United States Senate expresses its
deepest gratitude to Senator Ted Stevens for his dedication
and commitment during his service to the Senate as the
President Pro Tempore.
Further, as a token of appreciation of the Senate for his
long and faithful service, Senator Ted Stevens is hereby
designated President Pro Tempore Emeritus of the United
States Senate.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. REID. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
____________________
FIXING THE HOUR OF THE DAILY MEETING OF THE SENATE
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I send a resolution to the desk.
The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 7) fixing the hour of the daily
meeting of the Senate.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, the resolution is considered
and agreed to.
The resolution (S. Res. 7) was agreed to, as follows:
S. Res. 7
Resolved, That the daily meeting of the Senate be 12
o'clock meridian unless otherwise ordered.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. McCONNELL. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
____________________
ELECTING NANCY ERICKSON AS THE SECRETARY OF THE SENATE
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I send a resolution to the desk.
The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 8) electing Nancy Erickson as
Secretary of the Senate.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, the resolution is considered
and agreed to.
The resolution (S. Res. 8) was agreed to, as follows:
S. Res. 8
Resolved, That Nancy Erickson of South Dakota be, and she
is hereby, elected Secretary of the Senate.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. McCONNELL. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Nancy Erickson, escorted by Mr. Reid and Mr. McConnell, respectively,
advanced to the desk of the Vice President, the oath prescribed by law
was administered to her by the Vice President, and she subscribed to
the oath in the Official Oath Book.
[Applause, Senators rising.]
____________________
NOTIFYING THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF THE ELECTION OF THE
SECRETARY OF THE SENATE
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I send a resolution to the desk.
The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 9) notifying the President of the
United States of the election of the Secretary of the Senate.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, the resolution is considered
and agreed to.
The resolution (S. Res. 9) was agreed to, as follows:
S. Res. 9
Resolved, That the President of the United States be
notified of the election of the Honorable Nancy Erickson as
Secretary of the Senate.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. McCONNELL. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
____________________
NOTIFYING THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE ELECTION OF A SECRETARY
OF THE SENATE
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I send a resolution to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Lautenberg). The clerk will report the
resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 10) notifying the House of
Representatives of the election of a Secretary of the Senate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the resolution is
considered and agreed to.
The resolution (S. Res. 10) was agreed to, as follows:
S. Res. 10
Resolved, That the House of Representatives be notified of
the election of the Honorable Nancy Erickson as Secretary of
the Senate.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. McCONNELL. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
[[Page 67]]
____________________
ELECTING TERRANCE W. GAINER AS SERGEANT AT ARMS AND DOORKEEPER
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I send a resolution to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 11) electing Terrance W. Gainer as
Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the resolution is
considered and agreed to.
The resolution (S. Res. 11) was agreed to, as follows:
S. Res. 11
Resolved, That Terrance W. Gainer of Illinois be, and he is
hereby, elected Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the
Senate.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. McCONNELL. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
____________________
NOTIFYING THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF THE ELECTION OF A
SERGEANT AT ARMS AND DOORKEEPER OF THE SENATE
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I send a resolution to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 12) notifying the President of the
United States of the election of a Sergeant at Arms and
Doorkeeper of the Senate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the resolution is
considered and agreed to.
The resolution (S. Res. 12) was agreed to, as follows:
S. Res. 12
Resolved, That the President of the United States be
notified of the election of the Honorable Terrance W. Gainer
as Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. McCONNELL. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
____________________
NOTIFYING THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE ELECTION OF A SERGEANT AT
ARMS AND DOORKEEPER OF THE SENATE
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I send a resolution to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 13) notifying the House of
Representatives of the election of a Sergeant at Arms and
Doorkeeper of the Senate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the resolution is
considered and agreed to.
The resolution (S. Res. 13) was agreed to, as follows:
S. Res. 13
Resolved, That the House of Representatives be notified of
the election of the Honorable Terrance W. Gainer as Sergeant
at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. McCONNELL. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
____________________
ELECTING MARTIN P. PAONE AS SECRETARY FOR THE MAJORITY
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I send a resolution to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 14) electing Martin P. Paone of
Virginia as Secretary for the Majority of the Senate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the resolution is
considered and agreed to.
The resolution (S. Res. 14) was agreed to, as follows:
S. Res. 14
Resolvled, That Martin P. Paone of Virginia be, and he is
hereby, elected Secretary for the Majority of the Senate.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. McCONNELL. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
____________________
ELECTING DAVID J. SCHIAPPA AS SECRETARY FOR THE MINORITY OF THE SENATE
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I send a resolution to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 15) electing David J. Schiappa of
Maryland as Secretary for the Minority of the Senate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the resolution is
considered and agreed to.
The resolution (S. Res. 15) was agreed to, as follows:
S. Res. 15
Resolved, That David J. Schiappa of Maryland be, and he is
hereby, elected Secretary for the Minority of the Senate.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. REID. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
____________________
APPOINTMENT
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair, on behalf of the President pro
tempore, pursuant to Public Law 95-521, appoints Morgan J. Frankel, of
the District of Columbia, as Senate legal counsel, for a term of
service to expire at the end of the 111th Congress.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, has the Chair appointed Mr. Frankel?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes, the Chair has appointed Mr. Frankel.
____________________
MAKING EFFECTIVE THE APPOINTMENT OF SENATE LEGAL COUNSEL
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I send a resolution to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 16) to make effective appointment of
the Senate Legal Counsel.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the resolution is
considered and agreed to.
The resolution (S. Res. 16) was agreed to, as follows:
S. Res. 16
Resolved, That the appointment of Morgan J. Frankel to be
Senate Legal Counsel made by the President pro tempore this
day is effective as of January 3, 2007, and the term of
service of the appointee shall expire at the end of the One
Hundred Eleventh Congress.
Mr. REID. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. McCONNELL. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
____________________
APPOINTMENT
Mr. PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair, on behalf of the President pro
tempore, pursuant to Public Law 95-521, appoints Patricia Mack Bryan,
of Virginia, as Deputy Senate Legal Counsel for a term of service to
expire at the end of the 111th Congress.
____________________
MAKING EFFECTIVE THE APPOINTMENT OF DEPUTY SENATE LEGAL COUNSEL
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I send a resolution to the desk and ask
that it be considered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 17) to make effective appointment of
the Deputy Senate Legal Counsel.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the resolution is
considered and agreed to.
The resolution (S. Res. 17) was agreed to, as follows:
S. Res. 17
Resolved, That the appointment of Patricia Mack Bryan, of
Virginia, to be Deputy Senate Legal Counsel made by the
President pro
[[Page 68]]
tempore this day is effective as of January 3, 2007, and the
term of service of the appointee shall expire at the end of
the One Hundred Eleventh Congress.
Mr. McCONNELL. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. REID. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
____________________
UNANIMOUS-CONSENT AGREEMENT
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I send to the desk en bloc 12 unanimous
consent requests. I ask unanimous consent that the requests be
considered en bloc, that the requests be agreed to en bloc, and that
they appear separately in the Record.
Before the Chair rules, I wish to point out that these requests are
routine and are done at the beginning of every new Congress. They
entail issues such as authority for the Ethics Committee to meet,
authorizing the Secretary to receive reports at the desk, establishing
leader time each day and floor privileges for House parliamentarians.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The requests read as follows:
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that for the
duration of the 110th Congress, the Ethics Committee be
authorized to meet during the session of the Senate.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that for the
duration of the 110th Congress, there be a limitation of 15
minutes each upon any rollcall vote, with the warning signal
to be sounded at the midway point, beginning at the last 7\1/
2\ minutes, and when rollcall votes are of 10-minute
duration, the warning signal be sounded at the beginning of
the last 7\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that during the
110th Congress, it be in order for the Secretary of the
Senate to receive reports at the desk when presented by a
Senator at any time during the day of the session of the
Senate.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the majority
and minority leaders may daily have up to 10 minutes each on
each calendar day following the prayer and disposition of the
reading of, or the approval of, the journal.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the
Parliamentarian of the House of Representatives and his five
assistants be given the privileges of the floor during the
110th Congress.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that,
notwithstanding the provisions of rule XXVIII, conference
reports and statements accompanying them not be printed as
Senate reports when such conference reports and statements
have been printed as a House report unless specific request
is made in the Senate in each instance to have such a report
printed.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee
on Appropriations be authorized during the 110th Congress to
file reports during adjournments or recesses of the Senate on
appropriations bills, including joint resolutions, together
with any accompanying notices of motions to suspend rule XVI,
pursuant to rule V, for the purpose of offering certain
amendments to such bills or joint resolutions, which proposed
amendments shall be printed.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that, for the
duration of the 110th Congress, the Secretary of the Senate
be authorized to make technical and clerical corrections in
the engrossments of all Senate-passed bills and resolutions,
Senate amendments to House bills and resolutions, Senate
amendments to House amendments to Senate bills and
resolutions, and Senate amendments to House amendments to
Senate amendments to House bills or resolutions.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that for the
duration of the 110th Congress, when the Senate is in recess
or adjournment, the Secretary of the Senate is authorized to
receive messages from the President of the United States,
and--with the exception of House bills, joint resolution, and
concurrent resolutions--messages from the House of
Representatives; and that they be appropriately referred; and
that the President of the Senate, the President pro tempore,
and the Acting President pro tempore be authorized to sign
duly enrolled bills and joint resolutions.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that for the
duration of the 110th Congress, Senators be allowed to leave
at the desk with the journal clerk the names of two staff
members who will be granted the privilege of the floor during
the consideration of the specific matter noted, and that the
Sergeant-at-Arms be instructed to rotate such staff members
as space allows.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that for the
duration of the 110th Congress, it be in order to refer
treaties and nominations on the day when they are received
from the President, even when the Senate has no executive
session that day.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that for the
duration of the 110th Congress, Senators may be allowed to
bring to the desk bills, joint resolutions, concurrent
resolutions, and simple resolutions, for referral to
appropriate committees.
____________________
MORNING BUSINESS
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there now be a
period set aside to conduct morning business.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. REID. And that Senators be permitted to speak for whatever time
they wish--that is, at least Senator Reid and Senator McConnell--and
thereafter the speeches be limited to 10 minutes each.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
A NEW CONGRESS
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I appreciate everyone's courtesy. This is
the first experience of mine to go through these procedures. It wasn't
as smooth as clockwork, but with staff help it was smooth enough. So I
very much appreciate everyone's cooperation as we look forward to this
new Congress.
The future lies with those wise political leaders who
realize that the great public is interested more in
Government than in politics.
Franklin Roosevelt, 1940.
I have chosen this line to open this new session of the Senate
because the wisdom it imparts is as relevant today as it was 67 years
ago.
The future lies with those wise political leaders who
realize that the great public is interested more in
Government than in politics.
The American people are expecting positive results from this 110th
Congress, not more partisan rancor. We stand today at the cusp of a new
Congress, ready to write a new chapter in our country's great future.
It is a time of hope and promise for our Nation. The elections are
over, and the next Senate campaigns have yet to begin.
Today we are not candidates; we are U.S. Senators. We 100 are from
different States, we 100 represent different people, we 100 represent
different political parties, but we share the same mission: keeping our
country safe and providing a Government that allows people to enjoy the
fruits and prosperity and, of course, our economic freedom.
Last November, the voters sent us a message. They sent this message
to Democrats and they sent this message to Republicans: The voters are
upset with Congress and the partisan gridlock. The voters want a
Government that focuses on their needs. The voters want change.
Together, Democrats and Republicans must deliver that change.
No longer can we waste time here in the Capitol while families in
America struggle to get ahead. No longer can we here in the Capitol
afford to pass the problems of today to Congresses of tomorrow. Those
problems, for example, are from keeping families safe to raising the
minimum wage to instituting new ethical reforms. We can and we must get
to work.
As the new Congress begins, the challenges facing America are
complex. They range from a contracted war in Iraq to a health care
crisis right here at home, from a middle class that is squeezed to an
energy policy that is warming our globe, from a higher education system
that has exploded in costs to jobs where benefits have all but
disappeared. We Senators can make a difference in each of these areas
if we remember we are here to fight for our country, not with each
other.
The majority, my party, holds a very slim margin--51 to 49. Some may
look at this as a composition for gridlock, a recipe for gridlock, but
I see this as a unique opportunity. I guarantee everyone in this
Chamber that the American people are hoping it is a unique
opportunity--an opportunity for Democrats, an opportunity for
Republicans--to debate our differences and seek common ground. We must
turn the page on partisanship and usher in a new era of bipartisan
progress. How can we achieve progress? By doing things differently than
they have been done in recent years.
[[Page 69]]
One, we must--I repeat again and again--work together.
Second, we are going to have to work here in Washington, in the
Senate, longer hours. Factory workers, shopkeepers in America's malls,
schoolteachers, police officers, miners, welders, and business men and
women work at least 5 days a week. Shouldn't we here in Washington,
where we do our business, in this laboratory we call the Senate, do the
same?
Three, we will achieve progress by working on an agenda that reflects
not the needs of Democrats, not the needs of Republicans, but the needs
of the people of this great country.
Today Democrats may be in charge of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, but we in the Senate are committed to bipartisanship.
We found that a one-party town simply doesn't work. We know from
experience that majorities come and they go. Majorities are very
fragile, and majorities must work with minorities to make that lasting
change.
In this body, the U.S. Senate, nothing can be accomplished unless we
reach across the aisle--not one way but both ways. It is because when
our Founding Fathers created the Senate 219 years ago, they carved out
a special place for the minority. See, the Framers of this Constitution
knew that majorities can always take care of themselves. Majorities
didn't need help as defined in the Constitution. But this Constitution
takes care of minorities because they can't always take care of
themselves. The Founding Fathers created an institution that protects
this minority, and we will respect our Constitution and those
protections.
I have talked with Senator Mitch McConnell, the senior Senator from
the great State of Kentucky. He is the minority leader. He is my
friend. In the months and years that go forward, we will become even
closer because he has learned, and I have learned, through adversity we
grow together. I am committed to working with him, and I know he is
committed to working with me. We as Democrats are committed to working
with Republicans and Republicans are committed to working with us.
Does this mean there are going to be no bumps in the road? Of course
there will be bumps in the road. We are in the Senate. The Founding
Fathers wanted bumps in the road.
This morning, at 9 o'clock in the Old Senate Chamber, we held a rare
joint caucus. It was an opportunity for us to look across the rows at
each other and understand that the Senate is a place where we have to
work in a bipartisan fashion.
We in the majority, we Democrats, are committed to working with our
President, President Bush. He has pledged to work with Democrats. He
has pledged to me personally that he would work to make progress.
We are not going to talk about what went on for the past 6-plus
years. What I have discussed with the President, as late as last night,
is what we are going to do for the next 22 months together. There are
22 months left in this Presidential term. The President, I know, wants
to accomplish things. I want to accomplish things. He has to work with
us and we have to work with him or jointly we do nothing to help our
country.
As I have said, we are going to work longer hours, we are going to
work full weeks, we are going to have votes on Mondays and Fridays.
None of us are happy because all but 10 Senators here participated in
the last Congress, the so-called do-nothing Congress. We are not proud
of that fact. We spent less time working than any Congress in modern
history. Some days the sessions lasted a matter of minutes. In this
Congress, legislative days will be real workdays.
The extra days will help our committees. The foundation of this
institution, the Senate, is the committee system. It has worked from
the beginning of our great Republic, but it hasn't worked so well
lately. But it now is going to have an opportunity to work better. Our
committees will have the time they need to put their expertise to use.
The best legislation with the broadest possible support always comes
from our committees. In the Senate, we have chairmen and ranking
members with years of experience: Ted Kennedy and Mike Enzi on the HELP
Committee; Max Baucus and Chuck Grassley on the Finance Committee; Joe
Biden and Dick Lugar on the Foreign Relations Committee; Carl Levin and
John McCain on the Armed Services Committee; Patrick Leahy and Arlen
Specter on the Judiciary Committee. And on and on. These names speak of
their broad experience and their ability to get things done for our
country, but it must come through the committee process.
As all my Democrats know, when I assumed the job as Democratic
leader, I told every ranking member that those committees had to
function and I was going to let them function, and I have done that for
2 years. Now there is going to be more time for them to produce
legislation. They are no longer ranking members, they are Chairs, but
they cannot succeed unless they work with their ranking members.
Our committees will have the time to do a number of tasks, but the
one item they need to do is conduct strong oversight. This is not a
negative term. Oversight is good. It is important to find out what
Federal agencies are doing, to listen to what the people who work there
have to say. Congressional oversight is a responsibility that has been
abdicated in recent years. Oversight is important for our country, not
so we can point fingers or cast blame, but answer difficult questions
and find lasting solutions to the enormous challenges we have. Everyone
focuses on Iraq--of course, that is a very difficult problem--but there
are many other problems that face this great country. The war in Iraq
will cast a long shadow over the Senate's work this year. No issue in
our country is more important than finding an end to that war. We will
be listening very closely to President Bush when he comes forward with
his plan next week. The President's new plan must ensure that Iraq
takes responsibility for its own future and remove our troops from this
civil war. Completing the mission in Iraq is the President's job and we
will do everything to assist the Commander in Chief to ensure his
responsibilities.
Finally, the Senate will achieve progress for our Nation by ensuring
the Senate calendar reflects America's needs. In the weeks ahead, I
look forward to receiving input from the minority. This afternoon, as
is the tradition in the Senate, I will present an overview of the
Democrats' legislative agenda, bills S. 1 through S. 10. Following the
tradition of the Senate, my friend, the distinguished minority leader,
Senator McConnell, will offer bills S. 11 through S. 20 whenever he
feels it appropriate.
In the first 10 bills we will introduce this afternoon, and in our
ongoing oversight of the war in Iraq, we intend to address these
priorities, basically three of them: one, providing real security; two,
restoring transparency, accountability, and responsibility in the
United States Government; and three, helping working Americans get
ahead by boosting wages and cutting costs in health care, education,
and energy.
We begin with S. 1, our plan to change the way Washington works. It
was late 2005 when scandals involving lobbyists and lawmakers shocked
the very core of this Nation. Despite the Senate's best attempts on a
bipartisan basis, here we are 2 years later and still no reform of
ethics, lobbying, and earmarks. The American people deserve better.
That is why as our first order of business we will seek to give
Americans the open and accountable government they deserve. We will
start Monday with a bipartisan bill cosponsored by Reid and McConnell.
I think that is a pretty good start. We will start with the ethics bill
that passed the Senate last year. Now, had that bill passed, which it
didn't, it would have been the most significant reform since Watergate
in lobbying and ethics reform. It didn't pass. Some people minimized
our starting point. I maximize our starting point. This bill included
important provisions in many areas, but it was not allowed to proceed
because of what took place on the other side of the Capitol. This year,
we will improve that legislation and make additional reforms.
[[Page 70]]
This legislation will include reforms to slow the revolving door
between Government jobs and lucrative employment with special
interests. It will eliminate gifts paid for by lobbyists and interests
that hire lobbyists. It will limit privately funded travel such as that
of the notorious golf junkets to Scotland. It will increase disclosure
requirements so the public will be better informed about the activities
of lobbyists. And it will increase penalties for those who seek to
break the rules. I lay and spread across this Record how grateful I am
that the distinguished minority leader has agreed to cosponsor this
legislation. I think it sends the right message to America.
With these reforms, which I am confident will pass, we will help
ensure America has a government that is good and honest as the people
it serves.
Mr. President, I send S. 1 to the desk and ask for its appropriate
referral. The bill is at the desk. I am told that the bill is at the
desk and we choose not to rule XIV it at this stage.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill will be received and appropriately
referred.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, S. 2 is our plan to increase the wages of
working families by raising the minimum wage to $7.25 an hour. It has
been 10 years since the minimum wage was last increased. In that time,
the cost of gas, to say the least, has increased. The cost of food has
increased. The cost of health care has increased. Even the salaries of
Members of Congress have increased. In fact, the salaries of Members of
Congress in the last 10 years have increased 9 times, by more than
$30,000. But through all of this, the minimum wage has stayed the same.
It is long past time America's workers received a raise as well.
Today, a mother or father can work full time for the minimum wage but
still live $5,000 below the poverty level. Adjusted for inflation, the
minimum wage is at its lowest level since 1955. S. 2 will directly
raise the pay of nearly 7 million Americans by more than $4,000 and by
setting a new salary floor that will indirectly boost the wages of 8
million more workers. That increase is enough to provide nearly 2 years
of childcare, full tuition for a community college degree, over a
year's worth of heat and electricity or more than 9 months of rent.
During the minimum wage debate we will also likely consider giving
small businesses some tax relief. In fact, as we speak, Senator
McConnell's staff and my staff are working, along with Senator Enzi,
Senator Grassley, Senator Kennedy, and Senator Baucus, to see if we can
have a minimum wage bill that he and I will cosponsor and bring before
the Senate. We are working on that.
S. 2 is at the desk, and it will be reported at the appropriate time.
S. 3 is our plan to reduce drug costs for seniors. The flaws in the
Medicare drug program are well documented, but many can be traced back
to one simple fact: The law as written puts drug companies ahead of
America's aging. No matter whether we supported or opposed that law--
that is, the one that created Medicare drug benefits--we all want to
improve the program for older Americans and people with disabilities.
It is our obligation to do so. Now the Federal Government, with the
millions of seniors it represents through Medicare, is unable to
negotiate for lower drug prices. As a result, Medicare beneficiaries
are hostages to insurance companies, drug companies, and managed care
entities like HMOs. S. 3 is at the desk.
S. 4 is our plan to make America safer by fully implementing the
recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. Following September 11, 2001,
the country turned to a respected, bipartisan group--the 9/11
Commission--to review the lessons of that terrible day and to recommend
better ways to fight the war on terror. Two American patriots chaired
that independent bipartisan commission: Congressman Lee Hamilton of
Indiana and former Governor Tom Kean of New Jersey. They did a
remarkably good job in a period of 1 year. We realized we didn't need
Democratic solutions or Republican solutions to keep people safe; we
needed bipartisan American solutions to keep us safe. The Commission
did a wonderful job and made a number of recommendations. Some were
implemented, others weren't. I was the manager, along with my
distinguished colleague, the minority leader, of the bill that was
brought before the Senate.
One year ago, the Commission delivered a report card grading the
Government's progress in implementing its solutions. Among the grades
given by that commission were 12 Ds, 5 Fs, and two incompletes. I say,
try taking those grades home to your parents. These grades made clear
we still have not done enough to make America safe. We have work to do,
and this legislation will step toward in fulfilling the recommendations
of the 9/11 Commission. Specifically, it will reinvigorate the fight
against Osama bin Laden, al-Qaida, and the ideologies of violent
extremists. It will enhance the security of our transportation system
and our ports. It will provide America's first responders with the
technology they need to communicate with each other during a crisis,
and it will make it a priority to secure loose nukes around the world.
Finishing the job of implementing
9/11 Commission recommendations will not by itself win the war on
terror or guarantee 100-percent complete security for the people of our
country, but we hope with our legislation to improve on the worst of
those grades, those Ds and Fs and incompletes, so the American people
can have every confidence that Congress and the White House are taking
every step--every step possible--to keep America safe. S. 4 is at the
desk.
S. 5 is the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of this year, 2007. It
is legislation we seek to pass so that American scientists will find
cures--allow them to find cures for dread diseases that affect millions
of our fellow countrymen. Today, there are people all across America
suffering from debilitating diseases that stem cell research would
cure. For these Americans, stem cell research is an area of science
that offers hope, if only we in Washington would allow this hope to
flourish. Last year, Congress passed legislation promoting stem cell
research, only to see it vetoed by our President. This year, we will
consider the legislation again, and on behalf of millions of Americans
looking for cures, looking for relief, we urge our President to
reconsider his veto. S. 5 is at the desk.
S. 6 is our plan to promote energy independence so we can enhance
America's security and begin to deal with the threat--the threat--of
global warming. I, with five of my Senate colleagues, traveled last
week to the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere, Bolivia. We were
in Ecuador and Peru. They told us, the most diverse Nation in the
world, the most ecologically diverse Nation in the world--Ecuador--that
the glaciers are melting Ecuador, rapidly. For too long our country's
energy policy has had only one concern: oil company profits--$34
billion for Exxon and the other companies, international cartels, not
far behind. We have allowed Exxon's bottom line to take priority over
families struggling at the gas pump and the harmful effects of global
warming. So in an effort to begin to solve this energy crisis, our
sixth bill takes an aggressive approach to reducing America's
dependence on oil, especially foreign oil, and putting more advanced
technologies in the hands of consumers. It will boost production of
electricity from solar, geothermal, and other renewable resources that
are abundant in States such as Nevada, and it will grow our Nation's
renewable energy jobs and manufacturing base. Freeing ourselves from
oil is a tremendous challenge, but it is one we cannot afford to
ignore. Remember: Unstable regimes around the world use our petro
dollars to pay for international terror, to fund it, and pursue their
despotic goals. So energy independence is not only energy independence,
it is security. S. 6 is at the desk.
S. 7 is the College Opportunity Act, our plan to make college more
affordable for middle-class families. In America today, a college
education is more important than ever. Unfortunately, it
[[Page 71]]
is also far more expensive than ever. Today, too many families are
being squeezed trying to put their children through school. In the last
6 years, the cost of college has increased by 52 percent. Federal
assistance has declined, especially in the form of Pell grants. Our
legislation will reverse this trend by raising the maximum Pell grant
award. It will also assist families by lowering interest rates for
student loans and expanding tax breaks for college costs. S. 7 is at
the desk.
S. 8 is Rebuilding America's Military Act. As we speak, there is not
a single nondeployed Army unit that is battle ready. The wars in
Afghanistan and in Iraq, the war on terror, have been terribly
devastating to our military. These brave men and women have done the
very best any fighting force could do. But because of Iraq and
Afghanistan, the U.S. militarily is strained to levels not seen since
Vietnam. While our troops remain the finest in the world,
infrastructure is crumbling around them. Nearly all of our combat
divisions have been deployed and two-thirds of our Army combat brigades
are not ready for combat. GEN Peter Schoomaker, the Chief of Staff of
the Army, testified last month, ``At this pace . . . we will break the
active component'' of the U.S. Army.
We, also, have National Guard, Reserve and Active-Duty veterans
coming back in droves to America without sufficient help for their
health care and certainly not their education.
If we want real security, we must rebuild the U.S. military and
ensure it remains the best fighting force in the world. S. 8 is at the
desk.
S. 9 will secure America by undertaking comprehensive immigration
reform. I had friends and colleagues, staff, ask: Why are you bringing
up this controversial subject on the first day of Congress? It has to
be brought up. Immigration is a problem that affects this Nation. Last
year, we passed a solid immigration bill in the Senate. There are parts
of that bill I didn't like, but we passed a bill. Unfortunately, it
fell victim to politics, again in the other body. Immigration reform is
too vital to our security and our economy to fall by the wayside, so we
must deal with it again this year. Our immigration system is broken.
Does anyone dispute this? Our borders remain unsecured. Does anyone
dispute that? Our laws remain underenforced. Does anyone dispute that?
Does anyone dispute the fact that we have 11 million people with bad
papers who are here illegally? Does anyone dispute that? No. So our
bill will take a comprehensive approach to repairing this broken
system. With tough and smart reforms, it will secure our borders, crack
down on enforcement, and lay down a path to earned legalization for
undocumented immigrants already living here. There is no amnesty. If
there were ever an example of the need for bipartisanship, it is on
immigration because it is going to be hard, but it is something that we
have to do. S. 9 is at the desk.
Finally, S. 10 will reinstate pay-as-you-go rules to the budget
process. This does not sound very politically sexy, to talk about pay
as you go. But as most know, the Senate used to operate under a rule
called pay as you go. This simple proposition demanded that when we
increased spending or cut taxes we had to pay for it. It is a
commonsense principle families all across America practice when they
balance their checkbooks. Pay-go was in place in the Senate in the
1990s, when our country experienced unprecedented levels of economic
growth and vitality. Remember, it can be done. In the last years of the
Clinton administration, we paid down the national debt by almost a half
trillion dollars. Unfortunately, the rule disappeared in recent years
and the results have been disastrous: $9 trillion in debt; the largest
deficits, of course, in our history; foreign debt that has more than
doubled, giving unprecedented control to countries such as Saudi Arabia
and China. We are even borrowing money from Mexico. These countries
should not have the unprecedented control of our economic destiny. We
are facing a fiscal nightmare that will not go away this Congress, and
it will handicap our ability in all we need to do in so many different
areas. With pay-go in place, we will begin to set America on the right
track.
I have been in Congress going on 25 years. In my 25 years, I
witnessed many fine moments in our Senate's history. But I believe in
my State, in the Senate, and in the House, the days following 9/11 are
what America is all about. It was a national tragedy, but it brought
out the best in us, the best in Members of Congress, the best in the
American people. Democrats and Republicans from all over America put
aside our differences and worked with the administration to protect our
country. That day showed the Government working as the Founders
intended. This year we must work on the same bipartisan basis, the same
fashion.
It should not take a national tragedy for us to work together. We
should be equally united by our ability to make a positive difference
in the lives of the people who sent us here. Today is that beginning.
This year let us work side by side and succeed together.
The future lies with those wise political leaders who
realize the great public is interested more in government
than politics.
--Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 1940.
____________________
RECOGNITION OF THE MINORITY LEADER
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Pryor). The Republican leader.
____________________
THE 110TH CONGRESS
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, we have heard my good friend, the
majority leader, describe the first 10 bills of the majority in the new
Congress. I would say for the information of all of our colleagues, the
procedure in the Senate Republican conference is for the conference
itself to designate our first 10 bills. We will be doing that at a
meeting to occur in the next few weeks. We have essentially reserved
the numbers S. 11 through S. 20 which will reflect our priorities for
this Congress.
Let me say at the outset, before giving my opening remarks, how much
I value the friendship and relationship I have with the distinguished
majority leader. I believe we had an excellent session this morning in
the old Senate Chamber, and we look forward to getting off to a good
start.
Today is the 110th time in our Nation's history that we begin a new
session of Congress. This is a day to renew our purpose, to set a
sturdy course for the important work ahead, and to ask ourselves: What
will future generations say of the 110th Congress? This is the first
day of that Congress. What will they say of us on the last day?
The Senate has a unique role in our Government. It always has. It is
a place where the two great political parties must work together if a
common goal is to be reached. It is the legislative embodiment of
individual and minority rights, a place where the careful design,
crafted by our Founding Fathers, pretty much operates today the way
they planned it 220 years ago.
We saw this 43 years ago with the Civil Rights Act of 1964, when the
two parties forged a difficult alliance to reach a great goal.
Segregated buses and lunch counters are difficult to fathom now, but
their end only came about through the kind of cooperative resolution
that has marked this body from the start.
At its best, the Senate is a workshop where difficult challenges,
such as civil rights, are faced squarely--and addressed--with good will
and careful, principled agreement. At a time such as our own, when so
many issues of consequence press upon us, it must be nothing less.
Yet the challenges ahead will not be met if we do nothing to overcome
the partisanship that has come to characterize this body over the past
several years. A culture of partisanship over principle represents a
grave threat to the Senate's best tradition as a place of constructive
cooperation. It undermines the spirit and the purpose of this
institution, and we must do something to reverse its course.
The Senate can accomplish great things over the next 2 years, but
this opportunity will surely slip from our grasp if we do not commit
ourselves to a restoration of civility and common
[[Page 72]]
purpose. So as we open this session, I stake my party to a pledge: When
faced with an urgent issue, we will act; when faced with a problem, we
will seek solutions, not mere political advantage.
The Framers thought a lot about the kind of people who would sit
behind these desks on the floor and they set down some simple rules.
Senators should be older than their House colleagues. They should serve
longer terms, and proportional representation ensures that all States
have an equal say, regardless of size. The Senate was also conceived to
be a place of civil debate and good will.
Mike Mansfield showed grace and humility in his efforts to expand
civil rights. Working with Republicans to offset resistance in his own
party, he guided passage of the great Civil Rights Acts of the 1960s
and even let a Republican take the credit. In fact, today the name
Everett Dirksen may actually be better known, but historians know
better.
Mansfield's collegial spirit didn't just surface when it served his
purposes. Historians tell us his first appointment each day was
breakfast with Senator George Aiken, a Republican from Vermont. The two
men met when one of Aiken's aides spotted Mansfield alone, pushing a
tray down the cafeteria line in the Capitol. She asked the new Senator
if he wanted to join her and her boss for lunch, and he did. The two
men remained close friends for 25 years. A small act of kindness set
the tone.
Cooperation among parties is not so distant a memory that some of us
can't recall Democrats and Republicans working together to pass
President Reagan's tax cuts in the early 1980s. That common effort led
to the greatest economic expansion of our history--the American
miracle, they called it.
We saw the spirit of cooperation again in the 1990s, when a
Republican-led Senate worked with the Democrats, including President
Clinton, to reform welfare. And we have seen it in recent years, though
less frequently, on issues such as tort reform and the Medicare
prescription drug benefit.
We used to say that Senators were friends after 5 o'clock. We need
more of that if we are going to restore this body to its high purpose.
The Senate is not a club nor a clique. It is a group of men and women
charged with the solemn duty to support and defend the Constitution
against its enemies. George Mitchell once called the Senate a single
body made up of 100 independent contractors. Yet he earned the respect
of his colleagues by his willingness to listen, to work together, to
take risks. He knew when to put self-interest aside. He knew the role
of the Senate.
The risks we face today are grave, and facing them will require
greater unity and civility than we have been used to around here
lately. But drawing on the examples of the past and conscious of this
body's historic role, we can again rise out of our party trenches and
work together for the good of all.
This morning the Democrats and Republicans got together in the old
Senate Chamber, an ornate, rather small room compared to this one, that
always reminds me of the promise of this Nation in its early days. I
would like to see, in this small act of bipartisanship, a sign of
restoration to come.
The work of restoration should start with the things that are easiest
to do because a victory in small things now will lead to big victories
later. The Senate has not approved a minimum wage increase in more than
a decade, but we are willing to work together toward that end. We
believe that an increase needs to help both the workers who earn it and
the small businesses that pay it.
It just makes sense to pair the increased wage with tax and
regulatory relief, so the small businesses that create most of the new
jobs in this country can remain competitive and employ even more
people. We can get this done.
The voters told us in November that they expect more from us. One
concrete thing we can do to restore their trust is common sense
lobbying reform. The first bill I will sponsor as the Republican
leader, in cooperation with the majority leader, is aimed at precisely
that. The voters want honest government. We can get this done too.
Two issues. Two issues we can move on carefully but quickly. Let's
get them done.
After that, I challenge this body to be daring. The Senate has no
claim on greatness unless its power is put to great ends. Divided
government demands that we must work together. So let us do so not only
for ends that are easily within our grasp, but for those worthy things
that have just eluded us in the past.
Social Security is an issue on which Americans demand action--yet
many fear what action might mean.
Our job is not to play into those fears but to erase them. To show
voters that the greatest cause for fear is the system in its current,
unsustainable form. Everyone in this Chamber knows the facts. So let's
be honest brokers--and strengthen Social Security before this Congress
ends.
Today, the 110th Congress begins. But before it ends, the first great
wave of babyboomers will retire. Over the next two decades, more than
77 million people will leave the workforce even as fewer new workers
join it. And by the time they all leave, there will be only two
American workers supporting each retiree.
This is clearly unsustainable. Unless we reform the system, we have a
choice: Either our children work longer and harder or our parents live
with less.
The Senate cannot sit idly by as this demographic reality takes
shape. Rather, we must do the hard work we were elected to do. We must
make our money work harder for our parents and our children, and so we
need to reform Social Security now.
The Framers knew we would have to make tough decisions. That's why
they didn't want Senators to be elected by popular vote. The system
they devised had its own problems, so we changed it.
But the principle was sound: the right decision is not always the
easiest one. We have an obligation to address the important issues of
the day, in a spirit of cooperation and courage, and with a goal of
accomplishment for all Americans.
Immigration is one the most pressing issues of our day. We should be
daring about immigration reform--and act on it soon. The voters demand
it. We have a duty to deliver.
Americans are generous, eager to welcome strangers and happy when
they prosper. Yet we know that the blessings of liberty depend on
respect for the law and a common national culture. We can ensure both
even as we welcome those who come here looking for a better life.
Laws that are generous need not be lax. And a country that is not
secure at its borders is not secure in its laws. Border security and
other law enforcement professionals must have the tools they need to
keep our borders--and our laws--strong.
America has not seen a domestic terrorist attack since we committed
ourselves to the global war on terror. That is not an accident, some
quirk of fate. Rather, it is due to the hard work of spotting and
disrupting threats before they strike.
The indisputable success of these efforts is the greatest argument we
have to continue to support them--and to make sure those who secure the
homeland are fully equipped to continue the outstanding work they have
done.
One of the principles that has guided our efforts in the war on
terror is that terrorism must be fought at a distance or it will be
fought in our streets.
This policy has worked--and we must ensure that it continues to work
by giving the men and women who carry out that mission every day all
the tools they need.
One of those tools is the terrorist surveillance program. If
terrorists are calling the United States, we should know what they're
talking about. This program has saved lives. And we would endanger
others by ending it.
Al-Qaida is not a threat to Republicans; it's not a threat to
Democrats--it is a threat to America. And the Senate must work together
as we prepare for the long struggle ahead.
[[Page 73]]
We must use all the tools we have: diplomacy, intelligence, economic
and military might. The men and women of the Armed Forces have
sacrificed much in battle. Their families have made great quiet
sacrifices at home. We will honor both by pledging that the American
Armed Forces will remain the best equipped, best trained, and best
prepared in the world.
And very soon, we will return to the issue of Iraq. It is my hope,
and my challenge to this body, that the debate will be based on what's
best for the future of our Nation and for Iraq--not what's best for the
Republican party or the Democratic party.
The Senate must be bold in preparing Americans for the struggle
ahead. Our Nation's security depends on secure borders and a strong
fighting force. It also depends on energy independence. So we must
continue to work hard to decrease our reliance on foreign sources of
energy.
We laid a solid foundation during the last Congress, with passage of
the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and, just last month, with the enactment
of the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act. Both measures were passed
with bipartisan support, and both will decrease our dangerous
dependence on foreign oil and gas.
There is more that we can do both to increase domestic supply and
decrease our demand for foreign energy. The United States has an
abundance of coal and remains a leader in nuclear technology. We should
focus attention on using these natural resources safely, cleanly, and
efficiently.
We cannot go back on the gains we made in the last Congress. And I
will work with my colleagues to continue this vital work.
If the restoration of our purpose does not lead those of us in the
Senate to be daring, then our prosperity should.
Republicans presided over 4 years of economic growth; the biggest
housing boom since World War II; and an unemployment rate that has
stayed at or below 5 percent for more than 15 months. The current rate
of 4.5 percent is just remarkable.
The crash of 2000 yielded to gains that have sent the Dow Jones
Industrial average to an all-time high. We have created more than 7
million jobs since August 2003. These gains are no accident. They are
the result of the stimulative tax relief we passed. These policies
clearly worked, and they should be kept in place.
Republicans used the strong economic climate to cut the deficit. We
cut it in half even more quickly than anyone thought we would. And
working together, across the aisle, we must continue that trend and
balance the budget within 5 years.
Another focus of this Congress is the overwhelmingly popular and
effective prescription drug relief for seniors. President Bush and the
Republican Congress gave seniors the Medicare prescription drug care
benefit they had waited on for decades. We cannot ``scrap'' this
program, as some would like. And we will oppose any effort to do so.
A spirit of cooperation will lead to a heightened respect for
fairness--and ensure that the same number of judicial nominees that
were confirmed in the final years of the last three administrations are
confirmed in the last 2 years of this one.
Americans want judges to uphold the original intent of the
Constitution, not rewrite it. Judicial activism has divided the courts,
the Congress, and the Nation for too long. If our work of restoration
and a new civility is to take hold, we must recommit ourselves to the
ideal of judicial restraint.
Like the three Presidents before him, President Bush will spend his
last 2 years in office with the opposition party in control of the
Senate. Like them, he has a right to expect that his nominees will
receive an up-or-down vote.
The voters recently sent us a message. They told us to solve the
problems that face this Nation. They expect us to win the wars we wage.
And they expect us to be men and women of principle.
The people of Kentucky gave me the great honor of my life when they
first elected me to the Senate. And I have gone about my work here with
them foremost in my mind.
I have fought hard to advance and protect the values that matter most
to the people of my State.
It is because of another election that I stand here today. I am
honored that my colleagues chose me to lead them at this important
moment in our history. I take my duty seriously.
I am filled today with a sense of purpose--for party, yes, but for
this institution and for our Nation first, for their renewal.
Elections are about ideas, and here are some I hold most dear.
I believe the state exists to serve individuals and families, not the
other way around.
I believe everyone fortunate enough to call himself or herself an
American should be able to pursue their dreams freely.
I believe God has blessed this country richly, and that the proper
response to the gift of freedom is to defend it.
And I believe that the first duty of Government is the defense and
protection of its citizens.
So I am eager to work with my colleagues to find bold solutions to
big problems. Yet on some things I will not yield.
I will never agree to proposals that weaken the security of our
citizens at home or the capabilities of our Armed Forces abroad.
I will never agree to a tax increase on working families or small
businesses. Our economy is strong because of the hard work and
enterprise of Americans. We will not undermine that spirit by taxing
it.
I will never agree to retreat from our responsibility to confirm
qualified judicial nominees.
Bipartisanship, cooperation and accomplishment; yes. Civility; yes.
But we will remain true to our principles.
Henry Clay was a great Kentuckian. He spent the last 2 years of his
life using the tools of the Senate to save his country. His devotion to
the cause of national unity was so great that one rival called it ``a
crowning grace'' to Clay's public life.
Clay shows us that divided government need not be divisive. Indeed,
it often leads to historic agreements that unity governments have
little incentive to achieve.
And so, working together, forgetting past grievances, forging new
alliances, we can solve the difficult issues of the day. This is the
purpose of the Senate and the privilege of its Members.
If our steps are guided by this simple principle, then this 110th
Congress will have met its responsibility on behalf of all Americans,
and strengthened this institution for the unseen challenges that will
always lie ahead.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.
____________________
MORNING BUSINESS
Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent that the next 2 hours of morning
business be controlled as follows: the first 60 minutes under the
control of the majority, the second 60 minutes under the control of the
minority, with Senators therein limited to 10 minutes each.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The assistant majority leader.
____________________
A NEW DIRECTION FOR AMERICA
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, it is my honor to follow the speeches that
have been given by my new majority leader, Senator Harry Reid of
Nevada, and my new Republican leader, Senator Mitch McConnell of
Kentucky. It is a great honor for me to stand this day in the Senate as
the assistant Democratic leader. I cannot express my gratitude to my
colleagues for entrusting me with this responsibility.
I come to this moment with a sense of amazement. Some 40 years ago,
as a college student in this town, I first set foot in the old Senate
office building as an intern, never dreaming that 40 years later I
would be standing on the floor of the Senate in this capacity. It is
indeed a great honor.
I do not know how many men and women have lived in the United States
[[Page 74]]
of America in our history--hundreds of millions, for sure. Today there
are some 300 million who count America as their home. In the entire
history of the United States of America, from its creation, as of
today, as of this moment in our history, 1,895 men and women have had
this high honor of serving in the Senate. Today, we were joined by 10
more.
Their life stories, like the stories of many of us, are the stories
of America: stories of immigrant families, stories of struggle, stories
of dreams that finally resulted in an election to this great body in
the Senate.
I imagine if you called on some of the experts in U.S. history--even
those who served for quite a few years in the Senate--and asked them
how many of the 1,895 Senators who have served here they could
remember, they would be hard pressed to come up with a long list. As it
happens in most walks of life, a few people stand out in history. But
most are part of a parade, a parade that passes by many times
anonymously.
In the desk drawers of each of our desks here there is a quaint
little Senate custom. I was talking to Senator John Glenn of Ohio about
it today. Senators who have served here, despite what they were told by
their teachers in grade school, are encouraged to scratch their names
in the bottom of the desk drawer. I happen to be sitting at the desk of
former Senator John Glenn of Ohio, and my former mentor and
inspiration, Senator Paul Douglas of Illinois. I would imagine if you
look in these desk drawers, there will be many names you do not
recognize. The point I am trying to get to is this: Members of the
Senate, men and women, come and go, but, thank God, this Nation
endures. And it endures because of the sacrifice each makes for the
common good of this Nation.
We have weathered so many storms--9/11 the most recent but, of
course, the Civil War, which almost tore us apart--and time and again
throughout our history men and women in this body, in the Senate, have
decided the good of this Nation was more important than their
individual personal ambition.
We have another similar moment in history. It is interesting how
critical Americans are of their politicians; and that is a healthy
thing. We do not assume that those elected to public office are part of
any gifted class or any special group. We just assume they are people
who are like us and fortunate enough to get elected. But over the years
a lot of people have questioned us, whether those of us who have
devoted a good part of our lives to public service truly have the
public interest in mind.
The skepticism grew last year with the culture of corruption, the
announcements of indictments, prosecutions, resignations, not just
among public officials but those who work in the Halls of the Capitol.
And the skepticism and cynicism about public life grew as people heard
more and more of these stories. That is why it is so important we
reflect on what Senator Reid said earlier about our agenda.
The first item on our agenda--and there could be many--is to address
this issue of ethics and honesty in Government. I have been a fortunate
soul in public life. Two people who brought me here--Paul Douglas and
Paul Simon, both Senators--were literally paragons of public virtue.
Paul Douglas, as Senator from Illinois, used to have a tradition that
except for food and drink he would not accept a gift worth more than
$2.50. Now, it sounds like an interesting standard. It turned out to be
a complete headache to figure out what to do with a gift that was worth
$3, or what to do with the belt that a man hand tooled with Senator
Douglas's name on it and sent to him as a gift. But he was steadfast in
his belief that public service meant public sacrifice, not public
enrichment.
Paul Simon, my other mentor in life, felt the same, followed in the
Douglas tradition, and started me on a long road of disclosing in
complete detail every year my income taxes and total net worth. There
were painful moments early in my married life when Loretta and I had
very little to claim as earthly possessions and filed a net worth which
was pretty embarrassing. Things are a little better now, and I have
continued the tradition.
But when Senator Reid talks about changing the Senate rules, to start
with, as the first item of business, I think what he is trying to do on
behalf of Democrats and Republicans in this bipartisan bill is to
address this fundamental issue of restoring the confidence of the
public in the Senate. Before we roll up our sleeves and take on the
issues that count for every family across America, let's take on the
issue of restoring the integrity of the Senate. That is why this is a
bill that is high on our list and the first we will consider.
The American people voted for change in this last election in many
ways. They certainly want us to move forward. Some of our advisers tell
us that the term ``bipartisanship'' has too many syllables and is
unintelligible to the average person. I am not sure. But people do
understand the words ``cooperation'' and ``compromise.'' And I think
people across America said to us in the last election: We want you to
compromise. We want you to find solutions. We do not want you to play
to a draw with nothing to show for it.
The first issue that concerns the people of Illinois to whom I speak
is this war in Iraq. In the first week of October, I went to Iraq with
Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island. We visited Afghanistan and had three
different stops in Iraq, and we spent many hours meeting with our
soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen. I spent extra time with those
from Illinois just to say hello to them and thank them. I came back not
just with some frustration over a war which I think was a colossal,
strategic mistake, but anger--anger that we continue to ask these brave
young men and women to sacrifice their lives every single day.
I can recall when one of the generals took us aside and showed us one
of these roadside bombs that kills and maims our troops, almost on a
daily basis. It looked like nothing more than a fruit cocktail can,
with both ends lopped off and a metal charge inside. They disguise it
and camouflage it and put it on the side of the road. While
unsuspecting American soldiers course down that road, they unleash the
blast that kills or maims them. That is life for our soldiers in Iraq.
They do not confront an enemy so much as confronting these improvised
explosive devices.
Over the last few weeks, we have passed some tragic milestones. More
Americans have died in Iraq than died on 9/11. As of the first of this
year, the 3,000th American life was lost among our fighting men and
women in Iraq. Over 22,000 have returned from Iraq with serious
physical and mental injuries.
The legacy of this war will continue. Next week, the President is to
propose the next phase of the war, what he wants to do next. I have to
tell you, as one of 23 Members of this Senate who voted against this
war, I continue to believe we made a serious mistake underestimating
the gravity of the challenge once we had deposed Saddam Hussein. It is
clear now this administration was not prepared to wage this war,
certainly not prepared to move us to peace. What they have done is to
move our troops into harm's way, risked their lives, and leave us in a
situation, 4 years into this war--a war longer than World War II--where
there is still no end in sight.
In October, our leaders in Iraq told Senator Jack Reed and myself it
is a matter of months. If we cannot get this under control in a matter
of months, we have to be honest about it. I think honesty is important.
There is a lot of talk about surge. Let's move beyond the word
``surge'' into the reality. We are talking about the lives of American
soldiers, whether we will send 20,000 or 30,000 more American soldiers
into that field of combat, whether that can possibly make a difference.
I hope to God the President reconsiders that. I am afraid in many
instances we are only sending targets and not troops. It is time for
the Iraqis to stand up and defend their own country. It is time for
them to accept the responsibility of governance and defense. We have
given them so much,
[[Page 75]]
over 3,000 American lives and all of our treasure, so they can rebuild
their country and have a chance. We deposed their dictator, put him to
trial, saw his execution, gave them a chance for constitutions and
governments, gave them all these opportunities, and now it is their
turn. We cannot impose democracy on them. That appetite for democracy
has to spring from their souls, and they have to want it badly enough
to work out the political compromises to disband the militia, to show
the kind of leadership which will give them a nation in fact rather
than just in words. That will be one of the big issues we debate here.
Some have criticized us this week for not talking about Iraq enough.
I can understand it. When I hear the mothers of fallen soldiers say
that should be our first priority, I think they understand, as we do,
there is nothing more important that ever happened in their lives. This
assurance I can give: Next week, when this Senate convenes, both the
Armed Services Committee and the Foreign Relations Committee will begin
hearings on Iraq. The debate will really begin in earnest, as it
should, as the American people expect. And we will have a
responsibility to come up with the best answer for our Nation, for our
troops.
There are so many other issues we face. One near and dear to my heart
is the cost of college education. This young boy from East Saint Louis,
IL, could never have attended Georgetown University or law school were
it not for Government loans. I borrowed the money, paid it back, and
believe it changed my life forever. So many students across America
today wonder if they will ever be able to borrow enough to go to
school. Some of them drop out because of debt. Some of them change
their life plans because of paying off student debt.
One of our first priorities is to reduce the cost of college
education expenses so young people with great dreams and limited means
have a chance to succeed. That is one of our priorities as Democrats,
and one I totally support.
I also think we have to restore some basic economic justice in
America. How can you possibly explain that over 10 years we have not
raised the Federal minimum wage? These people get up and go to work
every day, many of them raising children, struggling to survive, going
to soup kitchens and pantries to supplement their income.
Over the Christmas holidays--as many of us do--I visited some of
those places, and I met a lot of people who work 40 hours a week. They
come to the soup kitchens, they come to the pantries because that is
the one way to supplement their income. Well, we can do better. We need
to increase the Federal minimum wage. And as Senator Reid said, it is
one of our highest priorities.
Senator McConnell said, a few moments ago, when it comes to the
Medicare prescription Part D program, he will not stand by and allow us
to scrap the program. I say: Hear, hear. We do not want to scrap the
program. It is long overdue. Prescription drugs under Medicare keep our
seniors healthy, independent, and strong. But, sadly, we know the
reality that when that bill was passed, it was written by the
pharmaceutical industry. It took competition out of the program so they
could charge higher prices. It created a maze of opportunities, but a
maze of choices for many seniors who were bewildered by what to do. It
created a doughnut hole, a period of time where seniors who were the
sickest had no coverage whatsoever.
So I would say to my colleague on the other side of the aisle, we are
not going to scrap it. We are going to do our best to improve it. And
we can improve it, bring in some competition so we have reasonable cost
drugs, so we have more coverage for seniors across America.
There is an old saying that there is no education in the second kick
of a mule. No matter what side of the aisle we are on, there is a
lesson for all of us. The American people have given us today a rare
opportunity in our history. They have given us an order, too, to chart
a better course for this Nation. They have asked us to listen. And if,
at the end of the day, we play to a draw on these major issues--if we
do not achieve results, if we do not show a good-faith effort toward
compromise and cooperation--they will be just as harsh in their
judgment 2 years from now as they were last November. And we deserve
it.
As we begin anew this Congress, we need to resolve together, on a
bipartisan basis, to find that path to a better and stronger America.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York.
____________________
IMPORTANT PRIORITIES
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I rise as well to speak about our
priorities that Senator Reid has introduced. First, I compliment him
for his vision and drive toward shaping these priorities, and his
leadership that will ensure the Senate makes the concerns of the
average American family our top priority.
I thank my colleague from Illinois, Senator Durbin, who, as always,
is able to articulate in a very smart way, but also a way the average
person can understand, how important these priorities are to us.
I also, in advance, thank my colleague Senator Murray for being here,
and who again, in her usual wise and thoughtful way, will help us let
the American people know what our priorities are.
Now, I wore a blue suit today, naturally, because we are all excited
over the election in November. But in our excitement, we have to
remember that we are here because of the people who sent us here, and
to realize their desire for change, to make their lives better. We know
a bipartisan approach is the best and perhaps the only way we will get
this done.
If all our exultation and happiness today--and, believe me, I stood
there with pride watching the new Members in particular be sworn in,
knowing how fine they are, what a diverse group of people they are--the
thing they share in common is coming from the bosom of the people of
their State. Each one, each of the new representatives, each of the new
Senators represents the people of their State.
They come to us with a message, and I don't think the message is
left, right, or center, as some of the pundits have said. The message
is to keep your eyes focused on the average family. All too often we in
Washington get lost in the world of Washington. Too often politics here
seems to be a minuet, shadow boxing, sometimes real boxing, where each
party and each individual is seeking advantage over the other, and the
focus on getting something done--something done for the American
people--gets lost.
If there was one message that this election had, I think that is it.
The American people were pleading with us, crying out to us with a
strong but plaintive voice: Help us. The world is changing, and we see
that world change in every way. Technology has dramatically affected
everything we do, whether it is terrorism, where technology has enabled
small groups of bad people to hurt us; whether it is jobs in education,
where we now have a one-world labor market, and our workers, our kids
in the third grade are going to be competing not simply against the
kids in the third grade across the hallway but the kids in the third
grade in China, India, and Brazil; whether it is the technology that
has allowed us to live longer.
I read somewhere that a little girl born today, if she lives in the
early months and up to a year old, could well live to be 100. And not
very unusually, that would almost be the average. That is incredible.
What that means is new problems for Social Security and Medicare. It
also means that our whole lifestyle changes as people get married
later, have children later, and retire and have many years of leisure
in life. So technology is changing everything.
The old messages--whether they be, in my judgment, the old Democratic
new deal message or the old Reagan Republican message--just don't work
anymore. Voters, in November, didn't tell us to adopt a certain
ideology or philosophy or even party. Their message to Washington was
to stop fighting with each other and finally get
[[Page 76]]
something done for average Americans who are in more need of help now
as the world changes quickly and dramatically.
The average American wants us to get to work on issues that matter to
them on a daily basis: making them more secure, lifesaving medical
research, fair wages, comprehensive immigration reform, energy
independence, and affordable education and prescription drugs. They
want us to go to work for them again. That is what we are going to do.
The 10 bills we have introduced are all aimed right at the heart of
the average American in the sense of saying to the average American: We
do know what you need, what you have asked us to do, and we are going
to do our best to help you.
Make no mistake; overall, families are doing quite well, but they are
beginning to hurt in certain ways: high gas prices, skyrocketing
tuition, prescription drugs. These are all things the average person
worries about that they probably didn't worry about 10 years ago. These
first 10 bills that we are going to introduce represent the Democratic
priorities for the Senate and the country. These bills take aim at
making education and prescription drugs more affordable. They address
our goals for energy independence, better homeland security, innovative
medical research, a modernized military, and comprehensive immigration
reform--priorities that have been neglected for far too long.
I first want to express my enthusiastic support for our bill to
address college affordability, S. 7, which my colleagues will also
address. We know we must make it easier for families to send their kids
to college. As tuition costs rise, it gets harder and harder for them
to do it. As college becomes more of a necessity, it also becomes less
affordable. That is the dilemma we face. We are facing a critical time
with this challenge coming, when a college education is vital not only
to one's individual future but to our Nation's prosperity and
independence.
We are competing now in a global market connected by technology, and
we need a well-educated workforce. That is why I introduced upon
arriving in the Senate a bill to permit a college tuition tax
deduction. I have worked to support it ever since. We must ensure that
this deduction does not expire, as it nearly did in December, by making
it permanent. And we must do more. Just getting by is not enough when
it comes to sending our kids to college. We must address other aspects
of college costs, including Pell grants, loans, and lowering interest
payments on loans. I know my colleague, Senator Kennedy, has big plans
for addressing these issues. Just as I will work hard on the Finance
Committee on the tuition issue, he, in the HELP Committee, will be
leading many of my colleagues on those issues there.
What I have been asked to spend a few minutes to talk about is S. 4,
a bill to implement the recommendations of the national commission on
terrorist acts, the 9/11 Commission. It has now been over 5 years since
the tragedy and devastation of September 11. On that day, our Nation
changed irrevocably with the knowledge that terrorist forces, motivated
by hatred, have the determination and ability to threaten America on
our own soil. My own city of New York knows this devastation and
tragedy well. On that day, and in the days following, we lost thousands
of our friends and family members, including hundreds of brave
firefighters and police officers who died trying to save others. We owe
it to all those who lost their lives on that day to take up and
implement the commission's recommendations.
On that day, it was clear that much needed to be done to improve the
security of our homeland. The President and Congress responded in part
by establishing the 9/11 Commission. This bipartisan commission did its
work thoroughly and well, devising 41 core recommendations to prevent,
defend against, and respond to the threat of future terrorist attacks.
Each one of the recommendations was a vital part of the Commission's
charge to Congress and the President. Yet Americans have not just been
gravely disappointed but also endangered by the failure to implement
all of the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. It is high time for
this failure to be rectified.
S. 4 expresses the sense of Congress that we must immediately work
toward passage of legislation that will, after far too long, implement
the solutions carefully crafted at our request. As the committee puts
together a final detailed bill, S. 4 will serve as an important symbol
of our priority for securing our Nation by implementing the
recommendations. We have made some improvements since 9/11, but we
still have so far to go.
America simply cannot wait any longer to fully protect our homeland.
Whether it is improving communications between first responders,
ensuring that law enforcement shares information about threats, or
securing our transportation systems, which I know my colleague from
Washington has worked on, we have a whole lot to do. We cannot wait
longer for decisive action to stop weapons of mass destruction from
falling into the hands of terrorists entering our country or being
built by those who would destroy us. We cannot wait any longer to
better combat the violent extremism that is growing around the globe.
This is only the beginning of the work that remains to be done. We
have heard so much talk about homeland security in the years and days
since 9/11, but in all this time we have seen far too little action. In
the 110th Congress, at last that shameful state of affairs must and
will come to an end.
In conclusion, the voters in November gave us great honor but
humbling responsibility. We must now rise to meet that responsibility
by returning the focus of our work to the basic needs of American
families. Today is the first and important step toward meeting that
responsibility.
So as we start this new Congress, I look forward to working with our
Republican colleagues and the President to deliver these priorities for
American families. Those families deserve no less.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Salazar). The Senator from Washington is
recognized.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I am honored to be here with my
Democratic colleague today. I listened to the Senator from New York
talk about our top 10 priorities. Senator Reid, our new majority
leader, and Senator Durbin before me talked about how we now in this
new majority are going to focus on the real issues affecting American
families. I congratulate Senators Reid, the new majority leader, and
McConnell, the Republican leader, for setting the right tone today by
bringing us together this morning and reminding us all that we are here
together to work on a very important agenda for the American people. We
will have our disagreements, our partisan battles, but at the end of
the day we have to move legislation forward because if there was any
message to me out of the November election that brought us to the
majority now, it was that people want us to get past the partisan
rancor on the floor of the Senate. They want us to get past the
bickering. They expect debates, they like that, but at the end of the
day they want us to move forward.
Across this country today, American families are struggling to send
their kids to college, struggling to get health care, struggling with
their pensions, struggling with their salaries, and they expect us, the
100 leaders of the Senate, to be here together to solve those issues in
a way that moves them forward and gives promise and hope to the next
generation.
Mr. President, that is what the top 10 priorities are that our new
majority leader set out for us today. They are bills that focus on
bringing back hope and opportunity for the thousands of American
families that are hoping today that we have heard them and that we will
respond and work hard to make sure their lives are better.
I am pleased that we are beginning next week with ethics reform. I
think it is important to start with a strong message that we understand
we have a responsibility to uphold the honor of this Senate, not just
for today but for
[[Page 77]]
many years to come. I am very excited that within a few weeks we will
be talking about the minimum wage for the families out there who are
struggling so hard to make sure they do the right thing for their kids
and to send them a message that we understand and we are going to do a
little bit to help them.
Senator Schumer talked about the 9/11 Commission and implementing
their report--something we should have done long ago. The security of
this Nation, people's fear about where we are, is a message that we all
need to understand. I am pleased that is part of the top 10 priorities
of this new Congress. In dealing with the Medicare prescription drug
plan, I have met with many seniors in my home State and they are
confused and frustrated. They are angry as they fall into the doughnut
hole and realize that the promise we have given them of prescription
drugs is not meeting that expectation, and we have a responsibility to
do better. I hope that we can.
I heard Senator McConnell a short while ago say he didn't want us to
tear apart the Medicare prescription drug plan. Nobody does. We want to
make it work. I hope we can work together in cooperation and make that
happen. Stem cell research: The Senator from Iowa will be speaking in a
few minutes. He has been a leader on that issue. It is about promise
and hope for so many American families. I hope we can move it quickly
through the Senate, through the House, and to the President's desk. If
we have to, I hope we have the votes to override. Far too many families
struggle today, and we should at least send them the promise of the
future as generations before did for us. Energy independence is
critical in my State and across the Nation. It is something I hear
about everywhere I go.
Strengthening our military: Certainly, that is important today, as we
know we face terrorism across the globe, and we have exhausted our
forces in Iraq. We have to make sure that we work together in a
bipartisan manner to strengthen our military not just for today but for
those who come behind us.
Included in that for me is taking care of those who have served us,
our veterans, keeping the promise we made to them when they served us
overseas, that we will be there when they come home. We cannot tolerate
the long lines our men and women are in, the fact that they are coming
home and cannot get a job; that the unemployment rate for 18- to 24-
year-olds who served in Iraq and Afghanistan is three times the
national average. We have a lot of work to do there. I am pleased our
leader has put out immigration. This is an issue the Senate has worked
through. It is a tough one, but it is one that, if we work together, we
can move forward.
Many other issues are coming before us, but one I want to mention, in
my last few minutes, is the issue of education. That is the backbone of
our country, it always has been: making sure young people today can
grow up and know that if they choose, they can go to college and it is
affordable.
I am especially delighted that S. 7, one of the top 10 priorities,
addresses the issue of college affordability. It is very disheartening
to me to walk into a middle school today and have seventh and eighth
graders say to me: Why should I get good grades; I can't afford to go
to college. That is not the message we should be sending. We should be
sending the message to them that if they work hard and get good grades,
they will go to college.
We have to address that issue in the Senate. We all know the jobs of
the future depend on our young people today and whether they get the
education they need, and the money should not be a barrier.
I know this issue. Money was not a barrier for me when I was growing
up. My father was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis when I was in high
school. There are seven kids in our family. We all thought the door had
been shut to us and the ability to go to college. But not so because
leaders in the Senate stood up before I ever knew about them and said
we need to have Pell grants and student loans and we need to make
college affordable.
So all seven kids in my family--despite the fact my dad could no
longer work and was confined to a wheelchair, that my mom had to go on
welfare, she had to go back to school herself and raise seven kids--we
were able to go to college on Pell grants and student loans. All seven
of us graduated and went on and one of us became a Senator.
We should not be shutting that door of hope to any young American
today. No matter what happens to them personally, no matter what their
circumstances, no matter what State, city or community they grow up in,
we want them to know the United States of America and leaders in their
country know it is important for them to get an education.
So as we move forward in this session of Congress, we are going to
focus on college affordability and making sure that the backbone of our
country is strong once again.
We have much work ahead of us. We do need to work together. Mr.
President, 51 to 49 in the Senate is very close, but we know that the
issues in this country are extremely important and the families in this
country are counting on us.
I look forward to working with all of my colleagues to achieve an
agenda that sends that promise of hope once again.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, first, I thank the Senator from Washington
for a very eloquent and very profound statement. The message the
Senator from Washington put forward on the Senate floor is one that all
Americans ought to hear. It is a message of hope and promise.
I thank the Senator from Washington for her leadership in so many
areas but especially in the area about which she spoke so eloquently--
the area of education. I had not known that about her family. It brings
home once again that in the America we love, anything should be
possible for any child. No child should be deprived of the hopes and
dreams of having an education and succeeding in life simply because
they were born poor or born on the wrong side of the tracks, so to
speak, or maybe the wrong color--whatever. Every child ought to have
that opportunity.
I thank the Senator for so eloquently putting it forward on the
Senate floor.
____________________
STEM CELL RESEARCH
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I wish to pick up a little bit from
Senator Murray's remarks and talk about S. 5, the stem cell bill, that
was also introduced today by the majority leader, Senator Reid.
Stem cell research, when it is stripped of all of the phony arguments
and rhetoric, is basically about hope. It is hope for people with Lou
Gehrig's disease. It is hope for people with spinal cord injuries, hope
for kids suffering from juvenile diabetes, hope for people with
Parkinson's disease.
In this Congress, we are going to bring those hopes one giant step
closer to reality. At long last, hopefully, we will lift the
President's restrictions on stem cell research and finally give our
Nation's best scientists the tools they need to produce treatments and
cures.
The bill we have introduced today, S. 5, the Stem Cell Research
Enhancement Act of 2007, is the exact same bill that passed both Houses
last year with strong bipartisan support. The House passed the bill 238
to 194. The Senate passed it 63 to 37.
Regrettably, the President chose to exercise his first and only veto
of his administration in vetoing this bill. And with his veto, the
President ignored the will of the American people, he ignored scores of
Nobel laureates, he ignored top scientists at the National Institutes
of Health, and with one stroke of his pen, he dashed the hopes of
millions of Americans suffering from diseases that could one day be
cured or treated through stem cell research.
But now we are back, it is a new Congress, and the voices of hope are
stronger than ever. In November, the American people elected many new
[[Page 78]]
Members of Congress who support stem cell research and replaced many
former Members of Congress who opposed this research. As a result, we
will pass this bill again this year, and the margins of victory will be
even wider.
Let me spend a moment reviewing what S. 5 would accomplish. More than
5 years ago, the President announced in a speech that federally funded
scientists could conduct research only on embryonic stem cell lines
that were derived prior to 9 p.m. on August 9, 2001. The President gave
his speech that evening, August 9, 2001. He said all of those stem cell
lines derived before 9 p.m., that was OK, but if they were derived
after 9 p.m., they could not be funded with Federal funds. I never
understood that. Why was it 9 p.m.? Why wasn't it 9:15 p.m. or maybe
8:45, 9:13? Why was it 9 p.m.? At the beginning, one has to question
the logic of why 9 p.m. was the time barrier.
When the President announced his policy, he said that 78 stem cell
lines were eligible for research. We now know that is not so. Only 21
are eligible, not nearly enough to reflect the genetic diversity of
this Nation.
What is more, every one of those lines, all 21 of those lines are
contaminated with mouse cells. They were grown on mouse cells, so they
are all contaminated. So none of them will ever be used for any kind of
human treatment.
Meanwhile, hundreds of new stem cell lines have been derived since
the President's arbitrary deadline. Many of these lines are
uncontaminated, they are healthy, but they are totally off limits to
federally funded scientists.
That is really a shame because if we are serious about realizing the
promise of stem cell research, our scientists need access to the best
stem cell lines possible. We need a stem cell policy that offers true
and meaningful hope. That is what S. 5 would provide.
Under this bill, federally funded researchers could study any stem
cell line, regardless of the date it was derived, as long as certain
strong ethical guidelines are met. I point out, again, as I have in the
past and I will continue to point out, that the ethical guidelines in
S. 5 are stronger than the ethical guidelines under the existing
policy.
What are those guidelines?
One, no money can be exchanged. No one can ever be paid for donating
embryos.
Second, these embryos can only be used for stem cell research and for
nothing else.
And third, the donors have to give informed consent for them to be
used.
The final point is most important. The only way a stem cell line
could be eligible for this federally funded research is if it were
derived from an embryo that was otherwise going to be discarded. Let
me, again, say what that means.
There are more than 400,000 embryos frozen in in vitro fertilization
clinics all over the country--over 400,000. Right now, the only thing
that can happen to those is that they be discarded. They are thrown
away every day. Every day embryos are discarded in in vitro
fertilization clinics all over America. The donors have no other
choice.
Take friends of mine, a young couple. They couldn't have children.
They finally went to an IVF clinic. That didn't work. They went to
another one. Now she is pregnant, and they are going to have twins.
They may have one or two more children--I don't know--but there are
going to be some of those embryos left over. Right now my friend's only
choice is to have them discarded. That is her only choice. But as she
said to me: I would love, after I have my children and my family, if
there are embryos left over, I would love to be able to donate them for
stem cell research to help cure disease and to help people who are
sick.
Right now she cannot do that. Neither she nor her husband can do
that. Our bill would allow them to have that option. No one is forced
to do anything, but it would allow them to have that option.
I also, wish to point out again one of the misconceptions. These are
embryos. They are blastocysts. They have about 100 cells. I always do
this: I put a dot on a piece of paper, hold it up and say: Can anybody
see that? That is what we are talking about. It is about the size of a
period at the end of a sentence. There is a lot of misinformation about
what we are talking about.
As I said before, Congress is going to pass this bill, that is
certain. Sadly, some are already predicting the President will veto it
for a second time. I hope they are wrong. I hope the President will
respect the will of the people and sign the stem cell research bill.
But if he does veto it, we will persist. We will use every legislative
means at our disposal to make sure S. 5 is enacted into law, and it
will happen during this Congress.
My nephew Kelly is one of the millions of Americans whose hopes
depend on stem cell research. Kelly was in the Navy. He had a terrible
accident on an aircraft carrier, and he has been basically a paraplegic
now for 28 years. But he has kept his hopes alive that our scientists
will be able to find a cure. Stem cell research offers the best hope
for people suffering from spinal cord injuries.
Now is the time to give them the hope, to lift the ban on stem cell
research. As I said, we will do that in this Congress. It will be one
of the first bills we pass. I hope the President will sign it and we
can move on. But if not, for Kelly and for so many millions of
Americans, we hope the long wait is almost over. I predict that hope
will prevail in this Congress.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
____________________
CESAR CHAVEZ
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President I will speak briefly. One of the things I am
going to do today is join the distinguished Presiding Officer, Senator
Salazar--in fact, I should note that this is the first time I have seen
the distinguished Presiding Officer in the chair. He looks as though he
was born to preside here, and he does it well. I am going to join him
in introducing a bill to include Cesar Chavez among the names of the
great civil rights leaders we honored in the title of last year's
Voting Rights Act Reauthorization and Amendments Act of 2006.
When we were considering this legislation in the Senate Judiciary
Committee, Senator Salazar made a compelling argument why that name, an
American hero's name, should be added to the bill: because he devoted
and sacrificed his life to empower the most vulnerable in America, as
did Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King.
Cesar Chavez's name should be added to the law as an important
recognition of the broad landscape of political inclusion made possible
by the Voting Rights Act. This bill would not alter the act's vital
remedies to address continuing discrimination in voting, but rather it
is overdue recognition of the importance of the Voting Rights Act to
Hispanic-Americans.
I offered Senator Salazar's amendment in the Judiciary Committee. The
moral weight of what he wanted to do was so compelling that in a
committee often fractured, it passed unanimously. It was included. It
was not included in the final bill because as we were nearing the
ending time, we did not want to have to have the bill go back and forth
to the other body again because we wanted to get it on the President's
desk in time. I committed to the distinguished Senator from Colorado
that I would join him again this year, and I say with virtual certainty
that the Senate Judiciary Committee will move very rapidly with that
issue this year. I have the commitment of the new chairman backing that
up, as does he have mine. And so I urge the Senate to quickly take up
and pass this measure as we convene the new Congress and commit
ourselves once again to ensuring that the great promises of the 14th
and 15th Amendments are kept for all Americans.
Comprehensive Immigration Reform
Mr. President, as this new Congress begins, we have a tremendous
opportunity before us to enact fair, comprehensive immigration reform.
It is time for bipartisan action. So I join with Senators from both
sides of the aisle to call for comprehensive immigration reform, and I
will work to
[[Page 79]]
enact it. We have to put aside the mean-spiritedness and shortsighted
policies driven by fear and recognize the dignity of those whose work
contributes to reinvigorating America. Consistent with our heritage as
a nation of immigrants, we need to bring people out of the shadows. My
maternal grandparents were immigrants to this country. My wife's
parents came as immigrants to this country. We are a nation of
immigrants. And those of us who are here now should not think that
somehow we got here differently, and that we should close the doors to
the rest. That is not the American way.
Through comprehensive immigration reform, we can increase the
opportunities for American businesses to obtain the workers they need
while ensuring that priority is given to willing workers already in
this country, from dairy farms in Vermont to multinational
corporations. We have been told of the plight of the American farmers
from New York to California. We have seen the pictures of the piles of
rotting fruit that have gone unharvested. We hear American technology
companies lamenting lost opportunities and the loss of skilled
innovators to other countries. Dairy farmers are yearning for more
available legal workers in my own State of Vermont. But worse yet,
others have watched families in their employ be torn apart through
piecemeal, inconsistent, sometimes heavyhanded enforcement efforts. I
have met some of those families. I have talked to people who were
fifth, sixth, seventh generation Vermonters who say how unfair it is to
see these good families torn apart by seemingly arbitrary immigration
enforcement efforts. No American farmer, no business, should be put in
the position of having to choose between obeying the law or losing
their livelihood.
Where American workers can fill available jobs, of course they should
be given priority. But where these jobs are available but unclaimed by
American citizens, it makes no sense to deny willing foreign workers
the opportunity to work. We can strike a balance if we work together.
We must streamline and reform our visa system for low-skilled workers
so we can help reduce the crippling backlogs that affect American
businesses. And we must increase the number of low-skilled work visas
issued each year to keep up with the needs of our economy. We should
enact stronger, consistent employer verification procedures. We should
impose penalties for those employers who flout the law and exploit
those who have no voice. We can do this by working together and
enacting comprehensive reform.
Through comprehensive and smart reforms we can increase our security.
Let us work to focus enforcement efforts and protect our citizens from
those who seek to do us harm. Let us put an end to the enforcement
conditions that end in too many needless deaths in the deserts of the
Southwest, families--spouses and children--who die needlessly trying to
seek the promise of America. We also have to take a smart approach in
dealing with the millions of people already here, one that does not
divide families and make instant criminals out of millions of people
but rather honors our Nation's best traditions. When we enact reforms
to bring the millions of undocumented people of this country out of the
shadows, greater accountability will follow. When we provide incentives
for undocumented people to enter a path to citizenship, we will
encourage them to live up to our traditions of citizenship and civic
responsibility. When we endow those who seek to better their lives and
the lives of their families with the tools to do so legally, we help
instill in them a sense of belonging, of patriotism, of opportunity.
Those who decry this aspect of immigration reform must carefully
consider the alternative path. By driving more people underground, we
foster a culture of lawlessness and mistrust.
We can't wall ourselves off from the world. A 700-mile fence on a
2,000-mile border is not the answer. Last fall, the Republican Congress
rushed through a bill to build 700 miles of fencing and did so against
the advice of the Department of Homeland Security. That fence bill was
neither fair nor comprehensive. I share the disappointment of tens of
millions of Americans who had hoped President Bush would have exercised
his constitutional authority to veto that costly, cobbled-together and
mean-spirited law. Instead, the President seemed to have abandoned his
principles in signing the Secure Fence Act: legislation that will cost
between $2 billion and $9 billion and fail to perform as advertised to
seal our southern border. Scarring our southwestern landscape with a
symbol of fear, pandering, and intolerance offends the great heritage
of our Nation by sending the wrong message to our neighbors and to the
world about American values. It was a pricey bumper sticker law passed
to curry favor in certain quarters before the elections. Instead, by
focusing on technology, innovation, and personnel rather than partisan
politics and divisive walls, we can do a better job of securing our
border.
The President has said many times that in order for the United States
to achieve real security, we must have comprehensive immigration reform
which must include a realistic solution to bring out of the shadows the
millions of undocumented immigrants in this country and at the same
time meet the pressing needs of employers who are looking for willing
workers. In numerous statements, including a speech in Mission, TX, in
August 2006, he recognized that without all components of comprehensive
reform working together, immigration reform will not work.
So I will continue working to enact legislation to secure our borders
and strengthen our economy and bring about a realistic solution for the
millions of people who want to work and live legally in our country. I
will continue to support fair and comprehensive immigration reform that
will respect the dignity of those who seek to join mainstream American
society and better their lives in the United States. Let's hope that
common sense and bipartisanship will prevail and that the promises of
America, those promises of America that encouraged my grandparents to
come to this country and my wife's parents to come to this country, are
still there. Let us not enact laws that are beneath the dignity of a
great and noble and welcoming Nation. Let us pass legislation that
reflects what is the best of America and reflects the America that is a
diverse country made up of people of diverse backgrounds. We will be
stronger and better for it.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, before the Senator from Vermont leaves the
floor, let me commend him for his remarks and the passion he brings to
this subject which is based on his own personal experience but which
reflects the experience, I believe, of the vast majority of Americans.
I just want to tell him how much we all look forward to his leadership
on this and so many other issues.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, might I thank the distinguished senior
Senator from Michigan. He and I have been dear friends for years and
years. I thank him for those words. I am also happy to see the gavel of
the Armed Services Committee go into his hands.
Mr. LEVIN. I thank my dear friend from Vermont. I join him also in
telling the Senate just how pleased we are to see the Presiding Officer
sitting where he is. We have worked together on many issues. We have
traveled together. His commitment to such critical issues as
immigration, environment, energy, and a number of other issues has made
a real difference. He is a very quick study and a quick learner, as
noted when we traveled together to Iraq and other countries. So he
indeed fits the chair which he is sitting, and it is a pleasure to look
at him as I address the Senate for a few minutes this afternoon.
REBUILDING AMERICA'S MILITARY ACT OF 2007
Mr. President, I join our majority leader, Senator Reid, in
introducing S. 8, the Rebuilding America's Military Act of 2007. Every
Member of the Senate, every Democrat, every Republican, strongly
supports our men and women in uniform and is committed to providing
them with the training, equipment, and support they need and deserve. I
commend Senator Harry Reid
[[Page 80]]
for recognizing that much needs to be done in this regard and that we
need to commit ourselves to doing what needs to be done.
As the situation in Iraq has grown steadily worse over the last 3
years, our military commitments in that country have placed an
increasing strain on our Armed Forces. For example, delays in ordering
body armor and other protective equipment have left some of our troops
vulnerable in combat. Failures to fully fund special replacement and
repair of equipment that has been damaged and destroyed in the course
of ongoing operations endangers our troops. The decision to send our
best and most ready equipment to Iraq has left the military's
nondeployed ground forces with a declining and dangerously low level of
readiness to meet their wartime missions. For example, at least two-
thirds of the Army units in the United States are rated as not ready to
deploy. That is a totally unacceptable situation relative to the
readiness of our forces. The repeated deployments and a sustained high
operational tempo have placed increasing strains on members of the
Armed Forces and their families.
It is my hope that we will change course in Iraq for many reasons,
but one of them surely is that such a change will help address many of
the problems that I have identified here in these few minutes. Placing
the responsibility for the future of Iraq in the hands of the Iraqis
and beginning a phased withdrawal of our troops from that country in
the next 4 to 6 months would be an important step toward turning
responsibility for the future of Iraq over to the Iraqis, but also a
critically needed step toward rebuilding our own military. We must act
to ensure that our troops have the training, equipment, and support
they need to remain the strongest and best military force in the world.
Senator Reid's S. 8, Senate bill 8, the Rebuilding America's Military
Act of 2007, commits us to taking such action. I am confident that we
can do so on a bipartisan basis, and I look forward to proceeding in
that manner as the weeks and months unfold.
I again thank the Chair. I again commend him for the way in which he
has proceeded as a Senator in so many ways and for his friendship.
I yield the floor.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Idaho is recognized.
Mr. CRAIG. I thank the Chair.
(The remarks of Mr. CRAIG pertaining to the introduction of S.J. Res.
1 are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced bills
and Joint Resolutions.'')
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico is recognized.
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask each side, the Democratic and
Republican sides, be given an additional 10 minutes to speak in this
period. I will take the first 5 minutes of that, and then my colleague
from California, Senator Boxer, will take the second 5 minutes of the
Democratic time remaining for us.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
NATIONAL ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT SECURITY ACT OF 2007
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I am pleased to cosponsor S. 6, which is
the National Energy and Environment Security Act of 2007. This is a
message bill that Senator Reid introduced earlier today. It lays out a
number of important goals that will guide our thinking and action on
energy-related matters, including the issue of global warming, in the
110th Congress.
Let me talk briefly about five key goals that are mentioned in the
bill. These goals will be subject to much more detailed discussion in
future weeks and to action both in the Energy Committee and, for some
issues, in the Environment Committee as well.
The first goal of the bill is to reduce our dependence on foreign and
un-
sustainable energy sources. Any national energy strategy to reduce that
dependence will have to maintain our domestic production of oil and gas
as well as undertake three basic initiatives. The first of those
initiatives is to greatly increase the efficiency of the cars and
trucks that we put on the road in this country. There are a lot of
ideas on how to do this. They include several proposals for increased
CAFE standards as well as so-called ``feebate'' standards that send
signals to the market to encourage the production and sale of high
efficiency vehicles. I look forward to working with my colleagues on
both sides of the aisle to try to move these proposals forward.
Another way to reduce our dependence is to further develop
alternative fuels, particularly biofuels. In that regard we need to
focus on broadening the base of biological feedstocks that are used to
make fuels such as ethanol. This is an issue we will be focusing on in
the Energy Committee.
A third way is to look at the other new technologies to power our
cars and our trucks. There is much promise in hybrid vehicles with
larger batteries that can be charged overnight, so-called plug-in
hybrids. This sort of technology can help reduce demand for gasoline
for short trips and deserves further attention.
The second goal in the bill is to reduce our exposure to the risks of
global warming. While there are several Senate committees with great
interest in this issue, obviously the Environment Committee has a
primary role and the primary jurisdiction. But over 95 percent of the
U.S. carbon dioxide emissions and nearly 85 percent of all U.S.
greenhouse gas emissions come from energy production, distribution, and
use. We want to work with other committees to find the best way to deal
with this important issue and to balance environmental imperatives with
the need for reliable and affordable energy into the future.
The third goal in the bill is to diversify and expand our use of
secure, efficient, and environmentally friendly energy supplies and
technologies. Efficiency is a key element in our energy policy. It
deserves more attention in this Congress than we have been able to give
it before. There are outstanding opportunities to reduce the demands of
our future energy system by being more efficient and effective in the
ways we distribute and use energy.
As one example, most incandescent light bulbs are only 5 percent
efficient, so they waste 95 percent of the energy that goes into them.
Fluorescent lighting is only 20 percent efficient. There is no
fundamental scientific reason why lighting has to waste so much energy.
New technologies are on the horizon that could reach close to 100
percent efficiency. Even if we were to make all lighting in the United
States just 50 percent efficient, we would eliminate the need for the
equivalent of 70 1000-megawatt nuclear power plants. Examples like this
present a compelling case for pushing energy efficiency, and I expect
that we will have a strong focus on these opportunities in this
Congress.
A fourth goal of the bill is to reduce the burdens on consumers of
rising energy prices. We need to make sure that programs such as the
Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program are fully funded and targeted
at low-
income and working families.
The fifth goal in the bill is to eliminate unnecessary tax giveaways
and prevent energy price gouging and manipulation. We need to take a
broad look at the incentives we have in place for energy production on
both the tax side and the royalty side, to ensure that we have the most
effective mix of incentives going forward. We are all agreed that those
are issues that need attention.
The United States has one of the most favorable set of fiscal
policies for production of oil and gas in the world today. Some of
those fiscal incentives may be redundant at the price levels we are
currently seeing. There are big problems in the royalty system being
managed by the Department of the Interior, with some companies getting
royalty treatment that Congress never intended them to receive. We will
be looking at these issues closely in this new Congress. We will be
examining how to rebalance the system, both from the perspective of
having fair and effective royalty and tax policies for oil and gas and
from the perspective of having effective tax and other incentives to
promote other forms of energy,
[[Page 81]]
such as production of electricity from wind solar, geothermal, and
renewable sources.
All of this is a tall order for Congress. I predict instead of seeing
just one big energy bill, we will be addressing these issues through
multiple bills that move through the Senate as issues and proposals for
addressing these issues become ripe for action. In the Senate we will
not make much progress on energy or environment unless we can develop a
strong bipartisan approach on the issues. The Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources has a strong tradition of bipartisan accomplishment
that I plan on continuing in this new Congress. I look forward to
working with my colleague, Senator Pete Domenici, and all members of
the committee as we forge an effective path forward to promote our
energy and energy-related environmental security.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, it is wonderful to see you sitting there
and to tell you, as I know you will be very pleased with this news,
that S. 6, which has been introduced by Leader Reid, is called the
National Energy and Environmental Security Act of 2007. That means
Senator Reid is sending a signal to all of us here, both sides of the
aisle, that we are going to put the environmental issue back front and
center and we are going to put the energy issue front and center and we
are going to do everything we can do to become energy independent and
to preserve this planet for future generations.
This is a very emotional day for me in a very good way because I am
assuming the Chair of the Environment and Public Works Committee, which
is a dream come true for me. Since I started my career, the environment
has always been one of my signature issues. In California it is a
bipartisan signature issue. We all work together, Republicans and
Democrats and Independents, because we understand that the health of
our planet and the health of our families is very important. America
has always taken the lead. Somehow, recently, we have lost our way.
Oftentimes when I speak about the environment, people are stunned to
see that, indeed, Republican Presidents have taken the lead on the
environment. Dwight Eisenhower set aside the area that is now part of
the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and said we should not destroy this
beautiful part of the world. Richard Nixon created the Environmental
Protection Agency, and then you look at Jimmy Carter who I believe
created Superfund. Presidents of both parties worked with Congress to
write the Clean Air Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act--it has been, I
think, a backpedaling of environmental laws and regulations that has
undermined the bipartisan issue of the environment.
I have three goals for this committee. No. 1 is to protect this
planet. I think that is our moral obligation. I view it as a spiritual
obligation. No. 2 is to protect the health of our families, the health
of our children. I view that as a moral obligation and a spiritual
obligation. My third goal for the committee is to bring back
bipartisanship. We have had, in this great committee, great leaders
from both parties. Already I have begun reaching out to Republican
friends. Of course we know there will be disagreements. But I can tell
you, and I want to reassure the American people, that we are working
together. Today I had an open house at the committee room and in walked
my Democratic colleagues and my Republican colleagues. My former
chairman, James Inhofe, was the first Senator to come by and we had a
series of Senators come by--Senator Isakson, Senator Obama, Senator
Lautenberg, Senator Alexander, Senator Vitter, and Senator Warner. It
was a wonderful experience for me to sit there and see that in fact we
are getting off on the right foot.
I cannot tell you how good I feel about S. 6 because it lays down a
marker and it says we have to do something about energy efficiency and
we have to do something about global warming. If we do not act on
global warming, our children and our grandchildren will wonder why we
walked away from them. How could we have walked away from them? We do
not want to walk away from them. I don't know any Member of this Senate
who would knowingly walk away from their future family. Scientists are
telling us we need to take action soon in order to avoid dangerous
global warming. If we fail to act, we could reach the tipping point
with irreversible consequences.
I say to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, today I believe we
have no choice but to act to slow global warming. We should look at our
actions as an insurance policy. Yes, scientists will disagree. Some
will say horrific things will happen. Some will say bad things will
happen. I don't know of any respected scientist who thinks nothing will
happen. But for bad things or horrific things, we need an insurance
policy. We need to be conservative. We need to do the most we can do so
we protect those future generations so when they look back at us, they
will say: They stepped up and did the right thing.
It is hard to persuade people to act when the consequences of
inaction lie down the road. But we are smart enough, we are wise enough
to do something about global warming.
Here is the good news. Whatever we do about global warming, to reduce
greenhouse gases, has a beneficial effect on our society. That is why
it is something I think we can wrap our arms around. When we do
something for energy efficiency, to cut back on the carbon dioxide,
what does it mean? It means we save money in our pockets, if we drive
fuel-efficient automobiles, alternative fuel vehicles, hybrid vehicles,
cellulosic fuel vehicles. It helps us keep money in our pockets. It
says we don't have to rely on foreign countries. So that makes eminent
good sense. It means we will be developing technologies that we can
export to the rest of the world.
Today, as the incoming Chair of the Environment and Public Works
Committee, I am embarrassed to say to the people of the United States
that of the 56 emitters of greenhouse gases in the order of what they
have done to help solve the problem, we are 53 out of 56. Only a few
countries have done less than we have done and those countries are
China, Malaysia, and Saudi Arabia. I am embarrassed to stand here and
say that to the American people, but I must speak the truth to the
American people. We are the No. 1 emitter of greenhouse gases and we
are 53rd out of 56 countries in doing something about it.
All this is going to change. I think it is going to change because
the people want us to change. The people want us to lead.
I look around and see, for example, Wal-Mart--Wal-Mart, with whom I
have disagreed on so many labor issues I can't even start to tell you
the story about that, but here is what they are doing. They want to
sell millions and millions of energy-efficient lightbulbs. These
lightbulbs will save so much energy, these lightbulbs will save the
consumer so much money, and I am very pleased to see that business is
stepping up to the plate.
I am also pleased to see the State of California passing landmark
legislation to fight global warming--my State--and doing it on such a
bipartisan basis. This is very exciting for me.
We have a great bill that will be introduced by the Senator from
Vermont, Mr. Sanders. That will be the same bill written by former
Senator Jeffords, a great leader on the Committee on Environment and
Public Works, before retirement. I have to try to fill his shoes. This
great bill is modeled after the California bill and will tackle this
issue in a way which will be good for the environment, good for the
health of our families, good for foreign policy, and good for the
export of new technologies, meaning more jobs here. We can do this. We
can reduce costs for consumers, for businesses.
Energy efficiency is the name of the game. It is the easiest way to
get more energy.
Everyone who knows me knows I want to pass the greatest bill in the
history of mankind to fight global
[[Page 82]]
warming. Everyone knows I want to do that. Everyone knows I want us to
go as far as we can go. I am an idealist when it comes to this, but I
am also a pragmatist. So we will work our colleagues in the Senate,
both sides of the aisle, Republicans, Independents, and Democrats. We
will open the committee to all the Senators. We will listen to their
ideas. We will listen to their views. We will take the best of those
ideas, we will sit down, and we will work hard and get a bill. That day
will come in the near future. At that time, the faith the people have
placed in Congress, once again, that faith will be restored. Some of it
was lost because in many ways we took our eye off of what we had to do.
When people ask me, What is it like in the Congress, what do you like
to do in the Congress, I say, Let's face it, the easiest thing is to do
nothing. When you do something, somebody gets nervous about it, but
when we have an issue such as global warming, which is a national
security threat--and the Pentagon has told us it is a national security
threat because if waters rise and there are refugees all over the
world, the instability that will follow will be absolutely enormous; it
will create a trend. There are predictions that if we have bad global
warming, we will have weather extremes with droughts and floods and all
the problems we have been getting a little look at through the lens of
the last couple of years.
Fate has thrown us together, I say to my friends on the other side of
the aisle. You never know when you will be born or whom you will come
to know. I have gotten to know the Senator presiding. I am fortunate to
have friends on both sides of the aisle. I am fortunate to have the
State that has as its core value protecting God's green Earth and this
planet. I am going to bring all that enthusiasm to the committee. I am
going to be patient. We are going to listen. We are going to write a
bill and bring it here.
I say to Majority Leader Reid, it means so much to me to have as one
of the top bills a bill that uses the word ``environment'' in the
title. I cannot state how long I have been waiting for that. We have it
in S. 6. It is called the National Energy and Environment Security Act
of 2007. It is an apt name because when we take care of the
environment, we are taking care of our own security and the health of
our families.
I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
AGENDA FOR COLORADO
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, today we start the 110th Congress of the
United States. We embark on a 2-year journey to submit, consider,
debate, improve, and eventually pass legislation on behalf of the
greater good of our constituents and the American people. Accordingly,
I have here today a package of legislative proposals which I believe
will benefit Colorado and the country. This package is the first
chapter of what I hope becomes a legislative agenda for Colorado and
the Nation. These 15 bills address matters from healthcare to housing,
land usage to veterans, and Homeland Security to drug trafficking
prevention.
These bills are:
The Methamphetamine Trafficking Enforcement Act of 2007;
the Medicare Cost Contract Extension and Refinement Act of 2007;
the Mark-to-Market Extension Act of 2007;
the National Domestic Preparedness Consortium Expansion Act of 2007;
the National Trails System Willing Seller Act of 2007;
the Pikes Peak Regional Veteran's Cemetery Act of 2007;
the Pinon Canyon Expansion Citizen's Input Act of 2007;
the Arkansas Valley Conduit Act;
the Increase Computer Efficiency Study Act of 2007;
the Mesa Verde National Park Boundary Expansion Act of 2007;
the Baca National Wildlife Refuge Purpose Act;
the Cache la Poudre River National Heritage Area Technical Amendments
Act of 2007;
the Satellite and Cable Access Act of 2007;
the Granada Relocation Center National Historic Site Act of 2007;
and a Ronald Reagan U.S. Capitol Artistic Tribute Resolution.
Mr. President, this agenda of 15 bills represents many hours of work
with Colorado citizens, officials, interested parties, and
stakeholders. It is a set of fairly controversy-free proposals that
will solve problems and offer solutions.
I intend to return to this floor with a second round of legislative
proposals, proposals that I am now working on with colleagues, State
officials, and Colorado stakeholders. Other measures I plan to address
this session include Good Samaritan mine cleanups, bark beetle
eradication legislation, Rocky Mt. National Park Wilderness, National
ID theft/Social Security number protection, renewable energy tax
credits, reverse mortgages, the need for public health veterinarians,
oil shale royalties, and manufactured housing reform.
I look forward to working with my colleagues on getting these bills
through the legislative process and being able to tell Coloradans that
we in Washington are engaged on their behalf.
(The remarks of Mr. ALLARD pertaining to the submission of S. Con.
Res. 1 are located in today's Record under ``Submission of Concurrent
and Senate Resolutions.'')
(The remarks of Mr. ALLARD pertaining to the introduction of S. 124,
S. 125, S. 126, S. 127, S. 128, S. 129, S. 130, S. 131, S. 132, S. 134,
S. 135, S. 136, S. 168, and S. 169 are located in today's Record under
``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')
Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Obama). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
____________________
A NEW BEGINNING
Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, first let me congratulate the Presiding
Officer for having assumed that position today for the first time. This
Senator has a long-time admiration for the Senator from Illinois, for
the great work he has done, and for his contributions to this body.
Let me also say that I come here today to congratulate both our
majority leader, Senator Reid, for his leadership, and Senator
McConnell for his leadership as the minority leader, and for them
having brought the Members of this body together to start a new
beginning, which is based on a sense that we as America will do better
by working together, and that the politics of division of the past are
politics that we will be able to transcend and move forward with a
positive and strong agenda that will make our country and the world a
stronger and safer place.
I also congratulate Senator Reid and the leadership for the 10 bills
introduced here today. I believe those bills create a good framework
for issues that urgently need to be addressed by the Congress and by
this President. I am hopeful that in the days and weeks and months
ahead we will, in fact, be the kind of Senate and Congress that gets
results on these important initiatives.
I don't want to comment on all 10 pieces of legislation today, but I
will make reference to a couple of them. First, with respect to energy,
I think all of us in this body recognize that it is time for us to
embrace a true ethic of energy independence. For a long time, we have
given rhetoric to the issue of energy and our overdependence on oil
from the Middle East and other places. I think today Republicans and
Democrats, conservatives and progressives, have come together to say we
know what the answer is to this. It is
[[Page 83]]
not as difficult as other areas we have to deal with, such as health
care. The national renewable energy lab in my home State will tell us
all if we put our minds together, we can produce 30 to 40 percent of
our energy from renewable energy sources. We can use the new
technologies that are out there to get to energy independence.
The only thing lacking, really, has been the will of the leadership
of America to move forward to get us to that energy independence. In my
view, it is important that we do so, first, because our national
security is dependent upon our being energy independent. We ought not
to be in a position where the national sovereignty and security of this
Nation is held hostage to the whims of the Middle East and those who
happen to have oil wealth under their sands.
Secondly, it is important for the economic security of our country
that we move forward with energy independence. As we move forward, we
will find economic opportunity, including economic opportunity for
rural America, to help us grow our way to energy independence.
Finally, we will be able to deal with the environmental security
issues that are very much at stake in this energy debate.
I want to comment on the importance of education and the College
Affordability Act, which has been presented today by Senator Reid. For
many of us who know the promise of America, we know that promise of
America has come about through the educational opportunities we
receive. For many of us in this Chamber, including Senator Murray, who
spoke a few minutes ago--she talked about the promise of America
delivered through the educational opportunities which she had. Even
though she was one of seven children and had a father who had multiple
sclerosis, she achieved the highest level of the American dream because
that educational opportunity was given to her. I and others have gone
through similar circumstances. In my own case, in Colorado, my father
and mother never had an opportunity to get a college degree. We were
poor, raised in a place that didn't have electricity and a telephone.
Yet the promise of America and the promise of education was something
that was constantly talked about to us by our parents. I often remember
my father going around the table at our ranch and making sure all eight
of his children were doing their homework because he knew that
education would allow them to seek horizons and get to places he had
not been able to reach. Over time, all eight of his children became
first-generation college graduates.
Today, I stand here as a Senator from that family, born in that
place. Without education, I would not be here, and those in my family
would not have had the opportunities they have had. It has been the
leaders in the Senate, including people such as former Senator
Claiborne Pell from Rhode Island, who stood for the proposition that
that educational opportunity should be afforded to all Americans, no
matter what your background, no matter your economic condition; that
you should be allowed to have an educational opportunity in America,
because there was a recognition that with educational opportunity,
anything is possible for a child in America.
So that piece of legislation Senator Reid introduced today is
something I hope we can embrace electively as a Senate moving forward
in a comprehensive way.
Finally, let me make a quick remark on the issue of immigration
reform. We spent a lot of time on immigration here in the Senate. A few
months ago, we were successful in passing a bipartisan compromise to
move forward. I am hopeful that as we look at the months ahead, we will
be able to work with President Bush and our Democratic and Republican
colleagues to fashion a comprehensive immigration reform package that
will deliver an effective immigration law for our country.
In my view, that immigration reform package has to have three
principles at its center. First, we have to secure our borders. I
believe the legislation introduced today will, in fact, help us make
sure our borders are secure. We as a sovereign Nation have to make sure
we are securing our borders.
Secondly, we need to enforce our laws within our country. For far too
long we have looked the other way and the laws of immigration in our
country simply have not been enforced. The measure we passed last year
put together the pieces to allow us to enforce our immigration laws.
Finally, from both a human and a moral and economic perspective, we
need to find ways of bringing the 12 million people who now live in the
shadows of America out into the sunlight of America. Those people are
here working today, as they have been for many years. Their reality has
in fact been recognized but somehow ignored. We need to find a way to
make sure that we bring those people from the shadows into the
sunlight, and the only way we will be able to do that is with a
comprehensive immigration reform package that we pushed forward last
year and, hopefully, we will have another opportunity to push forward
in the manner of the bill introduced today by Senator Reid.
I very much look forward to working with my colleagues, both
Democrats and Republicans, in this body as we address the major issues
facing our Nation and our world.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma is recognized.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be
recognized for such time as I may consume.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is recognized.
____________________
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATIONS
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I have a couple of concerns here. One is a
driving concern. After having served on the House Armed Services
Committee before and for the last 12 years on the Senate Armed Services
Committee, I am deeply distressed that we did not get our MilCon
Appropriations bill passed. I don't think a lot of people realize how
significant it is that we get it passed for this fiscal year, 2007.
The partisan issues that some people are trying to tie up on the
floor are nowhere near as important as this issue, and I am talking
about some of the other bills. It is true that we need to have the DC
appropriations bill, but it is not life-threatening and certainly not
going to result in the loss of lives of our fighting troops. Labor-HHS
is important but not as important as this bill. Commerce-State-
Justice--a lot of those items can be put into a CR. I would have no
problem with a continuing resolution. But as far as this bill is
concerned, if we don't do it now, there are a lot of items in
conjunction with our BRAC process that are not going to happen and have
to happen and are life-threatening to our troops.
I compliment Senator Hutchison, who was chairman of the Subcommittee
on Military Construction. She tried so hard in the last 2 days of the
last session to get this bill through. Quite frankly, it wasn't really
a problem in the Senate as much as it was in the other body. We tried
very hard. We talked with a number of people and were unable to get
that bill done.
Over the past few years, the military has sought to reshape itself
out of a Cold War footing into a modern, more modular force. It has
tried to reconstitute its equipment, while at the same time fighting a
war in Iraq and Afghanistan. It has been forced to come to Congress for
supplementals to meet just the bare minimum requirements of fighting
the war and rebuilding the military as is so necessary.
So we have stretched them every way we can. We have cut into almost
every program, essential initiatives such as the Future Combat System.
That is a recognition, after the 1990s, when we let our modernization
slide and a lot of our military needs, to bring us up so that when we
send our kids into battle, we send them with the very best of
equipment. If we look at some of our ground equipment, such as our
artillery pieces, it is World War II technology. It is the old Paladin
where
[[Page 84]]
they actually have to swab the breech after every shot.
The Future Combat System came up, and there was a recognition that we
should have an army, a ground force that is faster, more agile, more
transportable, more modern than it is today. Every week that goes by
that we don't get this done, it is causing the Future Combat System--
there are about 19 elements of it--to move to the right and delay this
from taking place.
The fiscal year 2007 Military Construction appropriations bill was
not passed into law. The continuing resolution, as currently enacted,
does not allow the Department of Defense to proceed with over $17
billion in new construction and BRAC projects authorized by Congress in
the 2007 authorization bill.
Let me mention what will happen if we don't do this. There are so
many things having to do with the BRAC process. I opposed the last BRAC
round. We went ahead and had it, and I think that is probably the last
we will have for a long period of time. It has a deadline of 2011. If
we don't get this bill passed--by the way, I have introduced S. 113. We
have a number of cosponsors. Most of the Republican members of the
Senate Armed Services Committee are on it.
The 1st Armored Division will have to stay in Germany if we don't get
this passed. If that happens, we are not going to be able to have the
two modular combat brigade teams we so critically need on the front
lines. We are talking about the war that is taking place right now and
why we need to get this MILCON appropriations bill passed.
The Army National Guard and Reserve lack $1.1 billion to construct
and replace aviation support facilities. They cannot function without
these facilities. The postponement of construction of 250 new homes at
the naval base in Guam and the Marine Corps logistics base in Barstow,
CA, are just some of the housing needs that will not be able to be
continued. Of course, they will cost more money the longer we put them
off.
We opened up some serious shortfalls in our UHF--that is, ultra high
frequency--satellite communications capabilities. Two of the $6.5
million mobile user objective systems ground control tracking stations
were slated for Hawaii and Sigonella, Italy. Without the stations, the
already-funded satellites--we have the satellites ready to go--cannot
launch until we get this bill passed.
We went through months of agonizing discomfort in deciding what are
we going to do with the F-22, C-17, C-5, C-9, and C-40 in terms of the
new locations. That has all been determined. It has been outlined in
BRAC, but we can't do it until we have the hangars to take care of
them, to get them into the new areas.
What we are talking about are items that directly affect the
warfighting effort. The Predator, for example, has the tactical air
control program that should be supporting the Army brigade combat
teams.
I think we all know our ground forces have to have support, either
close air support or artillery support on the ground. We can't do the
close air support if we don't have the appropriations bill passed.
The Predator mission--a lot of people are not aware of this; they
think of it as being intelligence-gathering agencies and a
communications system targeting and retargeting on the ground. While
that is very important and it has to be done, a lot of people don't
realize the Predator also has the capability of firing a rocket. So we
need to have that program. We cannot have it unless we get this bill
passed.
The military is going to lose a lot if we don't get this bill passed.
When we look at the military construction that is going on in the
continental United States and we see the community support--in my State
of Oklahoma, we have five major military installations. They are
located near major cities. Vance Air Force Base is at Enid, OK. Then we
have Altus, Lawton, McAlester, Oklahoma City, and Midwest City. We have
always done well in our BRAC process because we have greater community
support than most other installations. But when you have a community
that has made a commitment toward MILCON predicated on the assumption
that we are going to pass our Military Construction appropriations bill
and then we don't do it, they could very well renege on their
commitment for housing, hospitalization, and childcare. It is far more
significant than most people realize. If we don't pass the needed
funding, the results will be very serious.
I have in front of me a letter signed by Army Secretary Harvey and
General Schoomaker:
The potential negative effects on operational readiness
cannot be overemphasized; the Army's ability to prosecute the
Global War on Terrorism and to prepare for future conflicts
would be severely hampered.
Another letter from Navy Secretary Donald Winter and Marine Corps
Commandant GEN James T. Conway and ADM Michael G. Mullen:
The lack of construction money ``is precluding our ability
to provide modern, government owned or privatized quality
housing to our Sailors, Marines and their families at a time
when the Global War on Terror is placing enormous stress on
our military and our military families.''
I am going to be looking for every opportunity to get this bill up
for consideration. Again, I am concerned about all appropriations
bills, and a continuing resolution, as far as I am concerned, at least
is going to take care of those needs. But the one thing it cannot do is
take care of the military construction needs we will have to address.
That bill is S. 113. I look forward to it coming up for
consideration. We already have, as I mentioned, most members of the
Armed Services Committee cosponsoring this legislation.
____________________
POLAR BEARS
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I do not see anyone else in the Chamber
right now. I wish to speak on a totally different subject.
Up until I guess today, turnover day, as the Presiding Officer knows,
I have chaired the Environment and Public Works Committee for 4 years.
I have enjoyed that very much. I will be turning that over now to
Senator Barbara Boxer. We will still be working very closely together.
One thing that happened a few days ago that I think is worth getting
on the record and talking about a little bit, because this is something
which is going to come up in our discussions in that committee, is, as
you probably noticed, Mr. President, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
recently took some action to begin formal consideration of whether to
list the polar bear as a threatened species under the Endangered
Species Act. Over the next year, they are going to be working on this
issue, making a determination as to whether the listing should take
place. So right now we are starting that 1-year period.
The question the Service has to answer is this: Is there clear
scientific evidence that the current worldwide polar bear population is
in trouble and facing possible extinction in the foreseeable future? As
the Service reviews the issue over the next year, I am confident they
will conclude, as I have, that listing the polar bear is unwarranted at
this time.
In the proposal, the Fish and Wildlife Service acknowledges that for
7 of the 19 worldwide polar bear populations--this is very significant.
There are 19 populations worldwide for the polar bear. For seven of
those populations, the Service has no population trend data of any
kind. For more than a third of the known populations out there, we
don't have any information. The other data suggests that for an
additional five polar bear populations, the number of bears is not
declining but is stable. Two more of the bear populations showed a
reduced number in the past due to overhunting, but these two
populations are now increasing because of new hunting restrictions.
Other sources of data mentioned in a recent Wall Street Journal
piece--just this past Tuesday--suggest that ``there are more polar
bears in the world now than there were 40 years ago.'' I have to say
there are quite a few more, almost twice the number from 40 years ago.
[[Page 85]]
The Service estimates that the polar bear population is 20,000 to
25,000 bears, whereas in the fifties and sixties, the estimates were as
low as 5,000 to 10,000 bears, and most of that was due to sport hunting
at that time, and most of that has been banned.
A 2002 U.S. Geological Survey study of wildlife in the Arctic Refuge
Coastal Plain noted that the polar bear populations ``may now be near
historic highs.''
So if the number of polar bears does not appear to be in decline,
then why are we considering listing the species as threatened? Because
the Endangered Species Act is broken. It needs to be fixed. We tried to
fix it for the past 4 years. We have been unable to reach a consensus.
The ESA allows the Fish and Wildlife Service to list the entire range
of polar bears as threatened and thereby extend a wide array of
regulatory restrictions to them and their habitat despite the dearth of
data and a lack of scientific evidence that polar bears are, indeed, in
trouble.
The law also allows for the Fish and Wildlife Service to justify its
proposal on a sample from a single population in western Hudson Bay in
Canada where the populations have decreased by 259 polar bears in the
last 17 years. Stop and think about this. This is the western Hudson
Bay in Canada, 1 of 19 sites. This is the one which is the most severe.
The population has decreased by 259 polar bears in the last 17 years;
however, the figures that the International Union of Conservation of
Nature and Natural Resources says that 234 bears have been killed in
the last 5 years alone. If you figure that 234 have been killed in the
last 5 years, the total in the last 17 years is 259, you have to assume
that more than the 259 were actually shot. Ironically, Canada now is
liberalizing a lot of their hunting in that area, and it is going to
allow more hunting. This is something they need to address.
At this point, I would like to say that while I support hunting as a
general matter, we need to fully understand its impact on the polar
bear population before we blame global warming for changes in bear
population. I already said we can document pretty well--scientifically
it is documented--that the number of bears has actually increased
except in areas where hunting is more prevalent.
I think there are a lot of people who want to somehow insert global
warming as a crisis in everything and use polar bears for that reason,
and we are not going to let that take place.
The Fish and Wildlife Service asserts that the reason for the decline
in the western Hudson Bay population is climate change-induced ice
melting. To make that assertion, they rely on hypothetical climate
change computer models showing massive loss of ice and irreparable
damages in the polar bear's habitat. The Service then extrapolates that
reasoning to the other 18 populations of polar bears. There are 19
populations, 1 of them is in trouble, but they use that as the model,
and they take that and apply that same extrapolation to the other 18
populations of polar bears, making the assumption all bears in these
populations will eventually decline and go extinct.
Again, this conclusion is not based on field data but hypothetical
modeling, and that is considered perfectly acceptable scientific
evidence under the Endangered Species Act.
That is why it should be changed. I don't believe our Federal
conservation policy should be dictated by hypothetical computer
projections because the stakes of listing a decision under ESA could be
extremely high. The listing of the polar bear is no exception. The ESA
is the most effective Federal tool to usurp local land use control and
undermine private property rights. As landowners and businesses have
known for decades, when you want to stop a development project or just
about any other activity, find a species on that land to protect and
things will slow down and many times they stop. It could be the bearing
beetle, the Arkansas shiner, and now it could be the polar bear. This
is because section 7 of the ESA requires that any project that involves
the Federal Government in any way must meet the approval of the Fish
and Wildlife Service before the project can move forward. The Federal
Government's involvement in the project can take the form of a Federal
grant, an environmental permit, a grazing allotment, a pesticide
registration or land development permit or a number of other documents.
The law requires that Fish and Wildlife intervene and determine if the
project may affect an endangered or threatened species.
So in the case of the polar bear listing, oil and gas exploration in
Alaska, which accounts for 85 percent of the State's revenue and 25
percent of the Nation's domestic oil production, is immediately called
into question. Likewise, the State's shipping, highway construction or
fishing activities will also be subject to Federal scrutiny under
section 7.
Furthermore, because the Fish and Wildlife Service has linked the
icefloe habitat concerns of polar bears to global climate change, all
kinds of projects around the country could be challenged. Some would
say this isn't possible or that I am exaggerating. But if you take the
ESA to its logical conclusion, which is certain to be done by
environmental special interest groups, any activity that allegedly
affects climate change or greenhouse gas emissions, they have to be
evaluated and approved by Fish and Wildlife for its effect on the
icefloes on which polar bears depend. Thus, this proposal could be the
ultimate assault on local land use decisionmaking and suppression of
private property rights to date.
So it is important that we take the next year to gather information,
to make sure it is logical science, and that our decisions are science
based. Again, the Wall Street Journal of this past Wednesday--not
Tuesday--has an article where they go through and document very well,
very succinctly, that we are not having a problem in losing this
population. In fact, it is actually growing. So I ask unanimous consent
to include the Wall Street Journal editorial in its entirety.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From the Wall Street Journal, Jan. 3, 2007]
Polar Bear Politics--Using an ``Endangered'' Species To Change Energy
Policy.
Unless you've been hibernating for the winter, you have no
doubt heard the many alarms about global warming. Now even
the Bush Administration is getting into the act, at least
judging from last week's decision by Interior Secretary Dirk
Kempthorne to recommend that the majestic polar bear be
listed as ``threatened'' under the Endangered Species Act.
The closer you inspect this decision, however, the more it
looks like the triumph of politics over science.
``We are concerned,'' said Mr. Kempthorne, that ``the polar
bears' habitat may literally be melting'' due to warmer
Arctic temperatures. However, when we called Interior
spokesman Hugh Vickery for some elaboration, he was a lot
less categorical, even a tad defensive. The ``endangered''
designation is based less on the actual number of bears in
Alaska than on ``projections into the future,'' Mr. Vickery
said, adding that these ``projection models'' are ``tricky
business.''
Apparently so, because there are in fact more polar bears
in the world now than there were 40 years ago, as the nearby
chart shows. The main threat to polar bears in recent decades
has been from hunting, with estimates as low as 5,000 to
10,000 bears in the 1950s and 1960s. But thanks to
conservation efforts, and some cross-border cooperation among
the U.S., Canada and Russia, the best estimate today is that
the polar bear population is 20,000 to 25,000.
It also turns out that most of the alarm over the polar
bear's future stems from a single, peer-reviewed study, which
found that the bear population had declined by some 250, or
25 percent, in Western Hudson Bay in the last decade. But the
polar bear's range is far more extensive than Hudson Bay. A
2002 U.S. Geological Survey of wildlife in the Arctic Refuge
Coastal Plain concluded that the ice bear populations ``may
now be near historic highs.'' One of the leading experts on
the polar bear, Mitchell Taylor, the manager of wildlife
resources for the Nunavut territory in Canada, has found that
the Canadian polar bear population has actually creased by 25
percent--to 15,000 from 12,000 over the past decade.
Mr. Taylor tells us that in many parts of Canada, ``polar
bears are very abundant and productive. In some areas, they
are overly abundant. I understand that people not living in
the North generally have difficulty
[[Page 86]]
grasping the concept of too many polar bears, but those who
live here have a pretty good grasp of what that is like.''
Those cuddly white bears are the Earth's largest land
carnivores.
There is no doubt that higher temperatures threaten polar
bear habitat by melting sea ice. Mr. Kempthorne also says he
had little choice because the threshold for triggering a
study under the Endangered Species Act is low. The Bush
Administration was sued by the usual environmental suspects
to make this decision, which means that Interior will now
conduct a year-long review before any formal listing decision
is made.
Nonetheless, the bears seem to have survived despite many
other severe warming and cooling periods over the last few
thousands of years. Polar bears are also protected from
poaching and environmental damage by the Marine Mammal
Protection Act, so there is little extra advantage to the
bears themselves from an ``endangered'' classification.
All of which suggests that the real story here is a human
one, namely about the politics of global warming. Once a
plant or animal is listed under the Endangered Species Act,
the government must also come up with an elaborate plan to
protect its habitat. If the polar bear is endangered by
warmer temperatures, then the environmentalist demand will be
that the government do something to address that climate
change. Faster than you can say Al Gore, this would lead to
lawsuits and cries in Congress demanding federal mandates to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Think we're exaggerating? No sooner had Mr. Kempthorne
announced his study than Kassie Siegel of something called
the Center for Biological Diversity told the New York Times
that ``even this Administration'' would not be able to
``write this proposal without acknowledging that the primary
threat to polar bears is global warming and without
acknowledging the science of global warming.'' Her outfit was
one of those who had sued the feds in the first place over
the polar bears, notwithstanding its location in the frozen
tundra of Arizona. But no matter. For want of a few hundred
polar bears, the entire U.S. economy could be vulnerable to
judicial dictation.
With that much at stake, Mr. Kempthorne could have shown a
stiffer backbone in resisting this political pressure. At the
very least he now has an obligation to ensure that Interior's
year-long study be based on real science and the actual polar
bear population, rather than rely on computer projections.
Any government decision to limit greenhouse gases deserves to
be debated in the open, where the public can understand the
consequences, not legislated by the back door via the
Endangered Species Act.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence
of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The
Senator from Kentucky is recognized.
Mr. BUNNING. I thank the Chair.
(The remarks of Mr. Bunning pertaining to the introduction of (S. 154
and S. 155) are located in today's Record under ``Statements on
Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')
____________________
RESTORING FISCAL DISCIPLINE ACT OF 2007
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, on this very first day of the first
session of the 110th Congress, I am proud to introduce, with Majority
Leader Reid, the Restoring Fiscal Discipline Act of 2007. By including
this act in our top 10 legislative priorities, Democrats are sending a
message. We are saying to the Nation that it is time to restore fiscal
discipline in Washington.
Unfortunately, we are inheriting a fiscal mess. It is a fiscal mess
of historic proportion. The head of the Government Accountability
Office, General Walker, has told us:
The U.S. Government is on an imprudent and unsustainable
fiscal path.
General Walker is right. General Walker is the head of the Government
Accountability Office. He is the person responsible for reporting to
Congress on our fiscal condition, and he is warning us of the serious
course correction that is required. As General Walker has said, and as
I agree, the fact is that our budget outlook is far worse than what has
been claimed. The increase in debt in 2006 is far greater than the
reported deficit.
It is very interesting how the media reports these things to the
American people. They say to the American people that the deficit last
year was $248 billion. That is true. What they do not tell the American
people, what is not said, is the debt last year increased by $546
billion--almost $300 billion more than the stated deficit. This is an
utterly unsustainable course. To add almost $550 billion of debt in 1
year after having done about that amount each of the last 5 years has
put us on a course that is utterly unsustainable. It fundamentally
threatens America's economic security.
Read the reports. Yesterday and today in the national newspapers you
saw stories about the declining value of the dollar. The dollar has
been in a deep slide for 3 months. There are reports of countries, one
after another, announcing that they intend to diversify their
investments out of dollar-denominated securities. There is a message
here to all of us--a warning, a warning of America's preeminent
position in the financial world being threatened. It is being
threatened by a mountain of debt.
I have tried to put into visual terms how dramatically the change in
debt has been in just the last few years. When this President came to
office, after his last full year, the debt stood at $5.8 trillion. We
do not hold him responsible for his first year because obviously he was
operating under the budget of the previous administration. But look
what has happened since. The debt has skyrocketed to $8.5 trillion. If
the President's course is pursued, over the next 5 years the debt will
rise inexorably to $11.6 trillion, and all of this at the worst
possible time, before the baby boom generation retires. This is a time
we should be paying down debt, not exploding debt. There is no sober or
objective observer who does not recognize the fundamental threat to our
economic security caused by these budget policies. We must change
course.
The result of this rising debt is that increasingly we are borrowing
the funds to float this boat from abroad. In 2005, our country borrowed
65 percent of all the money that was borrowed in the world by
countries. Let me repeat that. In 2005, our Nation borrowed 65 percent
of all the money that was borrowed by countries in the world. The
second biggest borrower was Spain. They borrowed one-tenth as much.
As we look back, this is a historic time with great challenges. The
question before this body and the Congress of the United States and
this President will be whether we are honest with the American people
about the extent of our financial problems. This is a moment of
testing. Will we be honest? Will we be truthful? Will we make the tough
choices that are required?
In the last 5 years, foreign holdings of our debt have doubled. In
other words, it took 42 Presidents 224 years to run up $1 trillion of
U.S. debt held abroad. That amount has more than doubled in just the
last 5 years. This is a course that cannot be sustained. It must be
changed.
I come to the floor today to offer an important measure, a measure to
restore fiscal discipline, by reimposing the pay-go rule that was so
effective in the 1990s at helping us get back on track after the record
deficits of the 1980s.
We know that pay-go works. It was instrumental in our turning
deficits into surpluses in the 1990s. The pay-go rule says simply this:
If you want more tax cuts you have to pay for them. If you want new
mandatory spending you have to pay for it. If you do not pay for it,
you have to muster a supermajority vote on the floor of the Senate for
more tax cuts or new mandatory spending to go forward.
That is a good rule, but it will not solve the problem. No one should
overpromise. No one should overstate. It is going to take serious,
consistent discipline on spending, on revenue, and on entitlement
reform for us to truly make progress.
In the joint caucus this morning, the leadership called on all of us
to set aside partisanship to make genuine progress. This is going to be
an area in which we have that opportunity. We have a window of
opportunity, before we get into the next election cycle, to face up to
these fiscal challenges. One
[[Page 87]]
part of a successful strategy is to reimpose the pay-go discipline. It
is not the only thing, but it is a beginning.
In addition to reestablishing the pay-go rule, the legislation I am
offering today prohibits the use of the fast-track reconciliation
process for any legislation that would add to the deficit.
Reconciliation is a big word; it is a fancy word. It confuses people,
but it is a special process in the Senate to go around the standard
rules of this body to pass legislation. It circumscribes Senators'
rights. It restricts their ability to offer amendments. It sets a
strict time limit on debate. The only reason those procedures were ever
adopted in this body--the only reason--was to reduce budget deficits.
Unfortunately, over the last 6 years those special procedures have been
used to increase deficits, not to reduce deficits. That stood the whole
rationale for reconciliation on its head.
It is time for us to go back to the reconciliation process that was
intended and only use those extraordinary procedures for reducing
deficits, not for increasing them.
(Mrs. MURRAY assumed the Chair.)
Mr. CONRAD. I note the very distinguished Member of the Senate, the
Senator from the State of Washington and a member of the Senate Budget
Committee, who understands full well the subject we are discussing
today and the critical need for our Nation to return to a more sound
fiscal course.
I offer this measure today to restore fiscal discipline. I ask my
colleagues to bring their ideas to the Senate floor. You have my
commitment as the incoming chairman of the Senate Budget Committee to
do my level best to bring our country back. Our country needs us now.
Our country needs us to be truthful and honest and to work together.
I felt, in the Senate Chamber this morning, a new spirit, a new sense
of possibility--perhaps the chance that we can come together in a way
that would make us all proud.
I very much hope we seize that opportunity. I look forward to working
with my colleagues to achieve that result.
I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. SPECTER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
REINTRODUCTION OF LEGISLATION
Mr. SPECTER. Madam President, on the first day of the 110th Congress,
it is an appropriate occasion to reintroduce legislation which was
introduced in the 109th Congress which was not enacted. I have a number
of legislative proposals to introduce today and to discuss.
(The remarks of Mr. Specter pertaining to the introduction of S. 185,
S. 186, and S. 187 are located in today's Record under ``Statements on
Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.''
____________________
STEM CELL RESEARCH
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I strongly support legislation introduced
earlier today which would permit Federal funding to be used for
embryonic stem cell research. That is a subject which has been at the
top of my agenda since November of 1998 when stem cells were first
exposed. Within 10 days, in December 1998, the Appropriations
Subcommittee on Labor, Health, Human Services and Education held the
first hearing to explore the potential of embryonic stem cell research.
In the intervening years the subcommittee has held some 19 hearings
exploring this issue in some great detail.
The Specter-Harkin bill was passed last year, vetoed by the
President, and the bill is back before the Congress this year where it
may be possible to override a Presidential veto. That depends upon how
much public support there is--really, how much public clamor there is--
for this legislation to be enacted.
Embryonic stem cells have the potential to replace diseased cells.
They are a veritable fountain of youth. They have enormous potential in
Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, cancer, heart disease, and almost all of the
known maladies. I don't know of any malady where they are not a
potential for a cure because the cells in a person's body become
diseased, and if the embryonic stem cell can replace the diseased cell,
there is a potential for a cure.
There is opposition to this legislation on the ground that it would
destroy life. That is factually not correct because there are some
400,000 embryos created for in vitro fertilization which are going to
be destroyed. When the issue was raised about destroying a life, the
subcommittee took the lead and appropriated $2 million to facilitate
adoptions. There have only been about 100 adoptions in the past several
years, so there is no doubt that using some of these embryonic stem
cells will not destroy life because they will not be used to create
life. If there were any chance they would create life, I would not
consider utilizing them for medical research.
When the alternative is to throw them away or to use them, it seems
to me a clear choice to utilize them to save lives and fight disease.
That is the thrust of this legislation.
____________________
PRESIDENTIAL SIGNING STATEMENTS
Mr. SPECTER. Madam President, moving now to the issue of signing
statements: I had introduced legislation in the 109th Congress to
provide standing to the Congress to go to court when the President
issues signing statements which, in effect, cherry-picked the
provisions in the legislation he liked and disregarded the provisions
in the legislation he disliked.
That kind of a proceeding, in my view, is unconstitutional because
the Constitution says that we present a bill to the President; he
either signs it or vetoes it. His veto is subject to override on a two-
thirds vote. But, the President cannot pick and choose among the
provisions of the act.
When we passed the PATRIOT Act, there were some provisions very
carefully negotiated as to congressional oversight. No objection had
been raised by the Department of Justice in our discussions as we
negotiated about the bill. And then, when the President signed the
bill, the President specifically said that he would not pay attention
to those provisions if he felt that his Executive power would be
impinged upon. If he disagreed with the provisions, he should have told
us before we legislated.
Similarly, in the McCain Anti-Torture legislation, which passed the
Senate 90 to 9, a compromise was struck between the White House and
Senator McCain. And here again, the President's signing statement seems
to undermine the compromise that was struck.
I am not going to reintroduce the legislation now because we are
discussing some modifications with some of my Senate colleagues, and I
am going to defer for a brief period of time to see if we can get
additional cosponsors.
____________________
JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS
Mr. SPECTER. Madam President, finally, a brief comment on judicial
nominations. During the course of the 109th Congress, the Senate
confirmed two Supreme Court Justices, Chief Justice Roberts and Justice
Alito, 16 Court of Appeals judges, 35 District Court judges, and 1
Court of International Trade judge. At the close of the 109th Congress,
there were 13 District Court nominees on the Executive Calendar, but
were held up on a technicality.
I am pleased to say that Senator Leahy advised me earlier today he is
going to put those 13 nominees on the first executive session of the
Judiciary Committee next week, so they will be confirmed. There was no
objection raised to them in the last Congress, except they were tied up
on a concern raised by one Senator about a nominee for the Western
District of Michigan.
In the last Congress, we were also able to confirm a number of
judges--
[[Page 88]]
circuit judges, who have been held up for a long period of time:
Priscilla Owen, pending since 2001; Janice Rogers Brown, pending since
2003; William Pryor, pending since 2003; Brett Kavanaugh, pending since
2003.
I ask unanimous consent that my full statement be printed in the
Record at the conclusion of these extemporaneous remarks.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Judicial Nominations
Mr. SPECTER. Madam President, I seek recognition today, to
discuss one of this body's most important responsibilities;
namely, our responsibility to provide advice and consent on
the President's judicial nominations.
At the outset, I would like to take a few moments to remind
my colleagues of the Judiciary Committee's success during the
last Congress in moving the President's judicial nominees
through the confirmation process in a timely manner.
During the last Congress, the Senate confirmed 54 Article
III judges, including the Chief Justice of the United States,
an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, 16 Court of
Appeals judges, 35 District Court judges, and one Court of
International Trade judge. The Senate could have, and I
believe should have, confirmed 13 more District Court
nominees before the conclusion of the last Congress. All of
these qualified men and women were favorably reported by the
Judiciary Committee without a single dissenting vote. Many of
them are nominated to vacancies that have been deemed
judicial emergencies. I hope we can promptly move to confirm
all of these men and women in the new Congress. Failure to do
so will continue to delay justice in courts from Pennsylvania
to California. I have asked my friend and new Judiciary
Committee Chairman Senator Leahy to place these nominees on
our Committee's very first executive business meeting. I am
happy to report that he has agreed to do so.
I remind my colleagues that at the beginning of the last
Congress judicial confirmations, particularly to the Circuit
Courts, were at a virtual standstill with many nominees
subject to filibusters. Much of the debate in this chamber
during the first months of the 109th Congress involved
whether or not to invoke the so-called ``Constitutional
Option,'' whereby the rules of the Senate would be altered to
allow for a vote on Circuit Court nominees. Thankfully, the
Senate managed to avert a major showdown over this debate and
instead confirmed highly qualified nominees to the Courts of
Appeals, several of whom had been pending for many years.
These included Priscilla Owen (pending since 2001); Janice
Rogers Brown (pending since 2003); Bill Pryor (pending since
2003); and Brett Kavanaugh (pending since 2003).
So in the last Congress we managed to move to a vote on
many long languishing nominees. We also moved expeditiously
on new.nominations. It was my practice as Chairman to
schedule a prompt hearing on every judicial nomination as
soon as all necessary materials were received and the nominee
was prepared to move forward. Once given a hearing, every
nominee was placed promptly on the Committee's agenda for
consideration. I believe our practice, while avoiding
unnecessary delay, also ensured that each nomination was
thoroughly vetted so that the Senate had the information it
needed to come to a vote.
In short, the Judiciary Committee and the Senate, by
following regular order, carried out our Constitutional
responsibilities. As a result, the federal court vacancy rate
fell to as low as 4.8% during my tenure as Chairman. This is
among the lowest vacancy rates in the last 20 years.
Unfortunately, in part because of our failure to confirm the
13 district court nominees late in the last Congress, the
vacancy rates have increased during the fall and winter.
I cite this recent history and these statistics as examples
of what can be done in this body when we work hard and put
fairness ahead of partisanship. I committed myself to this
principle as Chairman of the Judiciary Committee and I am
hopeful we can continue to work in this vein during the 110th
Congress under the Chairmanship of Senator Leahy. Working
together, I believe we can avoid some of the acrimony that
has poisoned the nominations process in recent years.
In fact, I want to give Senator Leahy a good bit of credit.
He worked cooperatively with us to ensure that nominees were
moved during the 109th Congress. There were times when our
friends across the aisle could stymie our efforts to process
nominees, but Senator Leahy worked with me to enable the
Senate to carry out its constitutional responsibilities.
That is why I am troubled by recent suggestions that it is
appropriate to dramatically slow the confirmation process
during the last two years of a president's term. Our
Constitutional duties remain, despite the fact that we are
now beginning a Presidential election cycle. Past Congresses
have been very productive on judicial nominations during
Presidential elections cycles and we should be as well.
The record shows that the Senate has confirmed numerous
nominees during the last two years of every modern
president's term in office. For example, in the last two
years of the Carter Administration, the Senate confirmed 44
Circuit Court nominees and 154 District Court nominees.
During the last two years of the Reagan Administration, the
Senate confirmed 17 Circuit Court nominees and 66 District
Court nominees.
During the last two years of the George H.W. Bush
Administration, the Senate confirmed 20 Circuit Court
nominees and 100 District Court nominees.
During the last two years of the Clinton Administration,
the Senate confirmed 15 Circuit Court nominees and 57
District Court nominees.
In many of these cases the Senate was controlled, sometimes
by a substantial margin, by a different party than that which
controlled the White House. I see no reason why this Senate
should not be at least as productive as the Republican
controlled Senate which confirmed 15 Circuit Court nominees
during President Clinton's final two years in office.
I would also like to address what has been called the
``Thurmond Rule.'' Some have suggested that this so-called
rule holds that the Senate should dramatically curtail
confirmations after the spring of a presidential election
year. Review of the historical record suggests that this rule
is more myth than reality.
It does not appear that Senator Thurmond, for whom the
purported rule is named, ever publicly asserted that
nominations should be delayed due to an impending
presidential election. The only comment that could be so
construed was made after the Committee approved ten nominees
at a September 17, 1980 markup. He stated, ``[L]et me make
the point [that] the Minority has tried to be more than fair
in considering all of the nominees that have appeared before
this Committee. I would remind [the Committee] it is just
about six weeks before the election, and I want to say that
for a year and a half before the last election, there was no
action taken on judges when we had a Republican President.''
However, because Senator Thurmond used this as a point of
contrast, the natural implication seems to be that he
considered blocking nominations in the lead up to an election
unfair.
The fact of the matter is that the Senate has regularly
confirmed judges in presidential election years. In the
election year of 1980, when it is asserted Senator Thurmond
inaugurated the so-called rule, the Senate confirmed ten
Circuit Court nominees and 53 District Court nominees.
Several of the Circuit Court nominations were high profile
nominees with well-known credentials. Many of these nominees
were confirmed relatively late in the year.
Between June 1 and September 1, 1980, the Senate confirmed
four Circuit Court nominees and 15 District Court nominees,
including then-ACLU General Counsel Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who
was confirmed June 18, 1980.
After September 1, 1980, the Senate confirmed two more
Circuit Court nominees and eleven District Court nominees.
The first Circuit Court nominee, Stephen Reinhardt of the
Ninth Circuit, who is now thought to be one of nation's most
liberal jurists, was confirmed on September 11, 1980.
More remarkable is the second Circuit Court nominee, that
of Stephen Breyer to the First Circuit. Justice Breyer was
then Senator Kennedy's Chief Counsel. He was nominated by
President Carter on November 13, 1980, after Carter had lost
the election to Ronald Reagan. The Senate, which was also
about to switch party control, held a swift confirmation
hearing and voted to confirm Breyer on December 9, 1980.
The presidential election year of 1980 was not an
aberration, the pattern continued in subsequent election
years. In 1988, President Reagan's last year in office, the
Senate confirmed seven Circuit Court nominees and 33 District
Court nominees. In 1992, President George H.W. Bush's last
year in office, the Senate confirmed eleven Circuit Court
nominees and 53 District Court nominees. In 2000, President
Clinton's last year in office, the Senate confirmed eight
Circuit Court nominees and 31 District Court nominees.
Furthermore, many of these presidential election year
confirmations occurred late in the year. Since 1980, 110
judges were confirmed after July 1st of a presidential
election year, 17 of those were confirmed to Circuit Courts.
In the same period, 63 judges were confirmed after September
1st of presidential elections years, twelve of those to
Circuit Courts. In short, there does not appear to be any
historical basis for the so-called ``Thurmond Rule.'' The
Senate has confirmed numerous nominees during presidential
election years, and I expect that with Senator Leahy and I
working together, we will do so again next year.
In fact, I think it's time to move beyond some of the more
acrimonious judicial battles of the past. I think the country
is served best when the Senate fulfills its constitutional
duty and votes on the President's nominees.
[[Page 89]]
I have called on the White House to consult with Senator
Leahy and Leader Reid during the nomination process. I have
also worked to ensure that judicial nominees are afforded
prompt consideration and fair treatment by the Judiciary
Committee. I plan to continue to do that as the Ranking
Member and am confident that under Senator Leahy's
leadership, our Committee will fairly and expeditiously
consider judicial nominees.
Aside from the responsibility the Senate has to vote up or
down on the President's nominees, we cannot forget that these
people, who have agreed to undertake important government
service, have family considerations and professional lives
that are often adversely impacted when their careers are out
on hold because of a pending nomination. We should never
forget that these nominees, whether a Member decides
ultimately to support them or not, are deserving of our
thanks for their willingness to undergo this process and to
offer their services to the American people. They deserve
fair treatment by this body.
I trust that during the 110th Congress the Senate will work
productively to ensure that nominees are treated fairly and
that judicial vacancies are filled as soon as possible. I
look forward to working with the White House and with
Chairman Leahy to that end.
I yield the floor.
Mr. SPECTER. Madam President, in the absence of any other Senator on
the floor, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, what is the parliamentary situation?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate is in morning business, with
Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes.
The Senator from Vermont is recognized.
Mr. LEAHY. I thank the Chair.
(The remarks of Mr. Leahy are printed in today's Record under
``Morning Business.'')
Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I realize I have gone over the
appropriate time, and I appreciate the Chair not calling me on it.
I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Lincoln). The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. KYL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the
quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
WORKING TOGETHER
Mr. KYL. Madam President, this has been a good day. It is a day on
which many of us were sworn in and a day that the Senate began again to
function in this new 110th Congress. It began with a rather historic
meeting called by the new majority leader, Harry Reid, in the Old
Senate Chamber, a place which I explained to my family is so imbued
with the history of the United States and the history of the Senate
that one cannot but help feel a sense of responsibility, a special
sense of duty when functioning as a Senator in that Old Senate Chamber.
Frequently there are people there who remind us of some of the history
to call on us to try to rise to the same level to which many of the
great Senators in the history of this country rose in the most
difficult and challenging times of our country.
I believe it was Senator Kennedy who reminded us that exactly on this
day, at the very beginning of the Civil War, the Senators from the
South left the Senate Chamber for the last time. They did not meet with
the Senate thereafter because of the beginning of the Civil War, and
that is when the Senate moved from the Old Senate Chamber to the
Chamber we are now in--here.
There is a great deal of a sense of mission and of history and of
responsibility when we meet in a place such as that. The purpose for
the meeting was to begin this new Congress thinking about something
that we have tended to forget in recent months and even, I would say,
years, and that is the degree to which Senators had in the past worked
together to get the people's business done.
Unlike under the rules of the House of Representatives in which the
majority pretty much rules and the minority has very little power, in
the Senate the minority and the majority must work together to get
anything done because of the rules. With a 51-49 division right now, it
is obvious that this body is almost equally divided and that under our
rules we are going to have to work very well together to get anything
done.
In the past there has been--and I would say leading up to the last
election--a special amount of politicking and of negativity, the sort
of ``gotcha'' kind of politics that is designed to score political
points; a cynicism, a lack of comity. I think we always see that a
little bit before an election but I felt it much more oppressively in
the runup to this last election.
Someone has pointed out that perhaps with a divided Government now,
in the sense that Democrats control the Congress and the Republican
Party controls the executive branch, actually there may be much less
incentive for either side to engage in that kind of politics and, to
the contrary, much more incentive for both sides to try to work with
each other to get things done. The reputation of Democratic Senators
and Representatives will depend to some extent on how much they can
accomplish. They will have to have Republican help to accomplish
things. The last 2 years of the Bush Presidency will depend a great
deal on how much he, working with the Congress, can get done in these 2
years. He can't do anything on his own. He has to sign bills that we
pass. So he has to work with us, meaning that Republicans working with
him also have to reach across the aisle and work with our colleagues in
the Democratic Party.
I thought some things the Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, said
today were especially appropriate in this regard. I want to close our
day today, reiterating some of the thoughts he expressed with which I
am in total agreement. He said this:
The Senate can accomplish great things over the next 2
years, but this opportunity will surely slip from our grasp
if we do not commit ourselves to a restoration of civility
and common purpose.
New Democratic colleague Bernie Sanders from Vermont, with whom I
served in the House--we got reacquainted today--said, Are you enjoying
it over here? I hesitated. And he laughed. We had a discussion about
the fact that it can be very enjoyable when you work together to try to
get something done. You have to work with each other across the aisle
if you are going to get something done. It is not enjoyable when there
is a lack of comity, where harsh language is used, when you see things
done purely for political purposes. Then it is not fun. I think we
would all rather look forward coming to work in the morning. And it
certainly is better when we go home and report to our constituents that
we were able to get something done.
I am sure the distinguished majority leader would agree with this
comment that Mitch McConnell made this morning. He said:
. . . as we open this session, I stake my party to a pledge: when
faced with an urgent issue, we will act; when faced with a problem, we
will seek solution, not mere political advantage.
I think that is the credo all of us pretty well agreed to at the end
of that very special meeting we had this morning: that we need positive
solutions to real problems. We need to act in a spirit of comity. All
of us need to stop the finger pointing, the negativity, the taking
advantage for political purposes, and the setting up of each other in a
way we would fail rather than finding a way that we can both succeed.
In fact, one of our colleagues made a comment almost exactly to that
effect: We need to both succeed in what we do. Since we now have
divided Government, there is an incentive for us to work with each
other to do that.
There were, of course, some of our colleagues who reminded us that
realistically this would not be easy, that
[[Page 90]]
there would be a great tendency to slip back into old habits and to
fight politically, and we know that to be true. But there are some
things--at least one of our colleagues made this point very strongly--
on which we have to act in a united way and that starts with our
national security, meeting this threat of terrorism. The distinguished
Republican leader made that point. Among the things he suggested we
would have to work on, he said:
America has not seen a domestic terrorist attack since we
committed ourselves to the global war on terror. That's not
an accident, some quirk of fate. Rather, it is due to the
hard work of spotting and disrupting threats before they
strike.
Much of that capability was granted by the Senate and the House and
the President in reorganizing our intelligence agencies, reorganizing
some of the laws under which our intelligence agencies and law
enforcement work. So we have helped to keep the American people more
secure. We should continue that hard work.
He concluded on this point:
Al-qaida is not a threat to Republicans, it is not a threat
to Democrats, it is a threat to America. And the Senate must
work together as we prepare for the long struggle ahead.
There were many other issues that have been discussed, things we can
work together on, things we are going to have to work together on. I
close with one example that, to us in this body, we know this for a
fact. That is the confirmation of judges. When you have a President of
one party nominating judges and the majority in the Senate is of the
other party, obviously something has to give. You have to work
together. It was the hope of the Republican leader, I am sure, speaking
on behalf of the President of the United States as well, that we would
find ways to work together, Democrats and Republicans in this body, to
give a fair chance to the President's nominees. He is, after all,
elected President. He has the authority under the Constitution to
nominate judges. Our responsibility is to check them out, to hold the
hearings, and to question their qualifications but if in fact they are
qualified, to give them a chance to be put on the bench with an up-or-
down vote. I hope we could do that for the vast majority of the judges
the President has nominated and for the other executive branch
nominations of the President as well.
These are good examples of areas in which, without cooperation, the
Government for the people does not function well. So, as we end this
day I ask us to reflect on some of the words of our leaders, Harry Reid
and Mitch McConnell, today and our colleagues in that historic meeting
this morning when we talked a good game about recommitting ourselves to
bipartisan solutions to problems, to work on behalf of the American
people with more comity in this body, in a way which will make us feel
much better amongst ourselves and make our constituents much happier
than they are when they see us fighting and bickering all the time. It
is fitting to end this day on that note.
I commend the majority leader, Harry Reid. I commend the Republican
leader, Mitch McConnell, for serving as examples for all Members in the
leadership they exhibited in starting the Senate off this way.
I see the distinguished majority leader now. We can conclude this day
on that high note, giving some hope to the American people that we are
committed to working on their behalf for a better future, a better
America.
____________________
HONORING OUR ARMED FORCES
Lance Corporal Clinton Jon (C.J.) Miller
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to a fallen
soldier from Greenfield, IA, LCpl Clinton Jon (C.J.) Miller, who was
killed while serving his country as part of an improvised explosive
device detection team in Iraq. My thoughts and prayers go out to his
wife Jackie, his mother Susan, his father Kerby, and all his family and
friends. I am sure I speak for all Iowans when I say that I am proud to
call C.J. one of us. By all accounts, he was a fine marine who felt
called to, and liked, military service. Family members say that he
joined the Marines during wartime because he just felt he had to serve.
Where would our country be without patriotic young Americans like C.J.
who feel a call to serve their country? All Americans owe a debt of
gratitude to this brave Marine. As his father said, ``He was a hero.''
Lance Corporal Miller's tremendous service and sacrifice should never
be forgotten.
Sergeant James P. Musack
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to SGT James P.
Musack of Riverside, IA, who tragically died as a result of a noncombat
related incident while serving his country in Iraq. I am sure that all
Iowans shared the same sense of sadness I felt when learning of the
death of this young Iowa native. According to family and friends, he
had found his calling in the military and all Americans owe him our
deepest thanks for his service. Everyone joining the military knows the
risks involved, but all Americans are indebted to brave patriots like
James Musack who voluntarily assume those risks in order to defend our
freedom and way of life. My prayers go out to his mother Yvette, his
father Jim, and all his family and friends.
Lieutenant Colonel Paul J. Finken
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to LTC Paul J.
Finken who has given his life for his country while serving in Iraq. He
was 40 years old. Paul Finken was raised in Earling, IA, and I know all
Iowans share my pride as we also mourn his loss. As a career Army
officer, Lieutenant Colonel Finken had dedicated his life to the
service of his country and we can never thank him enough for his
service and his final sacrifice on behalf of our freedom.
In remembering Paul Finken, his family said, ``Paul was a devoted
husband, loving father and respected leader. He loved being a soldier
and respected the soldiers he worked with. He always set the example
and would never ask his soldiers to do anything he wouldn't do himself.
He will be greatly missed by his family and by all who knew him.'' My
thoughts and prayers are with his wife Jackie and his three daughters,
Emilie, Caroline, and Julia, for their loss. I hope it will be of some
comfort to them to know that Paul died a hero.
____________________
COLORADO WEATHER
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I come today to discuss the situation in
Colorado and surrounding States that has captured national attention.
Over the last few weeks Colorado and its neighbors have experienced two
record-setting blizzards. In some parts of Colorado these storms
dropped almost 5 feet of snow and have created a nightmare situation
for many in rural America. Thousands of head of cattle and other
livestock are currently stranded without food or water. Only recently
have some of these animals begun to see relief with supply drops via
helicopter.
The aftermath of these devastating blizzards continues to paralyze
many counties in Colorado and the West. Thousands of local men and
women have banded together and are working to provide relief to their
neighbors and to the tens of thousands of livestock facing starvation.
Dozens of communities have experienced severe economic damage and loss
as a result of these blizzards. These storms have created a dire
situation.
In the tradition of the West local individuals have pulled together
and have spent much of their holiday season trying to dig each other
out and reach stranded livestock. Locals are doing all that they can,
and I am grateful for the assistance that the National Guard has
provided. Unfortunately more needs to be done. I am introducing
legislation today that will help provide Federal resources to the
backbone of America; our producers. The legislation that I introduce
today will reauthorize the Livestock Compensation Program and direct
the Secretary of Agriculture to allocate funds to it from the Commodity
Credit Corporation to help eligible producers that have suffered a loss
from these blizzards.
I am hopeful that the Senate will act swiftly on this important
legislation
[[Page 91]]
that will get vital help to America's farmers and ranchers.
____________________
TRIBUTE TO ANTHONY J. ZAGAMI
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise today in recognition of Anthony J.
``Tony'' Zagami, who retired from the U.S. Government Printing Office,
GPO, on January 3, 2007. Mr. Zagami has been a true public servant,
having served over 40 years in Federal service and earned the
distinction as the longest serving general counsel in the history of
the GPO.
Mr. Zagami started his government service as a Senate page in the
1960s. He continued his service to Congress while working his way
through college and law school. He received his bachelor of science
degree from the University of Maryland School of Business and Public
Administration, and his juris doctor from the George Mason University
School of Law.
After working 25 years in the Congress, he left to become the general
counsel of the Government Printing Office in 1990. The GPO, among other
things, is responsible for producing the Congressional Record. During
his time at the GPO, he was instrumental in transforming it into the
modern digital information processing organization that it is today.
Throughout his career, both in the Congress and at the GPO, Mr.
Zagami was known for his dedication and commitment to public service
and received numerous awards and recognitions for his achievements. As
a tribute to his outstanding performance, the GPO named him General
Counsel Emeritus--the first time such a title has been bestowed upon an
individual in the GPO's 145-year history.
As he ends a distinguished career, I would like to take this
opportunity to thank Tony Zagami for his many years of public service
to our Nation and wish him and his family the very best in all future
endeavors.
____________________
ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS
______
IN MEMORY OF BRYAN TUVERA
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, it is with a heavy heart that I ask
my colleagues to join me today in honoring the memory of a courageous
man, Police Officer Bryan Tuvera. Officer Tuvera was a member of the
San Francisco Police Department who died in the line of duty on
December 23, 2006. He was 28 years old.
Officer Tuvera was a 4\1/2\-year veteran of the San Francisco Police
Department. He served with distinction and received numerous
commendations during his tenure. He was shot and killed during the
pursuit of an escaped convict. He died on the tenth anniversary of his
beloved father's death, who had worked as a police dispatcher with the
San Francisco Police Department.
Before joining the San Francisco Police Department on July 1, 2002,
Officer Tuvera received his degree in criminal justice from San
Francisco State University. He is a 1996 graduate of South San
Francisco High School.
Officer Tuvera was married to his wife Salina Tuvera 2 months ago.
They had been preparing for their first Christmas together. He is
remembered by friends and colleagues as a dedicated and professional
police officer and a good friend who loved his job and was always a
``class act.''
Bryan Tuvera risked his life every day to make San Francisco safer.
We will always be grateful for Officer Tuvera's heroic service
protecting his community.
Bryan Tuvera is survived by his wife and fellow police officer,
Salina Tuvera; his mother Sandy; his sister Tracee; and his
grandparents Shirley and Stanley Scovill.
____________________
IN MEMORY OF ELIZABETH TERWILLIGER
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, it is with a heavy heart that I ask
my colleagues to join me today in honoring the memory of an
extraordinary Californian, Elizabeth Terwilliger.
To the Marin County community, Elizabeth Terwilliger was a renowned
naturalist and educator, beloved by schoolchildren and adults, who
leaves an amazing environmental legacy. She died on November 27, 2006
at the age of 97. She is survived by her daughter Lynn, her son John,
and several grandchildren.
Elizabeth Cooper was born in Hawaii in 1909. She moved to the
mainland to pursue a master's degree in nutrition from Columbia
University in New York and then attended Stanford nursing school. While
at Stanford, she met her husband, Dr. Calvin Terwilliger. After World
War II, the couple settled in Mill Valley, California where they raised
two children.
Elizabeth took her children on nature walks throughout Marin County.
Soon, she was leading nature walks for local Girl Scout and Boy Scout
troops. Her unique hands-on style and storytelling ability became known
throughout the community and soon she began leading field trips for
area schools and environmental organizations. Leading such trips 5 days
a week became her life's work.
For the 50 years that followed, every child growing up in Marin
County knew Mrs. Terwilliger. She was a famous and beloved educator who
traveled across the county in her familiar van filled with life-like
animal models to teach school children about nature. Upon sight of her
characteristic floppy straw hat, children would come running and follow
her through the woods with excitement and adoration. They would soak up
her stories and bring them home to teach their parents.
Those who knew Mrs. Terwilliger well recount her mesmerizing
personality, her passion for nature and wildlife, and her openhearted
way with children and adults alike.
In 1984, President Ronald Reagan honored Mrs. Terwilliger as an
outstanding volunteer. While accepting the award at the White House,
she shared one of her famous stories about ``Mr. Vulture,'' and had
President Reagan holding his arms over his head in the ``V'' position,
representing a vulture in flight.
In addition to leading nature education programs, Mrs. Terwilliger
was an advocate for environmental conservation and open space. She
campaigned for a monarch butterfly preserve, bicycle paths, wetlands
and open space preservation. She received numerous awards and has two
preserves named after her: Terwilliger Marsh in Mill Valley and
Terwilliger Butterfly Grove at Muir Beach.
She inspired Joan Linn Bekins to create the Elizabeth Terwilliger
Nature Education Foundation, which later became known as WildCare.
Using educational programs developed by Mrs. Terwilliger, the center
provides nature programs for over 40,000 Bay Area schoolchildren each
year. The center also treats thousands of wildlife each year,
rehabilitating them and returning them to their natural environment.
Mrs. Terwilliger often said, ``while you're learning, you're
living.'' Her life's passion was to teach people how to embrace and
love nature. She was a local treasure and a wonderful, inspiring woman.
I knew Mrs. Terwilliger and respected and admired her greatly. She
will be deeply missed.
For those of us who were fortunate to know her, we take comfort in
knowing that schoolchildren will continue to learn from Mrs.
Terwilliger's unique educational style at WildCare. Her vision, her
passion and her spirit will remain in the countless lives she
touched.
____________________
TRIBUTE TO BETH McWHIRT
Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I pay tribute to Beth McWhirt
teacher of social studies at Fulton County Schools on being named
Teacher of the Year by the Chamber of Commerce in Hickman County, Ky.
Beth has exhibited a great commitment to her students at Fulton
Middle and Senior High Schools. As a teacher of social studies, Beth is
tasked to mold our Nation's young citizens to understand the history of
our great Nation and the world. Being honored with this award, Beth
sets an example of excellence for the rest of the faculty at Fulton
County Schools.
[[Page 92]]
Mr. President, I now ask my fellow colleagues join me in thanking
Beth for her dedication and commitment to the education of America's
future. In order for our society to continue to advance in the right
direction, we must have teachers like Beth McWhirt in our public
schools.
____________________
RECOGNIZING THE BOISE STATE UNIVERSITY BRONCOS
Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, Today on the first day of the 110th
Congress, I wish to recognize the accomplishment of the Boise State
University Broncos football team this past Monday, January 1, 2007.
College sports have a way of putting schools, and cities, on the map.
For instance, George Mason University was virtually unknown until their
basketball team catapulted into the national spotlight through March
Madness last year. However, no sport is more adept at this than the
all-American sport of football.
On New Year's Day, Boise State University battled Oklahoma in the
Fiesta Bowl. One announcer commented that, until today, many of the
Oklahoma football players didn't even know where Boise is. Well, Mr.
President, they do now.
In what is being described as one of the most thrilling games in the
history of college bowl games, the Broncos defeated Oklahoma 43 to 42.
I can't begin to describe to you the enthusiasm of the Bronco fans
before, during, and especially after the game. It was contagious. And
that is coming from a proud Idaho Vandal.
Idaho is a small State. We haven't had nationally known sports teams.
It wasn't too long ago that Boise State was only known in football
circles for its blue football field. On the first day of 2007, that all
changed.
I am proud of what our Broncos did proving to the Nation that Idaho
knows how to play football.
With this new notoriety, of course, comes an opportunity for us to
tell the country that Idaho's State-run universities have a lot to
offer besides great football. Between Boise State, the University of
Idaho, and Idaho State University, Idaho offers tremendous education
with a quality of life that can't be beat.
Boise, Idaho is now on the map of millions of college football fans
thanks to our Broncos. To them I say congratulations and thank
you.
____________________
HONORING 2007 BOISE STATE UNIVERSITY BRONCOS
Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, if a football victory on New Year's
Day is a harbinger of things to come, 2007 looks to be a thrilling year
marked by success and celebration. Most of my colleagues here know that
Boise State University won the Tostitos Fiesta Bowl on New Year's Day.
This bowl victory completes an undefeated football season, 13 to 0,
thanks to the hard work, dedication, and love of the game by the Boise
State football players, fans, coach Chris Petersen, his staff, the
athletic department, and the university administration. They all worked
very hard to reach this remarkable achievement, and they have not only
my congratulations, but the congratulations, of Idahoans and Americans
everywhere.
Idaho is home to just over a million people and has some surprising
secrets, not the least of which has been the five-time defending
Western Athletic Conference Champion Boise State Broncos football team.
It is a source of tremendous pride to see the team make national
headlines, once again, for Idaho in this incredibly positive manner.
The victory that barely eluded them in last year's MPC Computers Bowl
came riding home and riding home hard. The Fiesta Bowl game against
traditional football powerhouse the University of Oklahoma was college
football at its best, and the BSU players and coaches came through with
some stunning plays. While Boise dominated the first three-quarters of
the game, the Sooners came roaring back. The last 2 minutes of the game
were as good as college football gets. When the game went into
overtime, the Sooners didn't waste a play they immediately scored a
touchdown to temporarily take the lead. With the game on the line, the
Boise State players came through and scored a touchdown along with a
thrilling two-point conversion to bring the final score to 43 to 42,
Boise State. Earlier in 2006, Boise was named the eighth most inventive
city in the Nation. That creativity and innovation was certainly the
Spirit of Idaho at its best on the field of play at crunch time and
made this dreamed Bronco victory a reality.
The BSU Broncos are committed to excellence both on and off the
field. The players take the energy they generate on the field and
spread it throughout the community and State. The extraordinary
progress and development of the BSU football program and the entire
university stand as a testament to what can be accomplished with
leadership, commitment, determination, and, most importantly, teamwork.
As the Nation marvels at the ``hook and lateral'' and ``Statue of
Liberty'' plays that sealed the victory, I congratulate Coach Petersen,
President Bob Kustra, Athletic Director Gene Bleymaier, the entire
team, loyal students, alumni, and fans on their collective victory
which all Idahoans enthusiastically share. I offer a friendly
condolence to my colleagues from Oklahoma, and I am confident that
their fine program will continue its tradition of excellence. And I
offer this statement as a friendly notice to my colleagues from States
that are home to traditional college football powerhouses: that thunder
you hear is from our charging Broncos. I look forward to another great
season this fall when the Broncos will run again.
____________________
TRIBUTE TO MARVIN VAN HAAFTEN
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I would like to take this
opportunity to offer my congratulations and gratitude to an
extraordinary Iowan. Marvin Van Haaften is stepping down from his
distinguished position as director of the State of Iowa's Office of
Drug Control Policy. He assumed this position after being named by
Governor Tom Vilsack in 2002 and has served the State with honor and
distinction since accepting the appointment.
I would like to take this opportunity to show Marvin Van Haaften the
appreciation that the country, the State of Iowa, and myself personally
have for his extensive commitment as a public servant. With more than
32 years of law enforcement experience, Marvin has taught extensively
in the field of rural law enforcement, particularly death investigation
and domestic violence crimes. He has provided local and national
leadership on the role of law enforcement in strategic victim safety
and offender apprehension, and is presently on the board of directors
of the National Center for Rural Law Enforcement. Marvin also served on
many local and State committees such as the Iowa Criminal and Juvenile
Justice Planning Advisory Council, the board of the Mid-Iowa Narcotics
Enforcement Task Force, the board of the 18-county South Central Iowa
Clandestine Laboratory Task Force, and was the third vice president on
the board of directors of the Iowa Association of Counties. Marvin was
named Sheriff of the year in 1991 by the Iowa State Sheriffs' and
Deputies' Association and served as its president in 1996. He is also a
graduate of the FBI National Academy and has attended the National
Sheriffs' Association's National Sheriffs' Institute and the FBI Law
Enforcement Executive Development Institute. In 1997 he became a
licensed Iowa medical examiner investigator.
Marvin knows firsthand the true value and significance of a loving
family. He has been married to his wife Joyce for 42 wonderful years
and has the blessings of 5 grown children and the joy of 11
grandchildren. It is through Marvin's love of family and law
enforcement experience that enabled him to expose the destruction that
drug abuse wreaks on families.
I share my appreciation for Marvin Van Haaften along with my fellow
Iowans for the invaluable service he has provided to our State and
country.
[[Page 93]]
He has proven himself to be versatile and fully capable of accepting
and mastering the tasks placed before him. His enduring commitment to
the safety of Americans is cause for admiration.
Again, I offer my congratulations and sincere appreciation to Marvin
Van Haaften for his remarkable achievements throughout his extensive
and highly regarded career. His hard work and determination will be
missed in Iowa and throughout the Nation.
____________________
TRIBUTE TO JUSTIN MINKEL
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, it is with the greatest pleasure
that today I honor Justin Minkel, a second grade teacher at Harvey
Jones Elementary School in Springdale, AR, who was named a recipient of
the 2006 Milken Family Foundation National Educator Award.
Since the inception of the Milken Foundation National Educator Awards
Program in 1985, over 2200 outstanding men and women have been named
Milken Educators. They are honored with both public recognition and
financial reward for their exceptional educational talent and positive
results in the classroom.
Justin Minkel teaches in a classroom where English is the second
language for the majority of his students. His students have flourished
under his instruction, with nearly a third becoming fluent in English.
He uses hands-on experiences to show the relevance of math concepts,
and makes subjects such as science, social studies and literature more
meaningful by associating them with real-world experiences. He has
shared these strategies with other professionals throughout his
district and has also mentored student teachers from a local
university.
During the 2007-2008 school year, Mr. Minkel will serve as an ex-
officio member of the Arkansas State Board of Education. He will travel
the State providing professional and technical assistance to other
teachers.
My home State of Arkansas is fortunate to have men and women of
Justin Minkel's caliber who devote their lives to providing quality
education for our children. He exemplifies the commitment and energy
that will help to build a brighter future for the generations to come,
and I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating Justin Minkel on
receiving the 2006 Milken Family Foundation National Education Award.
This is a well deserved honor.
____________________
MESSAGES FROM THE HOUSE
At 4:04 p.m., a message from the House of Representatives, delivered
by Ms. Niland, one of its reading clerks, announced that the House has
agreed to H. Res. 1, resolving that Karen L. Haas of the State of
Maryland, be, and is hereby, chosen Clerk of the House of
Representatives, and that Wilson S. Livingood of the Commonwealth of
Virginia, be, and is hereby, chosen Sergeant at Arms of the House of
Representatives, and that James M. Eagen, III, of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, be, and is hereby, chosen Chief Administrative Officer of
the House of Representatives, and that Father Daniel P. Coughlin of the
State of Illinois, be, and is hereby, chosen Chaplain of the House of
Representatives.
The message also announced that the House has agreed to H. Res. 2,
resolving that the Senate be informed that a quorum of the House of
Representatives has assembled, that Nancy Pelosi, a Representative from
the State of California, has been elected Speaker, and Karen L. Haas, a
citizen of the State of Maryland, has been elected Clerk of the House
of Representatives of the One Hundred Tenth Congress.
The message further announced that the House has agreed to H. Res. 3,
resolving that a committee of 2 Members be appointed by the Speaker on
the part of the House of Representatives to join with a committee on
the part of the Senate to notify the President of the United States
that a quorum of each House has assembled and Congress is ready to
receive any communication that he may be pleased to make.
The message also announced that the Speaker appoints as members of
the committee on the part of the House to join a committee on the part
of the Senate to notify the President of the United States that a
quorum of each House has been assembled, and that Congress is ready to
receive any communication that he may be pleased to make, the gentleman
from Maryland Mr. Hoyer and the gentleman from Ohio Mr. Boehner.
____________________
MESSAGES FROM THE HOUSE RECEIVED SUBSEQUENT TO SINE DIE ADJOURNMENT
Under the authority of the order of the Senate of January 5, 2005,
the Secretary of the Senate, on December 19, 2006, subsequent to the
sine die adjournment of the Senate, received a message from the House
of Representatives announcing that the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Davis
of Virginia) had signed the following enrolled bills and joint
resolution:
H.R. 6111. An act to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to extend expiring provisions, and for other purposes.
H.R. 6143. An act to amend title XXVI of the Public Health
Service Act to revise and extend the program for providing
life-saving care for those with HIV/AIDS.
H.R. 6344. An act to reauthorize the Office of National
Drug Control Policy Act.
H.R. 6407. An act to reform the postal laws of the United
States.
H.R. 6429. An act to treat payments by charitable
organizations with respect to certain firefighters as exempt
payments.
H.J. Res. 101. Joint resolution appointing the day for the
convening of the first session of the One Hundred Tenth
Congress.
Under the authority of the order of the Senate of January 5, 2005,
the enrolled bills were signed on December 19, 2006, subsequent to the
sine die adjournment, by the Acting President pro tempore (Mr. Frist).
Under the authority of the order of the Senate of January 5, 2005,
the Secretary of the Senate, on December 19, 2006, subsequent to the
sine die adjournment of the Senate, received a message from the House
of Representatives announcing that the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Wolf of
Virginia) had signed the following enrolled bills:
H.R. 3248. An act to amend the Public Health Service Act to
establish a program to assist family caregivers in accessing
affordable and high-quality respite care, and for other
purposes.
H.R. 5782. An act to amend title 49, United States Code, to
provide for enhanced safety and environmental protection in
pipeline transportation, to provide for enhanced reliability
in the transportation of the Nation's energy products by
pipeline, and for other purposes.
H.R. 6342. An act to amend title 38, United States Code, to
extend certain expiring provisions of law administered by the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs, to expand eligibility for the
Survivors' and Dependents' Educational Assistance program,
and for other purposes.
Under the authority of the order of the Senate of January 5, 2005,
the enrolled bills were signed on December 20, 2006, subsequent to the
sine die adjournment, by the Acting President pro tempore (Mr. Allen).
Under the authority of the order of the Senate of January 5, 2005,
the Secretary of the Senate, on December 27, 2006, subsequent to the
sine die adjournment of the Senate, received a message from the House
of Representatives announcing that the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Davis
of Virginia) had signed the following enrolled bills:
H.R. 482. An act to provide for a land exchange involving
Federal lands in the Lincoln National Forest in the State of
New Mexico, and for other purposes.
H.R. 486. An act to provide for a land exchange involving
private land and Bureau of Land Management land in the
vicinity of Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico, for the
purpose of removing private land from the required safety
zone surrounding munitions storage bunkers at Holloman Air
Force Base.
H.R. 1245. An act to provide for programs to increase the
awareness and knowledge of women and health care providers
with respect to gynecologic cancers.
H.R. 4588. An act to reauthorize grants for and require
applied water supply research regarding the water resources
research and technology institutes established under the
Water Resources Research Act of 1984.
H.R. 4709. An act to amend title 18, United States Code, to
strengthen protections for law enforcement officers and the
public by providing criminal penalties for the fraudulent
acquisition or unauthorized disclosure of phone records.
H.R. 4997. An act to extend for 2 years the authority to
grant waivers of the foreign
[[Page 94]]
country residence requirement with respect to certain
international medical graduates.
H.R. 5483. An act to increase the disability earning
limitation under the Railroad Retirement Act and to index the
amount of allowable earnings consistent with increases in the
substantial gainful activity dollar amount under the Social
Security Act.
H.R. 5946. An act to amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act to authorize activities to
promote improved monitoring and compliance for high seas
fisheries, or fisheries governed by international fishery
management agreements, and for other purposes.
H.R. 5948. An act to reauthorize the Belarus Democracy Act
of 2004.
H.R. 6060. An act to authorize certain activities by the
Department of State, and for other purposes.
H.R. 6164. An act to amend title IV of the Public Health
Service Act to revise and extend the authorities of the
National Institutes of Health, and for other purposes.
H.R. 6338. An act to amend title 18, United States Code, to
prevent and repress the misuse of the Red Crescent
distinctive emblem and the Third Protocol (Red Crystal)
distinctive emblem.
H.R. 6345. An act to make a conforming amendment to the
Federal Deposit Insurance Act with respect to examinations of
certain insured depository institutions, and for other
purposes.
Under the authority of the order of the Senate of January 5, 2005,
the enrolled bills were signed on January 3, 2007, subsequent to the
sine die adjournment, by the Acting President pro tempore (Mr.
Stevens).
____________________
MEASURE HELD AT THE DESK
The following measure was submitted and ordered held at the desk:
S. Res. 19. A resolution honoring President Gerald Rudolph
Ford.
____________________
MEASURES READ THE FIRST TIME
The following bills were read the first time:
S. 1. A bill to provide greater transparency in the
legislative process.
S. 2. A bill to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938
to provide for an increase in the Federal minimum wage.
S. 5. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to
provide for human embryonic stem cell research.
S. 113. A bill to make appropriations for military
construction and family housing projects for the Department
of Defense for fiscal year 2007.
____________________
EXECUTIVE AND OTHER COMMUNICATIONS
The following communications were laid before the Senate, together
with accompanying papers, reports, and documents, and were referred as
indicated:
EC-1. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fluthiacet-methyl;
Pesticide Tolerance'' (FRL No. 8108-8) received on January 3,
2007; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and
Forestry.
EC-2. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Zeta-Cypermethrin;
Pesticide Tolerance'' (FRL No. 8093-6) received on January 3,
2007; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and
Forestry.
EC-3. A communication from the Congressional Review
Coordinator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service,
Department of Agriculture, transmitting, pursuant to law, the
report of a rule entitled ``Tuberculosis in Cattle and Bison;
State and Zone Designations; Texas'' (Docket No. APHIS-2006-
0145) received on January 3, 2007; to the Committee on
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
EC-4. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Flucarbazone-sodium;
Pesticide Tolerance'' (FRL No. 8105-6) received on December
15, 2006; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and
Forestry.
EC-5. A communication from the Congressional Review
Coordinator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service,
Department of Agriculture, transmitting, pursuant to law, the
report of a rule entitled ``Importation of Fruits and
Vegetables'' (Docket No. 03-086-3) received on December 15,
2006; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and
Forestry.
EC-6. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Pesticide Tolerance
Nomenclature Changes; Technical Amendment'' (FRL No. 8064-3)
received on December 15, 2006; to the Committee on
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
EC-7. A communication from the Executive Director,
Commodity Futures Trading Commission, transmitting, pursuant
to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Financial Reporting
Requirements for Introducing Brokers'' (RIN3038-AC34)
received on December 14, 2006; to the Committee on
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
EC-8. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fluroxypyr; Pesticide
Tolerance'' (FRL No. 8107-7) received on December 15, 2006;
to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
EC-9. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Extension of Tolerances
for Emergency Exemptions (Multiple Chemicals)'' (FRL No.
8105-4) received on December 15, 2006; to the Committee on
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
EC-10. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Dimethomorph; Pesticide
Tolerance'' (FRL No. 8104-6) received on December 15, 2006;
to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
EC-11. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Boscalid; Pesticide
Tolerance'' (FRL No. 8107-8) received on December 15, 2006;
to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
EC-12. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Azoxystrobin; Pesticide
Tolerances for Emergency Exemptions'' (FRL No. 8100-9)
received on December 15, 2006; to the Committee on
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
EC-13. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Glyphosate; Pesticide
Tolerance'' (FRL No. 8105-9) received on December 15, 2006;
to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
EC-14. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Metconazole; Pesticide
Tolerances for Emergency Exemptions'' (FRL No. 8095-4)
received on December 15, 2006; to the Committee on
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
EC-15. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Myclobutanil; Pesticide
Tolerance'' (FRL No. 8105-1) received on December 15, 2006;
to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
EC-16. A communication from the Secretary of Defense,
transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on the approved
retirement of Vice Admiral Justin D. McCarthy, United States
Navy, and his advancement to the grade of vice admiral on the
retired list; to the Committee on Armed Services.
EC-17. A communication from the Principal Deputy Assistant
Secretary, Department of the Army, transmitting, pursuant to
law, a report relative to the number of Army National Guard
and Reserve Soldiers adversely affected by the disparate
treatment of Army Incentive Pay; to the Committee on Armed
Services.
EC-18. A communication from the Commander, Army Claims
Service, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Claims Against the
United States'' (RIN0702-AA54) received on December 15, 2006;
to the Committee on Armed Services.
EC-19. A communication from the Commander, Army Claims
Service, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Claims on Behalf of the
United States'' (RIN0702-AA55) received on December 15, 2006;
to the Committee on Armed Services.
EC-20. A communication from the Under Secretary of Defense,
transmitting, pursuant to law, five quarterly Selected
Acquisition Reports for the quarter ending September 30,
2006; to the Committee on Armed Services.
EC-21. A communication from the Director, Defense
Procurement and Acquisition Policy, Department of Defense,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Labor Reimbursement on Department of Defense Non-Commercial
Time-and-
[[Page 95]]
Materials and Labor-Hour Contracts'' (DFARS Case 2006-D030)
received on December 15, 2006; to the Committee on Armed
Services.
EC-22. A communication from the Director, Defense
Procurement and Acquisition Policy, Department of Defense,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Levy on Payments to Contractors'' (DFARS Case 2004-D033)
received on December 15, 2006; to the Committee on Armed
Services.
EC-23. A communication from the Director, Defense
Procurement and Acquisition Policy, Department of Defense,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Contract Pricing and Cost Accounting Standards'' (DFARS
Case 2003-D014) received on December 14, 2006; to the
Committee on Armed Services.
EC-24. A communication from the Director, Defense
Procurement and Acquisition Policy, Department of Defense,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Contracting Officers' Representatives'' (DFARS Case 2005-
D022) received on December 14, 2006; to the Committee on
Armed Services.
EC-25. A message from the President of the United States,
transmitting, pursuant to law, a report relative to the
Service Members' training and use of riot control agents; to
the Committee on Armed Services.
EC-26. A communication from the General Counsel, National
Credit Union Administration, transmitting, pursuant to law,
the report of a rule entitled ``Permissible Investments for
Federal Credit Unions'' (RIN3133-AD27) received on January 3,
2007; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban
Affairs.
EC-27. A communication from the Assistant to the Board,
Division of Consumer and Community Affairs, Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve System, transmitting,
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Home
Mortgage Disclosure Act'' (Docket No. 1275) received on
December 14, 2006; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and
Urban Affairs.
EC-28. A communication from the Director, Office of
Legislative Affairs, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Deposit Insurance Assessments--Designated Reserve Ratio''
(RIN3064-AD02) received on December 14, 2006; to the
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
EC-29. A communication from the Director, Office of
Legislative Affairs, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Assessments'' (RIN3064-AD03) received on December 14, 2006;
to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
EC-30. A communication from the Director, Office of
Legislative Affairs, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Assessments'' (RIN3064-AD09) received on December 14, 2006;
to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
EC-31. A communication from the Assistant Secretary,
Division of Corporation Finance, Securities and Exchange
Commission, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a
rule entitled ``Internal Control Over Financial Reporting in
Exchange Act Periodic Reports of Non-Accelerated Filers and
Newly Public Companies'' (RIN3235-AJ64) received on December
14, 2006; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban
Affairs.
EC-32. A communication from the Chief Counsel, Bureau of
the Public Debt, Department of the Treasury, transmitting,
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Sale and
Issue of Marketable Book-Entry Treasury Bills, Notes, and
Bonds--Customer Confirmation Reporting Requirement Threshold
Amount'' (Docket No. BPD-GSRS-06-02) received on December 15,
2006; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban
Affairs.
EC-33. A message from the President of the United States,
transmitting, a report on the decision to take no action to
suspend or prohibit the proposed merger between Alcatel and
Lucent Technologies, Inc.; to the Committee on Banking,
Housing, and Urban Affairs.
EC-34. A communication from the Chairman and President of
the Export-Import Bank of the United States, transmitting,
pursuant to law, a report relative to transactions involving
U.S. exports to Mexico; to the Committee on Banking, Housing,
and Urban Affairs.
EC-35. A communication from the Acting General Deputy
General Counsel, Department of Housing and Urban Development,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a vacancy in the
position of General Counsel, received on December 14, 2006;
to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
EC-36. A communication from the Chairman, Federal
Communications Commission, transmitting, pursuant to law, the
Commission's Performance and Accountability Report for fiscal
year 2006; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban
Affairs.
EC-37. A communication from the Secretary of the Treasury,
transmitting, pursuant to law, a six-month periodic report on
the national emergency that was declared in Executive Order
13159 of June 21, 2000; to the Committee on Banking, Housing,
and Urban Affairs.
EC-38. A communication from the Director, Office of
Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce, transmitting,
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries of
the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Coastal
Migratory Pelagic Resources of the Gulf of Mexico and South
Atlantic; Trip Limit Reduction'' (ID No. 091306A) received on
December 15, 2006; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
EC-39. A communication from the Director, Office of
Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce, transmitting,
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries
Off West Coast States; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery;
Specifications and Management Measures; End of the Pacific
Whiting Primary Season for the Catcher/Processor Sector'' (ID
No. 110706A) received on December 21, 2006; to the Committee
on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-40. A communication from the Director, Office of
Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce, transmitting,
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Atlantic
Highly Migratory Species; Atlantic Bluefin Tuna Fisheries;
Temporary Rule; Inseason Retention Limit Adjustment'' (ID No.
112006D) received on December 15, 2006; to the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-41. A communication from the Acting Director, Office of
Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce, transmitting,
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Temporary
Rule; Closure (Rhode Island Commercial Bluefish Fishery)''
(ID No. 112006F-X) received on December 15, 2006; to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-42. A communication from the Acting Director, Office of
Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce, transmitting,
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Temporary
Rule; Inseason Bluefish Quota Transfers from VA and ME to
NC'' (ID No. 112406A-X) received on December 15, 2006; to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-43. A communication from the Program Analyst, Federal
Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Airworthiness Directives; Various Aircraft Equipped with
Honeywell Primus II RNZ-850()/-851() Integrated Navigation
Units'' (Docket No. 2003-NM-193) received on December 13,
2006; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
EC-44. A communication from the Program Analyst, Federal
Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Reservation System for Unscheduled Operations at Chicago's
O'Hare International Airport; Extension of Expiration Date''
((RIN2120-AI47)(Docket No. FAA-2005-19422)) received on
December 14, 2006; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
EC-45. A communication from the Program Analyst, Federal
Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Additional Types of Child Restraint Systems That May Be
Furnished and Used on Aircraft; Corrections'' ((RIN2120-
AI76)(Docket No. FAA-2006-25334)) received on December 14,
2006; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
EC-46. A communication from the Program Analyst, Federal
Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Airworthiness Directives; Air Tractor, Inc., Models AT-602,
AT-802, and AT-802A Airplanes'' ((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No.
2006-CE-22)) received on December 14, 2006; to the Committee
on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-47. A communication from the Program Analyst, Federal
Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747-400, 777-200,
and 777-300 Series Airplanes'' ((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No.
2000-NM-360)) received on December 14, 2006; to the Committee
on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-48. A communication from the Program Analyst, Federal
Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Airworthiness Directives; Pratt and Whitney JT8D-1, -1A, -
1B, -7, -7A, -7B, -9, -9A, -11, -15, -15A, -17, -17A, -17R, -
17AR, -209, -217, -217A, -217C, and -219 Turbofan Engines''
((RIN2120-AI47)(Docket No. FAA-2005-19422)) received on
December 14, 2006; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
EC-49. A communication from the Program Analyst, Federal
Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A321 Airplanes''
((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No. 2006-NM-119)) received on December
14, 2006; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
EC-50. A communication from the Program Analyst, Federal
Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation,
transmitting,
[[Page 96]]
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 777-200 Series
Airplanes Equipped with General Electric GE90-94B Engines''
((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No. 2006-NM-142)) received on December
14, 2006; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
EC-51. A communication from the Program Analyst, Federal
Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Airworthiness Directives; Turmo IV A and IV C Series
Turboshaft Engines'' ((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No. 2006-NE-31))
received on December 14, 2006; to the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation.
EC-52. A communication from the Program Analyst, Federal
Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A330-200, A340-200,
and A340-300 Airplanes'' ((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No. 2006-NM-
185)) received on December 14, 2006; to the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-53. A communication from the Program Analyst, Federal
Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Airworthiness Directives; Aerospace Technologies of
Australia Pty Ltd. Models N22B, N22S, and N24A Airplanes''
((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No. FAA-2006-25928)) received on
December 14, 2006; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
EC-54. A communication from the Program Analyst, Federal
Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Airworthiness Directives; Turbomeca Arriel 2B Series
Turboshaft Engines'' ((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No. 2005-NE-52))
received on December 14, 2006; to the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation.
EC-55. A communication from the Regulations Officer,
Federal Highway Administration, Department of Transportation,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Worker Visibility'' (RIN2125-AF11) received on December 14,
2006; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
EC-56. A communication from the Paralegal, Federal Transit
Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting,
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Controlled
Substances and Alcohol Misuse Testing'' (RIN2132-AA86)
received on December 14, 2006; to the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation.
EC-57. A communication from the Deputy Director, Office of
Protected Resources, Department of Commerce, transmitting,
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Taking and
Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals; Taking and
Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to
Conducting Precision Strike Weapons Testing and Training by
Eglin Air Force Base in the Gulf of Mexico'' ((RIN0648-
AT39)(ID No. 022106A)) received on January 3, 2007; to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-58. A communication from the Deputy Assistant
Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting,
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Final Rule
to Implement Amendment 68 to the Fishery Management Plan for
Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska'' (RIN0648-AT71) received on
December 21, 2006; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
EC-59. A communication from the Deputy Assistant
Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting,
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Final Rule
to Implement Amendment 68 to the Pacific Coast Groundfish
Fishery Management Plan'' (ID No. 060606A) received on
December 21, 2006; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
EC-60. A communication from the Deputy Assistant
Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting,
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Final Rule
for Seasonal Closure Provision for Regulatory Amendment to
the Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish Resources of
the Gulf of Mexico'' (RIN0648-AU04) received on December 21,
2006; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
EC-61. A communication from the Acting Director, Office of
Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce, transmitting,
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries of
the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Greenland Turbot in
the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area'' (ID No.
081605D) received on December 21, 2006; to the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-62. A communication from the Deputy Assistant
Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting,
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Temporary
Rule Extension of Emergency Action Re-activating the Atlantic
Sea Scallop Fishery Management Plan's (Scallop FMP) Observer
Set-aside Program and Implementing an Observer Service
Provider Approval Process'' (RIN0648-AU47) received on
December 21, 2006; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
EC-63. A communication from the Deputy Assistant
Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting,
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Final Rule
for Amendment 26 to the Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Fishery
Management Plan to Establish a Red Snapper Individual Fishing
Quota Program'' (RIN0648-AS67) received on December 21, 2006;
to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-64. A communication from the Deputy Assistant
Administrator for Operations, National Marine Fisheries
Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Partial Approval of the
George's Bank Cod Fixed Gear Sector Operations Plan and
Allocation for 2006'' (RIN0648-AU56) received on December 14,
2006; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
EC-65. A communication from the Acting Director, Office of
Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce, transmitting,
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries
Off West Coast States; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery;
Specifications and Management Measures; Inseason
Adjustments'' (ID No. 112106B) received on December 14, 2006;
to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-66. A communication from the Chairman, Office of
Proceedings, Surface Transportation Board, transmitting,
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Major Issues
in Rail Rate Cases'' (STB Ex Parte No. 657) received on
December 14, 2006; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
EC-67. A communication from the Chairman, Office of
Proceedings, Surface Transportation Board, transmitting,
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Public
Participation in Class Exemption Proceedings'' (STB Ex Parte
No. 659) received on December 14, 2006; to the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-68. A communication from the Secretary of the Federal
Trade Commission, transmitting, pursuant to law, the
Commission's annual report on Ethanol market concentration;
to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-69. A communication from the Assistant Secretary,
Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to
law, a report relative to the level of screening services and
protection provided at San Francisco International Airport;
to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-70. A communication from the Assistant Administrator for
Procurement, National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``NASA FAR Supplement Administrative Changes'' (RIN2700-31)
received on December 14, 2006; to the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation.
EC-71. A communication from the Deputy Assistant Secretary,
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs,
Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to
law, a report relative to the Coast Guard's compliance with
the Edible Oil Regulatory Reform Act; to the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-72. A communication from the Chief of Regulations and
Administrative Law, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland
Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule
entitled ``Safety Zones (including 260 regulations)''
(RIN1625-AA00) received on December 14, 2006; to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-73. A communication from the Secretary of Energy,
transmitting, pursuant to law, a report relative to the
construction and operation of the Mixed Oxide Fuel
Fabrication Facility; to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources.
EC-74. A communication from the Chairman, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, transmitting, pursuant to law, a
report relative to the Commission's response to the
Competitive Sourcing Activities Report; to the Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources.
EC-75. A communication from the General Counsel, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, transmitting, pursuant to law,
the report of a rule entitled ``Regulations for Filing
Applications for Permits to Site Interstate Electric
Transmission Facilities'' (RIN1902-AD16) received on December
14, 2006; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
EC-76. A communication from the Director, Office of Surface
Mining, Department of the Interior, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``North Dakota Regulatory
Program'' (SATS No. ND-049-FOR) received on December 14,
2006; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
EC-77. A communication from the Attorney, Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for Certain
Consumer Products and Certain Commercial and Industrial
[[Page 97]]
Equipment; Technical Amendment to Energy Conservation
Standards for Certain Consumer Products and Certain
Commercial and Industrial Equipment'' (RIN1904-AB53) received
on December 14, 2006; to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources.
EC-78. A communication from the Director, Office of
Congressional Affairs, Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks: HI-STORM 100
Revision 3'' (RIN3150-AH98) received on December 14,2006; to
the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
EC-79. A communication from the Director, Office of
Congressional Affairs, Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Final Rule: List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks:
NUHOMS HD Addition'' (RIN3150-AH93) received on December 14,
2006; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
EC-80. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Approval and
Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Update to Materials Incorporated byReference''
(FRL No. 8249-6) received on January 3, 2007; to the
Committee on Environment and Public Works.
EC-81. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Amendment to Tier 2
Vehicle Emission Standards and Gasoline Sulfur Requirements:
Partial Exemption for U.S. Pacific Island Territories''
((RIN2060-AN66)(FRL No. 8263-4)) received on January 3, 2007;
to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
EC-82. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Approval and
Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland;
PM-10 Test Methods'' (FRL No. 8264-8) received on January 3,
2007; to the Committee on Environment and PublicWorks.
EC-83. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Approval and
Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Revisions to the Nevada
State Implementation Plan; Requests for Rescission'' (FRL No.
8260-1) received on January 3, 2007; to the Committee on
Environment and Public Works.
EC-84. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Approval and
Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Tennessee: Approval of
Revisions to the Knox County Portion of the Tennessee State
Implementation Plan'' (FRL No. 8265-6) received on January 3,
2007; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
EC-85. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Approval and
Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Tennessee: Approval of
Revisions to the Knox County Portion of the Tennessee State
Implementation Plan'' (FRL No. 8265-4) received on January 3,
2007; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
EC-86. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Approval and
Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Tennessee: Approval of
Revisions to the Knox County Portion of the Tennessee State
Implementation Plan'' (FRL No. 8265-8) received on January 3,
2007; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
EC-87. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories
From Oil and Natural Gas Production Facilities'' ((RIN2060-
AM16)(FRL No. 8264-1)) received on January 3, 2007; to the
Committee on Environment and Public Works.
EC-88. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Shipbuilding and Ship
Repair (Surface Coating) Operations'' ((RIN2060-AO03)(FRL No.
8264-2)) received on January 3, 2007; to the Committee on
Environment and Public Works.
EC-89. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Regulation of Fuels and
Fuel Additives: Extension of the Reformulated Gasoline
Program to the East St. Louis, Illinois Ozone Nonattainment
Area'' (FRL No. 8261-9) received on January 3, 2007; to the
Committee on Environment and Public Works.
EC-90. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Revisions to the
California State Implementation Plan, Imperial County Air
Pollution Control District and South Coast Air Quality
Management District'' (FRL No. 8258-8) received on January 3,
2007; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
EC-91. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Revisions to the
California State Implementation Plan, Imperial County Air
Pollution Control District'' (FRL No. 8259-9) received on
January 3, 2007; to the Committee on Environment and Public
Works.
EC-92. A communication from the Principal Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Unregulated Contaminant
Monitoring Regulation for Public Water Systems Revisions''
(FRL No. 8261-7) received on January 3, 2007; to the
Committee on Environment and Public Works.
____________________
INTRODUCTION OF BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
The following bills and joint resolutions were introduced, read the
first and second times by unanimous consent, and referred as indicated:
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Durbin,
Mr. Lott, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Lieberman,
Ms. Collins, Mr. Schumer, Ms. Mikulski, Ms. Cantwell,
Mr. Leahy, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Webb, Mr. Lautenberg,
and Mr. Menendez):
S. 1. A bill to provide greater transparency in the
legislative process; placed on the calendar.
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Schumer, Mr.
Lieberman, Mr. Akaka, Mr. Biden, Ms. Cantwell, Mr.
Leahy, Mr. Lautenberg, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Webb, Mr.
Kerry, Mr. Reed, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Harkin, Ms.
Mikulski, Mr. Bingaman, Mrs. Murray, Mrs. Clinton,
Mr. Obama, Mr. Levin, Mr. Kohl, Mrs. Feinstein, Mrs.
Boxer, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Pryor, Mr.
Menendez, Mr. Bayh, and Mrs. Lincoln):
S. 2. A bill to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938
to provide for an increase in the Federal minimum wage; read
the first time.
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Leahy, Ms.
Mikulski, Mr. Schumer, Mrs. Clinton, Ms. Cantwell,
Mr. Kohl, Ms. Stabenow, and Mr. Webb):
S. 3. A bill to amend part D of title XVIII of the Social
Security Act to provide for fair prescription drug prices for
Medicare beneficiaries; to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. Lieberman, Ms. Collins,
Mr. Leahy, Mr. Schumer, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Lautenberg,
Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Webb, Mr. Menendez, and Ms.
Landrieu):
S. 4. A bill to make the United States more secure by
implementing unfinished recommendations of the 9/11
Commission to fight the war on terror more effectively, to
improve homeland security, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Specter, Mr.
Kennedy, Mr. Hatch, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Smith, Mr.
Durbin, Mr. Lautenberg, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Schumer, Ms.
Mikulski, Mrs. Clinton, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Feingold,
Mr. Leahy, Mr. Kohl, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Webb, Mr.
Kerry, Mrs. Lincoln, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Menendez, Mr.
Reed, Mr. Akaka, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Lieberman, Mr.
Nelson of Florida, Mr. Levin, Mr. Obama, and Mr.
Inouye):
S. 5. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to
provide for human embryonic stem cell research; read the
first time.
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. Bingaman, Mrs. Boxer, Mr.
Schumer, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Lautenberg, Ms. Cantwell,
Mr. Leahy, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Webb, Mr. Salazar, and
Mr. Menendez):
S. 6. A bill to enhance the security of the United States
by reducing the dependence of the United States on foreign
and unsustainable energy sources and the risks of global
warming, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
[[Page 98]]
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Schumer,
Mrs. Clinton, Ms. Mikulski, Mrs. Murray, Mr.
Lieberman, Mr. Akaka, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Bingaman, Mr.
Leahy, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Levin, Ms. Stabenow, Mr.
Webb, Mr. Menendez, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Sanders, Mr.
Reed, and Mr. Dodd):
S. 7. A bill to amend title IV of the Higher Education Act
of 1965 and other laws and provisions and urge Congress to
make college more affordable through increased Federal Pell
Grants and providing more favorable student loans and other
benefits, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. Levin, Mr. Schumer, Mr.
Lautenberg, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Leahy, Ms. Stabenow,
Mr. Webb, Mr. Menendez, and Ms. Landrieu):
S. 8. A bill to restore and enhance the capabilities of the
Armed Forces, to enhance the readiness of the Armed Forces,
to support the men and women of the Armed Forces, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Armed Services.
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Schumer, Ms.
Cantwell, and Ms. Stabenow):
S. 9. A bill to recognize the heritage of the United States
as a nation of immigrants and to amend the Immigration and
Nationality Act to provide for more effective border and
employment enforcement, to prevent illegal immigration, and
to reform and rationalize avenues for legal immigration, and
for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. Conrad, Mr. Feingold, Mr.
Schumer, Mr. Salazar, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Leahy, Ms.
Stabenow, Mr. Menendez, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Harkin, Ms.
Landrieu, Mr. Durbin, and Mr. Obama):
S. 10. A bill to reinstate the pay-as-you-go requirement
and reduce budget deficits by strengthening budget
enforcement and fiscal responsibility; to the Committee on
the Budget.
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mrs. Clinton, Mrs. Murray,
Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Akaka, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Leahy, Mr.
Obama, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Kennedy, Mr.
Harkin, Mr. Menendez, and Mr. Inouye):
S. 21. A bill to expand access to preventive health care
services that help reduce unintended pregnancy, reduce
abortions, and improve access to women's health care; to the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
By Mr. WEBB:
S. 22. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to
establish a program of educational assistance for members of
the Armed Forces who serve in the Armed Forces after
September 11, 2001, and for other purposes; to the Committee
on Veterans' Affairs.
By Mr. HARKIN (for himself, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Dorgan, Mr.
Biden, and Mr. Obama):
S. 23. A bill to promote renewable fuel and energy security
of the United States, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
By Mrs. BOXER (for herself, Mrs. Feinstein, and Mr.
Lautenberg):
S. 24. A bill to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to
require a health advisory and monitoring of drinking water
for perchlorate; to the Committee on Environment and Public
Works.
By Mr. KOHL (for himself and Mr. Leahy):
S. 25. A bill to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act to establish requirements for certain petitions submitted
to the Food and Drug Administration, and for other purposes;
to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
By Ms. CANTWELL (for herself and Ms. Snowe):
S. 26. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to
establish a program demonstrating multiple approaches to
Lifelong Learning Accounts, which are portable, worker-owned
savings accounts that can be used by workers to help finance
education, training, and apprenticeships and which are
intended to supplement both public and employer-provided
education and training resources, and for other purposes; to
the Committee on Finance.
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mrs. Boxer):
S. 27. A bill to authorize the implementation of the San
Joaquin River Restoration Settlement; to the Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources.
By Mr. KOHL:
S. 28. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security
Act to require the use of generic drugs under the Medicare
part D prescription drug program when available unless the
brand name drug is determined to be medically necessary; to
the Committee on Finance.
By Ms. LANDRIEU:
S. 29. A bill to clarify the tax treatment of certain
payments made to homeowners by the Louisiana Recovery
Authority and the Mississippi Development Authority; to the
Committee on Finance.
By Mr. STEVENS:
S. 39. A bill to establish a coordinated national ocean
exploration program within the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
By Mr. BAUCUS:
S. 41. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to
provide incentives to improve America's research
competitiveness, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Finance.
By Mr. McCONNELL (for Ms. Murkowski):
S. 42. A bill to make improvements to the Arctic Research
and Policy Act of 1984; to the Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs.
By Mr. ENSIGN (for himself, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Thomas, Mr.
Sessions, Mr. Coleman, and Mrs. Dole):
S. 43. A bill to amend title II of the Social Security Act
to preserve and protect Social Security benefits of American
workers and to help ensure greater congressional oversight of
the Social Security system by requiring that both Houses of
Congress approve a totalization agreement before the
agreement, giving foreign workers Social Security benefits,
can go into effect; to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. VITTER:
S. 44. A bill to require disclosure and payment of
noncommercial air travel in the Senate; to the Committee on
Rules and Administration.
By Mr. ENSIGN (for himself and Ms. Landrieu):
S. 45. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security
Act to make a technical correction in the definition of
outpatient speech-language pathology services; to the
Committee on Finance.
By Mr. ENSIGN (for himself, Mr. DeMint, Mr. Graham, and
Mr. Coburn):
S. 46. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to
expand the permissible use of health savings accounts to
include premiums for non-group high deductible health plan
coverage; to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. ENSIGN (for himself and Mr. Isakson):
S. 47. A bill to establish a Law Enforcement Assistance
Force in the Department of Homeland Security to facilitate
the contributions of retired law enforcement officers during
major disasters; to the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs.
By Mr. ENSIGN (for himself, Mr. DeMint, and Mr.
Inhofe):
S. 48. A bill to return meaning to the Fifth Amendment by
limiting the power of eminent domain; to the Committee on
Finance.
By Mr. STEVENS:
S. 49. A bill to amend the Communications Act of 1934 to
prevent the carriage of child pornography by video service
providers, to protect children from online predators, and to
restrict the sale or purchase of children's personal
information in interstate commerce; to the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
By Mr. ISAKSON:
S. 50. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to
provide economic incentives for the preservation of open
space and conservation of natural resources, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. ISAKSON:
S. 51. A bill to derive human pluripotent stem cell lines
using techniques that do not knowingly harm embryos; to the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
By Mr. ISAKSON (for himself and Mr. Chambliss):
S. 52. A bill to amend the Tennessee Valley Authority Act
of 1933 to increase the membership of the Board of Directors
and require that each State in the service area of the
Tennessee Valley Authority be represented by at least 1
member; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 53. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to
provide health care practitioners in rural areas with
training in preventive health care, including both physical
and mental care, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 54. A bill to amend title XIX of the Social Security Act
to provide for coverage of services provided by nursing
school clinics under State medicaid programs; to the
Committee on Finance.
By Mr. BAUCUS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Schumer,
Mr. Kyl, and Mr. Crapo):
S. 55. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to
repeal the individual alternative minimum tax; to the
Committee on Finance.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 56. A bill to provide relief to the Pottawatomi Nation
in Canada for settlement of certain claims against the United
States; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 57. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to
deem certain service in the organized military forces of the
Government of the Commonwealth of the Philippines and the
Philippine Scouts to have been active
[[Page 99]]
service for purposes of benefits under programs administered
by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs; to the Committee on
Veterans' Affairs.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 58. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to
repeal the reduction in the deductible portion of expenses
for business meals and entertainment; to the Committee on
Finance.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 59. A bill to amend title XIX of the Social Security Act
to improve access to advanced practice nurses and physician
assistants under the Medicaid Program; to the Committee on
Finance.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 60. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to
provide a means for continued improvement in emergency
medical services for children; to the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 61. A bill to amend chapter 81 of title 5, United States
Code, to authorize the use of clinical social workers to
conduct evaluations to determine work-related emotional and
mental illnesses; to the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 62. A bill to treat certain hospital support
organizations as qualified organizations for purposes of
determining acquisition indebtedness; to the Committee on
Finance.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 63. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security
Act to remove the restriction that a clinical psychologist or
clinical social worker provide services in a comprehensive
outpatient rehabilitation facility to a patient only under
the care of a physician; to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 64. A bill to amend title VII of the Public Health
Service Act to ensure that social work students or social
work schools are eligible for support under certain programs
to assist individuals in pursuing health careers and programs
of grants for training projects in geriatrics, and to
establish a social work training program; to the Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
By Mr. INHOFE (for himself, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Lieberman,
and Mr. Feingold):
S. 65. A bill to modify the age-60 standard for certain
pilots and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 66. A bill to require the Secretary of the Army to
determine the validity of the claims of certain Filipinos
that they performed military service on behalf of the United
States during World War II; to the Committee on Veterans'
Affairs.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 67. A bill to amend title 10, United States Code, to
permit former members of the Armed Forces who have a service-
connected disability rated as total to travel on military
aircraft in the same manner and to the same extent as retired
members of the Armed Forces are entitled to travel on such
aircraft; to the Committee on Armed Services.
By Mr. AKAKA:
S. 68. A bill for the relief of Vichai Sae Tung (also known
as Chai Chaowasaree); to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. KOHL (for himself and Ms. Snowe):
S. 69. A bill to authorize appropriations for the Hollings
Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 70. A bill to restore the traditional day of observance
of Memorial Day, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
the Judiciary.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 71. A bill to amend title 10, United States Code, to
authorize certain disabled former prisoners of war to use
Department of Defense commissary and exchange stores; to the
Committee on Armed Services.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 72. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security
Act to provide improved reimbursement for clinical social
worker services under the medicare program; to the Committee
on Finance.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 73. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security
Act to provide for patient protection by establishing minimum
nurse staffing ratios at certain Medicare providers, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. SCHUMER:
S. 74. A bill to ensure adequate funding for high-threat
areas, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs.
By Mr. SCHUMER:
S. 75. A bill to require the Federal Aviation
Administration to finalize the proposed rule relating to the
reduction of fuel tank flammability exposure, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
By Mr. SCHUMER:
S. 76. A bill to amend section 1028 of title 18, United
States Code, to prohibit the possession, transfer, or use of
fraudulent travel documents; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
By Mr. SCHUMER:
S. 77. A bill to improve the tracking of stolen firearms
and firearms used in a crime, to allow more frequent
inspections of gun dealers to ensure compliance with Federal
gun law, to enhance the penalties for gun trafficking, and
for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. SCHUMER:
S. 78. A bill for the relief of Alemseghed Mussie
Tesfamical; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. SCHUMER:
S. 79. A bill to establish within the United States
Marshals Service a short term State witness protection
program to provide assistance to State and local district
attorneys to protect their witnesses in homicide and major
violent crime cases and to provide Federal grants for such
protection; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. STEVENS:
S. 80. A bill to amend title 5, United States Code, to
provide for 8 weeks of paid leave for Federal employees
giving birth and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
By Mr. SCHUMER (for himself and Mrs. Clinton):
S. 81. A bill to authorize the United States Department of
Energy to remediate the Western New York Nuclear Service
Center in the Town of Ashford, New York, and to dispose of
nuclear waste; to the Committee on Environment and Public
Works.
By Mr. AKAKA (for himself and Mr. Lautenberg):
S. 82. A bill to reaffirm the authority of the Comptroller
General to audit and evaluate the programs, activities, and
financial transactions of the intelligence community, and for
other purposes; to the Select Committee on Intelligence.
By Mr. McCAIN (for himself, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Biden, and
Mr. Lieberman):
S. 83. A bill to provide increased rail transportation
security; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
By Mr. McCAIN (for himself, Mr. Stevens, and Mr.
Dorgan):
S. 84. A bill to establish a United States Boxing
Commission to administer the Act, and for other purposes; to
the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
By Mr. McCAIN (for himself, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Baucus, Mr.
Grassley, Mr. Reid, Mrs. Feinstein, and Mr.
Feingold):
S. 85. 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.
By Mr. McCAIN (for himself and Mr. Kyl):
S. 86. A bill to designate segments of Fossil Creek, a
tributary to the Verde River in the State of Arizona, as wild
and scenic rivers; to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources.
By Mr. VITTER:
S. 87. A bill to permit the cancellation of certain loans
under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act; to the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs.
By Mr. VITTER:
S. 88. A bill to increase the penalty for failure to comply
with lobbying disclosure requirements; to the Committee on
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
By Mr. VITTER:
S. 89. A bill to prohibit authorized committees and
leadership PACs from employing the spouse or immediate family
members of any candidate or Federal office holder connected
to the committee; to the Committee on Rules and
Administration.
By Mr. VITTER:
S. 90. A bill to modify the application of the Federal
Election Campaign Act of 1971 to Indian tribes; to the
Committee on Rules and Administration.
By Mr. ENSIGN (for himself and Mr. Crapo):
S. 91. A bill to require the Congressional Budget Office
and the Joint Committee on Taxation to use dynamic economic
modeling in addition to static economic modeling in the
preparation of budgetary estimates of proposed changes in
Federal revenue law; to the Committee on the Budget.
By Mr. STEVENS (for himself, Mr. Coleman, and Mr.
Vitter):
S. 92. A bill to amend the Communications Act of 1934 to
prohibit the unlawful acquisition and use of confidential
customer proprietary network information, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
By Mr. STEVENS:
S. 93. A bill to authorize NTIA to borrow against
anticipated receipts of the Digital Television and Public
Safety Fund to initiate migration to a national IP-enabled
emergency network capable of receiving and responding to all
citizen activated emergency communications; to the Committee
on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
By Mr. STEVENS:
S. 94. A bill to protect the welfare of consumers by
prohibiting price gouging by merchants with respect to
gasoline or petroleum
[[Page 100]]
distillates during certain abnormal market disruptions; to
the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
By Mr. KERRY (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, Ms. Cantwell,
Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Lautenberg, and Mrs. Murray):
S. 95. A bill to amend titles XIX and XXI of the Social
Security Act to ensure that every uninsured child in America
has health insurance coverage, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Finance.
By Mr. KERRY:
S. 96. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to
ensure a fairer and simpler method of taxing controlled
foreign corporations of United States shareholders, to treat
certain foreign corporations managed and controlled in the
United States as domestic corporations, to codify the
economic substance doctrine, and to eliminate the top
corporate income tax rate, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Finance.
By Mr. KERRY:
S. 97. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to
replace the Hope and Lifetime Learning credits with a
partially refundable college opportunity credit; to the
Committee on Finance.
By Mr. KERRY (for himself and Ms. Landrieu):
S. 98. A bill to foster the development of minority-owned
small businesses; to the Committee on Small Business and
Entrepreneurship.
By Mr. KERRY:
S. 99. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to
provide a refundable credit for small business employee
health insurance expenses; to the Committee on Finance.
By Mrs. BOXER:
S. 100. A bill to encourage the health of children in
schools by promoting better nutrition and increased physical
activity, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Finance.
By Mr. STEVENS (for himself, Mr. Lott, and Mrs.
Hutchison):
S. 101. A bill to update and reinvigorate universal service
provided under the Communications Act of 1934; to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
By Mr. KERRY:
S. 102. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
to extend and expand relief from the alternative minimum tax
and to repeal the extension of the lower rates for capital
gains and dividends for 2009 and 2010; to the Committee on
Finance.
By Mr. KERRY (for himself, Mrs. Feinstein, and Mr.
Wyden):
S. 103. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
to provide that major oil and gas companies will not be
eligible for the effective rate reductions enacted in 2004
for domestic manufacturers; to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. VITTER:
S. 104. A bill to amend the Ethics in Government Act of
1978 to establish criminal penalties for knowingly and
willfully falsifying or failing to file or report certain
information required to be reported under that Act; to the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
By Mr. VITTER:
S. 105. A bill to prohibit the spouse of a Member of
Congress previously employed as a lobbyist from lobbying the
Member after the Member is elected; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 106. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to
provide for the establishment of a National Center for Social
Work Research; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor,
and Pensions.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 107. A bill to amend title VII of the Public Health
Service Act to make certain graduate programs in professional
psychology eligible to participate in various health
professions loan programs; to the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 108. A bill to amend title VII of the Public Health
Service Act to make certain graduate programs in professional
psychology eligible to participate in various health
professions loan programs; to the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 109. A bill to recognize the organization known as the
National Academics of Practice; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 110. A bill to allow the psychiatric or psychological
examinations required under chapter 313 of title 18, United
States Code, relating to offenders with mental disease or
defect, to be conducted by a clinical social worker; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 111. A bill to amend title 10, United States Code, to
recognize the United States Military Cancer Institute as an
establishment within the Uniformed Services University of the
Health Sciences, to require the Institute to promote the
health of members of the Armed Forces and their dependents by
enhancing cancer research and treatment, to provide for a
study of the epidemiological causes of cancer among various
ethnic groups for cancer prevention and early detection
efforts, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Armed
Services.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 112. A bill to amend title XIX of the Social Security
Act to provide 100 percent reimbursement for medical
assistance provided to a Native Hawaiian through a federally-
qualified health center or a Native Hawaiian health care
system; to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. INHOFE (for himself, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Thune, Mr.
Graham, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Chambliss, Mr. Hatch, Mr.
Thomas, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. Ensign, Mr. McCain, Mr.
Martinez, Mr. Roberts, and Mrs. Dole):
S. 113. A bill to make appropriations for military
construction and family housing projects for the Department
of Defense for fiscal year 2007; read the first time.
By Mr. OBAMA:
S. 114. A bill to authorize resources for a grant program
for local educational agencies to create innovation
districts; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and
Pensions.
By Mr. OBAMA:
S. 115. A bill to suspend royalty relief, to repeal certain
provisions of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, and to amend the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal certain tax
incentives for the oil and gas industry; to the Committee on
Finance.
By Mr. OBAMA (for himself and Ms. Mikulski):
S. 116. A bill to authorize resources to provide students
with opportunities for summer learning through summer
learning grants; to the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions.
By Mr. OBAMA (for himself and Ms. Snowe):
S. 117. A bill to amend titles 10 and 38, United States
Code, to improve benefits and services for members of the
Armed Forces, veterans of the Global War on Terrorism, and
other veterans, to require reports on the effects of the
Global War on Terrorism, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
By Mr. LEAHY (for himself and Mr. Pryor):
S. 118. A bill to give investigators and prosecutors the
tools they need to combat public corruption; to the Committee
on the Judiciary.
By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Harkin,
Mr. Kerry, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr.
Dorgan, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Wyden, Ms. Cantwell, Mrs.
Clinton, Mr. Menendez, and Mr. Nelson of Florida):
S. 119. A bill to prohibit profiteering and fraud relating
to military action, relief, and reconstruction efforts, and
for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mrs. CLINTON (for herself, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Kennedy,
Mr. Menendez, and Mr. Lautenberg):
S. 120. A bill to establish a grant program for individuals
still suffering health effects as a result of the September
11, 2001, attacks in New York City and at the Pentagon; to
the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
By Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself and Mrs. Boxer):
S. 121. A bill to provide for the redeployment of United
States forces from Iraq; to the Committee on Foreign
Relations.
By Mr. BAUCUS (for himself and Mr. Coleman):
S. 122. A bill to amend the Trade Act of 1974 to extend
benefits to service sector workers and firms, enhance certain
trade adjustment assistance authorities, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
By Ms. LANDRIEU:
S. 123. A bill to authorize the project for hurricane and
storm damage reduction, Morganza to the Gulf of Mexico,
Louisiana; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
By Mr. ALLARD:
S. 124. A bill to provide certain counties with the ability
to receive television broadcast signals of their choice; to
the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
By Mr. ALLARD:
S. 125. A bill to establish the Granada Relocation Center
National Historic Site as an affiliated unit of the National
Park System; to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources.
By Mr. ALLARD (for himself and Mr. Salazar):
S. 126. A bill to modify the boundary of Mesa Verde
National Park, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources.
By Mr. ALLARD (for himself and Mr. Salazar):
S. 127. A bill to amend the Great Sand Dunes National Park
and Preserve Act of 2000 to explain the purpose and provide
for the administration of the Baca National Wildlife Refuge;
to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
By Mr. ALLARD (for himself and Mr. Salazar):
S. 128. A bill to amend the Cache La Poudre River Corridor
Act to designate a new management entity, make certain
technical and conforming amendments, enhance private property
protections, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources.
[[Page 101]]
By Mr. ALLARD:
S. 129. A bill to study and promote the use of energy-
efficient computer servers in the United States; to the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
By Mr. ALLARD (for himself and Mr. Salazar):
S. 130. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security
Act to extend reasonable cost contracts under medicare; to
the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. ALLARD (for himself and Mr. Reed):
S. 131. A bill to extend for 5 years the Mark-to-Market
program of the Department of Housing and Urban Development;
to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
By Mr. ALLARD:
S. 132. A bill to end the trafficking of methamphetamines
and precursor chemicals across the United States and its
borders; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. OBAMA (for himself, Mr. Lugar, and Mr. Harkin):
S. 133. A bill to promote the national security and
stability of the economy of the United States by reducing the
dependence of the United States on oil through the use of
alternative fuels and new technology, and for other purposes;
to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. ALLARD (for himself and Mr. Salazar):
S. 134. A bill to authorize the construction of the
Arkansas Valley Conduit in the State of Colorado, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources.
By Mr. ALLARD:
S. 135. A bill to authorize the Secretary of the Army to
acquire land for the purposes of expanding Pinon Canyon
Maneuver Site, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Armed Services.
By Mr. ALLARD:
S. 136. A bill to expand the National Domestic Preparedness
Consortium to include the Transportation Technology Center;
to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs.
By Mr. CARDIN:
S. 137. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security
Act to provide additional beneficiary protections; to the
Committee on Finance.
By Mr. SCHUMER:
S. 138. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
to apply the joint return limitation for capital gains
exclusion to certain post-marriage sales of principal
residences by surviving spouses; to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. SCHUMER:
S. 139. A bill to expedite review by the Supreme Court of
the warrantless electronic surveillance program of the
National Security Agency; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. SCHUMER (for himself and Mr. Crapo):
S. 140. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
to repeal the excise tax on telephone and other
communications services; to the Committee on Finance.
By Ms. CANTWELL:
S. 141. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
to permanently increase the maximum annual contribution
allowed to be made to Coverdell education savings accounts,
and to provide for a deduction for contributions to education
savings accounts; to the Committee on Finance.
By Ms. CANTWELL (for herself, Mrs. Murray, and Ms.
Mikulski):
S. 142. A bill to amend title XXI of the Social Security
Act to allow qualifying States to use all or any portion of
their allotments under the State Children's Health Insurance
Program for certain Medicaid expenditures; to the Committee
on Finance.
By Ms. CANTWELL (for herself, Mrs. Murray, and Mr.
Nelson of Florida):
S. 143. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
to make permanent the deduction of State and local general
sales taxes; to the Committee on Finance.
By Mrs. BOXER (for herself and Mrs. Feinstein):
S. 144. A bill to provide Federal coordination and
assistance in preventing gang violence; to the Committee on
the Judiciary.
By Mrs. BOXER (for herself, Mr. Smith, and Mr. Wyden):
S. 145. A bill to make funds available for Pacific Salmon
emergency disaster assistance; to the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation.
By Mrs. BOXER:
S. 146. A bill to require the Federal Government to
purchase fuel efficient automobiles, and for other purposes;
to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
By Mrs. BOXER (for herself, Mr. Biden, and Mr. Dodd):
S. 147. A bill to empower women in Afghanistan, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
By Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself and Mr. Menendez):
S. 148. A bill to establish the Paterson Great Falls
National Park in the State of New Jersey, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. Sessions):
S. 149. A bill to address the effect of the death of a
defendant in Federal criminal proceedings; to the Committee
on the Judiciary.
By Mrs. BOXER (for herself, Mrs. Feinstein, and Mr.
Lautenberg):
S. 150. A bill to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to
protect the health of pregnant women, fetuses, infants, and
children by requiring a health advisory and drinking water
standard for perchlorate; to the Committee on Environment and
Public Works.
By Mrs. BOXER (for herself and Mrs. Feinstein):
S. 151. A bill to permanently prohibit oil and gas leasing
off the coast of the State of California, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
By Mrs. BOXER:
S. 152. A bill to amend the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 to establish a program to help States
expand the educational system to include at least 1 year of
early education preceding the year a child enters
kindergarten; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor,
and Pensions.
By Mrs. BOXER:
S. 153. A bill to provide for the monitoring of the long-
term medical health of firefighters who responded to
emergencies in certain disaster areas and for the treatment
of such firefighters; to the Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation.
By Mr. BUNNING (for himself, Mr. Obama, Mr. Lugar, Mr.
Pryor, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. Bond, Mr. Thomas, Mr.
Martinez, Mr. Enzi, Ms. Landrieu, and Mr. Craig):
S. 154. A bill to promote coal-to-liquid fuel activities;
to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
By Mr. BUNNING (for himself, Mr. Obama, Mr. Lugar, Mr.
Pryor, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. Bond, Mr. Thomas, Mr.
Martinez, Mr. Enzi, Ms. Landrieu, and Mr. Craig):
S. 155. A bill to promote coal-to-liquid fuel activities;
to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Wyden (for himself, Mr. McCain,
and Mr. Sununu)):
S. 156. A bill to make the moratorium on Internet access
taxes and multiple and discriminatory taxes on electronic
commerce permanent; to the Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation.
By Ms. CANTWELL:
S. 157. A bill to permanently increase the maximum annual
contribution allowed to be made to Coverdell education
savings accounts; to the Committee on Finance.
By Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Ms. Landrieu):
S. 158. A bill to expand access to affordable health care
and to strengthen the health care safety net and make health
care services more available in rural and underserved areas;
to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. LEAHY (for himself and Mr. Sanders):
S. 159. A bill to redesignate the White Rocks National
Recreation Area in the State of Vermont as the ``Robert T.
Stafford White Rocks National Recreation Area''; considered
and passed.
By Mr. THUNE:
S. 160. A bill to provide for compensation to the Lower
Brule and Crow Creek Sioux Tribes of South Dakota for damage
to tribal land caused by Pick-Sloan projects along the
Missouri River; to the Committee on Indian Affairs.
By Mr. THUNE:
S. 161. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to
provide for annual cost-of-living adjustments to be made
automatically by law each year in the rates of disability
compensation for veterans with service-connected disabilities
and the rates of dependency and indemnity compensation for
survivors of certain service-connected disabled veterans; to
the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
By Mr. LUGAR:
S. 162. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
to modify the alcohol credit and the alternative fuel credit,
to amend the Clean Air Act to promote the installation of
fuel pumps for E-85 fuel, to amend title 49 of the United
States Code to require the manufacture of dual fueled
automobiles, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Finance.
By Mr. KERRY (for himself, Ms. Snowe, Ms. Landrieu, and
Mr. Vitter):
S. 163. A bill to improve the disaster loan program of the
Small Business Administration, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship.
By Mr. KENNEDY:
S. 164. A bill to modernize the education system of the
United States; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor,
and Pensions.
By Mr. ALLARD (for himself, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Domenici,
Mr. Inhofe, and Mr. Hagel):
S. 165. A bill to require the Secretary of Agriculture to
provide compensation for certain livestock losses; to the
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
By Mr. McCAIN (for himself, Mr. DeMint, Mr. Smith, and
Mr. Sununu):
S. 166. A bill to restrict any State from imposing a new
discriminatory tax on cell
[[Page 102]]
phone services; to the Committee on Finance.
By Mrs. BOXER:
S. 167. A bill to amend the Clean Air Act to require the
Secretary of Energy to provide grants to eligible entities to
carry out research, development, and demonstration projects
of cellulosic ethanol and construct infrastructure that
enables retail gas stations to dispense cellulosic ethanol
for vehicle fuel to reduce the consumption of petroleum-based
fuel; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
By Mr. ALLARD (for himself and Mr. Salazar):
S. 168. A bill to direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs
to establish a national cemetery for veterans in the Pikes
Peak Region of Colorado; to the Committee on Veterans'
Affairs.
By Mr. ALLARD (for himself and Mr. Levin):
S. 169. A bill to amend the National Trails System Act to
clarify Federal authority relating to land acquisition from
willing sellers for the majority of the trails in the System,
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources.
By Mr. ENSIGN (for himself, Mr. Craig, Mr. DeMint, Mr.
Coburn, Mr. Stevens, Mr. McCain, Mr. Vitter, and Mr.
Crapo):
S. 170. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
to repeal the excise tax on telephone and other
communications services; to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. INHOFE (for himself and Mr. Coburn):
S. 171. A bill to designate the facility of the United
States Postal Service located at 301 Commerce Street in
Commerce, Oklahoma, as the ``Mickey Mantle Post Office
Building''; to the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs.
By Mr. INHOFE:
S. 172. A bill to prohibit Federal funding for the
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development; to
the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
By Mr. INHOFE (for himself and Mr. DeMint):
S. 173. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security
Act to establish Medicare Health Savings Accounts; to the
Committee on Finance.
By Mr. INHOFE:
S. 174. A bill to amend the Head Start Act to require
parental consent for nonemergency intrusive physical
examinations; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor,
and Pensions.
By Mr. INHOFE:
S. 175. A bill to provide for a feasibility study of
alternatives to augment the water supplies of the Central
Oklahoma Master Conservancy District and cities served by the
District; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
By Mr. INHOFE (for himself and Mr. Coburn):
S. 176. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
to permanently extend the Indian employment credit and the
depreciation rules for property used predominantly within an
Indian reservation; to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. INHOFE:
S. 177. A bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior
to convey to the McGee Creek Authority certain facilities of
the McGee Creek Project, Oklahoma, and for other purposes; to
the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
By Mr. INHOFE:
S. 178. A bill to protect freedom of speech exercisable by
houses of worship or meditation and affiliated organizations;
to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. ENSIGN (for himself and Mr. Akaka):
S. 179. A bill to amend title 10, United States Code, to
establish the position of Deputy Secretary of Defense for
Management, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Armed
Services.
By Mrs. HUTCHISON (for herself, Mr. Cornyn, Mr.
Alexander, Mr. Ensign, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Martinez, Mr.
Thune, and Mr. Stevens):
S. 180. A bill to provide a permanent deduction for State
and local general sales taxes; to the Committee on Finance.
By Mrs. HUTCHISON (for herself, Mr. Cornyn, Mr.
Bunning, Mr. Ensign, Mr. Hagel, Mr. Martinez, Mr.
Vitter, Mr. Chambliss, Mr. Stevens, and Mr.
Brownback):
S. 181. A bill to provide permanent tax relief from the
marriage penalty; to the Committee on Finance.
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr.
Feingold, Mr. Leahy, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Kennedy, and Mr.
Durbin):
S. 182. A bill to authorize the Attorney General to make
grants to improve the ability of State and local governments
to prevent the abduction of children by family members, and
for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. STEVENS:
S. 183. A bill to require the establishment of a corporate
average fuel economy standard for passenger automobiles of 40
miles per gallon by 2017, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
By Mr. INOUYE (for himself, Mr. Stevens, Mr.
Lautenberg, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Kerry,
Mr. Lieberman, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Pryor, Mr. Carper, Mr.
Biden, Mr. Baucus, Mrs. Clinton, and Mr. Schumer):
S. 184. A bill to provide improved rail and surface
transportation security; to the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation.
By Mr. SPECTER (for himself and Mr. Leahy):
S. 185. A bill to restore habeas corpus for those detained
by the United States; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. SPECTER:
S. 186. A bill to provide appropriate protection to
attorney-client privileged communications and attorney work
product; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. SPECTER:
S. 187. A bill to provide sufficient resources to permit
electronic surveillance of United States persons for foreign
intelligence purposes to be conducted pursuant to
individualized court-issued orders for calls originating in
the United States, to provide additional resources to enhance
oversight and streamline the procedures of the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, to ensure review of
the Terrorist Surveillance Program by the United States
Supreme Court, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
the Judiciary.
By Mr. SALAZAR (for himself, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Reid, Mr.
Menendez, Mrs. Boxer, and Mrs. Feinstein):
S. 188. A bill to revise the short title of the Fannie Lou
Hamer, Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King Voting Rights Act
Reauthorization and Amendments Act of 2006; to the Committee
on the Judiciary.
By Mr. LEVIN:
S. 189. A bill to decrease the matching funds requirements
and authorize additional appropriations for Keweenaw National
Historical Park in the State of Michigan; to the Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources.
By Mrs. HUTCHISON (for herself and Mr. Cornyn):
S. 190. A bill to provide a technical correction to the
Pension Protection Act of 2006; to the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
By Mrs. HUTCHISON (for herself and Mr. Cornyn):
S. 191. A bill to provide relief for all air carriers with
pension plans that are not frozen pension plans; to the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
By Mr. McCAIN (for himself, Mr. Lieberman, Ms. Collins,
and Mr. Feingold):
S. 192. A bill providing greater transparency with respect
to lobbying activities, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
By Mr. LUGAR (for himself, Mr. Biden, Mr. Craig, Mr.
Salazar, Ms. Snowe, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Coleman, Mr.
Lieberman, and Mr. Hagel):
S. 193. A bill to increase cooperation on energy issues
between the United States Government and foreign governments
and entities in order to secure the strategic and economic
interests of the United States, and for other purposes; to
the Committee on Foreign Relations.
By Mr. CRAIG:
S.J. Res. 1. A joint resolution proposing an amendment to
the Constitution of the United States relative to require a
balanced budget and protect Social Security surpluses; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
____________________
SUBMISSION OF CONCURRENT AND SENATE RESOLUTIONS
The following concurrent resolutions and Senate resolutions were
read, and referred (or acted upon), as indicated:
By Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell):
S. Res. 1. A resolution informing the President of the
United States that a quorum of each House is assembled;
considered and agreed to.
By Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell):
S. Res. 2. A resolution informing the House of
Representatives that a quorum of the Senate is assembled;
considered and agreed to.
By Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell):
S. Res. 3. A resolution to elect Robert C. Byrd, a Senator
from the State of West Virginia, to be President pro tempore
of the Senate of the United States; considered and agreed to.
By Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell):
S. Res. 4. A resolution notifying the President of the
United States of the election of a President pro tempore;
considered and agreed to.
By Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell):
S. Res. 5. A resolution notifying the House of
Representatives of the election of a President pro tempore;
considered and agreed to.
By Mr. McCONNELL (for himself and Mr. Reid):
S. Res. 6. A resolution expressing the thanks of the Senate
to the Honorable Ted Stevens for his service as President Pro
Tempore of the United States Senate and to
[[Page 103]]
designate Senator Stevens as President Pro Tempore Emeritus
of the United States Senate; considered and agreed to.
By Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell):
S. Res. 7. A resolution fixing the hour of daily meeting of
the Senate; considered and agreed to.
By Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell):
S. Res. 8. A resolution electing Nancy Erickson as
Secretary of the Senate; considered and agreed to.
By Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell):
S. Res. 9. A resolution notifying the President of the
United States of the election of the Secretary of the Senate;
considered and agreed to.
By Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell):
S. Res. 10. A resolution notifying the House of
Representatives of the election of a Secretary of the Senate;
considered and agreed to.
By Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell):
S. Res. 11. A resolution electing Terrance W. Gainer as the
Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate; considered and
agreed to.
By Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell):
S. Res. 12. A resolution notifying the President of the
United States of the election of a Sergeant at Arms and
Doorkeeper of the Senate; considered and agreed to.
By Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell):
S. Res. 13. A resolution notifying the House of
Representatives of the election of a Sergeant at Arms and
Doorkeeper of the Senate; considered and agreed to.
By Mr. REID:
S. Res. 14. A resolution electing Martin P. Paone of
Virginia as Secretary for the Majority of the Senate;
considered and agreed to.
By Mr. McCONNELL:
S. Res. 15. A resolution electing David J. Schiappa of
Maryland as Secretary for the Minority of the Senate;
considered and agreed to.
By Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell):
S. Res. 16. A resolution to make effective appointment of
the Senate Legal Counsel; considered and agreed to.
By Mr. McCONNELL (for himself and Mr. Reid):
S. Res. 17. A resolution to make effective appointment of
the Deputy Senate Legal Counsel; considered and agreed to.
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. Res. 18. A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate
regarding designation of the month of November as ``National
Military Family Month''; to the Committee on Armed Services.
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. McConnell, Ms. Stabenow,
Mr. Levin, Mr. Akaka, Mr. Alexander, Mr. Allard, Mr.
Baucus, Mr. Bayh, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Biden, Mr.
Bingaman, Mr. Bond, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Brown, Mr.
Brownback, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Burr, Mr. Byrd, Ms.
Cantwell, Mr. Cardin, Mr. Carper, Mr. Casey, Mr.
Chambliss, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Coburn, Mr. Cochran, Mr.
Coleman, Ms. Collins, Mr. Conrad, Mr. Corker, Mr.
Cornyn, Mr. Craig, Mr. Crapo, Mr. DeMint, Mr. Dodd,
Mrs. Dole, Mr. Domenici, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Durbin, Mr.
Ensign, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Feingold, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr.
Graham, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Gregg, Mr. Hagel, Mr.
Harkin, Mr. Hatch, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. Inhofe, Mr.
Inouye, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Kennedy, Mr.
Kerry, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Kohl, Mr. Kyl, Ms.
Landrieu, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Lieberman,
Mrs. Lincoln, Mr. Lott, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Martinez, Mr.
McCain, Mrs. McCaskill, Mr. Menendez, Ms. Mikulski,
Ms. Murkowski, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Nelson of Florida,
Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, Mr. Obama, Mr. Pryor, Mr.
Reed, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Salazar, Mr.
Sanders, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Sessions, Mr. Shelby, Mr.
Smith, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Specter, Mr. Stevens, Mr.
Sununu, Mr. Tester, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Thune, Mr.
Vitter, Mr. Voinovich, Mr. Warner, Mr. Webb, Mr.
Whitehouse, and Mr. Wyden):
S. Res. 19. A resolution honoring President Gerald Rudolph
Ford; ordered held at the desk.
By Mrs. CLINTON:
S. Res. 20. A resolution recognizing the uncommon valor of
Wesley Autry of New York, New York; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
By Mr. ALLARD:
S. Con. Res. 1. A concurrent resolution expressing the
sense of Congress that an artistic tribute to commemorate the
speech given by President Ronald Reagan at the Brandenburg
Gate on June 12, 1987, should be placed within the United
States Capitol; to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
____________________
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
______
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Lott,
Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Lieberman, Ms. Collins, Mr.
Schumer, Ms. Mikulski, Mrs. Cantwell, Mr. Leahy, Ms. Stabenow,
Mr. Webb, Mr. Lautenberg and Mr. Menendez):
S. 1. A bill to provide greater transparency in the legislative
process; placed on the calendar.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the
bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 1
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. TABLE OF CONTENTS.
The table of contents for this Act is as follows:
Sec. 1. Table of contents.
TITLE I--LEGISLATIVE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2007
Sec. 101. Short title.
Sec. 102. Out of scope matters in conference reports.
Sec. 103. Earmarks.
Sec. 104. Availability of conference reports on the Internet.
Sec. 105. Elimination of floor privileges for former Members, Senate
officers, and Speakers of the House who are lobbyists or
seek financial gain.
Sec. 106. Ban on gifts from lobbyists.
Sec. 107. Travel restrictions and disclosure.
Sec. 108. Post employment restrictions.
Sec. 109. Public disclosure by Members of Congress of employment
negotiations.
Sec. 110. Prohibit official contact with spouse or immediate family
member of Member who is a registered lobbyist.
Sec. 111. Influencing hiring decisions.
Sec. 112. Sense of the Senate that any applicable restrictions on
Congressional branch employees should apply to the
Executive and Judicial branches.
Sec. 113. Amounts of COLA adjustments not paid to certain Members of
Congress.
Sec. 114. Requirement of notice of intent to proceed.
Sec. 115. Effective date.
TITLE II--LOBBYING TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2007
Sec. 201. Short title.
Subtitle A--Enhancing Lobbying Disclosure
Sec. 211. Quarterly filing of lobbying disclosure reports.
Sec. 212. Annual report on contributions.
Sec. 213. Public database of lobbying disclosure information.
Sec. 214. Disclosure by registered lobbyists of all past executive and
Congressional employment.
Sec. 215. Disclosure of lobbyist travel and payments.
Sec. 216. Increased penalty for failure to comply with lobbying
disclosure requirements.
Sec. 217. Disclosure of lobbying activities by certain coalitions and
associations.
Sec. 218. Disclosure of enforcement for noncompliance.
Sec. 219. Electronic filing of lobbying disclosure reports.
Sec. 220. Disclosure of paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying.
Sec. 221. Electronic filing and public database for lobbyists for
foreign governments.
Sec. 222. Effective date.
Subtitle B--Oversight of Ethics and Lobbying
Sec. 231. Comptroller General audit and annual report.
Sec. 232. Mandatory Senate ethics training for Members and staff.
Sec. 233. Sense of the Senate regarding self-regulation within the
Lobbying community.
Sec. 234. Annual ethics committees reports.
Subtitle C--Slowing the Revolving Door
Sec. 241. Amendments to restrictions on former officers, employees, and
elected officials of the executive and legislative
branches.
Subtitle D--Ban on Provision of Gifts or Travel by Lobbyists in
Violation of the Rules of Congress
Sec. 251. Prohibition on provision of gifts or travel by registered
lobbyists to Members of Congress and to Congressional
employees.
Subtitle E--Commission to Strengthen Confidence in Congress Act of 2007
Sec. 261. Short title.
[[Page 104]]
Sec. 262. Establishment of commission.
Sec. 263. Purposes.
Sec. 264. Composition of commission.
Sec. 265. Functions of Commission.
Sec. 266. Powers of Commission.
Sec. 267. Administration.
Sec. 268. Security clearances for Commission Members and staff.
Sec. 269. Commission reports; termination.
Sec. 270. Funding.
TITLE I--LEGISLATIVE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2007
SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Legislative Transparency
and Accountability Act of 2007''.
SEC. 102. OUT OF SCOPE MATTERS IN CONFERENCE REPORTS.
(a) In General.--A point of order may be made by any
Senator against consideration of a conference report that
includes any matter not committed to the conferees by either
House. The point of order shall be made and voted on
separately for each item in violation of this section.
(b) Disposition.--If the point of order against a
conference report under subsection (a) is sustained, then--
(1) the matter in such conference report shall be deemed to
have been struck;
(2) when all other points of order under this section have
been disposed of--
(A) the Senate shall proceed to consider the question of
whether the Senate should recede from its amendment to the
House bill, or its disagreement to the amendment of the
House, and concur with a further amendment, which further
amendment shall consist of only that portion of the
conference report not deemed to have been struck;
(B) the question shall be debatable; and
(C) no further amendment shall be in order; and
(3) if the Senate agrees to the amendment, then the bill
and the Senate amendment thereto shall be returned to the
House for its concurrence in the amendment of the Senate.
(c) Supermajority Waiver and Appeal.--This section may be
waived or suspended in the Senate only by an affirmative vote
of \3/5\ of the Members, duly chosen and sworn. An
affirmative vote of \3/5\ of the Members of the Senate, duly
chosen and sworn, shall be required in the Senate to sustain
an appeal of the ruling of the Chair on a point of order
raised under this section.
SEC. 103. EARMARKS.
The Standing Rules of the Senate are amended by adding at
the end the following:
``RULE XLIV
``earmarks
``1. In this rule--
``(1) the term `earmark' means a provision that specifies
the identity of a non-Federal entity to receive assistance
and the amount of the assistance; and
``(2) the term `assistance' means budget authority,
contract authority, loan authority, and other expenditures,
and tax expenditures or other revenue items.
``2. It shall not be in order to consider any Senate bill
or Senate amendment or conference report on any bill,
including an appropriations bill, a revenue bill, and an
authorizing bill, unless a list of--
``(1) all earmarks in such measure;
``(2) an identification of the Member or Members who
proposed the earmark; and
``(3) an explanation of the essential governmental purpose
for the earmark;
is available along with any joint statement of managers
associated with the measure to all Members and made available
on the Internet to the general public for at least 48 hours
before its consideration.''.
SEC. 104. AVAILABILITY OF CONFERENCE REPORTS ON THE INTERNET.
(a) In General.--
(1) Amendment.--Rule XXVIII of all the Standing Rules of
the Senate is amended by adding at the end the following:
``7. It shall not be in order to consider a conference
report unless such report is available to all Members and
made available to the general public by means of the Internet
for at least 48 hours before its consideration.''.
(2) Effective date.--This subsection shall take effect 60
days after the date of enactment of this title.
(b) Implementation.--Not later than 60 days after the date
of enactment of this title, the Secretary of the Senate, in
consultation with the Clerk of the House of Representatives,
the Government Printing Office, and the Committee on Rules
and Administration, shall develop a website capable of
complying with the requirements of paragraph 7 of rule XXVIII
of the Standing Rules of the Senate, as added by subsection
(a).
SEC. 105. ELIMINATION OF FLOOR PRIVILEGES FOR FORMER MEMBERS,
SENATE OFFICERS, AND SPEAKERS OF THE HOUSE WHO
ARE LOBBYISTS OR SEEK FINANCIAL GAIN.
Rule XXIII of the Standing Rules of the Senate is amended
by--
(1) inserting ``1.'' before ``Other'';
(2) inserting after ``Ex-Senators and Senators elect'' the
following: ``, except as provided in paragraph 2'';
(3) inserting after ``Ex-Secretaries and ex-Sergeants at
Arms of the Senate'' the following: ``, except as provided in
paragraph 2'';
(4) inserting after ``Ex-Speakers of the House of
Representatives'' the following: ``, except as provided in
paragraph 2''; and
(5) adding at the end the following:
``2. (a) The floor privilege provided in paragraph 1 shall
not apply to an individual covered by this paragraph who is--
``(1) a registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign
principal; or
``(2) is in the employ of or represents any party or
organization for the purpose of influencing, directly, or
indirectly, the passage, defeat, or amendment of any
legislative proposal.
``(b) The Committee on Rules and Administration may
promulgate regulations to allow individuals covered by this
paragraph floor privileges for ceremonial functions and
events designated by the Majority Leader and the Minority
Leader.''.
SEC. 106. BAN ON GIFTS FROM LOBBYISTS.
Paragraph 1(a)(2) of rule XXXV of the Standing Rules of the
Senate is amended by--
(1) inserting ``(A)'' after ``(2)''; and
(2) adding at the end the following:
``(B) This clause shall not apply to a gift from a
registered lobbyist or an agent of a foreign principal.''.
SEC. 107. TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS AND DISCLOSURE.
(a) In General.--Paragraph 2 of rule XXXV of the Standing
Rules of the Senate is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(f)(1) Before a Member, officer, or employee may accept
transportation or lodging otherwise permissible under this
paragraph from any person, other than a governmental entity,
such Member, officer, or employee shall--
``(A) obtain a written certification from such person (and
provide a copy of such certification to the Select Committee
on Ethics) that--
``(i) the trip was not financed in whole, or in part, by a
registered lobbyist or foreign agent;
``(ii) the person did not accept, directly or indirectly,
funds from a registered lobbyist or foreign agent
specifically earmarked for the purpose of financing the
travel expenses;
``(iii) the trip was not planned, organized, or arranged by
or at the request of a registered lobbyist or foreign agent;
and
``(iv) registered lobbyists will not participate in or
attend the trip;
``(B) provide the Select Committee on Ethics (in the case
of an employee, from the supervising Member or officer), in
writing--
``(i) a detailed itinerary of the trip; and
``(ii) a determination that the trip--
``(I) is primarily educational (either for the invited
person or for the organization sponsoring the trip);
``(II) is consistent with the official duties of the
Member, officer, or employee;
``(III) does not create an appearance of use of public
office for private gain; and
``(iii) has a minimal or no recreational component; and
``(C) obtain written approval of the trip from the Select
Committee on Ethics.
``(2) Not later than 30 days after completion of travel,
approved under this subparagraph, the Member, officer, or
employee shall file with the Select Committee on Ethics and
the Secretary of the Senate a description of meetings and
events attended during such travel and the names of any
registered lobbyist who accompanied the Member, officer, or
employee during the travel, except when disclosure of such
information is deemed by the Member or supervisor under whose
direct supervision the employee is employed to jeopardize the
safety of an individual or adversely affect national
security. Such information shall also be posted on the
Member's official website not later than 30 days after the
completion of the travel, except when disclosure of such
information is deemed by the Member to jeopardize the safety
of an individual or adversely affect national security.''.
(b) Disclosure of Noncommercial Air Travel.--
(1) Rules.--Paragraph 2 of rule XXXV of the Standing Rules
of the Senate, as amended by subsection (a), is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(g) A Member, officer, or employee of the Senate shall--
``(1) disclose a flight on an aircraft that is not licensed
by the Federal Aviation Administration to operate for
compensation or hire, excluding a flight on an aircraft
owned, operated, or leased by a governmental entity, taken in
connection with the duties of the Member, officer, or
employee as an officeholder or Senate officer or employee;
and
``(2) with respect to the flight, file a report with the
Secretary of the Senate, including the date, destination, and
owner or lessee of the aircraft, the purpose of the trip, and
the persons on the trip, except for any person flying the
aircraft.''.
(2) FECA.--Section 304(b) of the Federal Election Campaign
Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 434(b)) is amended--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (7);
(B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (8) and
inserting ``; and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(9) in the case of a principal campaign committee of a
candidate (other than a candidate for election to the office
of President
[[Page 105]]
or Vice President), any flight taken by the candidate (other
than a flight designated to transport the President, Vice
President, or a candidate for election to the office of
President or Vice President) during the reporting period on
an aircraft that is not licensed by the Federal Aviation
Administration to operate for compensation or hire, together
with the following information:
``(A) The date of the flight.
``(B) The destination of the flight.
``(C) The owner or lessee of the aircraft.
``(D) The purpose of the flight.
``(E) The persons on the flight, except for any person
flying the aircraft.''.
(c) Public Availability.--Paragraph 2(e) of rule XXXV of
the Standing Rules of the Senate is amended to read as
follows:
``(e) The Secretary of the Senate shall make available to
the public all disclosures filed pursuant to subparagraphs
(f) and (g) as soon as possible after they are received and
such matters shall be posted on the Member's official website
but no later than 30 days after the trip or flight.''.
SEC. 108. POST EMPLOYMENT RESTRICTIONS.
(a) In General.--Paragraph 9 of rule XXXVII of the Standing
Rules of the Senate is amended by--
(1) designating the first sentence as subparagraph (a);
(2) designating the second sentence as subparagraph (b);
and
(3) adding at the end the following:
``(c) If an employee on the staff of a Member or on the
staff of a committee whose rate of pay is equal to or greater
than 75 percent of the rate of pay of a Member and employed
at such rate for more than 60 days in a calendar year, upon
leaving that position, becomes a registered lobbyist under
the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995, or is employed or
retained by such a registered lobbyist for the purpose of
influencing legislation, such employee may not lobby any
Member, officer, or employee of the Senate for a period of 1
year after leaving that position.''.
(b) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect 60 days
after the date of enactment of this title.
SEC. 109. PUBLIC DISCLOSURE BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS OF
EMPLOYMENT NEGOTIATIONS.
Rule XXXVII of the Standing Rules of the Senate is amended
by adding at the end the following:
``14. A Member shall not directly negotiate or have any
arrangement concerning prospective private employment until
after the election for his or her successor has been held,
unless such Member files a statement with the Secretary of
the Senate, for public disclosure, regarding such
negotiations or arrangements within 3 business days after the
commencement of such negotiation or arrangement, including
the name of the private entity or entities involved in such
negotiations or arrangements, the date such negotiations or
arrangements commenced, and must be signed by the Member.''.
SEC. 110. PROHIBIT OFFICIAL CONTACT WITH SPOUSE OR IMMEDIATE
FAMILY MEMBER OF MEMBER WHO IS A REGISTERED
LOBBYIST.
Rule XXXVII of the Standing Rules of the Senate is amended
by--
(1) redesignating paragraphs 10 through 12 as paragraphs 11
through 13, respectively; and
(2) inserting after paragraph 9, the following:
``10. (a) If a Member's spouse or immediate family member
is a registered lobbyist under the Lobbying Disclosure Act of
1995, or is employed or retained by such a registered
lobbyist for the purpose of influencing legislation, the
Member shall prohibit all staff employed by that Member
(including staff in personal, committee and leadership
offices) from having any official contact with the Member's
spouse or immediate family member.
``(b) In this paragraph, the term `immediate family member'
means the son, daughter, stepson, stepdaughter, son-in-law,
daughter-in-law, mother, father, stepmother, stepfather,
mother-in-law, father-in-law, brother, sister, stepbrother,
or stepsister of the Member.''.
SEC. 111. INFLUENCING HIRING DECISIONS.
Rule XLIII of the Standing Rules of the Senate is amended
by adding at the end the following:
``6. No Member shall, with the intent to influence on the
basis of partisan political affiliation an employment
decision or employment practice of any private entity--
``(1) take or withhold, or offer or threaten to take or
withhold, an official act; or
``(2) influence, or offer or threaten to influence the
official act of another.''.
SEC. 112. SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT ANY APPLICABLE
RESTRICTIONS ON CONGRESSIONAL BRANCH EMPLOYEES
SHOULD APPLY TO THE EXECUTIVE AND JUDICIAL
BRANCHES.
It is the sense of the Senate that any applicable
restrictions on Congressional branch employees in this title
should apply to the Executive and Judicial branches.
SEC. 113. AMOUNTS OF COLA ADJUSTMENTS NOT PAID TO CERTAIN
MEMBERS OF CONGRESS.
(a) In General.--Any adjustment under section 601(a) of the
Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (2 U.S.C. 31)
(relating to the cost of living adjustments for Members of
Congress) shall not be paid to any Member of Congress who
voted for any amendment (or against the tabling of any
amendment) that provided that such adjustment would not be
made.
(b) Deposit in Treasury.--Any amount not paid to a Member
of Congress under subsection (a) shall be transmitted to the
Treasury for deposit in the appropriations account under the
subheading ``medical services'' under the heading ``veterans
health administration''.
(c) Administration.--The salary of any Member of Congress
to whom subsection (a) applies shall be deemed to be the
salary in effect after the application of that subsection,
except that for purposes of determining any benefit
(including any retirement or insurance benefit), the salary
of that Member of Congress shall be deemed to be the salary
that Member of Congress would have received, but for that
subsection.
(d) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect on the
first day of the first applicable pay period beginning on or
after February 1, 2008.
SEC. 114. REQUIREMENT OF NOTICE OF INTENT TO PROCEED.
(a) In General.--The majority and minority leaders of the
Senate or their designees shall recognize a notice of intent
of a Senator who is a member of their caucus to object to
proceeding to a measure or matter only if the Senator--
(1) submits the notice of intent in writing to the
appropriate leader or their designee; and
(2) within 3 session days after the submission under
paragraph (1), submits for inclusion in the Congressional
Record and in the applicable calendar section described in
subsection (b) the following notice:
``I, Senator __, intend to object to proceeding to __,
dated __.''.
(b) Calendar.--The Secretary of the Senate shall establish
for both the Senate Calendar of Business and the Senate
Executive Calendar a separate section entitled ``Notices of
Intent to Object to Proceeding''. Each section shall include
the name of each Senator filing a notice under subsection
(a)(2), the measure or matter covered by the calendar that
the Senator objects to, and the date the objection was filed.
(c) Removal.--A Senator may have an item with respect to
the Senator removed from a calendar to which it was added
under subsection (b) by submitting for inclusion in the
Congressional Record the following notice:
``I, Senator __, do not object to proceeding to __, dated
__.''.
SEC. 115. EFFECTIVE DATE.
Except as otherwise provided in this title, this title
shall take effect on the date of enactment of this title.
TITLE II--LOBBYING TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2007
SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Legislative Transparency
and Accountability Act of 2007''.
Subtitle A--Enhancing Lobbying Disclosure
SEC. 211. QUARTERLY FILING OF LOBBYING DISCLOSURE REPORTS.
(a) Quarterly Filing Required.--Section 5 of the Lobbying
Disclosure Act of 1995 (in this title referred to as the
``Act'') (2 U.S.C. 1604) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in the subsection heading, by striking ``Semiannual''
and inserting ``Quarterly'';
(B) by striking ``the semiannual period'' and all that
follows through ``July of each year'' and inserting ``the
quarterly period beginning on the 20th day of January, April,
July, and October of each year or on the first business day
after the 20th day if that day is not a business day''; and
(C) by striking ``such semiannual period'' and inserting
``such quarterly period''; and
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking
``semiannual report'' and inserting ``quarterly report'';
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``semiannual filing
period'' and inserting ``quarterly period'';
(C) in paragraph (3), by striking ``semiannual period'' and
inserting ``quarterly period''; and
(D) in paragraph (4), by striking ``semiannual filing
period'' and inserting ``quarterly period''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Definition.--Section 3(10) of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1602)
is amended by striking ``six month period'' and inserting
``three-month period''.
(2) Registration.--Section 4 of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1603) is
amended--
(A) in subsection (a)(3)(A), by striking ``semiannual
period'' and inserting ``quarterly period''; and
(B) in subsection (b)(3)(A), by striking ``semiannual
period'' and inserting ``quarterly period''.
(3) Enforcement.--Section 6(a)(6) of the Act (2 U.S.C.
1605(6)) is amended by striking ``semiannual period'' and
inserting ``quarterly period''.
(4) Estimates.--Section 15 of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1610) is
amended--
(A) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ``semiannual period''
and inserting ``quarterly period''; and
[[Page 106]]
(B) in subsection (b)(1), by striking ``semiannual period''
and inserting ``quarterly period''.
(5) Dollar amounts.--
(A) Registration.--Section 4 of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1603) is
amended--
(i) in subsection (a)(3)(A)(i), by striking ``$5,000'' and
inserting ``$2,500'';
(ii) in subsection (a)(3)(A)(ii), by striking ``$20,000''
and inserting ``$10,000'';
(iii) in subsection (b)(3)(A), by striking ``$10,000'' and
inserting ``$5,000''; and
(iv) in subsection (b)(4), by striking ``$10,000'' and
inserting ``$5,000''.
(B) Reports.--Section 5 of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1604) is
amended--
(i) in subsection (c)(1), by striking ``$10,000'' and
``$20,000'' and inserting ``$5,000'' and ``$10,000'',
respectively; and
(ii) in subsection (c)(2), by striking ``$10,000'' both
places such term appears and inserting ``$5,000''.
SEC. 212. ANNUAL REPORT ON CONTRIBUTIONS.
Section 5 of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1604) is amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(d) Annual Report on Contributions.--Not later than 45
days after the end of the quarterly period beginning on the
first day of October of each year referred to in subsection
(a), a lobbyist registered under section 4(a)(1), or an
employee who is a lobbyist of an organization registered
under section 4(a)(2), shall file a report with the Secretary
of the Senate and the Clerk of the House of Representatives
containing--
``(1) the name of the lobbyist;
``(2) the employer of the lobbyist;
``(3) the name of each Federal candidate or officeholder,
leadership PAC, or political party committee, to whom a
contribution equal to or exceeding $200 was made within the
past year, and the date and amount of such contribution; and
``(4) the name of each Federal candidate or officeholder,
leadership PAC, or political party committee for whom a
fundraising event was hosted, co-hosted, or otherwise
sponsored, within the past year, and the date and location of
the event.''.
SEC. 213. PUBLIC DATABASE OF LOBBYING DISCLOSURE INFORMATION.
(a) Database Required.--Section 6 of the Act (2 U.S.C.
1605) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (7), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in paragraph (8), by striking the period and inserting
``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(9) maintain, and make available to the public over the
Internet, without a fee or other access charge, in a
searchable, sortable, and downloadable manner, an electronic
database that--
``(A) includes the information contained in registrations
and reports filed under this Act;
``(B) directly links the information it contains to the
information disclosed in reports filed with the Federal
Election Commission under section 304 of the Federal Election
Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 434); and
``(C) is searchable and sortable, at a minimum, by each of
the categories of information described in section 4(b) or
5(b).''.
(b) Availability of Reports.--Section 6(a)(4) of the Act is
amended by inserting before the semicolon the following:
``and, in the case of a report filed in electronic form under
section 5(e), shall make such report available for public
inspection over the Internet not more than 48 hours after the
report is filed''.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out
paragraph (9) of section 6(a) of the Act, as added by
subsection (a).
SEC. 214. DISCLOSURE BY REGISTERED LOBBYISTS OF ALL PAST
EXECUTIVE AND CONGRESSIONAL EMPLOYMENT.
Section 4(b)(6) of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1603) is amended by
striking ``or a covered legislative branch official'' and all
that follows through ``as a lobbyist on behalf of the
client,'' and inserting ``or a covered legislative branch
official,''.
SEC. 215. DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYIST TRAVEL AND PAYMENTS.
Section 5(b) of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1604(b)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (3), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon;
(2) in paragraph (4), by striking the period and inserting
a semicolon; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(5) the name of each covered legislative branch official
or covered executive branch official for whom the registrant
provided, or directed or arranged to be provided, or the
employee listed as a lobbyist directed or arranged to be
provided, any payment or reimbursements for travel and
related expenses in connection with the duties of such
covered official, including for each such official--
``(A) an itemization of the payments or reimbursements
provided to finance the travel and related expenses and to
whom the payments or reimbursements were made, including any
payment or reimbursement made with the express or implied
understanding or agreement that such funds will be used for
travel and related expenses;
``(B) the purpose and final itinerary of the trip,
including a description of all meetings, tours, events, and
outings attended;
``(C) the names of any registrant or individual employed by
the registrant who traveled on any such trip;
``(D) the identity of the listed sponsor or sponsors of
travel; and
``(E) the identity of any person or entity, other than the
listed sponsor or sponsors of the travel, which directly or
indirectly provided for payment of travel and related
expenses at the request or suggestion of the registrant or
the employee;
``(6) the date, recipient, and amount of funds contributed
or disbursed by, or arranged by, a registrant or employee
listed as a lobbyist--
``(A) to pay the costs of an event to honor or recognize a
covered legislative branch official or covered executive
branch official;
``(B) to, or on behalf of, an entity that is named for a
covered legislative branch official or covered executive
branch official, or to a person or entity in recognition of
such official;
``(C) to an entity established, financed, maintained, or
controlled by a covered legislative branch official or
covered executive branch official, or an entity designated by
such official; or
``(D) to pay the costs of a meeting, retreat, conference or
other similar event held by, or for the benefit of, 1 or more
covered legislative branch officials or covered executive
branch officials;
except that this paragraph shall not apply to any payment or
reimbursement made from funds required to be reported under
section 304 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2
U.S.C. 434); and
``(7) the date, recipient, and amount of any gift (that
under the rules of the House of Representatives or Senate
counts towards the one hundred dollar cumulative annual limit
described in such rules) valued in excess of $20 given by a
registrant or employee listed as a lobbyist to a covered
legislative branch official or covered executive branch
official;
``(8) for each client, immediately after listing the
client, an identification of whether the client is a public
entity, including a State or local government or a
department, agency, special purpose district, or other
instrumentality controlled by a State or local government, or
a private entity.
For purposes of paragraph (7), the term `gift' means a
gratuity, favor, discount, entertainment, hospitality, loan,
forbearance, or other item having monetary value. The term
includes gifts of services, training, transportation,
lodging, and meals, whether provided in kind, by purchase of
a ticket, payment in advance, or reimbursement after the
expense has been incurred. Information required by paragraph
(5) shall be disclosed as provided in this Act not later than
30 days after the travel.''.
SEC. 216. INCREASED PENALTY FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH
LOBBYING DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS.
Section 7 of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1606) is amended by striking
``$50,000'' and inserting ``$100,000''.
SEC. 217. DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES BY CERTAIN
COALITIONS AND ASSOCIATIONS.
(a) In General.--Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act (2 U.S.C.
1603(b)(3)(B)) is amended to read as follows:
``(B) participates in a substantial way in the planning,
supervision or control of such lobbying activities;''.
(b) No Donor or Membership List Disclosure.--Section 4(b)
of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1603(b)) is amended by adding at the end
the following:
``No disclosure is required under paragraph (3)(B) if it is
publicly available knowledge that the organization that would
be identified is affiliated with the client or has been
publicly disclosed to have provided funding to the client,
unless the organization in whole or in major part plans,
supervises or controls such lobbying activities. Nothing in
paragraph (3)(B) shall be construed to require the disclosure
of any information about individuals who are members of, or
donors to, an entity treated as a client by this Act or an
organization identified under that paragraph.''.
SEC. 218. DISCLOSURE OF ENFORCEMENT FOR NONCOMPLIANCE.
Section 6 of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1605) is amended--
(1) by inserting ``(a)'' before ``The Secretary of the
Senate'';
(2) in paragraph (8), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(3) in paragraph (9), by striking the period and inserting
``; and'';
(4) after paragraph (9), by inserting the following:
``(10) provide to the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on
Government Reform of the House of Representatives the
aggregate number of lobbyists and lobbying firms, separately
accounted, referred to the United States Attorney for the
District of Columbia for noncompliance as required by
paragraph (8) on a semi-annual basis''; and
(5) by inserting at the end the following:
``(b) Enforcement Report.--The United States Attorney for
the District of Columbia shall report to the Committee on
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and the Committee
on the Judiciary of the Senate
[[Page 107]]
and the Committee on Government Reform and the Committee on
the Judiciary of the House of Representatives on a semi-
annual basis the aggregate number of enforcement actions
taken by the Attorney's office under this Act and the amount
of fines, if any, by case, except that such report shall not
include the names of individuals or personally identifiable
information.''.
SEC. 219. ELECTRONIC FILING OF LOBBYING DISCLOSURE REPORTS.
Section 5 of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1604) is amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(e) Electronic Filing Required.--A report required to be
filed under this section shall be filed in electronic form,
in addition to any other form. The Secretary of the Senate
and the Clerk of the House of Representatives shall use the
same electronic software for receipt and recording of filings
under this Act.''.
SEC. 220. DISCLOSURE OF PAID EFFORTS TO STIMULATE GRASSROOTS
LOBBYING.
(a) Definitions.--Section 3 of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1602) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (7), by adding at the end of the
following: ``Lobbying activities include paid efforts to
stimulate grassroots lobbying, but do not include grassroots
lobbying.''; and
(2) by adding at the end of the following:
``(17) Grassroots lobbying.--The term `grassroots lobbying'
means the voluntary efforts of members of the general public
to communicate their own views on an issue to Federal
officials or to encourage other members of the general public
to do the same.
``(18) Paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying.--
``(A) In general.--The term `paid efforts to stimulate
grassroots lobbying' means any paid attempt in support of
lobbying contacts on behalf of a client to influence the
general public or segments thereof to contact one or more
covered legislative or executive branch officials (or
Congress as a whole) to urge such officials (or Congress) to
take specific action with respect to a matter described in
section 3(8)(A), except that such term does not include any
communications by an entity directed to its members,
employees, officers, or shareholders.
``(B) Paid attempt to influence the general public or
segments thereof.--The term `paid attempt to influence the
general public or segments thereof' does not include an
attempt to influence directed at less than 500 members of the
general public.
``(C) Registrant.--For purposes of this paragraph, a person
or entity is a member of a registrant if the person or
entity--
``(i) pays dues or makes a contribution of more than a
nominal amount to the entity;
``(ii) makes a contribution of more than a nominal amount
of time to the entity;
``(iii) is entitled to participate in the governance of the
entity;
``(iv) is 1 of a limited number of honorary or life members
of the entity; or
``(v) is an employee, officer, director or member of the
entity.
``(19) Grassroots lobbying firm.--The term `grassroots
lobbying firm' means a person or entity that--
``(A) is retained by 1 or more clients to engage in paid
efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying on behalf of such
clients; and
``(B) receives income of, or spends or agrees to spend, an
aggregate of $25,000 or more for such efforts in any
quarterly period.''.
(b) Registration.--Section 4(a) of the Act (2 U.S.C.
1603(a)) is amended--
(1) in the flush matter at the end of paragraph (3)(A), by
adding at the end the following: ``For purposes of clauses
(i) and (ii), the term `lobbying activities' shall not
include paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying.''; and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following:
``(4) Filing by grassroots lobbying firms.--Not later than
45 days after a grassroots lobbying firm first is retained by
a client to engage in paid efforts to stimulate grassroots
lobbying, such grassroots lobbying firm shall register with
the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House of
Representatives.''.
(c) Separate Itemization of Paid Efforts to Stimulate
Grassroots Lobbying.--Section 5(b) of the Act (2 U.S.C.
1604(b)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (3), by--
(A) inserting after ``total amount of all income'' the
following: ``(including a separate good faith estimate of the
total amount of income relating specifically to paid efforts
to stimulate grassroots lobbying and, within that amount, a
good faith estimate of the total amount specifically relating
to paid advertising)''; and
(B) inserting ``or a grassroots lobbying firm'' after
``lobbying firm'';
(2) in paragraph (4), by inserting after ``total expenses''
the following: ``(including a good faith estimate of the
total amount of expenses relating specifically to paid
efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying and, within that
total amount, a good faith estimate of the total amount
specifically relating to paid advertising)''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``Subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (2) shall not
apply with respect to reports relating to paid efforts to
stimulate grassroots lobbying activities.''.
(d) Good Faith Estimates and De Minimis Rules for Paid
Efforts to Stimulate Grassroots Lobbying.--
(1) In general.--Section 5(c) of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1604(c))
is amended to read as follows:
``(c) Estimates of Income or Expenses.--For purposes of
this section, the following shall apply:
``(1) Estimates of income or expenses shall be made as
follows:
``(A) Estimates of amounts in excess of $10,0000 shall be
rounded to the nearest $20,000.
``(B) In the event income or expenses do not exceed
$10,000, the registrant shall include a statement that income
or expenses totaled less than $10,000 for the reporting
period.
``(2) Estimates of income or expenses relating specifically
to paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying shall be
made as follows:
``(A) Estimates of amounts in excess of $25,000 shall be
rounded to the nearest $20,000.
``(B) In the event income or expenses do not exceed
$25,000, the registrant shall include a statement that income
or expenses totaled less than $25,000 for the reporting
period.''.
(2) Tax reporting.--Section 15 of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1610)
is amended--
(A) in subsection (a)--
(i) in paragraph (1), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon;
(ii) in paragraph (2), by striking the period and inserting
``; and''; and
(iii) by adding at the end the following:
``(3) in lieu of using the definition of paid efforts to
stimulate grassroots lobbying in section 3(18), consider as
paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying only those
activities that are grassroots expenditures as defined in
section 4911(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.'';
and
(B) in subsection (b)--
(i) in paragraph (1), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon;
(ii) in paragraph (2), by striking the period and inserting
``; and''; and
(iii) by adding at the end the following:
``(3) in lieu of using the definition of paid efforts to
stimulate grassroots lobbying in section 3(18), consider as
paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying only those
activities that are grassroots expenditures as defined in
section 4911(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.''.
SEC. 221. ELECTRONIC FILING AND PUBLIC DATABASE FOR LOBBYISTS
FOR FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS.
(a) Electronic Filing.--Section 2 of the Foreign Agents
Registration Act (22 U.S.C. 612) is amended by adding at the
end the following new subsection:
``(g) Electronic Filing of Registration Statements and
Updates.--A registration statement or update required to be
filed under this section shall be filed in electronic form,
in addition to any other form that may be required by the
Attorney General.''.
(b) Public Database.--Section 6 of the Foreign Agents
Registration Act (22 U.S.C. 616) is amended by adding at the
end the following new subsection:
``(d) Public Database of Registration Statements and
Updates.--
``(1) In general.--The Attorney General shall maintain, and
make available to the public over the Internet, without a fee
or other access charge, in a searchable, sortable, and
downloadable manner, an electronic database that--
``(A) includes the information contained in registration
statements and updates filed under this Act;
``(B) directly links the information it contains to the
information disclosed in reports filed with the Federal
Election Commission under section 304 of the Federal Election
Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 434); and
``(C) is searchable and sortable, at a minimum, by each of
the categories of information described in section 2(a).
``(2) Accountability.--Each registration statement and
update filed in electronic form pursuant to section 2(g)
shall be made available for public inspection over the
internet not more than 48 hours after the registration
statement or update is filed.''.
SEC. 222. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This subtitle and the amendments made by this subtitle
shall take effect January 1, 2008.
Subtitle B--Oversight of Ethics and Lobbying
SEC. 231. COMPTROLLER GENERAL AUDIT AND ANNUAL REPORT.
(a) Audit Required.--The Comptroller General shall audit on
an annual basis lobbying registration and reports filed under
the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 to determine the extent
of compliance or noncompliance with the requirements of that
Act by lobbyists and their clients.
(b) Annual Reports.--Not later than April 1 of each year,
the Comptroller General shall submit to Congress a report on
the review required by subsection (a). The report shall
include the Comptroller General's assessment of the matters
required to be emphasized by that subsection and any
recommendations of the Comptroller General to--
(1) improve the compliance by lobbyists with the
requirements of that Act; and
(2) provide the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of
the House of Representatives with the resources and
authorities needed for
[[Page 108]]
effective oversight and enforcement of that Act.
SEC. 232. MANDATORY SENATE ETHICS TRAINING FOR MEMBERS AND
STAFF.
(a) Training Program.--The Select Committee on Ethics shall
conduct ongoing ethics training and awareness programs for
Members of the Senate and Senate staff.
(b) Requirements.--The ethics training program conducted by
the Select Committee on Ethics shall be completed by--
(1) new Senators or staff not later than 60 days after
commencing service or employment; and
(2) Senators and Senate staff serving or employed on the
date of enactment of this Act not later than 120 days after
the date of enactment of this Act.
SEC. 233. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING SELF-REGULATION
WITHIN THE LOBBYING COMMUNITY.
It is the sense of the Senate that the lobbying community
should develop proposals for multiple self-regulatory
organizations which could provide--
(1) for the creation of standards for the organizations
appropriate to the type of lobbying and individuals to be
served;
(2) training for the lobbying community on law, ethics,
reporting requirements, and disclosure requirements;
(3) for the development of educational materials for the
public on how to responsibly hire a lobbyist or lobby firm;
(4) standards regarding reasonable fees to clients;
(5) for the creation of a third-party certification program
that includes ethics training; and
(6) for disclosure of requirements to clients regarding fee
schedules and conflict of interest rules.
SEC. 234. ANNUAL ETHICS COMMITTEES REPORTS.
The Committee on Standards of Official Conduct of the House
of Representatives and the Select Committee on Ethics of the
Senate shall each issue an annual report due no later than
January 31, describing the following:
(1) The number of alleged violations of Senate or House
rules including the number received from third parties, from
Members or staff within each House, or inquires raised by a
Member or staff of the respective House or Senate committee.
(2) A list of the number of alleged violations that were
dismissed--
(A) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction; or
(B) because they failed to provide sufficient facts as to
any material violation of the House or Senate rules beyond
mere allegation or assertion.
(3) The number of complaints in which the committee staff
conducted a preliminary inquiry.
(4) The number of complaints that staff presented to the
committee with recommendations that the complaint be
dismissed.
(5) The number of complaints that the staff presented to
the committee with recommendation that the investigation
proceed.
(6) The number of ongoing inquiries.
(7) The number of complaints that the committee dismissed
for lack of substantial merit.
(8) The number of private letters of admonition or public
letters of admonition issued.
(9) The number of matters resulting in a disciplinary
sanction.
Subtitle C--Slowing the Revolving Door
SEC. 241. AMENDMENTS TO RESTRICTIONS ON FORMER OFFICERS,
EMPLOYEES, AND ELECTED OFFICIALS OF THE
EXECUTIVE AND LEGISLATIVE BRANCHES.
(a) Very Senior Executive Personnel.--The matter after
subparagraph (C) in section 207(d)(1) of title 18, United
States Code, is amended by striking ``within 1 year'' and
inserting ``within 2 years''.
(b) Restrictions on Lobbying by Members of Congress and
Employees of Congress.--Subsection (e) of section 207 of
title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking ``within 1 year'' and
inserting ``within 2 years'';
(2) by striking paragraphs (2) through (5) and inserting
the following:
``(2) Congressional staff.--
``(A) Prohibition.--Any person who is an employee of a
House of Congress and who, within 1 year after that person
leaves office, knowingly makes, with the intent to influence,
any communication to or appearance before any of the persons
described in subparagraph (B), on behalf of any other person
(except the United States) in connection with any matter on
which such former employee seeks action by a Member, officer,
or employee of either House of Congress, in his or her
official capacity, shall be punished as provided in section
216 of this title.
``(B) Contact persons covered.--persons referred to in
subparagraph (A) with respect to appearances or
communications are any Member, officer, or employee of the
House of Congress in which the person subject to subparagraph
(A) was employed. This subparagraph shall not apply to
contacts with staff of the Secretary of the Senate or the
Clerk of the House of Representatives regarding compliance
with lobbying disclosure requirements under the Lobbying
Disclosure Act of 1995.'';
(3) in paragraph (6)--
(A) by striking ``paragraphs (2), (3), and (4)'' and
inserting ``paragraph (2)'';
(B) by striking ``(A)'';
(C) by striking subparagraph (B); and
(D) by redesignating the paragraph as paragraph (3); and
(4) by redesignating paragraph (7) as paragraph (4).
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (b)
shall take effect 60 days after the date of enactment of this
Act.
Subtitle D--Ban on Provision of Gifts or Travel by Lobbyists in
Violation of the Rules of Congress
SEC. 251. PROHIBITION ON PROVISION OF GIFTS OR TRAVEL BY
REGISTERED LOBBYISTS TO MEMBERS OF CONGRESS AND
TO CONGRESSIONAL EMPLOYEES.
The Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``SEC. 25. PROHIBITION ON PROVISION OF GIFTS OR TRAVEL BY
REGISTERED LOBBYISTS TO MEMBERS OF CONGRESS AND
TO CONGRESSIONAL EMPLOYEES.
``(a) Prohibition.--A registered lobbyist may not knowingly
make a gift or provide travel to a Member, Delegate, Resident
Commissioner, officer, or employee of Congress, unless the
gift or travel may be accepted under the rules of the House
of Representatives or the Senate.
``(b) Penalty.--Any registered lobbyist who violates this
section shall be subject to penalties provided in section
7.''.
Subtitle E--Commission to Strengthen Confidence in Congress Act of 2007
SEC. 261. SHORT TITLE.
This subtitle may be cited as the ``Commission to
Strengthen Confidence in Congress Act of 2007''.
SEC. 262. ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMISSION.
There is established in the legislative branch a commission
to be known as the ``Commission to Strengthen Confidence in
Congress'' (in this subtitle referred to as the
``Commission'').
SEC. 263. PURPOSES.
The purposes of the Commission are to--
(1) evaluate and report the effectiveness of current
congressional ethics requirements, if penalties are enforced
and sufficient, and make recommendations for new penalties;
(2) weigh the need for improved ethical conduct with the
need for lawmakers to have access to expertise on public
policy issues;
(3) determine whether the current system for enforcing
ethics rules and standards of conduct is sufficiently
effective and transparent;
(4) determine whether the statutory framework governing
lobbying disclosure should be expanded to include additional
means of attempting to influence Members of Congress, senior
staff, and high-ranking executive branch officials;
(5) analyze and evaluate the changes made by this Act to
determine whether additional changes need to be made to
uphold and enforce standards of ethical conduct and
disclosure requirements; and
(6) investigate and report to Congress on its findings,
conclusions, and recommendations for reform.
SEC. 264. COMPOSITION OF COMMISSION.
(a) Members.--The Commission shall be composed of 10
members, of whom--
(1) the chair and vice chair shall be selected by agreement
of the majority leader and minority leader of the House of
Representatives and the majority leader and minority leader
of the Senate;
(2) 2 members shall be appointed by the senior member of
the Senate leadership of the Republican Party, 1 of which is
a former member of the Senate;
(3) 2 members shall be appointed by the senior member of
the Senate leadership of the Democratic Party, 1 of which is
a former member of the Senate;
(4) 2 members shall be appointed by the senior member of
the leadership of the House of Representatives of the
Republican Party, 1 of which is a former member of the House
of Representatives; and
(5) 2 members shall be appointed by the senior member of
the leadership of the House of Representatives of the
Democratic Party, 1 of which is a former member of the House
of Representatives.
(b) Qualifications; Initial Meeting.--
(1) Political party affiliation.--Five members of the
Commission shall be Democrats and 5 Republicans.
(2) Nongovernmental appointees.--An individual appointed to
the Commission may not be an officer or employee of the
Federal Government or any State or local government.
(3) Other qualifications.--It is the sense of Congress that
individuals appointed to the Commission should be prominent
United States citizens, with national recognition and
significant depth of experience in professions such as
governmental service, government consulting, government
contracting, the law, higher education, historian, business,
public relations, and fundraising.
[[Page 109]]
(4) Deadline for appointment.--All members of the
Commission shall be appointed on a date 3 months after the
date of enactment of this Act.
(5) Initial meeting.--The Commission shall meet and begin
the operations of the Commission as soon as practicable.
(c) Quorum; Vacancies.--After its initial meeting, the
Commission shall meet upon the call of the chairman or a
majority of its members. Six members of the Commission shall
constitute a quorum. Any vacancy in the Commission shall not
affect its powers, but shall be filled in the same manner in
which the original appointment was made.
SEC. 265. FUNCTIONS OF COMMISSION.
The functions of the Commission are to submit to Congress a
report required by this title containing such findings,
conclusions, and recommendations as the Commission shall
determine, including proposing organization, coordination,
planning, management arrangements, procedures, rules and
regulations--
(1) related to section 263; or
(2) related to any other areas the commission unanimously
votes to be relevant to its mandate to recommend reforms to
strengthen ethical safeguards in Congress.
SEC. 266. POWERS OF COMMISSION.
(a) Hearings and Evidence.--The Commission or, on the
authority of the Commission, any subcommittee or member
thereof, may, for the purpose of carrying out this title hold
such hearings and sit and act at such times and places, take
such testimony, receive such evidence, administer such oaths.
(b) Obtaining Information.--Upon request of the Commission,
the head of any agency or instrumentality of the Federal
Government shall furnish information deemed necessary by the
panel to enable it to carry out its duties.
(c) Limit on Commission Authority.--The Commission shall
not conduct any law enforcement investigation, function as a
court of law, or otherwise usurp the duties and
responsibilities of the ethics committee of the House of
Representatives or the Senate.
SEC. 267. ADMINISTRATION.
(a) Compensation.--Except as provided in subsection (b),
members of the Commission shall receive no additional pay,
allowances, or benefits by reason of their service on the
Commission.
(b) Travel Expenses and Per Diem.--Each member of the
Commission shall receive travel expenses and per diem in lieu
of subsistence in accordance with sections 5702 and 5703 of
title 5, United States Code.
(c) Staff and Support Services.--
(1) Staff director.--
(A) Appointment.--The Chair (or Co-Chairs) in accordance
with the rules agreed upon by the Commission shall appoint a
staff director for the Commission.
(B) Compensation.--The staff director shall be paid at a
rate not to exceed the rate established for level V of the
Executive Schedule under section 5315 of title 5, United
States Code.
(2) Staff.--The Chair (or Co-Chairs) in accordance with the
rules agreed upon by the Commission shall appoint such
additional personnel as the Commission determines to be
necessary.
(3) Applicability of civil service laws.--The staff
director and other members of the staff of the Commission
shall be appointed without regard to the provisions of title
5, United States Code, governing appointments in the
competitive service, and shall be paid without regard to the
provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of
such title relating to classification and General Schedule
pay rates.
(4) Experts and consultants.--With the approval of the
Commission, the staff director may procure temporary and
intermittent services under section 3109(b) of title 5,
United States Code.
(d) Physical Facilities.--The Architect of the Capitol, in
consultation with the appropriate entities in the legislative
branch, shall locate and provide suitable office space for
the operation of the Commission on a nonreimbursable basis.
The facilities shall serve as the headquarters of the
Commission and shall include all necessary equipment and
incidentals required for the proper functioning of the
Commission.
(e) Administrative Support Services and Other Assistance.--
(1) In general.--Upon the request of the Commission, the
Architect of the Capitol and the Administrator of General
Services shall provide to the Commission on a nonreimbursable
basis such administrative support services as the Commission
may request.
(2) Additional support.--In addition to the assistance set
forth in paragraph (1), departments and agencies of the
United States may provide the Commission such services,
funds, facilities, staff, and other support services as the
Commission may deem advisable and as may be authorized by
law.
(f) Use of Mails.--The Commission may use the United States
mails in the same manner and under the same conditions as
Federal agencies and shall, for purposes of the frank, be
considered a commission of Congress as described in section
3215 of title 39, United States Code.
(g) Printing.--For purposes of costs relating to printing
and binding, including the cost of personnel detailed from
the Government Printing Office, the Commission shall be
deemed to be a committee of the Congress.
SEC. 268. SECURITY CLEARANCES FOR COMMISSION MEMBERS AND
STAFF.
The appropriate Federal agencies or departments shall
cooperate with the Commission in expeditiously providing to
the Commission members and staff appropriate security
clearances to the extent possible pursuant to existing
procedures and requirements, except that no person shall be
provided with access to classified information under this
title without the appropriate security clearances.
SEC. 269. COMMISSION REPORTS; TERMINATION.
(a) Annual Reports.--The Commission shall submit--
(1) an initial report to Congress not later than July 1,
2007; and
(2) annual reports to Congress after the report required by
paragraph (1);
containing such findings, conclusions, and recommendations
for corrective measures as have been agreed to by a majority
of Commission members.
(b) Administrative Activities.--During the 60-day period
beginning on the date of submission of each annual report and
the final report under this section, the Commission shall--
(1) be available to provide testimony to committees of
Congress concerning such reports; and
(2) take action to appropriately disseminate such reports.
(c) Termination of Commission.--
(1) Final report.--Five years after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Commission shall submit to Congress a final
report containing information described in subsection (a).
(2) Termination.--The Commission, and all the authorities
of this title, shall terminate 60 days after the date on
which the final report is submitted under paragraph (1), and
the Commission may use such 60-day period for the purpose of
concluding its activities.
SEC. 270. FUNDING.
There are authorized such sums as necessary to carry out
this title.
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to join my colleagues in
cosponsoring S. 1, a bill to provide greater transparency in the
legislative process.
The recent elections sent a clear message to Congress that the
American people have lost confidence in their government. Without the
support of the people, we cannot tackle the difficult issues that this
Congress must face. This bill, then, is a critical part of restoring
the people's trust by reforming ethics and lobbying rules.
It is important to remember that the conduct of most Members and
their staffs is beyond reproach. Likewise, it is important to recognize
that lobbying--whether done on behalf of the business community, an
environmental organization, a children's advocacy group, or any other
cause--can provide us with useful information and analysis that aids,
but does not dictate, the decision-making process. Unfortunately, in
the minds of many Americans, ``lobbying'' has come to be associated
with expensive paid vacations masquerading as fact-finding trips,
special access to Members and staff that an ordinary citizen could
never hope to have, and undue influence that leads to decisions made in
the best interest of the lobbyist and his or her client instead of the
American people.
S. 1 which is nearly identical to a bill that was the product of
bipartisan efforts by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs and the Senate Committee on Rules and
Administration and that was passed by this Senate just last year--
includes a number of important provisions that will help to restore the
public image of the United States Congress.
S. 1 bans gifts from lobbyists. This is clear, brightline rule that
diminishes the appearance of impropriety that gifts can create.
S. 1 requires greater disclosure of the sponsors of and the purposes
for earmarks included in a bill so that the people can know where tax
dollars are being spent and why.
S. 1 eliminates floor privileges for former Members who are seeking
to lobby other members. They will enjoy no more access to Senators and
Congressmen than any other citizen.
S. 1 will eliminate the practice of anonymous holds in the Senate so
that we can bring debate into the open and not simply kill a bill with
a secret hold.
S. 1 will require enhanced disclosure of the activities of groups
lobbying Congress so that the public can easily
[[Page 110]]
find out which interests are trying to influence the decisions we make.
S. 1 will slow the revolving door between the Hill and the private
sector by limiting the ability of departing Members and staff to lobby
their former colleagues.
While I am pleased to be a cosponsor of this bill, I also believe
strongly that it would be improved by the addition of an independent
Office of Public Integrity within the Legislative Branch. This Office
would be able to conduct nonpartisan investigations of possible ethics
violations. These investigations would help to promote public
confidence in the enforcement of any laws that we pass to enhance
congressional ethics. During debate on this bill last year, an
amendment that Senator Lieberman, Senator McCain, and I offered to
create this Office was defeated. However, I hope my colleagues have
taken the lessons of the recent elections to heart and that the idea of
an Office of Public Integrity will be approved this year. To that end,
I am also cosponsoring Senator McCain's lobbying reform package, which
he has introduced today and which contains a number of the provisions
of S. 1 as well as creating an independent Office of Public Integrity.
I once again commend my colleagues on recognizing the importance of
this issue by making it our first priority in the 110th Congress. I
urge the Senate to work quickly to get this legislation finished so
that we can move on from the task of governing ourselves and get down
to the business of governing our Nation.
______
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Leahy, Ms. Mikulski,
Mr. Schumer, Mrs. Clinton, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Kohl, Ms.
Stabenow, and Mr. Webb):
S. 3. A bill to amend part D of title XVIII of the Social Security
Act to provide for fair prescription drug prices for Medicare
beneficiaries; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the
bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
record, as follows:
S. 3
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; SENSE OF THE CONGRESS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Medicare
Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act of 2007''.
(b) Sense of the Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress
that the Congress should enact, and the President should
sign, legislation to amend part D of title XVIII of the
Social Security Act to provide for fair prescription drug
prices for Medicare beneficiaries.
______
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. Lieberman, Ms. Collins, Mr. Leahy,
Mr. Schumer, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Lautenberg, Ms. Stabenow, Mr.
Webb, Mr. Menendez, and Ms. Landrieu):
S. 4. A bill to make the United States more secure by implementing
unfinished recommendations of the 9/11 Commission to fight the war on
terror more effectively, to improve homeland security, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the
bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 4
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 ``Improving America's Security
by Implementing Unfinished Recommendations of the 9/11
Commission Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
It is the sense of Congress that Congress should enact, and
the President should sign, legislation to make the United
States more secure by implementing unfinished recommendations
of the 9/11 Commission to fight the war on terror more
effectively and to improve homeland security.
______
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Specter, Mr. Kennedy,
Mr. Hatch, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Smith, Mr. Durbin, Mr.
Lautenberg, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Schumer, Ms. Mikulski, Mrs. Clinton,
Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Kohl, Ms. Stabenow,
Mr. Webb, Mr. Kerry, Mrs. Lincoln, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Menendez, Mr.
Reed, Mr. Akaka, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Nelson of
Florida, Mr. Levin, Mr. Obama, and Mr. Inouye):
S. 5. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for
human embryonic stem cell research; read the first time.
(The bill will be printed in a future edition of the Record.)
______
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. Bingaman, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Schumer,
Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Lautenberg, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Leahy, Ms.
Stabenow, Mr. Webb, Mr. Salazar, and Mr. Menendez):
S. 6. A bill to enhance the security of the United States by reducing
the dependence of the United States on foreign and unsustainable energy
sources and the risks of global warming, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Finance.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the
bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 6
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 ``National Energy and
Environmental Security Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
It is the sense of Congress that Congress should enact, and
the President should sign, legislation to enhance the
security of the United States by reducing the dependence of
the United States on foreign and unsustainable energy sources
and the risks of global warming by--
(1) requiring reductions in emissions of greenhouse gases;
(2) diversifying and expanding the use of secure,
efficient, and environmentally-friendly energy supplies and
technologies;
(3) reducing the burdens on consumers of rising energy
prices;
(4) eliminating tax giveaways to large energy companies;
and
(5) preventing energy price gouging, profiteering, and
market manipulation.
______
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Schumer, Mrs. Clinton,
Ms. Mikulski, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Akaka, Ms.
Cantwell, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Levin,
Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Webb, Mr. Menendez, Ms. Landrieu, Mr.
Sanders, Mr. Reed, and Mr. Dodd):
S. 7. A bill to amend title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965
and other laws and provisions and urge Congress to make college more
affordable through increased Federal Pell Grants and providing more
favorable student loans and other benefits, and for other purposes; to
the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the
bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 7
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``College Opportunity Act of
2007''.
SEC. 2. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
It is the sense of Congress that the Congress should enact,
and the President should sign, legislation to amend title IV
of the Higher Education Act of 1965 and other laws and
provisions to make college more affordable through increased
Federal Pell Grants and providing more favorable student
loans and other benefits.
______
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. Levin, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Lautenberg,
Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Leahy, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Webb, Mr. Menendez,
and Ms. Landrieu):
S. 8. A bill to restore and enhance the capabilities of the Armed
Forces, to
[[Page 111]]
enhance the readiness of the Armed Forces, to support the men and women
of the Armed Forces, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Armed
Services.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the
bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 8
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 ``Rebuilding America's
Military Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT OF
THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES.
It is the sense of Congress that Congress should enact
legislation--
(1) to restore and enhance the capabilities of the Armed
Forces for deterrence, combat, and post-conflict operations;
(2) to enhance the readiness of the Armed Forces, including
by the reset of military equipment; and
(3) to support the men and women of the Armed Forces,
including the members of the National Guard and Reserves,
through the provision of quality health care and enhanced
educational assistance.
______
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Schumer, Ms. Cantwell,
and Ms. Stabenow):
S. 9. A bill to recognize the heritage of the United States as a
nation of immigrants and to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act
to provide for more effective border and employment enforcement, to
prevent illegal immigration, and to reform and rationalize avenues for
legal immigration, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the
bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 9
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 ``Comprehensive Immigration
Reform Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
It is the sense of Congress that the Senate and the House
of Representatives should pass, and the President should
sign, legislation to recognize the heritage of the United
States as a nation of immigrants and to amend the Immigration
and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.) to provide for
more effective border and employment enforcement, to prevent
illegal immigration, and to reform and rationalize avenues
for legal immigration.
______
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. Conrad, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Schumer,
Mr. Salazar, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Leahy, Ms. Stabenow, Mr.
Menendez, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Harkin, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Durbin, and
Mr. Obama):
S. 10 A bill to reinstate the pay-as-you-go requirement and reduce
budget deficits by strengthening budget enforcement and fiscal
responsibility; to the Committee on the Budget.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the
bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 10
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 ``Restoring Fiscal Discipline
Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. PAY-AS-YOU-GO POINT OF ORDER IN THE SENATE.
(a) Pay-as-You-Go Point of Order in the Senate.--
(1) In general.--For purposes of Senate enforcement, it
shall not be in order in the Senate to consider any direct
spending or revenue legislation that would increase the on-
budget deficit or cause an on-budget deficit for any one of
the 4 applicable time periods as measured in paragraphs (5)
and (6).
(2) Applicable time periods.--For purposes of this
subsection, the term ``applicable time periods'' means any 1
of the 4 following periods:
(A) The current year.
(B) The budget year.
(C) The period of the 5 fiscal years following the current
year.
(D) The period of the 5 fiscal years following the 5 fiscal
years referred to in subparagraph (C).
(3) Direct-spending legislation.--For purposes of this
subsection and except as provided in paragraph (4), the term
``direct-spending legislation'' means any bill, joint
resolution, amendment, motion, or conference report that
affects direct spending as that term is defined by, and
interpreted for purposes of, the Balanced Budget and
Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
(4) Exclusion.--For purposes of this subsection, the terms
``direct-spending legislation'' and ``revenue legislation''
do not include--
(A) any concurrent resolution on the budget; or
(B) any provision of legislation that affects the full
funding of, and continuation of, the deposit insurance
guarantee commitment in effect on the date of enactment of
the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990.
(5) Baseline.--Estimates prepared pursuant to this section
shall--
(A) use the baseline surplus or deficit used for the most
recently adopted concurrent resolution on the budget; and
(B) be calculated under the requirements of subsections (b)
through (d) of section 257 of the Balanced Budget and
Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 for fiscal years beyond
those covered by that concurrent resolution on the budget.
(6) Prior surplus.--If direct spending or revenue
legislation increases the on-budget deficit or causes an on-
budget deficit when taken individually, it must also increase
the on-budget deficit or cause an on-budget deficit when
taken together with all direct spending and revenue
legislation enacted since the beginning of the calendar year
not accounted for in the baseline under paragraph (5)(A),
except that direct spending or revenue effects resulting in
net deficit reduction enacted pursuant to reconciliation
instructions since the beginning of that same calendar year
shall not be available.
(b) Waiver.--This section may be waived or suspended in the
Senate only by the affirmative vote of three-fifths of the
Members, duly chosen and sworn.
(c) Appeals.--Appeals in the Senate from the decisions of
the Chair relating to any provision of this section shall be
limited to 1 hour, to be equally divided between, and
controlled by, the appellant and the manager of the bill or
joint resolution, as the case may be. An affirmative vote of
three-fifths of the Members of the Senate, duly chosen and
sworn, shall be required to sustain an appeal of the ruling
of the Chair on a point of order raised under this section.
(d) Determination of Budget Levels.--For purposes of this
section, the levels of new budget authority, outlays, and
revenues for a fiscal year shall be determined on the basis
of estimates made by the Committee on the Budget of the
Senate.
(e) Sunset.--This section shall expire on September 30,
2012.
SEC. 3. RECONCILIATION FOR DEFICIT REDUCTION OR INCREASING
THE SURPLUS IN THE SENATE.
(a) In General.--It shall not be in order in the Senate to
consider under the expedited procedures applicable to
reconciliation in sections 305 and 310 of the Congressional
Budget Act of 1974 any bill, resolution, amendment, amendment
between Houses, motion, or conference report that increases
the deficit or reduces the surplus in the first fiscal year
covered by the most recently adopted concurrent resolution on
the budget, the period of the first 5 fiscal years covered by
the most recently adopted concurrent resolution on the
budget, or the period of the 5 fiscal years following the
first 5 fiscal years covered by the most recently adopted
concurrent resolution on the budget.
(b) Budget Resolution.--It shall not be in order in the
Senate to consider pursuant to sections 301, 305, or 310 of
the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 pertaining to concurrent
resolutions on the budget any resolution, concurrent
resolution, amendment, amendment between the Houses, motion,
or conference report that contains any reconciliation
directive that would increase the deficit or reduce the
surplus in the first fiscal year covered by the most recently
adopted concurrent resolution on the budget, the period of
the first 5 fiscal years covered by the most recently adopted
concurrent resolution on the budget, or the period of the 5
fiscal years following the first 5 fiscal years covered by
the most recently adopted concurrent resolution on the
budget.
(c) Supermajority Waiver and Appeal.--This section may be
waived or suspended in the Senate only by an affirmative vote
of \3/5\ of the Members, duly chosen and sworn. An
affirmative vote of \3/5\ of the Members of the Senate, duly
chosen and sworn, shall be required in the Senate to sustain
an appeal of the ruling of the Chair on a point of order
raised under this section.
______
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mrs. Clinton, Mrs. Murray, Mrs. Boxer,
Mr. Akaka, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Obama, Mr. Schumer, Mr.
Lautenberg, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Menendez, and Mr.
Inouye):
S. 21. A bill to expand access to preventive health care services
that help
[[Page 112]]
reduce unintended pregnancy, reduce abortions, and improve access to
women's health care; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and
Pensions.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the
bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
record, as follows:
S. 21
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 ``Prevention
First Act''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Findings.
TITLE I--TITLE X OF PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE ACT
Sec. 101. Short title.
Sec. 102. Authorization of appropriations.
TITLE II--EQUITY IN PRESCRIPTION INSURANCE AND CONTRACEPTIVE COVERAGE
Sec. 201. Short title.
Sec. 202. Amendments to Employee Retirement Income Security Act of
1974.
Sec. 203. Amendments to Public Health Service Act relating to the group
market.
Sec. 204. Amendment to Public Health Service Act relating to the
individual market.
TITLE III--EMERGENCY CONTRACEPTION EDUCATION AND INFORMATION
Sec. 301. Short title.
Sec. 302. Emergency contraception education and information programs.
TITLE IV--COMPASSIONATE ASSISTANCE FOR RAPE EMERGENCIES
Sec. 401. Short title.
Sec. 402. Survivors of sexual assault; provision by hospitals of
emergency contraceptives without charge.
TITLE V--AT-RISK COMMUNITIES TEEN PREGNANCY PREVENTION ACT
Sec. 501. Short title.
Sec. 502. Teen pregnancy prevention.
Sec. 503. School-based projects.
Sec. 504. Multimedia campaigns.
Sec. 505. National clearinghouse.
Sec. 506. Research.
Sec. 507. General requirements.
Sec. 508. Definitions.
TITLE VI--ACCURACY OF CONTRACEPTIVE INFORMATION
Sec. 601. Short title.
Sec. 602. Accuracy of contraceptive information.
TITLE VII--UNINTENDED PREGNANCY REDUCTION ACT
Sec. 701. Short title.
Sec. 702. Medicaid; clarification of coverage of family planning
services and supplies.
Sec. 703. Expansion of family planning services.
Sec. 704. Effective date.
TITLE VIII--RESPONSIBLE EDUCATION ABOUT LIFE ACT
Sec. 801. Short title.
Sec. 802. Assistance to reduce teen pregnancy, HIV/AIDS, and other
sexually transmitted diseases and to support healthy
adolescent development.
Sec. 803. Sense of Congress.
Sec. 804. Evaluation of programs.
Sec. 805. Definitions.
Sec. 806. Appropriations.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds as follows:
(1) Healthy People 2010 sets forth a reduction of
unintended pregnancies as an important health objective for
the Nation to achieve over the first decade of the new
century, a goal first articulated in the 1979 Surgeon
General's Report, Healthy People, and reiterated in Healthy
People 2000: National Health Promotion and Disease Prevention
Objectives.
(2) Although the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(referred to in this section as the ``CDC'') included family
planning in its published list of the Ten Great Public Health
Achievements in the 20th Century, the United States still has
one of the highest rates of unintended pregnancies among
industrialized nations.
(3) Each year, 3,000,000 pregnancies, nearly half of all
pregnancies, in the United States are unintended, and nearly
half of unintended pregnancies end in abortion.
(4) In 2004, 34,400,000 women, half of all women of
reproductive age, were in need of contraceptive services and
supplies to help prevent unintended pregnancy, and nearly
half of those were in need of public support for such care.
(5) The United States has the highest rate of infection
with sexually transmitted diseases of any industrialized
country. In 2005, there were approximately 19,000,000 new
cases of sexually transmitted diseases, almost half of them
occurring in young people ages 15 to 24. According to the
CDC, these sexually transmitted diseases impose a tremendous
economic burden with direct medical costs as high as
$14,100,000,000 per year.
(6) Increasing access to family planning services will
improve women's health and reduce the rates of unintended
pregnancy, abortion, and infection with sexually transmitted
diseases. Contraceptive use saves public health dollars. For
every dollar spent to increase funding for family planning
programs under title X of the Public Health Service Act,
$3.80 is saved.
(7) Contraception is basic health care that improves the
health of women and children by enabling women to plan and
space births.
(8) Women experiencing unintended pregnancy are at greater
risk for physical abuse and women having closely spaced
births are at greater risk of maternal death.
(9) A child born from an unintended pregnancy is at greater
risk than a child born from an intended pregnancy of low
birth weight, dying in the first year of life, being abused,
and not receiving sufficient resources for healthy
development.
(10) The ability to control fertility allows couples to
achieve economic stability by facilitating greater
educational achievement and participation in the workforce.
(11) Without contraception, a sexually active woman has an
85 percent chance of becoming pregnant within a year.
(12) The percentage of sexually active women ages 15
through 44 who were not using contraception increased from
5.4 percent to 7.4 percent in 2002, an increase of 37
percent, according to the CDC. This represents an apparent
increase of 1,430,000 women and could raise the rate of
unintended pregnancy.
(13) Many poor and low-income women cannot afford to
purchase contraceptive services and supplies on their own. In
2003, 20.5 percent of all women ages 15 through 44 were
uninsured.
(14) Public health programs, such as the Medicaid program
and family planning programs under title X of the Public
Health Service Act, provide high-quality family planning
services and other preventive health care to underinsured or
uninsured individuals who may otherwise lack access to health
care.
(15) The Medicaid program is the single largest source of
public funding for family planning services and HIV/AIDS care
in the United States. Half of all public dollars spent on
contraceptive services and supplies in the United States are
provided through the Medicaid program and more than 6,000,000
low-income women of reproductive age rely on such program for
their basic health care needs.
(16) Each year, family planning services provided under
title X of the Public Health Service Act enable people in the
United States to prevent approximately 1,000,000 unintended
pregnancies, and one in three women of reproductive age who
obtains testing or treatment for sexually transmitted
diseases does so at a clinic receiving funds under such
title. In 2005, such clinics provided 2.5 million Pap smears,
over 5.3 million sexually transmitted disease tests, and over
6.2 million HIV tests.
(17) The combination of an increasing number of uninsured
individuals, stagnant funding for family planning, health
care inflation, new and expensive contraceptive technologies,
increasing costs of contraceptives, and improved but
expensive screening and treatment for cervical cancer and
sexually transmitted diseases, has diminished the ability of
clinics receiving funds under title X of the Public Health
Service Act to adequately serve all individuals in need of
services of such clinics. Taking inflation into account,
funding for the family planning programs under such title
declined by 59 percent between 1980 and 2005.
(18) While the Medicaid program remains the largest source
of subsidized family planning services, States are facing
significant budgetary pressures to cut their Medicaid
programs, putting many women at risk of losing coverage for
family planning services.
(19) In addition, eligibility under the Medicaid program in
many States is severely restricted, which leaves family
planning services financially out of reach for many poor
women. Many States have demonstrated tremendous success with
Medicaid family planning waivers that allow States to expand
access to Medicaid family planning services. However, the
administrative burden of applying for a waiver poses a
significant barrier to States that would like to expand their
coverage of family planning programs through Medicaid.
(20) As of December of 2006, 24 States offered expanded
family planning benefits as a result of Medicaid family
planning waivers. The cost-effectiveness of these waivers was
affirmed by a recent evaluation funded by the Centers for
Medicare & Medicaid Services. This evaluation of six waivers
found that all family planning programs under such waivers
resulted in significant savings to both the Federal and State
governments. Moreover, the researchers found measurable
reductions in unintended pregnancy.
(21) Although employer-sponsored health plans have improved
coverage of contraceptive services and supplies, largely in
response to State contraceptive coverage laws,
[[Page 113]]
there is still significant room for improvement. The ongoing
lack of coverage in health insurance plans, particularly in
self-insured and individual plans, continues to place
effective forms of contraception beyond the financial reach
of many women.
(22) Including contraceptive coverage in private health
care plans saves employers money. Not covering contraceptives
in employee health plans costs employers 15 to 17 percent
more than providing such coverage.
(23) Approved for use by the Food and Drug Administration,
emergency contraception is a safe and effective way to
prevent unintended pregnancy after unprotected sex. New
research confirms that easier access to emergency
contraceptives does not increase sexual risk-taking or
sexually transmitted diseases.
(24) The available evidence shows that many women do not
know about emergency contraception, do not know where to get
it, or are unable to access it. Overcoming these obstacles
could help ensure that more women use emergency contraception
consistently and correctly.
(25) A November 2006 study of declining pregnancy rates
among teens concluded that the reduction in teen pregnancy
between 1995 and 2002 is primarily the result of increased
use of contraceptives. As such, it is critically important
that teens receive accurate, unbiased information about
contraception.
(26) The American Medical Association, the American Nurses
Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American
College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American
Public Health Association, and the Society for Adolescent
Medicine, support responsible sexuality education that
includes information about both abstinence and contraception.
(27) Teens who receive comprehensive sexuality education
that includes discussion of contraception as well as
abstinence are more likely than those who receive abstinence-
only messages to delay sex, to have fewer partners, and to
use contraceptives when they do become sexually active.
(28) Government-funded abstinence-only-until-marriage
programs are precluded from discussing contraception except
to talk about failure rates. An October 2006 report by the
Government Accountability Office found that the Department of
Health and Human Services does not review the materials of
recipients of grants administered by such department for
scientific accuracy and requires grantees to review their own
materials for scientific accuracy. The GAO also reported on
the Department's total lack of appropriate and customary
measurements to determine if funded programs are effective.
In addition, a separate letter from the Government
Accountability Office found that the Department of Health and
Human Services is in violation of Federal law by failing to
enforce a requirement under the Public Health Service Act
that Federally-funded grantees working to address the
prevention of sexually transmitted diseases, including
abstinence-only-until-marriage programs, must provide
medically accurate information about the effectiveness of
condoms.
(29) Recent scientific reports by the Institute of
Medicine, the American Medical Association, and the Office on
National AIDS Policy stress the need for sexuality education
that includes messages about abstinence and provides young
people with information about contraception for the
prevention of teen pregnancy, HIV/AIDS, and other sexually
transmitted diseases.
(30) A 2006 statement from the American Public Health
Association (``APHA'') ``recognizes the importance of
abstinence education, but only as part of a comprehensive
sexuality education program . . . APHA calls for repealing
current federal funding for abstinence-only programs and
replacing it with funding for a new Federal program to
promote comprehensive sexuality education, combining
information about abstinence with age-appropriate sexuality
education.''
(31) Comprehensive sexuality education programs respect the
diversity of values and beliefs represented in the community
and will complement and augment the sexuality education
children receive from their families.
(32) Nearly half of the 40,000 annual new cases of HIV
infections in the United States occur in youth ages 13
through 24. African American and Latino youth have been
disproportionately affected by the HIV/AIDS epidemic.
Although African American adolescents, ages 13 through 19,
represent only 15 percent of the adolescent population in the
United States, they accounted for 73 percent of new AIDS
cases reported among adolescents in 2004. Latino adolescents,
ages age 13 through 19, accounted for 14 percent of AIDS
cases among adolescents, compared to 16 percent of all
adolescents in the United States, in 2004. Teens in the
United States contract an estimated 9.1 million sexually
transmitted infections each year. By age 24, at least one in
four sexually active people between the ages of 15 and 24
will have contracted a sexually transmitted disease.
(33) Approximately 50 young people a day, an average of two
young people every hour of every day, are infected with HIV
in the United States.
TITLE I--TITLE X OF PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE ACT
SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Title X Family Planning
Services Act of 2007''.
SEC. 102. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
For the purpose of making grants and contracts under
section 1001 of the Public Health Service Act, there are
authorized to be appropriated $700,000,000 for fiscal year
2008 and such sums as may be necessary for each subsequent
fiscal year.
TITLE II--EQUITY IN PRESCRIPTION INSURANCE AND CONTRACEPTIVE COVERAGE
SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Equity in Prescription
Insurance and Contraceptive Coverage Act of 2007''.
SEC. 202. AMENDMENTS TO EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT INCOME SECURITY
ACT OF 1974.
(a) In General.--Subpart B of part 7 of subtitle B of title
I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29
U.S.C. 1185 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``SEC. 714. STANDARDS RELATING TO BENEFITS FOR
CONTRACEPTIVES.
``(a) Requirements for Coverage.--A group health plan, and
a health insurance issuer providing health insurance coverage
in connection with a group health plan, may not--
``(1) exclude or restrict benefits for prescription
contraceptive drugs or devices approved by the Food and Drug
Administration, or generic equivalents approved as
substitutable by the Food and Drug Administration, if such
plan or coverage provides benefits for other outpatient
prescription drugs or devices; or
``(2) exclude or restrict benefits for outpatient
contraceptive services if such plan or coverage provides
benefits for other outpatient services provided by a health
care professional (referred to in this section as `outpatient
health care services').
``(b) Prohibitions.--A group health plan, and a health
insurance issuer providing health insurance coverage in
connection with a group health plan, may not--
``(1) deny to an individual eligibility, or continued
eligibility, to enroll or to renew coverage under the terms
of the plan because of the individual's or enrollee's use or
potential use of items or services that are covered in
accordance with the requirements of this section;
``(2) provide monetary payments or rebates to a covered
individual to encourage such individual to accept less than
the minimum protections available under this section;
``(3) penalize or otherwise reduce or limit the
reimbursement of a health care professional because such
professional prescribed contraceptive drugs or devices, or
provided contraceptive services, described in subsection (a),
in accordance with this section; or
``(4) provide incentives (monetary or otherwise) to a
health care professional to induce such professional to
withhold from a covered individual contraceptive drugs or
devices, or contraceptive services, described in subsection
(a).
``(c) Rules of Construction.--
``(1) In general.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed--
``(A) as preventing a group health plan and a health
insurance issuer providing health insurance coverage in
connection with a group health plan from imposing
deductibles, coinsurance, or other cost-sharing or
limitations in relation to--
``(i) benefits for contraceptive drugs under the plan or
coverage, except that such a deductible, coinsurance, or
other cost-sharing or limitation for any such drug shall be
consistent with those imposed for other outpatient
prescription drugs otherwise covered under the plan or
coverage;
``(ii) benefits for contraceptive devices under the plan or
coverage, except that such a deductible, coinsurance, or
other cost-sharing or limitation for any such device shall be
consistent with those imposed for other outpatient
prescription devices otherwise covered under the plan or
coverage; and
``(iii) benefits for outpatient contraceptive services
under the plan or coverage, except that such a deductible,
coinsurance, or other cost-sharing or limitation for any such
service shall be consistent with those imposed for other
outpatient health care services otherwise covered under the
plan or coverage;
``(B) as requiring a group health plan and a health
insurance issuer providing health insurance coverage in
connection with a group health plan to cover experimental or
investigational contraceptive drugs or devices, or
experimental or investigational contraceptive services,
described in subsection (a), except to the extent that the
plan or issuer provides coverage for other experimental or
investigational outpatient prescription drugs or devices, or
experimental or investigational outpatient health care
services; or
``(C) as modifying, diminishing, or limiting the rights or
protections of an individual under any other Federal law.
``(2) Limitations.--As used in paragraph (1), the term
`limitation' includes--
``(A) in the case of a contraceptive drug or device,
restricting the type of health care professionals that may
prescribe such drugs or devices, utilization review
provisions, and limits on the volume of prescription drugs or
[[Page 114]]
devices that may be obtained on the basis of a single
consultation with a professional; or
``(B) in the case of an outpatient contraceptive service,
restricting the type of health care professionals that may
provide such services, utilization review provisions,
requirements relating to second opinions prior to the
coverage of such services, and requirements relating to
preauthorizations prior to the coverage of such services.
``(d) Notice Under Group Health Plan.--The imposition of
the requirements of this section shall be treated as a
material modification in the terms of the plan described in
section 102(a)(1), for purposes of assuring notice of such
requirements under the plan, except that the summary
description required to be provided under the last sentence
of section 104(b)(1) with respect to such modification shall
be provided by not later than 60 days after the first day of
the first plan year in which such requirements apply.
``(e) Preemption.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to preempt any provision of State law to the extent
that such State law establishes, implements, or continues in
effect any standard or requirement that provides coverage or
protections for participants or beneficiaries that are
greater than the coverage or protections provided under this
section.
``(f) Definition.--In this section, the term `outpatient
contraceptive services' means consultations, examinations,
procedures, and medical services, provided on an outpatient
basis and related to the use of contraceptive methods
(including natural family planning) to prevent an unintended
pregnancy.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section 1
of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29
U.S.C. 1001) is amended by inserting after the item relating
to section 713 the following:
``Sec. 714. Standards relating to benefits for contraceptives''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply with respect to plan years beginning on or after
January 1, 2008.
SEC. 203. AMENDMENTS TO PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE ACT RELATING TO
THE GROUP MARKET.
(a) In General.--Subpart 2 of part A of title XXVII of the
Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg-4 et seq.) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 2707. STANDARDS RELATING TO BENEFITS FOR
CONTRACEPTIVES.
``(a) Requirements for Coverage.--A group health plan, and
a health insurance issuer providing health insurance coverage
in connection with a group health plan, may not--
``(1) exclude or restrict benefits for prescription
contraceptive drugs or devices approved by the Food and Drug
Administration, or generic equivalents approved as
substitutable by the Food and Drug Administration, if such
plan or coverage provides benefits for other outpatient
prescription drugs or devices; or
``(2) exclude or restrict benefits for outpatient
contraceptive services if such plan or coverage provides
benefits for other outpatient services provided by a health
care professional (referred to in this section as `outpatient
health care services').
``(b) Prohibitions.--A group health plan, and a health
insurance issuer providing health insurance coverage in
connection with a group health plan, may not--
``(1) deny to an individual eligibility, or continued
eligibility, to enroll or to renew coverage under the terms
of the plan because of the individual's or enrollee's use or
potential use of items or services that are covered in
accordance with the requirements of this section;
``(2) provide monetary payments or rebates to a covered
individual to encourage such individual to accept less than
the minimum protections available under this section;
``(3) penalize or otherwise reduce or limit the
reimbursement of a health care professional because such
professional prescribed contraceptive drugs or devices, or
provided contraceptive services, described in subsection (a),
in accordance with this section; or
``(4) provide incentives (monetary or otherwise) to a
health care professional to induce such professional to
withhold from covered individual contraceptive drugs or
devices, or contraceptive services, described in subsection
(a).
``(c) Rules of Construction.--
``(1) In general.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed--
``(A) as preventing a group health plan and a health
insurance issuer providing health insurance coverage in
connection with a group health plan from imposing
deductibles, coinsurance, or other cost-sharing or
limitations in relation to--
``(i) benefits for contraceptive drugs under the plan or
coverage, except that such a deductible, coinsurance, or
other cost-sharing or limitation for any such drug shall be
consistent with those imposed for other outpatient
prescription drugs otherwise covered under the plan or
coverage;
``(ii) benefits for contraceptive devices under the plan or
coverage, except that such a deductible, coinsurance, or
other cost-sharing or limitation for any such device shall be
consistent with those imposed for other outpatient
prescription devices otherwise covered under the plan or
coverage; and
``(iii) benefits for outpatient contraceptive services
under the plan or coverage, except that such a deductible,
coinsurance, or other cost-sharing or limitation for any such
service shall be consistent with those imposed for other
outpatient health care services otherwise covered under the
plan or coverage;
``(B) as requiring a group health plan and a health
insurance issuer providing health insurance coverage in
connection with a group health plan to cover experimental or
investigational contraceptive drugs or devices, or
experimental or investigational contraceptive services,
described in subsection (a), except to the extent that the
plan or issuer provides coverage for other experimental or
investigational outpatient prescription drugs or devices, or
experimental or investigational outpatient health care
services; or
``(C) as modifying, diminishing, or limiting the rights or
protections of an individual under any other Federal law.
``(2) Limitations.--As used in paragraph (1), the term
`limitation' includes--
``(A) in the case of a contraceptive drug or device,
restricting the type of health care professionals that may
prescribe such drugs or devices, utilization review
provisions, and limits on the volume of prescription drugs or
devices that may be obtained on the basis of a single
consultation with a professional; or
``(B) in the case of an outpatient contraceptive service,
restricting the type of health care professionals that may
provide such services, utilization review provisions,
requirements relating to second opinions prior to the
coverage of such services, and requirements relating to
preauthorizations prior to the coverage of such services.
``(d) Notice.--A group health plan under this part shall
comply with the notice requirement under section 714(d) of
the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 with
respect to the requirements of this section as if such
section applied to such plan.
``(e) Preemption.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to preempt any provision of State law to the extent
that such State law establishes, implements, or continues in
effect any standard or requirement that provides coverage or
protections for enrollees that are greater than the coverage
or protections provided under this section.
``(f) Definition.--In this section, the term `outpatient
contraceptive services' means consultations, examinations,
procedures, and medical services, provided on an outpatient
basis and related to the use of contraceptive methods
(including natural family planning) to prevent an unintended
pregnancy.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply with respect to group health plans for plan years
beginning on or after January 1, 2008.
SEC. 204. AMENDMENT TO PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE ACT RELATING TO
THE INDIVIDUAL MARKET.
(a) In General.--Part B of title XXVII of the Public Health
Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg-41 et seq.) is amended--
(1) by redesignating the first subpart 3 (relating to other
requirements) as subpart 2; and
(2) by adding at the end of subpart 2 the following:
``SEC. 2753. STANDARDS RELATING TO BENEFITS FOR
CONTRACEPTIVES.
``The provisions of section 2707 shall apply to health
insurance coverage offered by a health insurance issuer in
the individual market in the same manner as they apply to
health insurance coverage offered by a health insurance
issuer in connection with a group health plan in the small or
large group market.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
shall apply with respect to health insurance coverage
offered, sold, issued, renewed, in effect, or operated in the
individual market on or after January 1, 2008.
TITLE III--EMERGENCY CONTRACEPTION EDUCATION AND INFORMATION
SEC. 301. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Emergency Contraception
Education Act of 2007''.
SEC. 302. EMERGENCY CONTRACEPTION EDUCATION AND INFORMATION
PROGRAMS.
(a) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
(1) Emergency contraception.--The term ``emergency
contraception'' means a drug or device (as the terms are
defined in section 201 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321)) or a drug regimen that is--
(A) used after sexual relations;
(B) prevents pregnancy, by preventing ovulation,
fertilization of an egg, or implantation of an egg in a
uterus; and
(C) approved by the Food and Drug Administration.
(2) Health care provider.--The term ``health care
provider'' means an individual who is licensed or certified
under State law to provide health care services and who is
operating within the scope of such license.
(3) Institution of higher education.--The term
``institution of higher education'' has the same meaning
given such term in section 1201(a) of the Higher Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1141(a)).
[[Page 115]]
(4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Health and Human Services.
(b) Emergency Contraception Public Education Program.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary, acting through the Director
of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, shall
develop and disseminate to the public information on
emergency contraception.
(2) Dissemination.--The Secretary may disseminate
information under paragraph (1) directly or through
arrangements with nonprofit organizations, consumer groups,
institutions of higher education, Federal, State, or local
agencies, clinics, and the media.
(3) Information.--The information disseminated under
paragraph (1) shall include, at a minimum, a description of
emergency contraception and an explanation of the use,
safety, efficacy, and availability of such contraception.
(c) Emergency Contraception Information Program for Health
Care Providers.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary, acting through the
Administrator of the Health Resources and Services
Administration and in consultation with major medical and
public health organizations, shall develop and disseminate to
health care providers information on emergency contraception.
(2) Information.--The information disseminated under
paragraph (1) shall include, at a minimum--
(A) information describing the use, safety, efficacy, and
availability of emergency contraception;
(B) a recommendation regarding the use of such
contraception in appropriate cases; and
(C) information explaining how to obtain copies of the
information developed under subsection (b) for distribution
to the patients of the providers.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section such sums as may
be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2008 through 2012.
TITLE IV--COMPASSIONATE ASSISTANCE FOR RAPE EMERGENCIES
SEC. 401. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Compassionate Assistance
for Rape Emergencies Act of 2007''.
SEC. 402. SURVIVORS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT; PROVISION BY HOSPITALS
OF EMERGENCY CONTRACEPTIVES WITHOUT CHARGE.
(a) In General.--Federal funds may not be provided to a
hospital under any health-related program, unless the
hospital meets the conditions specified in subsection (b) in
the case of--
(1) any woman who presents at the hospital and states that
she is a victim of sexual assault, or is accompanied by
someone who states she is a victim of sexual assault; and
(2) any woman who presents at the hospital whom hospital
personnel have reason to believe is a victim of sexual
assault.
(b) Assistance for Victims.--The conditions specified in
this subsection regarding a hospital and a woman described in
subsection (a) are as follows:
(1) The hospital promptly provides the woman with medically
and factually accurate and unbiased written and oral
information about emergency contraception, including
information explaining that--
(A) emergency contraception does not cause an abortion; and
(B) emergency contraception is effective in most cases in
preventing pregnancy after unprotected sex.
(2) The hospital promptly offers emergency contraception to
the woman, and promptly provides such contraception to her on
her request.
(3) The information provided pursuant to paragraph (1) is
in clear and concise language, is readily comprehensible, and
meets such conditions regarding the provision of the
information in languages other than English as the Secretary
may establish.
(4) The services described in paragraphs (1) through (3)
are not denied because of the inability of the woman or her
family to pay for the services.
(c) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
(1) The term ``emergency contraception'' means a drug, drug
regimen, or device that--
(A) is used postcoitally;
(B) prevents pregnancy by delaying ovulation, preventing
fertilization of an egg, or preventing implantation of an egg
in a uterus; and
(C) is approved by the Food and Drug Administration.
(2) The term ``hospital'' has the meanings given such term
in title XVIII of the Social Security Act, including the
meaning applicable in such title for purposes of making
payments for emergency services to hospitals that do not have
agreements in effect under such title.
(3) The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of Health
and Human Services.
(4) The term ``sexual assault'' means coitus in which the
woman involved does not consent or lacks the legal capacity
to consent.
(d) Effective Date; Agency Criteria.--This section takes
effect upon the expiration of the 180-day period beginning on
the date of the enactment of this Act. Not later than 30 days
prior to the expiration of such period, the Secretary shall
publish in the Federal Register criteria for carrying out
this section.
TITLE V--AT-RISK COMMUNITIES TEEN PREGNANCY PREVENTION ACT
SEC. 501. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``At-Risk Communities Teen
Pregnancy Prevention Act of 2007''.
SEC. 502. TEEN PREGNANCY PREVENTION.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Health and Human Services
(referred to in this title as the ``Secretary'') shall make
grants to public and nonprofit private entities for the
purpose of carrying out projects to prevent teen pregnancies
in communities with a substantial incidence or prevalence of
cases of teen pregnancy as compared to the average number of
such cases in communities in the State involved (referred to
in this title as ``eligible communities'').
(b) Requirements Regarding Purpose of Grants.--A grant may
be made under subsection (a) only if, with respect to the
expenditure of the grant to carry out the purpose described
in such subsection, the applicant involved agrees to use one
or more of the following strategies:
(1) Promote effective communication among families about
preventing teen pregnancy, particularly communication among
parents or guardians and their children.
(2) Educate community members about the consequences of
teen pregnancy.
(3) Encourage young people to postpone sexual activity and
prepare for a healthy, successful adulthood.
(4) Provide educational information, including medically
accurate contraceptive information, for young people in such
communities who are already sexually active or are at risk of
becoming sexually active and inform young people in such
communities about the responsibilities and consequences of
being a parent, and how early pregnancy and parenthood can
interfere with educational and other goals.
(c) Utilizing Effective Strategies.--A grant may be made
under subsection (a) only if the applicant involved agrees
that, in carrying out the purpose described in such
subsection, the applicant will, whenever possible, use
strategies that have been demonstrated to be effective, or
that incorporate characteristics of effective programs.
(d) Report.--A grant may be made under subsection (a) only
if the applicant involved agrees to submit to the Secretary,
in accordance with the criteria of the Secretary, a report
that provides information on the project under such
subsection, including outcomes. The Secretary shall make such
reports available to the public.
(e) Evaluations.--Not later than 12 months after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall, directly
or through contract, provide for evaluations of six projects
under subsection (a). Such evaluations shall describe--
(1) the activities carried out with the grant; and
(2) how such activities increased education and awareness
services relating to the prevention of teen pregnancy.
(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--For the purpose of
carrying out this section, there are authorized to be
appropriated such sums as may be necessary for each of the
fiscal years 2008 through 2012.
SEC. 503. SCHOOL-BASED PROJECTS.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Health and Human Services
may make grants to public and nonprofit private entities for
the purpose of establishing and operating for eligible
communities, in association with public secondary schools for
such communities, projects for one or more of the following:
(1) To carry out activities, including counseling, to
prevent teen pregnancy.
(2) To provide necessary social and cultural support
services regarding teen pregnancy.
(3) To provide health and educational services related to
the prevention of teen pregnancy.
(4) To promote better health and educational outcomes among
pregnant teens.
(5) To provide training for individuals who plan to work in
school-based support programs regarding the prevention of
teen pregnancy.
(b) Priority.--In making grants under subsection (a), the
Secretary shall give priority to providing for projects under
such subsection in eligible communities.
(c) Required Coalition.--A grant may be made under
subsection (a) only if the applicant involved has formed an
appropriate coalition of entities for purposes of carrying
out a project under such subsection, including--
(1) one or more public secondary schools for the eligible
community involved; and
(2) entities to provide the services of the project.
(d) Training.--A grant under subsection (a) may be expended
to train individuals to provide the services described in
paragraphs (1) and (2) of such subsection for the project
involved.
(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--For the purpose of
carrying out this section, there is authorized to be
appropriated such sums as may be necessary for each of the
fiscal years 2008 through 2012.
SEC. 504. MULTIMEDIA CAMPAIGNS.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Health and Human Services
shall make grants to
[[Page 116]]
public and nonprofit private entities for the purpose of
carrying out multimedia campaigns to provide public education
and increase awareness with respect to the issue of teen
pregnancy and related social and emotional issues.
(b) Priority.--In making grants under subsection (a), the
Secretary shall give priority to campaigns described in such
subsection that are directed toward eligible communities.
(c) Requirements.--A grant may be made under subsection (a)
only if the applicant involved agrees that the multimedia
campaign under such subsection will--
(1) provide information on the prevention of teen
pregnancy;
(2) provide information that identifies organizations in
the communities involved that--
(A) provide health and educational services related to the
prevention of teen pregnancy; and
(B) provide necessary social and cultural support services;
and
(3) coincide with efforts of the National Clearinghouse for
Teen Pregnancy Prevention that are made under section
505(b)(1).
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--For the purpose of
carrying out this section, there is authorized to be
appropriated such sums as may be necessary for each of the
fiscal years 2008 through 2012.
SEC. 505. NATIONAL CLEARINGHOUSE.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall make grants to a
nonprofit private entity to establish and operate a National
Clearinghouse for Teen Pregnancy Prevention (referred to in
this section as the ``Clearinghouse'') for the purposes
described in subsection (b).
(b) Purposes of Clearinghouse.--The purposes referred to in
subsection (a) regarding the Clearinghouse are as follows:
(1) To provide information and technical assistance to
States, Indian tribes, local communities, and other public or
private entities to develop content and messages for teens
and adults that address and seek to reduce the rate of teen
pregnancy.
(2) To support parents in their essential role in
preventing teen pregnancy by equipping parents with
information and resources to promote and strengthen
communication with their children about sex, values, and
positive relationships, including healthy relationships.
(c) Requirements for Grantee.--A grant may be made under
subsection (a) only if the applicant involved is an
organization that meets the following conditions:
(1) The organization is a nationally recognized,
nonpartisan organization that focuses exclusively on
preventing teen pregnancy and has at least 10 years of
experience in working with diverse groups to reduce the rate
of teen pregnancy.
(2) The organization has a demonstrated ability to work
with and provide assistance to a broad range of individuals
and entities, including teens; parents; the entertainment and
news media; State, tribal, and local organizations; networks
of teen pregnancy prevention practitioners; businesses; faith
and community leaders; and researchers.
(3) The organization has experience in the use of
culturally competent and linguistically appropriate methods
to address teen pregnancy in eligible communities.
(4) The organization conducts or supports research and has
experience with scientific analyses and evaluations.
(5) The organization has comprehensive knowledge and data
about strategies for the prevention of teen pregnancy.
(6) The organization has experience in carrying out
functions similar to the functions described in subsection
(b).
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--For the purpose of
carrying out this section, there is authorized to be
appropriated such sums as may be necessary for each of the
fiscal years 2008 through 2012.
SEC. 506. RESEARCH.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Health and Human
Services, acting through the Director of the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, shall make grants to public
or nonprofit private entities to conduct, support, and
coordinate research on the prevention of teen pregnancy in
eligible communities, including research on the factors
contributing to the disproportionate rates of teen pregnancy
in such communities.
(b) Research.--In carrying out subsection (a), the
Secretary shall support research that--
(1) investigates and determines the incidence and
prevalence of teen pregnancy in communities described in such
subsection;
(2) examines--
(A) the extent of the impact of teen pregnancy on--
(i) the health and well-being of teenagers in the
communities; and
(ii) the scholastic achievement of such teenagers;
(B) the variance in the rates of teen pregnancy by--
(i) location (such as inner cities, inner suburbs, and
outer suburbs);
(ii) population subgroup (such as Hispanic, Asian-Pacific
Islander, African-American, Native American); and
(iii) level of acculturation;
(C) the importance of the physical and social environment
as a factor in placing communities at risk of increased rates
of teen pregnancy; and
(D) the importance of aspirations as a factor affecting
young women's risk of teen pregnancy; and
(3) is used to develop--
(A) measures to address race, ethnicity, socioeconomic
status, environment, and educational attainment and the
relationship to the incidence and prevalence of teen
pregnancy; and
(B) efforts to link the measures to relevant databases,
including health databases.
(c) Priority.--In making grants under subsection (a), the
Secretary shall give priority to research that incorporates--
(1) interdisciplinary approaches; or
(2) a strong emphasis on community-based participatory
research.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--For the purpose of
carrying out this section, there is authorized to be
appropriated such sums as may be necessary for each of the
fiscal years 2008 through 2012.
SEC. 507. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS.
(a) Medically Accurate Information.--A grant may be made
under this title only if the applicant involved agrees that
all information provided pursuant to the grant will be age-
appropriate, factually and medically accurate and complete,
and scientifically based.
(b) Cultural Context of Services.--A grant may be made
under this title only if the applicant involved agrees that
information, activities, and services under the grant that
are directed toward a particular population group will be
provided in the language and cultural context that is most
appropriate for individuals in such group.
(c) Application for Grant.--A grant may be made under this
title only if an application for the grant is submitted to
the Secretary and the application is in such form, is made in
such manner, and contains such agreements, assurances, and
information as the Secretary determines to be necessary to
carry out the program involved.
SEC. 508. DEFINITIONS.
For purposes of this title:
(1) The term ``eligible community'' has the meaning
indicated for such term in section 502(a).
(2) The term ``racial or ethnic minority or immigrant
communities'' means communities with a substantial number of
residents who are members of racial or ethnic minority groups
or who are immigrants.
(3) The term ``Secretary'' has the meaning indicated for
such term in section 502(a).
TITLE VI--ACCURACY OF CONTRACEPTIVE INFORMATION
SEC. 601. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Truth in Contraception Act
of 2007''.
SEC. 602. ACCURACY OF CONTRACEPTIVE INFORMATION.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any information
concerning the use of a contraceptive provided through any
federally funded sex education, family life education,
abstinence education, comprehensive health education, or
character education program shall be medically accurate and
shall include health benefits and failure rates relating to
the use of such contraceptive.
TITLE VII--UNINTENDED PREGNANCY REDUCTION ACT
SEC. 701. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Unintended Pregnancy
Reduction Act of 2007''.
SEC. 702. MEDICAID; CLARIFICATION OF COVERAGE OF FAMILY
PLANNING SERVICES AND SUPPLIES.
Section 1937(b) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1396u-7(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(5) Coverage of family planning services and supplies.--
Notwithstanding the previous provisions of this section, a
State may not provide for medical assistance through
enrollment of an individual with benchmark coverage or
benchmark-equivalent coverage under this section unless such
coverage includes for any individual described in section
1905(a)(4)(C), medical assistance for family planning
services and supplies in accordance with such section.''.
SEC. 703. EXPANSION OF FAMILY PLANNING SERVICES.
(a) Coverage as Mandatory Categorically Needy Group.--
(1) In general.--Section 1902(a)(10)(A)(i) of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396a(a)(10)(A)(i)) is amended--
(A) in subclause (VI), by striking ``or'' at the end;
(B) in subclause (VII), by adding ``or'' at the end; and
(C) by adding at the end the following new subclause:
``(VIII) who are described in subsection (dd) (relating to
individuals who meet the income standards for pregnant
women);''.
(2) Group described.--Section 1902 of the Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C. 1396a) is amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
``(dd)(1) Individuals described in this subsection are
individuals who--
``(A) meet at least the income eligibility standards
established under the State plan as of January 1, 2007, for
pregnant women or such higher income eligibility standard for
such women as the State may establish; and
[[Page 117]]
``(B) are not pregnant.
``(2) At the option of a State, individuals described in
this subsection may include individuals who are determined to
meet the income eligibility standards referred to in
paragraph (1)(A) under the terms and conditions applicable to
making eligibility determinations for medical assistance
under this title under a waiver to provide the benefits
described in clause (XV) of the matter following subparagraph
(G) of section 1902(a)(10) granted to the State under section
1115 as of January 1, 2007.''.
(3) Limitation on benefits.--Section 1902(a)(10) of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396a(a)(10)) is amended in
the matter following subparagraph (G)--
(A) by striking ``and (XIV)'' and inserting ``(XIV)''; and
(B) by inserting ``, and (XV) the medical assistance made
available to an individual described in subsection (dd) who
is eligible for medical assistance only because of
subparagraph (A)(10)(i)(VIII) shall be limited to family
planning services and supplies described in 1905(a)(4)(C)
and, at the State's option, medical diagnosis or treatment
services that are provided in conjunction with a family
planning service in a family planning setting provided during
the period in which such an individual is eligible;'' after
``cervical cancer''.
(4) Conforming amendments.--Section 1905(a) of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396d(a)) is amended in the matter
preceding paragraph (1)--
(A) in clause (xii), by striking ``or'' at the end;
(B) in clause (xii), by adding ``or'' at the end; and
(C) by inserting after clause (xiii) the following:
``(xiv) individuals described in section 1902(dd),''.
(b) Presumptive Eligibility.--
(1) In general.--Title XIX of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 1396 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section
1920B the following:
``PRESUMPTIVE ELIGIBILITY FOR FAMILY PLANNING SERVICES
``Sec. 1920C. (a) State Option.--A State plan approved
under section 1902 may provide for making medical assistance
available to an individual described in section 1902(dd)
(relating to individuals who meet the income eligibility
standard for pregnant women in the State) during a
presumptive eligibility period. In the case of an individual
described in section 1902(dd) who is eligible for medical
assistance only because of subparagraph (A)(10)(i)(VIII),
such medical assistance may be limited to family planning
services and supplies described in 1905(a)(4)(C) and, at the
State's option, medical diagnosis or treatment services that
are provided in conjunction with a family planning service in
a family planning setting provided during the period in which
such an individual is eligible.
``(b) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
``(1) Presumptive eligibility period.--The term
`presumptive eligibility period' means, with respect to an
individual described in subsection (a), the period that--
``(A) begins with the date on which a qualified entity
determines, on the basis of preliminary information, that the
individual is described in section 1902(dd); and
``(B) ends with (and includes) the earlier of--
``(i) the day on which a determination is made with respect
to the eligibility of such individual for services under the
State plan; or
``(ii) in the case of such an individual who does not file
an application by the last day of the month following the
month during which the entity makes the determination
referred to in subparagraph (A), such last day.
``(2) Qualified entity.--
``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), the term
`qualified entity' means any entity that--
``(i) is eligible for payments under a State plan approved
under this title; and
``(ii) is determined by the State agency to be capable of
making determinations of the type described in paragraph
(1)(A).
``(B) Regulations.--The Secretary may issue regulations
further limiting those entities that may become qualified
entities in order to prevent fraud and abuse and for other
reasons.
``(C) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this paragraph
shall be construed as preventing a State from limiting the
classes of entities that may become qualified entities,
consistent with any limitations imposed under subparagraph
(B).
``(c) Administration.--
``(1) In general.--The State agency shall provide qualified
entities with--
``(A) such forms as are necessary for an application to be
made by an individual described in subsection (a) for medical
assistance under the State plan; and
``(B) information on how to assist such individuals in
completing and filing such forms.
``(2) Notification requirements.--A qualified entity that
determines under subsection (b)(1)(A) that an individual
described in subsection (a) is presumptively eligible for
medical assistance under a State plan shall--
``(A) notify the State agency of the determination within 5
working days after the date on which determination is made;
and
``(B) inform such individual at the time the determination
is made that an application for medical assistance is
required to be made by not later than the last day of the
month following the month during which the determination is
made.
``(3) Application for medical assistance.--In the case of
an individual described in subsection (a) who is determined
by a qualified entity to be presumptively eligible for
medical assistance under a State plan, the individual shall
apply for medical assistance by not later than the last day
of the month following the month during which the
determination is made.
``(d) Payment.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this
title, medical assistance that--
``(1) is furnished to an individual described in subsection
(a)--
``(A) during a presumptive eligibility period;
``(B) by a entity that is eligible for payments under the
State plan; and
``(2) is included in the care and services covered by the
State plan, shall be treated as medical assistance provided
by such plan for purposes of clause (4) of the first sentence
of section 1905(b).''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--
(A) Section 1902(a)(47) of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 1396a(a)(47)) is amended by inserting before the
semicolon at the end the following: ``and provide for making
medical assistance available to individuals described in
subsection (a) of section 1920C during a presumptive
eligibility period in accordance with such section.''.
(B) Section 1903(u)(1)(D)(v) of such Act (42 U.S.C.
1396b(u)(1)(D)(v)) is amended--
(i) by striking ``or for'' and inserting ``, for''; and
(ii) by inserting before the period the following: ``, or
for medical assistance provided to an individual described in
subsection (a) of section 1920C during a presumptive
eligibility period under such section''.
SEC. 704. EFFECTIVE DATE.
(a) In General.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the
amendments made by this title take effect on October 1, 2007.
(b) Extension of Effective Date for State Law Amendment.--
In the case of a State plan under title XIX of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq.) which the Secretary of
Health and Human Services determines requires State
legislation in order for the plan to meet the additional
requirements imposed by the amendments made by this title,
the State plan shall not be regarded as failing to comply
with the requirements of such title solely on the basis of
its failure to meet these additional requirements before the
first day of the first calendar quarter beginning after the
close of the first regular session of the State legislature
that begins after the date of the enactment of this Act. For
purposes of the previous sentence, in the case of a State
that has a 2-year legislative session, each year of the
session is considered to be a separate regular session of the
State legislature.
TITLE VIII--RESPONSIBLE EDUCATION ABOUT LIFE ACT
SEC. 801. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Responsible Education
About Life Act of 2007''.
SEC. 802. ASSISTANCE TO REDUCE TEEN PREGNANCY, HIV/AIDS, AND
OTHER SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASES AND TO
SUPPORT HEALTHY ADOLESCENT DEVELOPMENT.
(a) In General.--Each eligible State shall be entitled to
receive from the Secretary of Health and Human Services, for
each of the fiscal years 2008 through 2012, a grant to
conduct programs of family life education, including
education on both abstinence and contraception for the
prevention of teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted
diseases, including HIV/AIDS.
(b) Requirements for Family Life Programs.--For purposes of
this title, a program of family life education is a program
that--
(1) is age-appropriate and medically accurate;
(2) does not teach or promote religion;
(3) teaches that abstinence is the only sure way to avoid
pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases;
(4) stresses the value of abstinence while not ignoring
those young people who have had or are having sexual
intercourse;
(5) provides information about the health benefits and side
effects of all contraceptives and barrier methods as a means
to prevent pregnancy;
(6) provides information about the health benefits and side
effects of all contraceptives and barrier methods as a means
to reduce the risk of contracting sexually transmitted
diseases, including HIV/AIDS;
(7) encourages family communication between parent and
child about sexuality;
(8) teaches young people the skills to make responsible
decisions about sexuality, including how to avoid unwanted
verbal, physical, and sexual advances and how not to make
unwanted verbal, physical, and sexual advances; and
(9) teaches young people how alcohol and drug use can
effect responsible decision making.
(c) Additional Activities.--In carrying out a program of
family life education, a State may expend a grant under
subsection
[[Page 118]]
(a) to carry out educational and motivational activities that
help young people--
(1) gain knowledge about the physical, emotional,
biological, and hormonal changes of adolescence and
subsequent stages of human maturation;
(2) develop the knowledge and skills necessary to ensure
and protect their sexual and reproductive health from
unintended pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease,
including HIV/AIDS throughout their lifespan;
(3) gain knowledge about the specific involvement and
responsibility of males in sexual decision making;
(4) develop healthy attitudes and values about adolescent
growth and development, body image, racial and ethnic
diversity, and other related subjects;
(5) develop and practice healthy life skills, including
goal-setting, decision making, negotiation, communication,
and stress management;
(6) promote self-esteem and positive interpersonal skills
focusing on relationship dynamics, including friendships,
dating, romantic involvement, marriage and family
interactions; and
(7) prepare for the adult world by focusing on educational
and career success, including developing skills for
employment preparation, job seeking, independent living,
financial self-sufficiency, and workplace productivity.
SEC. 803. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
It is the sense of Congress that while States are not
required under this title to provide matching funds, with
respect to grants authorized under section 802(a), they are
encouraged to do so.
SEC. 804. EVALUATION OF PROGRAMS.
(a) In General.--For the purpose of evaluating the
effectiveness of programs of family life education carried
out with a grant under section 802, evaluations of such
program shall be carried out in accordance with subsections
(b) and (c).
(b) National Evaluation.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall provide for a national
evaluation of a representative sample of programs of family
life education carried out with grants under section 802. A
condition for the receipt of such a grant is that the State
involved agree to cooperate with the evaluation. The purposes
of the national evaluation shall be the determination of--
(A) the effectiveness of such programs in helping to delay
the initiation of sexual intercourse and other high-risk
behaviors;
(B) the effectiveness of such programs in preventing
adolescent pregnancy;
(C) the effectiveness of such programs in preventing
sexually transmitted disease, including HIV/AIDS;
(D) the effectiveness of such programs in increasing
contraceptive knowledge and contraceptive behaviors when
sexual intercourse occurs; and
(E) a list of best practices based upon essential
programmatic components of evaluated programs that have led
to success in subparagraphs (A) through (D).
(2) Report.--A report providing the results of the national
evaluation under paragraph (1) shall be submitted to Congress
not later than March 31, 2011, with an interim report
provided on an annual basis at the end of each fiscal year.
(c) Individual State Evaluations.--
(1) In general.--A condition for the receipt of a grant
under section 802 is that the State involved agree to provide
for the evaluation of the programs of family education
carried out with the grant in accordance with the following:
(A) The evaluation will be conducted by an external,
independent entity.
(B) The purposes of the evaluation will be the
determination of--
(i) the effectiveness of such programs in helping to delay
the initiation of sexual intercourse and other high-risk
behaviors;
(ii) the effectiveness of such programs in preventing
adolescent pregnancy;
(iii) the effectiveness of such programs in preventing
sexually transmitted disease, including HIV/AIDS; and
(iv) the effectiveness of such programs in increasing
contraceptive knowledge and contraceptive behaviors when
sexual intercourse occurs.
(2) Use of grant.--A condition for the receipt of a grant
under section 802 is that the State involved agree that not
more than 10 percent of the grant will be expended for the
evaluation under paragraph (1).
SEC. 805. DEFINITIONS.
For purposes of this title:
(1) The term ``eligible State'' means a State that submits
to the Secretary an application for a grant under section 802
that is in such form, is made in such manner, and contains
such agreements, assurances, and information as the Secretary
determines to be necessary to carry out this title.
(2) The term ``HIV/AIDS'' means the human immunodeficiency
virus, and includes acquired immune deficiency syndrome.
(3) The term ``medically accurate'', with respect to
information, means information that is supported by research,
recognized as accurate and objective by leading medical,
psychological, psychiatric, and public health organizations
and agencies, and where relevant, published in peer review
journals.
(4) The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of Health
and Human Services.
SEC. 806. APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) In General.--For the purpose of carrying out this
title, there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as
may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2008 through
2012.
(b) Allocations.--Of the amounts appropriated under
subsection (a) for a fiscal year--
(1) not more than 7 percent may be used for the
administrative expenses of the Secretary in carrying out this
title for that fiscal year; and
(2) not more than 10 percent may be used for the national
evaluation under section 804(b).
______
By Mr. WEBB:
S. 22. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to establish a
program of educational assistance for members of the Armed Forces who
serve in the Armed Forces after September 11, 2001, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Mr. WEBB. Mr. President, I rise today to speak in support of a bill
that I am introducing, entitled the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational
Assistance Act of 2007. This bill is designed to expand the educational
benefits that our Nation offers to the brave men and women who have
served us so honorably since the terrorist attacks of September 11,
2001.
As a veteran who hails from a family with a long history of military
service, I am proud to offer this bill as my first piece of legislation
in the United States Senate.
Most of us know that our country has a tradition--since World War
II--of offering educational assistance to returning veterans. In the
1940s, the first G.I. bill helped transform notions of equality in
American society. The G.I. bill program was designed to help veterans
readjust to civilian life, avoid high levels of unemployment, and give
veterans the opportunity to receive the education and training that
they missed while bravely serving in the military.
To achieve these goals, the post-World War II G.I. bill paid for
veterans' tuition, books, fees, and other training costs, and also gave
a monthly stipend. After World War II, 7.8 million veterans used the
benefits given under the original G.I. bill in some form, out of a
wartime veteran population of 15 million.
Over the last several decades, Congress subsequently passed several
other G.I. bills, which also gave educational benefits to veterans.
However, benefits awarded under those subsequent bills have not been as
generous as our Nation's original G.I. bill.
Currently, veterans' educational benefits are administered under the
Montgomery G.I. bill. This program periodically adjusts veterans'
educational benefits, but the program is designed primarily for
peacetime--not wartime--service.
Yet, now our Nation is fighting a worldwide war against terrorism.
Since 9/11, we have witnessed a sharp increase in the demands placed
upon our military. Many of our military members are serving two or
three tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan. In light of these immense
hardships, it is now time to implement a more robust educational
assistance program for our heroic veterans who have sacrificed so much
for our great Nation.
The Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2007 does just
that. This bill is designed to give our returning troops educational
benefits identical to the benefits provided to veterans after World War
II.
The new benefits package under the bill I am introducing today will
include the costs of tuition, room and board, and a monthly stipend of
$1,000. By contrast, existing law under the Montgomery G.I. bill
provides educational support of up to $1,000 per month for four years,
totaling $9,000 for each academic year. This benefit simply is
insufficient after 9/11.
For example, costs of tuition, room, and board for an in-state
student at George Mason University, located in Fairfax, Virginia, add
up to approximately $14,000 per year. In addition, existing law
requires participating service members to pay $1,200 during their first
year of service in order to even qualify for the benefit.
Let me briefly summarize some of the reforms that are contained in
the bill I am introducing today.
First, these increased educational benefits will be available to
those
[[Page 119]]
members of the military who have served on active duty since September
11, 2001. In general, to qualify, veterans must have served at least
two years of active duty, with at least some period of active duty time
served beginning on or after September 11, 2001.
Next, the bill provides for educational benefits to be paid for a
duration of time that is linked to time served in the military.
Generally, veterans will not receive assistance for more than a total
of 36 months, which equals four academic years.
Third, as I mentioned a moment ago, my bill would allow veterans
pursuing an approved program of education to receive payments covering
the established charges of their program, room and board, and a monthly
stipend of $1,000. Moreover, the bill would allow additional payments
for tutorial assistance, as well as licensure and certification tests.
Fourth, veterans would have up to 15 years to use their educational
assistance entitlement. But veterans would be barred from receiving
concurrent assistance from this program and another similar program,
such as the Montgomery G.I. bill program.
Finally, under this bill, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs would
administer the program, promulgate rules to carry out the new law, and
pay for the program from funds made available to the Department of
Veterans Affairs for the payment of readjustment benefits.
Again, I note that the benefits I have outlined today essentially
mirror the benefits allowed under the G.I. bill enacted after World War
II. That bill helped spark economic growth and expansion for a whole
generation of Americans. The bill I introduce today likely will have
similar beneficial effects. As the post-World War II experience so
clearly indicated, better educated veterans have higher income levels,
which in the long run will increase tax revenues.
Moreover, a strong G.I. bill will have a positive effect on military
recruitment, broadening the socio-economic makeup of the military and
reducing the direct costs of recruitment.
Perhaps more importantly, better-educated veterans have a more
positive readjustment experience. This experience lowers the costs of
treating post-traumatic stress disorder and other readjustment-related
difficulties.
The United States has never erred when it has made sustained new
investments in higher education and job training. Enacting the Post-9/
11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2007 is not only the right
thing to do for our men and women in uniform, but it also is a strong
tonic for an economy plagued by growing disparities in wealth, stagnant
wages, and the outsourcing of American jobs.
Mr. President I am a proud veteran who is honored to serve this great
Nation. As long as I represent Virginians in the United States Senate,
I will make it a priority to help protect our brave men and women in
uniform.
I am honored that the Senate Majority Leader has agreed to join with
me to be a defender and advocate of our veterans. The Majority Leader
has included the concepts of the bill I introduce today in his
leadership bill designed to rebuild the United States military.
Additionally, I plan to work closely with Veterans' Affairs Committee
Chairman Akaka--and all of my Senate colleagues--to statutorily update
G.I. benefits.
Together we can provide the deserving veterans of the 9/11 era with
the same program of benefits that our fathers and grandfathers received
after World War II.
Mr. President, I ask that the bill I introduce today--the Post-9/11
Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2007--be printed in the Record
along with this statement.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 22
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 ``Post-9/11 Veterans
Educational Assistance Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) On September 11, 2001, terrorists attacked the United
States, and the brave members of the Armed Forces of the
United States were called to the defense of the Nation.
(2) Service on active duty in the Armed Forces has been
especially arduous for the members of the Armed Forces since
September 11, 2001.
(3) The United States has a proud history of offering
educational assistance to millions of veterans, as
demonstrated by the many ``G.I. Bills'' enacted since World
War II. Educational assistance for veterans helps reduce the
costs of war, assist veterans in readjusting to civilian life
after wartime service, and boost the United States economy,
and has a positive effect on recruitment for the Armed
Forces.
(4) The current educational assistance program for veterans
is outmoded and designed for peacetime service in the Armed
Forces.
(5) The people of the United States greatly value military
service and recognize the difficult challenges involved in
readjusting to civilian life after wartime service in the
Armed Forces.
(6) It is in the national interest for the United States to
provide veterans who served on active duty in the Armed
Forces after September 11, 2001, with enhanced educational
assistance benefits that are worthy of such service and are
commensurate with the educational assistance benefits
provided by a grateful Nation to veterans of World War II.
SEC. 3. EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR MEMBERS OF THE ARMED
FORCES WHO SERVE AFTER SEPTEMBER 11, 2001.
(a) Educational Assistance Authorized.--
(1) In general.--Part III of title 38, United States Code,
is amended by inserting after chapter 32 the following new
chapter:
``CHAPTER 33--POST-9/11 EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE
``subchapter i--definitions
``Sec.
``3301. Definitions.
``subchapter ii--educational assistance
``3311. Educational assistance for service in the Armed Forces after
September 11, 2001: entitlement.
``3312. Educational assistance: duration.
``3313. Educational assistance: payment; amount.
``3314. Tutorial assistance.
``3315. Licensing and certification tests.
``subchapter iii--administrative provisions
``3321. Time limitation for use of and eligibility for entitlement.
``3322. Bar to duplication of educational assistance benefits.
``3323. Administration.
``3324. Allocation of administration and costs.
``SUBCHAPTER I--DEFINITIONS
``Sec. 3301. Definitions
``In this chapter:
``(1) The term `active duty' has the meaning given such
term in sections 101 and 3002(7) of this title and includes
the limitations specified in section 3002(6) of this title.
``(2) The terms `program of education', `Secretary of
Defense', and `Selected Reserve' have the meaning given such
terms in section 3002 of this title.
``SUBCHAPTER II--EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE
``Sec. 3311. Educational assistance for service in the Armed
Forces after September 11, 2001: entitlement
``(a) Entitlement.--Except as provided in subsection (c)
and subject to subsections (d) through (f), each individual
described in subsection (b) is entitled to educational
assistance under this chapter.
``(b) Covered Individuals.--An individual described in this
subsection is any individual as follows:
``(1) An individual who--
``(A) as of September 11, 2001, is a member of the Armed
Forces and has served an aggregate of at least two years of
active duty in the Armed Forces; and
``(B) after September 10, 2001--
``(i) serves at least 30 days of active duty in the Armed
Forces; or
``(ii) is discharged or released as described in subsection
(d)(1).
``(2) An individual who--
``(A) as of September 10, 2001, is a member of the Armed
Forces;
``(B) as of any date on or after September 11, 2001--
``(i) has served an aggregate of at least two years of
active duty in the Armed Forces; or
``(ii) before completion of service as described in clause
(i), is discharged or released as described in subsection
(d)(1); and
``(C) if described by subparagraph (B)(i), after September
11, 2001--
``(i) serves at least 30 days of active duty in the Armed
Forces; or
``(ii) is discharged or released as described in subsection
(d)(1).
``(3) An individual who--
``(A) on or after September 11, 2001, first becomes a
member of the Armed Forces or first enters on active duty as
a member of the Armed Forces and--
``(i) serves an aggregate of at least two years of active
duty in the Armed Forces; or
[[Page 120]]
``(ii) before completion of service as described in clause
(i), is discharged or released as described in subsection
(d);
``(B) before applying for benefits under this chapter,
completes the requirements of a secondary school diploma (or
equivalency certificate), or successfully completes (or
otherwise receives academic credit for) the equivalent of 12
semester hours in a program of education leading to a
standard college degree; and
``(C) after completion of the service described in
subparagraph (A)(i)--
``(i) continues on active duty;
``(ii) is discharged from active duty with an honorable
discharge;
``(iii) is released after service on active duty
characterized by the Secretary concerned as honorable service
and is placed on the retired list, is transferred to the
Fleet Reserve or Fleet Marine Corps Reserve, or is placed on
the temporary disability list; or
``(iv) is released from active duty for further service in
a reserve component of the Armed Forces after service on
active duty characterized by the Secretary concerned as
honorable service.
``(4) An individual who--
``(A) on or after September 11, 2001, first becomes a
member of the Armed Forces or first enters on active duty as
a member of the Armed Forces and--
``(i)(I) serves an aggregate of at least two years of
active duty in the Armed Forces characterized by the
Secretary concerned as honorable service; or
``(II) before completion of service as described in
subclause (I), is discharged or released as described in
subsection (d); and
``(ii) beginning within one year after completion of
service on active duty as described in clause (i)(I)--
``(I) serves at least four years of continuous active duty
in the Selected Reserve during which the individual
participates satisfactorily in training as required by the
Secretary concerned; or
``(II) during the four years described in subclause (I), is
discharged or released as described in subsection (d);
``(B) before applying for benefits under this chapter,
completes the requirements of a secondary school diploma (or
equivalency certificate), or successfully completes (or
otherwise receives academic credit for) the equivalent of 12
semester hours in a program of education leading to a
standard college degree; and
``(C) after completion of the service described in
subparagraph (A)--
``(i) is discharged from service with an honorable
discharge, is placed on the retired list, or is transferred
to the Standby Reserve or an element of the Ready Reserve
other than the Selected Reserve after service in the Selected
Reserve characterized by the Secretary concerned as honorable
service; or
``(ii) continues on active duty or in the Selected Reserve.
``(c) Exceptions.--The following individuals are not
entitled to educational assistance under this chapter:
``(1) An individual who, after September 11, 2001, receives
a commission as an officer in the Armed Forces upon
graduation from the United States Military Academy, the
United States Naval Academy, the United States Air Force
Academy, or the Coast Guard Academy.
``(2) An individual who, after September 11, 2001, receives
a commission as an officer in the Armed Forces upon
completion of a program of educational assistance under
section 2107 of title 10 if while participating in such
program such individual received an aggregate of $25,000 or
more for participation in such program.
``(d) Certain Discharge or Release Providing Exception From
Service Requirements.--A discharge or release described in
this subsection is a discharge or release (whether from
service on active duty in the Armed Forces under subsection
(b)(1)(B)(i), (b)(2)(B)(i), (b)(2)(C)(i), (b)(3)(A)(i), or
(b)(4)(A)(i)(I) or from service in the Selected Reserve under
subsection (b)(4)(A)(ii)(I)) for--
``(1) a service-connected disability;
``(2) a medical condition which preexisted such service and
which the Secretary determines is not service-connected;
``(3) hardship; or
``(4) a physical or mental condition that was not
characterized as a disability and did not result from the
individual's own willful misconduct but did interfere with
the individual's performance of duty, as determined by the
Secretary of each military department in accordance with
regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense.
``(e) Certain Interruption in Selected Reserve Service
Providing Exception From Service Requirement.--After an
individual begins service in the Selected Reserve as
described in subsection (b)(4)(A)(ii), the continuity of
service of the individual as a member of the Selected Reserve
shall not be considered to be broken--
``(1) by any period of time (not to exceed a maximum period
prescribed in regulations by the Secretary concerned) during
which the member is not able to locate a unit of the member's
Armed Force that the member is eligible to join or that has a
vacancy; or
``(2) by any other period of time (not to exceed a maximum
period so prescribed) during which the member is not attached
to a unit of the Selected Reserve that the Secretary
concerned, pursuant to regulations, considers to be
inappropriate to consider for such purpose.
``(f) Prohibition on Treatment of Certain Service as Period
of Active Duty.--A period of service shall not be considered
a part of the period of active duty on which an individual's
entitlement to educational assistance under this chapter is
based if the period of service is terminated because of a
defective enlistment and induction based on--
``(1) the individual's being a minor for purposes of
service in the Armed Forces;
``(2) an erroneous enlistment or induction; or
``(3) a defective enlistment agreement.
``Sec. 3312. Educational assistance: duration
``(a) In General.--Subject to section 3695 of this title
and subsection (b), an individual entitled to educational
assistance under section 3311 of this title is entitled to a
number of months of educational assistance under section 3313
of this title as follows:
``(1) In the case of an individual described by paragraph
(1) section 3311(b) of this title--
``(A) if the individual is described by subparagraph (B)(i)
of such paragraph, the aggregate number of months served by
the individual on active duty in the Armed Forces after
September 11, 2001; or
``(B) if the individual is described by subparagraph
(B)(ii) of such paragraph, 36 months.
``(2) In the case of an individual described by paragraph
(2) of section 3311(b) of this title--
``(A) if the individual is described by both subparagraphs
(B)(i) and (C)(i) of such paragraph, the aggregate number of
months served by the individual on active duty in the Armed
Forces after September 11, 2001; or
``(B) if the individual is described by subparagraph
(B)(ii) or (C)(ii) of such paragraph, 36 months.
``(3) In the case of an individual described by paragraph
(3) of section 3311(b) of this title--
``(A) if the individual is described by subparagraph (A)(i)
of such paragraph, the aggregate number of months served by
the individual on active duty in the Armed Forces after
September 11, 2001; or
``(B) if the individual is described by subparagraph
(A)(ii) of such paragraph--
``(i) if the discharge or release of the individual is
described by paragraph (1) of section 3311(d) of this title,
36 months; or
``(ii) if the discharge or release of the individual is
described by paragraph (2), (3), or (4) of section 3311(d) of
this title, the aggregate number of months served by the
individual on active duty in the Armed Forces after September
11, 2001.
``(4) In the case of an individual described by paragraph
(4) of section 3311(b) of this title--
``(A) if the individual is described by subparagraph (A)(i)
of such paragraph--
``(i) if the individual is further described by subclause
(I) of such subparagraph, 24 months;
``(ii) if the individual is further described by subclause
(II) of such subparagraph and has a discharge or release
described by paragraph (1) of section 3311(d) of this title,
36 months; or
``(iii) if the individual is further described by subclause
(II) of such subparagraph and has a discharge or release
described by paragraph (2), (3), of (4) of section 3311(d) of
this title, the aggregate number of months served by the
individual on active duty in the Armed Forces after September
11, 2001; and
``(B) if the individual is also described by subparagraph
(A)(ii) of such paragraph--
``(i) if the individual is further described by subclause
(I) of such subparagraph, an additional one month for each
four months served by the individual in the Selected Reserve
(other than any month in which the individual served on
active duty) after September 11, 2001; or
``(ii) if the individual is further described by subclause
(II) of such subparagraph and the individual--
``(I) has a discharge or release described by paragraph (1)
of section 3311(d) of this title, 12 months; or
``(II) has a discharge or release described by paragraph
(2), (3), or (4) of section 3311(d) of this title, an
additional one month for each four months served by the
individual in the Selected Reserve (other than any month in
which the individual served on active duty) after September
11, 2001.
``(b) Limitation.--Except as provided in section 3321(b)(2)
of this title, an individual may not receive educational
assistance under section 3313 of this title for a number of
months in excess of 36 months, which is the equivalent of
four academic years
``Sec. 3313. Educational assistance: payment; amount
``(a) Payment.--The Secretary shall pay to each individual
entitled to educational assistance under this chapter who is
pursuing an approved program of education (other than a
program covered by subsections (e) through (i)) the amounts
specified in subsection (c) to meet the expenses of such
individual's subsistence, tuition, fees, and other
educational costs for pursuit of such program of education.
[[Page 121]]
``(b) Approved Programs of Education.--Except as provided
in subsections (g) through (i), a program of education is an
approved program of education for purposes of this chapter if
the program of education is approved for purposes of chapter
30 of this title.
``(c) Amount of Educational Assistance.--(1) The amounts
payable under this subsection for pursuit of an approved
program of education are amounts as follows:
``(A) An amount equal to the established charges for the
program of education.
``(B) Subject to paragraph (2), an amount equal to the room
and board of the individual.
``(C) A monthly stipend in the amount of $1,000.
``(2) The amount payable under paragraph (1)(B) for room
and board of an individual may not exceed an amount equal to
the standard dormitory fee, or such equivalent fee as the
Secretary shall specify in regulations, which similarly
circumstanced nonveterans enrolled in the program of
education involved would be required to pay.
``(d) Frequency of Payment.--(1) Payment of the amounts
payable under subparagraphs (A) and (B) of subsection (c)(1)
for pursuit of a program of education shall be made in a
lump-sum amount for the entire quarter, semester, or term, as
applicable, of the program of education before the
commencement of such quarter, semester, or term.
``(2) Payment of the amount payable under subparagraph (C)
of subsection (c)(1) for pursuit of a program of education
shall be made on a monthly basis.
``(3) The Secretary shall prescribe in regulations methods
for determining the number of months (including fractions
thereof) of entitlement of an individual to educational
assistance this chapter that are chargeable under this
chapter for an advance payment of amounts for pursuit of a
program of education on a quarter, semester, term, or other
basis.
``(e) Programs of Education Pursued on Active Duty.--(1)
Educational assistance is payable under this chapter for
pursuit of an approved program of education while on active
duty.
``(2) The amount of educational assistance payable under
this chapter to an individual pursuing a program of education
while on active duty is the lesser of--
``(A) the established charges which similarly circumstanced
nonveterans enrolled in the program of education involved
would be required to pay; or
``(B) the amount of the charges of the educational
institution as elected by the individual in the manner
specified in section 3014(b)(1) of this title.
``(3) Payment of the amount payable under paragraph (2) for
pursuit of a program of education shall be made in a lump-sum
amount for the entire quarter, semester, or term, as
applicable, of the program of education before the
commencement of such quarter, semester, or term.
``(4) For each month (as determined pursuant to the methods
prescribed under subsection (c)(3)) for which amounts are
paid an individual under this subsection, the entitlement of
the individual to educational assistance under this chapter
shall be charged at the rate of one month for each such
month.
``(f) Programs of Education Pursued on Less Than Half-Time
Basis.--(1) Educational assistance is payable under this
chapter for pursuit of an approved program of education on
less than half-time basis.
``(2) The amount of educational assistance payable under
this chapter to an individual pursuing a program of education
on less than half-time basis is the established charges which
similarly circumstanced nonveterans enrolled in the program
of education involved would be required to pay.
``(3) Payment of the amount payable under this chapter to
an individual for pursuit of a program of education on less
than half-time basis shall be made in a lump-sum, and shall
be made not later than the last day of the month immediately
following the month in which certification is received from
the educational institution involved that the individual has
enrolled in and is pursuing a program of education at the
institution.
``(4) For each month (as determined pursuant to the methods
prescribed under subsection (c)(3)) for which amounts are
paid an individual under this subsection, the entitlement of
the individual to educational assistance under this chapter
shall be charged at a percentage of a month equal to--
``(A) the number of course hours borne by the individual in
pursuit of the program of education involved, divided by
``(B) the number of course hours for full-time pursuit of
such program of education.
``(g) Apprenticeship or Other On-Job Training.--(1)
Educational assistance is payable under this chapter for
full-time pursuit of a program of apprenticeship or other on-
job training described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of section
3687(a) of this title.
``(2)(A) The educational assistance payable under this
chapter to an individual for pursuit of a program of
apprenticeship or training referred to in paragraph (1) is
the amounts as follows:
``(i) The established charge which similarly circumstances
nonveterans enrolled in the program would be required to pay.
``(ii) A monthly stipend in the amount of $1,000.
``(B) The nature and amount of the tuition, fees, and other
expenses constituting the established charge for a program of
apprenticeship or training under this subsection shall be
determined in accordance with regulations prescribed by the
Secretary. Such expenses may include room and board under
such circumstances as the Secretary shall prescribe in the
regulations.
``(3)(A) Payment of the amount payable under paragraph
(2)(A)(i) for pursuit of a program of apprenticeship or
training shall be made, at the election of the Secretary--
``(i) in a lump sum for such period of the program as the
Secretary shall determine before the commencement of such
period of the program; or
``(ii) on a monthly basis.
``(B) Payment of the amount payable under paragraph
(2)(A)(ii) for pursuit of a program of apprenticeship or
training shall be made on a monthly basis.
``(4) For each month (as determined pursuant to the methods
prescribed under subsection (c)(3) in the case of payments
made in accordance with paragraph (3)(A)(i)) for which
amounts are paid an individual under this subsection, the
entitlement of the individual to educational assistance under
this chapter shall be charged at the rate of one month for
each such month.
``(h) Programs of Education by Correspondence.--(1)
Educational assistance is payable under this chapter for
pursuit of a program of education exclusively by
correspondence.
``(2)(A) The amount of educational assistance payable under
this chapter to an individual who is pursuing a program of
education exclusively by correspondence is an amount equal to
55 percent of the established charge which similarly
circumstanced nonveterans enrolled in the program of
education would be required to pay.
``(B) In this paragraph, the term `established charge', in
the case of a program of education, means the lesser of--
``(i) the charge for the course or courses under the
program of education, as determined on the basis of the
lowest extended time payment plan offered by the institution
involved and approved by the appropriate State approving
agency; or
``(ii) the actual charge to the individual for such course
or courses.
``(3) Payment of the amount payable under this chapter for
pursuit of a program of education by correspondence shall be
made quarterly on a pro rata basis for the lessons completed
by the individual and serviced by the institution involved.
``(4) For each month (as determined pursuant to the methods
prescribed under subsection (c)(3)) for which amounts are
paid an individual under this subsection, the entitlement of
the individual to educational assistance under this chapter
shall be charged at the rate of one month for each such
month.
``(i) Flight Training.--(1) Educational assistance is
payable under this chapter for a program of education
consisting of flight training as follows:
``(A) Courses of flight training approved under section
3860A(b) of this title.
``(B) Flight training meeting the requirements of section
3034(d) of this title.
``(2) Paragraphs (2) and (4) of section 3032(e) of this
title shall apply with respect to the availability of
educational assistance under this chapter for pursuit of
flight training covered by paragraph (1).
``(3)(A) The educational assistance payable under this
chapter to an individual for pursuit of a program of
education consisting of flight training covered by paragraph
(1) is the amounts as follows:
``(i) The established charge which similarly circumstances
nonveterans enrolled in the program would be required to pay.
``(ii) A monthly stipend in the amount of $1,000.
``(B) The nature and amount of the tuition, fees, and other
expenses constituting the established charge for a program of
flight training under this subsection shall be determined in
accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary.
``(4) Payment of the amounts payable under paragraph (3)
for pursuit of a program of flight training shall be made on
a monthly basis.
``(5) For each month for which amounts are paid an
individual under this subsection, the entitlement of the
individual to educational assistance under this chapter shall
be charged at the rate of one month for each such month.
``(j) Established Charges Defined.--(1) In subsections (c)
and (e), the term `established charges', in the case of a
program of education, means the actual charges (as determined
pursuant to regulations prescribed by the Secretary) for
tuition, fees (including required supplies, books, and
equipment), and other educational costs which similarly
circumstanced nonveterans enrolled in the program of
education would be required to pay.
``(2) Established charges shall be determined for purposes
of this subsection on the following basis:
``(A) In the case of an individual enrolled in a program of
education offered on a term, quarter, or semester basis, the
tuition and fees charged the individual for the term,
quarter, or semester.
[[Page 122]]
``(B) In the case of an individual enrolled in a program of
education not offered on a term, quarter, or semester basis,
the tuition and fees charged the individual for the entire
program of education.
``Sec. 3314. Tutorial assistance
``(a) In General.--Subject to subsection (b), an individual
entitled to educational assistance under this chapter shall
also be entitled to benefits provided an eligible veteran
under section 3492 of this title.
``(b) Conditions.--(1) The provision of benefits under
subsection (a) shall be subject to the conditions applicable
to an eligible veteran under section 3492 of this title.
``(2) In addition to the conditions specified in paragraph
(1), benefits may not be provided to an individual under
subsection (a) unless the professor or other individual
teaching, leading, or giving the course for which such
benefits are provided certifies that--
``(A) such benefits are essential to correct a deficiency
of the individual in such course; and
``(B) such course is required as a part of, or is
prerequisite or indispensable to the satisfactory pursuit of,
an approved program of education.
``(c) Amount.--(1) The amount of benefits described in
subsection (a) that are payable under this section may not
exceed $100 per month, for a maximum of 12 months, or until a
maximum of $1,200 is utilized.
``(2) The amount provided an individual under this
subsection is in addition to the amounts of educational
assistance paid the individual under section 3313 of this
title.
``(d) No Charge Against Entitlement.--Any benefits provided
an individual under subsection (a) are in addition to any
other educational assistance benefits provided the individual
under this chapter.
``Sec. 3315. Licensure and certification tests
``(a) In General.--An individual entitled to educational
assistance under this chapter shall also be entitled to
payment for one licensing or certification test described in
section 3452(b) of this title.
``(b) Limitation on Amount.--The amount payable under
subsection (a) for a licensing or certification test may not
exceed the lesser of--
``(1) $2,000; or
``(2) the fee charged for the test.
``(c) No Charge Against Entitlement.--Any amount paid an
individual under subsection (a) is in addition to any other
educational assistance benefits provided the individual under
this chapter.
``SUBCHAPTER III--ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS
``Sec. 3321. Time limitation for use of and eligibility for
entitlement
``(a) In General.--(1) Except as otherwise provided in this
section, the period during which an individual entitled to
educational assistance under this chapter may use such
individual's entitlement expires at the end of the 15-year
period beginning on the date of such individual's last
discharge or release from active duty.
``(2) In the case of an individual described in paragraph
(1) who becomes entitled to educational assistance under this
chapter under section 3311(b)(4) of this title, the 15-year
period described in paragraph (1) shall begin on the later
of--
``(A) the date of such individual's last discharge or
release from active duty; or
``(B) the date on which the four-year requirement described
in section 3311(b)(4)(A)(ii) of this title is met.
``(b) Exceptions.--(1) Subsections (b), (c), and (d) of
section 3031 of this title shall apply with respect to the
running of the 15-year period described in subsection (a) of
this section in the same manner as such subsections apply
under section 3031 of this title with respect to the running
of the 10-year period described in section 3031(a) of this
title.
``(2) Section 3031(f) of this title shall apply with
respect to the termination of an individual's entitlement to
educational assistance under this chapter in the same manner
as such section applies to the termination of an individual's
entitlement to educational assistance under chapter 30 of
this title, except that, in the administration of such
section for purposes of this chapter, the reference to
section 3013 of this title shall be deemed to be a reference
to 3312 of this title.
``(3) For purposes of subsection (a), an individual's last
discharge or release from active duty shall not include any
discharge or release from a period of active duty of less
than 90 days of continuous service, unless the individual is
discharged or released as described in paragraph (1), (2), or
(3) of section 3311(d) of this title.
``Sec. 3322. Bar to duplication of educational assistance
benefits
``(a) In General.--An individual entitled to educational
assistance under this chapter who is also eligible for
educational assistance under chapter 30, 31, 32, or 35 of
this title, chapter 107, 1606, or 1607 of title 10, or the
provisions of the Hostage Relief Act of 1980 (Public Law 96-
449; 5 U.S.C. 5561 note) may not receive assistance under two
or more such programs concurrently, but shall elect (in such
form and manner as the Secretary may prescribe) under which
chapter or provisions to receive educational assistance.
``(b) Inapplicability of Service Treated Under Educational
Loan Repayment Programs.--A period of service counted for
purposes of repayment of an education loan under chapter 109
of title 10 may not be counted as a period of service for
entitlement to educational assistance under this chapter.
``(c) Service in Selected Reserve.--An individual who
serves in the Selected Reserve may receive credit for such
service under only one of this chapter, chapter 30 of this
title, and chapters 1606 and 1607 of title 10, and shall
elect (in such form and manner as the Secretary may
prescribe) under which chapter such service is to be
credited.
``(d) Additional Coordination Matters.--In the case of an
individual entitled to educational assistance under chapter
30, 31, 32, or 35 of this title, chapter 107, 1606, or 1607
of title 10, or the provisions of the Hostage Relief Act of
1980, or making contributions toward entitlement to
educational assistance under chapter 30 of this title, as of
the date of the enactment of the Post-9/11 Veterans
Educational Assistance Act of 2007, coordination of
entitlement to educational assistance under this chapter, on
the one hand, and such chapters or provisions, on the other,
shall be governed by the provisions of section 3(c) of the
Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2007.
``Sec. 3323. Administration
``(a) In General.--(1) Except as otherwise provided in this
chapter, the provisions specified in section 3034(a)(1) of
this title shall apply to the provision of educational
assistance under this chapter.
``(2) In applying the provisions referred to in paragraph
(1) to an individual entitled to educational assistance under
this chapter for purposes of this section, the reference in
such provisions to the term `eligible veteran' shall be
deemed to refer to an individual entitled to educational
assistance under this chapter.
``(3) In applying section 3474 of this title to an
individual entitled to educational assistance under this
chapter for purposes of this section, the reference in such
section 3474 to the term `educational assistance allowance'
shall be deemed to refer to educational assistance payable
under section 3313 of this title.
``(4) In applying section 3482(g) of this title to an
individual entitled to educational assistance under this
chapter for purposes of this section--
``(A) the first reference to the term `educational
assistance allowance' in such section 3482(g) shall be deemed
to refer to educational assistance payable under section 3313
of this title; and
``(B) the first sentence of paragraph (1) of such section
3482(g) shall be applied as if such sentence ended with
`equipment'.
``(b) Information on Benefits.--(1) The Secretary of
Veterans Affairs shall provide the information described in
paragraph (2) to each member of the Armed Forces at such
times as the Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the Secretary
of Defense shall jointly prescribe in regulations.
``(2) The information described in this paragraph is
information on benefits, limitations, procedures, eligibility
requirements (including time-in-service requirements), and
other important aspects of educational assistance under this
chapter, including application forms for such assistance
under section 5102 of this title.
``(3) The Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall furnish the
information and forms described in paragraph (2), and other
educational materials on educational assistance under this
chapter, to educational institutions, training
establishments, military education personnel, and such other
persons and entities as the Secretary considers appropriate.
``(c) Regulations.--(1) The Secretary shall prescribe
regulations for the administration of this chapter.
``(2) Any regulations prescribed by the Secretary of
Defense for purposes of this chapter shall apply uniformly
across the Armed Forces.
``Sec. 3324. Allocation of administration and costs
``(a) Administration.--Except as otherwise provided in this
chapter, the Secretary shall administer the provision of
educational assistance under this chapter.
``(b) Costs.--Payments for entitlement to educational
assistance earned under this chapter shall be made from funds
appropriated to, or otherwise made available to, the
Department of Veterans Affairs for the payment of
readjustment benefits.''.
(2) Clerical amendments.--The tables of chapters at the
beginning of title 38, United States Code, and at the
beginning of part III of such title, are each amended by
inserting after the item relating to chapter 32 the following
new item:
``33. Post-9/11 Educational Assistance......................3301''.....
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Amendments relating to duplication of benefits.--
(A) Section 3033 of title 38, United States Code, is
amended--
(i) in subsection (a)(1), by inserting ``33,'' after
``32,''; and
(ii) in subsection (c), by striking ``both the program
established by this chapter and the
[[Page 123]]
program established by chapter 106 of title 10'' and
inserting ``two or more of the programs established by this
chapter, chapter 33 of this title, and chapters 1606 and 1607
of title 10''.
(B) Paragraph (4) of section 3695(a) of such title is
amended to read as follows:
``(4) Chapters 30, 32, 33, 34, 35, and 36 of this title.''.
(C) Section 16163(e) of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by inserting ``33,'' after ``32,''.
(2) Additional conforming amendments.--
(A) Title 38, United States Code, is further amended by
inserting ``33,'' after ``32,'' each place it appears in the
following provisions:
(i) In subsections (b) and (e)(1) of section 3485.
(ii) In section 3688(b).
(iii) In subsections (a)(1), (c)(1), (c)(1)(G), (d), and
(e)(2) of section 3689.
(iv) In section 3690( b)(3)(A).
(v) In subsections (a) and (b) of section 3692.
(vi) In section 3697(a).
(B) Section 3697A(b)(1) of such title is amended by
striking ``or 32'' and inserting ``32, or 33''.
(c) Applicability to Individuals Under Montgomery GI Bill
Program.--
(1) Individuals eligible to elect participation in post-9/
11 educational assistance.--An individual may elect to
receive educational assistance under chapter 33 of title 38,
United States Code (as added by subsection (a)), if such
individual--
(A) as of the date of the enactment of this Act--
(i) is entitled to basic educational assistance under
chapter 30 of title 38, United States Code, and has used, but
retains unused, such entitlement under that chapter;
(ii) is entitled to educational assistance under chapter
107, 1606, or 1607 of title 10, United States Code, and has
used, but retains unused, such entitlement under the
applicable chapter;
(iii) is entitled to basic educational assistance under
chapter 30 of title 38, United States Code, but has not used
any such entitlement under that chapter;
(iv) is entitled to educational assistance under chapter
107, 1606, or 1607 of title 10, United States Code, and has
not used any such entitlement under such chapter;
(v) is a member of the Armed Forces who is eligible for
receipt of basic educational assistance under chapter 30 of
title 38, United States Code, and is making contributions
toward such assistance under section 3011(b) or 3012(c) of
such title; or
(vi) is a member of the Armed Forces who is not entitled to
basic educational assistance under chapter 30 of title 38,
United States Code, by reason of an election under section
3011(c)(1) or 3012(d)(1) of such title; and
(B) as of the date of the individual's election under this
paragraph--
(i) otherwise meets the requirements for entitlement to
educational assistance under chapter 33 of title 38, United
States Code (as so added); or
(ii) is making progress toward meeting such requirements.
(2) Election on treatment of transferred entitlement.--
(A) Election.--If, on the date an individual described in
subparagraph (A)(i) or (A)(iii) of paragraph (1) makes an
election under that paragraph, a transfer of the entitlement
of the individual to basic educational assistance under
section 3020 of title 38, United States Code, is in effect
and a number of months of the entitlement so transferred
remain unutilized, the individual may elect to revoke all or
a portion of the entitlement so transferred that remains
unutilized.
(B) Availability of revoked entitlement.--Any entitlement
revoked by an individual under this paragraph shall no longer
be available to the dependent to whom transferred, but shall
be available to the individual instead for educational
assistance under chapter 33 of title 38, United States Code
(as so added), as provided in paragraph (3)(B).
(C) Availability of unrevoked entitlement.--Any entitlement
described in subparagraph (A) that is not revoked by an
individual in accordance with that subparagraph shall remain
available to the eligible dependent or dependents concerned
in accordance with the current transfer of such entitlement
under section 3020 of title 38, United States Code.
(3) Post-9/11 educational assistance.--
(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), an individual
making an election under paragraph (1) shall be entitled to
educational assistance under chapter 33 of title 38, United
States Code (as so added), in accordance with the provisions
of such chapter, instead of basic educational assistance
under chapter 30 of title 38, United States Code, or
educational assistance under chapter 107, 1606, or 1607 of
title 10, United States Code, as applicable.
(B) Limitation on entitlement for certain individuals.--In
the case of an individual making an election under paragraph
(1) who is described by subparagraph (A)(i), the number of
months of entitlement of such individual to educational
assistance under chapter 33 of title 38, United States Code
(as so added), shall be the number of months equal to the
number of months of unused entitlement of such individual
under chapter 30 of title 38, United States Code, as of the
date of the election, including any number of months
entitlement revoked by the individual under paragraph (2)(A).
(4) Continuing educational assistance under montgomery gi
bill.--
(A) In general.--If the aggregate amount of entitlement to
educational assistance under chapter 33 of title 38, United
States Code (as so added), that is accumulated by an
individual described in subparagraph (A)(i), (A)(ii), or
(A)(iii) of paragraph (1) who makes an election under that
paragraph is less than 36 months, the individual shall
retain, and may utilize, any unutilized entitlement of the
individual to educational assistance under chapter 30 of
title 38, United States Code, or chapter 107, 1606, or 1607
of title 10, United States Code, as applicable, for a number
of months equal to the lesser of--
(i) 36 months minus the number of months of entitlement so
accumulated by the individual; or
(ii) the number of months of such unutilized entitlement of
the individual.
(B) Utilization of retained entitlement.--The utilization
of entitlement retained by an individual under this paragraph
shall be governed by the provisions of chapter 30 of title
38, United States Code, or chapter 107, 1606, or 1607 of
title 10, United States Code, as applicable.
(5) Treatment of contributions toward basic educational
assistance.--
(A) Refund of contributions.--Except as provided in
subparagraph (B), the Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall pay
to each individual making an election under paragraph (1) who
is described by clause (i), (iii), or (v) of subparagraph (A)
of that paragraph an amount equal to the total amount of
contributions made by such individual under subchapter II of
chapter 30 of title 38, United States Code, for basic
educational assistance under that chapter, including any
contributions made under subsection (b) or (e) of section
3011 of such title or any contributions made under subsection
(c) or (f) of section 3012 of such title.
(B) Exception.--In the case of an individual described by
subparagraph (A) who is entitled to basic educational
assistance under chapter 30 of title 38, United States Code,
by reason of paragraph (4)(A), the amount payable to the
individual under this paragraph shall be an amount equal to--
(i) the amount otherwise payable to the individual under
subparagraph (A), multiplied by
(ii) a fraction--
(I) the numerator of which is the number equal to the
number of months of basic educational assistance under
chapter 30 of title 38, United States Code, to which the
individual is entitled by reason of paragraph (4)(A); and
(II) the denominator of which is 36.
(C) Cessation of contributions.--Effective as of the first
month beginning on or after the date of an election under
paragraph (1) of an individual described by subparagraph
(A)(v) of that paragraph, the obligation of such individual
to make contributions under section 3011(b) or 3012(c) of
title 38, United States Code, as applicable, shall cease, and
the requirements of such section shall be deemed to be no
longer applicable to such person.
(6) Termination of entitlement under montgomery gi bill.--
Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (4), effective on
the last day of the month in which an individual makes an
election under paragraph (1), the entitlement, if any, of the
individual to basic educational assistance under chapter 30
of title 38, United States Code, or educational assistance
under chapter 107, 1606, or 1607 of title 10, United States
Code, as applicable, shall terminate.
(7) Irrevocability of elections.--An election under
paragraph (1) or (2)(A) is irrevocable.
______
By Mr. HARKIN (for himself, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Biden, and
Mr. Obama):
S. 23. A bill to promote renewable fuel and energy security of the
United States, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation.
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, over the past several years, our national
energy security has deteriorated rapidly. Petroleum and natural gas
prices have gone up and appear to be staying up. Almost daily, we hear
projections of increases in electricity prices around the country. The
environmental impacts of energy use, especially from autos and power
plants, are still a major health concern. The evidence of climate
change is absolutely clear and very ominous, especially in the
disappearance of glaciers, the break up of polar ice sheets and the
increasing intensity of storms. We know that combustion of fossil fuels
is the primary contributor of the anthropogenic greenhouse gases
[[Page 124]]
emissions that drive this global warming. Despite these negative
consequences, our dependence on petroleum is rising steadily, and we
are importing over 60 percent of that petroleum from foreign sources,
many of whom are politically unstable or unfriendly to the United
States. In short, we need to initiate a major transition of our energy
sector, to one that is far more efficient, is much less reliant on
fossil fuels and imported oil, and is utilizing vastly more
domestically produced renewable energy.
We have seen waxing and waning concerns about our national energy
economy now for over 30 years. Many of us have believed all along that
we should be doing more to promote energy efficiency and to accelerate
the development and use of clean, domestic renewable energy, but during
most of that time, cheap energy supplies have lulled us into relatively
minimal actions. Over the past three years, however, there has been an
increasingly acute awareness of the dire nature of our overall energy
situation. It is now clear that our energy situation is a serious
threat not only to our economy but to our national security. We can no
longer postpone action.
Today I am joined by my esteemed colleagues, Senator Lugar of
Indiana, Senator Dorgan of North Dakota, Senator Biden of Delaware, and
Senator Obama of Illinois, in introducing the Biofuels Security Act of
2007. This bill directly addresses one of the most critical pieces of a
sound national energy transition policy. It charts a clear path forward
for significantly increasing our national use of renewable fuels over
the next 24 years, reaching a total of 30 billion gallons per year by
2020, and 60 billion gallons per year by 2030. That latter figure
represents about one-third of our nation's current annual fuel use for
highway transportation. The production of the two most common forms of
biofuels, ethanol and biodiesel, is expanding rapidly. We have reason
to believe that this provision will provide strong impetus to
increasing biofuels' production and use because it is an extension of
the renewable fuels standard that I promoted in the Energy Policy Act
of 2005. That standard mandates using a total of 7.5 billion gallons of
renewable fuels by 2012, and already we are on a path to exceed that
requirement by 2008. Thus, we can be very optimistic about the success
of setting these longer term and more aggressive targets.
This bill also will ensure that the vehicles to use these renewable
fuels are readily available by requiring auto manufacturers over time
to produce and sell increasing numbers of dual-fuel vehicles--that is,
vehicles that can be fueled by gasoline or gasoline/ethanol blends.
Because the turnover of vehicles on the highway takes many years, our
bill requires the fraction of dual-fuel vehicles to increase from 10
percent in 2008 up to 100 percent in 2017 and beyond. In order to
assure availability of alternative fuels, our bill requires
installation of increasing numbers of E-85 pumps by major oil companies
at fueling stations that they own or license under their brand. These
pumps will dispense E-85, a blend of 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent
gasoline, which is a very popular renewable fuel because of its high
ethanol content. The bill will require 50 percent of such owned and
licensed stations to have pumps dispensing E-85 fuel by 2017. In
addition, the bill includes a clause to ensure geographic distribution
of such E-85 marketing stations.
Today I urge my Senate colleagues to join us in taking action to
boost the transition to a cleaner, more resilient, and more secure
energy economy. I request support for this bill and its rapid
enactment.
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. 23
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 ``Biofuels
Security Act of 2007''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
TITLE I--RENEWABLE FUELS
Sec. 101. Renewable fuel program.
Sec. 102. Installation of E-85 fuel pumps by major oil companies at
owned stations and branded stations.
Sec. 103. Minimum Federal fleet requirement.
Sec. 104. Application of Gasohol Competition Act of 1980.
TITLE II--DUAL FUELED AUTOMOBILES
Sec. 201. Requirement to manufacture dual fueled automobiles.
Sec. 202. Manufacturing incentives for dual fueled automobiles.
TITLE I--RENEWABLE FUELS
SEC. 101. RENEWABLE FUEL PROGRAM.
Section 211(o)(2) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C.
7545(o)(2)) is amended by striking subparagraph (B) and
inserting the following:
``(B) Applicable volume.--
``(i) In general.--For the purpose of subparagraph (A), the
applicable volume for calendar year 2010 and each calendar
year thereafter shall be determined, by rule, by the
Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary of
Agriculture and the Secretary of Energy, in a manner that
ensures that--
``(I) the requirements described in clause (ii) for
specified calendar years are met; and
``(II) the applicable volume for each calendar year not
specified in clause (ii) is determined on an annual basis.
``(ii) Requirements.--The requirements referred to in
clause (i) are--
``(I) for calendar year 2010, at least 10,000,000,000
gallons of renewable fuel;
``(II) for calendar year 2020, at least 30,000,000,000
gallons of renewable fuel; and
``(III) for calendar year 2030, at least 60,000,000,000
gallons of renewable fuel.''.
SEC. 102. INSTALLATION OF E-85 FUEL PUMPS BY MAJOR OIL
COMPANIES AT OWNED STATIONS AND BRANDED
STATIONS.
Section 211(o) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7545(o)) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(11) Installation of e-85 fuel pumps by major oil
companies at owned stations and branded stations.--
``(A) Definitions.--In this paragraph:
``(i) E-85 fuel.--The term `E-85 fuel' means a blend of
gasoline approximately 85 percent of the content of which is
derived from ethanol produced in the United States.
``(ii) Major oil company.--The term `major oil company'
means any person that, individually or together with any
other person with respect to which the person has an
affiliate relationship or significant ownership interest, has
not less than 4,500 retail station outlets according to the
latest publication of the Petroleum News Annual Factbook.
``(iii) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the
Secretary of Energy, acting in consultation with the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency and the
Secretary of Agriculture.
``(B) Regulations.--The Secretary shall promulgate
regulations to ensure that each major oil company that sells
or introduces gasoline into commerce in the United States
through wholly-owned stations or branded stations installs or
otherwise makes available 1 or more pumps that dispense E-85
fuel (including any other equipment necessary, such as
including tanks, to ensure that the pumps function properly)
at not less than the applicable percentage of the wholly-
owned stations and the branded stations of the major oil
company specified in subparagraph (C).
``(C) Applicable percentage.--For the purpose of
subparagraph (B), the applicable percentage of the wholly-
owned stations and the branded stations shall be determined
in accordance with the following table:
``Applicable percentage of wholly-owned stations and branded stations
Calendar year: (percent):
2008...........................................................5 ....
2009..........................................................10 ....
2010..........................................................15 ....
2011..........................................................20 ....
2012..........................................................25 ....
2013..........................................................30 ....
2014..........................................................35 ....
2015..........................................................40 ....
2016..........................................................45 ....
2017 and each calendar year thereafter........................50.....
``(D) Geographic distribution.--
``(i) In general.--Subject to clause (ii), in promulgating
regulations under subparagraph (B), the Secretary shall
ensure that each major oil company described in subparagraph
(B) installs or otherwise makes available 1 or more pumps
that dispense E-85 fuel at not less than a minimum percentage
(specified in the regulations) of the wholly-owned stations
and the branded stations of the major oil company in each
State.
``(ii) Requirement.--In specifying the minimum percentage
under clause (i), the Secretary shall ensure that each major
oil company installs or otherwise makes available 1 or more
pumps described in that clause in each State in which the
major oil company operates.
[[Page 125]]
``(E) Financial responsibility.--In promulgating
regulations under subparagraph (B), the Secretary shall
ensure that each major oil company described in that
subparagraph assumes full financial responsibility for the
costs of installing or otherwise making available the pumps
described in that subparagraph and any other equipment
necessary (including tanks) to ensure that the pumps function
properly.
``(F) Production credits for exceeding e-85 fuel pumps
installation requirement.--
``(i) Earning and period for applying credits.--If the
percentage of the wholly-owned stations and the branded
stations of a major oil company at which the major oil
company installs E-85 fuel pumps in a particular calendar
year exceeds the percentage required under subparagraph (C),
the major oil company earns credits under this paragraph,
which may be applied to any of the 3 consecutive calendar
years immediately after the calendar year for which the
credits are earned.
``(ii) Trading credits.--Subject to clause (iii), a major
oil company that has earned credits under clause (i) may sell
credits to another major oil company to enable the purchaser
to meet the requirement under subparagraph (C).
``(iii) Exception.--A major oil company may not use credits
purchased under clause (ii) to fulfill the geographic
distribution requirement in subparagraph (D).''.
SEC. 103. MINIMUM FEDERAL FLEET REQUIREMENT.
Section 303(b)(1) of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42
U.S.C. 13212(b)(1)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon;
(2) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``fiscal year 1999 and
thereafter,'' and inserting ``each of fiscal years 1999
through 2007; and''; and
(3) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the following:
``(E) 100 percent in fiscal year 2008 and thereafter,''.
SEC. 104. APPLICATION OF GASOHOL COMPETITION ACT OF 1980.
Section 26 of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 26a) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (d);
(2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following:
``(c) For purposes of subsection (a), restricting the right
of a franchisee to install on the premises of that franchisee
a renewable fuel pump, such as one that dispenses E85, shall
be considered an unlawful restriction.''; and
(3) in subsection (d) (as redesignated by paragraph (1))--
(A) by striking ``section,'' and inserting the following:
``section--
``(1) the term'';
(B) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``;
and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) the term `gasohol' includes any blend of ethanol and
gasoline such as E-85.''.
TITLE II--DUAL FUELED AUTOMOBILES
SEC. 201. REQUIREMENT TO MANUFACTURE DUAL FUELED AUTOMOBILES.
(a) Requirement.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 329 of title 49, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after section 32902 the
following:
``Sec. 32902A. Requirement to manufacture dual fueled
automobiles
``(a) Requirement.--Each manufacturer of new automobiles
that are capable of operating on gasoline or diesel fuel
shall ensure that the percentage of such automobiles,
manufactured in any model year after model year 2007 and
distributed in commerce for sale in the United States, which
are dual fueled automobiles is equal to not less than the
applicable percentage set forth in the following table:
The percentage of dual fueled automobiles manufactured shall
``For each of the following model years: be not less than:
2008..........................................................10 ....
2009..........................................................20 ....
2010..........................................................30 ....
2011..........................................................40 ....
2012..........................................................50 ....
2013..........................................................60 ....
2014..........................................................70 ....
2015..........................................................80 ....
2016..........................................................90 ....
2017 and beyond..............................................100.....
``(b) Production Credits for Exceeding Flexible Fuel
Automobile Production Requirement.--
``(1) Earning and period for applying credits.--If the
number of dual fueled automobiles manufactured by a
manufacturer in a particular model year exceeds the number
required under subsection (a), the manufacturer earns credits
under this section, which may be applied to any of the 3
consecutive model years immediately after the model year for
which the credits are earned.
``(2) Trading credits.--A manufacturer that has earned
credits under paragraph (1) may sell credits to another
manufacturer to enable the purchaser to meet the requirement
under subsection (a).''.
(2) Technical amendment.--The table of sections for chapter
329 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting
after the item relating to section 32902 the following:
``32902A. Requirement to manufacture dual fueled automobiles.''.
(b) Activities to Promote the Use of Certain Alternative
Fuels.--The Secretary of Transportation shall carry out
activities to promote the use of fuel mixtures containing
gasoline or diesel fuel and 1 or more alternative fuels,
including a mixture containing at least 85 percent of
methanol, denatured ethanol, and other alcohols by volume
with gasoline or other fuels, to power automobiles in the
United States.
SEC. 202. MANUFACTURING INCENTIVES FOR DUAL FUELED
AUTOMOBILES.
Section 32905(b) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as
subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively;
(2) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``Except'';
(3) by striking ``model years 1993-2010'' and inserting
``model year 1993 through the first model year beginning not
less than 18 months after the date of enactment of the
Biofuels Security Act of 2007''; and
(4) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Except as provided in paragraph (5), subsection (d),
or section 32904(a)(2), the Administrator shall measure the
fuel economy for each model of dual fueled automobiles
manufactured by a manufacturer in the first model year
beginning not less than 30 months after the date of enactment
of the Biofuels Security Act of 2007 by dividing 1.0 by the
sum of--
``(A) 0.7 divided by the fuel economy measured under
section 32904(c) when operating the model on gasoline or
diesel fuel; and
``(B) 0.3 divided by the fuel economy measured under
subsection (a) when operating the model on alternative fuel.
``(3) Except as provided in paragraph (5), subsection (d),
or section 32904(a)(2), the Administrator shall measure the
fuel economy for each model of dual fueled automobiles
manufactured by a manufacturer in the first model year
beginning not less than 42 months after the date of enactment
of the Biofuels Security Act of 2007 by dividing 1.0 by the
sum of--
``(A) 0.9 divided by the fuel economy measured under
section 32904(c) when operating the model on gasoline or
diesel fuel; and
``(B) 0.1 divided by the fuel economy measured under
subsection (a) when operating the model on alternative fuel.
``(4) Except as provided in subsection (d) or section
32904(a)(2), the Administrator shall measure the fuel economy
for each model of dual fueled automobiles manufactured by a
manufacturer in each model year beginning not less than 54
months after the date of enactment of the Biofuels Security
Act of 2007 in accordance with section 32904(c).
``(5) Notwithstanding paragraphs (2) through (4), the fuel
economy for all dual fueled automobiles manufactured to
comply with the requirements under section 32902A(a),
including automobiles for which dual fueled automobile
credits have been used or traded under section 32902A(b),
shall be measured in accordance with section 32904(c).''.
______
By Mrs. BOXER (for herself, Mr. Feinstein, and Mr. Lautenberg):
S. 24. A bill to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to require a
health advisory and monitoring of drinking water for perchlorate; to
the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I am introducing a bill that would require
that tap water be tested for perchlorate, and would ensure the public's
right to know about perchlorate in their drinking water. I am pleased
that the senior Senator from California, Mrs. Feinstein, and the senior
Senator from New Jersey, Mr. Lautenberg, have joined as original
cosponsors of this measure.
This toxin is a clear and present danger to California's and much of
America's health, and EPA needs to get moving and protect our drinking
water now. But until a perchlorate tap water standard is set, something
must be done.
Therefore, my perchlorate monitoring and right to know bill will
require that: EPA first swiftly set a health advisory for perchlorate
that protects pregnant women, infants and children; second, that EPA
order monitoring of drinking water for perchlorate until an enforceable
standard is set; and, third, that the public be told about perchlorate
and its health effects, if it is detected in their drinking water
supply.
Drinking water sources for more than 20 million Americans are
contaminated with perchlorate. The Government Accountability Office
(GAO) says that perchlorate contamination has been found in water and
soil at almost 400 sites in the U.S., with levels ranging from 4 parts
per billion to millions of parts per billion. Perchlorate
[[Page 126]]
has polluted 35 States and the District of Columbia, and is known to
have contaminated 153 public water systems in 26 States.
As we know, perchlorate can harm human health, especially that of
pregnant women and children. Therefore, all citizens whose tap water
system contains perchlorate have a right to know about that
contamination, and about its potential health consequences. Only if
their water is tested, and only if all systems are obligated to
disclose the contamination and its health effects, will we be assured
that the public is given the information that they deserve to protect
themselves and their families.
EPA's original 1999 rule for monitoring of tap water for unregulated
contaminants ordered testing for perchlorate. Just last year, on August
22, 2005, EPA proposed to extend the requirement that perchlorate be
monitored in drinking water. However, on December 20, 2006, the
Administrator reversed himself and signed a final rule removing
perchlorate from the list of contaminants for which monitoring is
required under the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation. I was
shocked by this action.
As a result of this new rule, Americans will not be assured of up-to-
date information on whether their tap water is contaminated with this
toxin. Until EPA sets a tap water standard for perchlorate, at the very
least we should know if it's in our drinking water.
My bill will ensure that EPA acts swiftly to require water systems to
test for and to inform the public about this threat to our health and
welfare. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this
important legislation.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of my bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 24
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 ``Perchlorate Monitoring and
Right-to-Know Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) perchlorate--
(A) is a chemical used as the primary ingredient of solid
rocket propellant;
(B) is also used in fireworks, road flares, and other
applications.
(2) waste from the manufacture and improper disposal of
chemicals containing perchlorate is increasingly being
discovered in soil and water;
(3) according to the Government Accountability Office,
perchlorate contamination has been detected in water and soil
at almost 400 sites in the United States, with concentration
levels ranging from 4 parts per billion to millions of parts
per billion;
(4) the Government Accountability Office has determined
that the Environmental Protection Agency does not centrally
track or monitor perchlorate detections or the status of
perchlorate cleanup, so a greater number of contaminated
sites may already exist;
(5) according to the Government Accountability Office,
limited Environmental Protection Agency data show that
perchlorate has been found in 35 States and the District of
Columbia and is known to have contaminated 153 public water
systems in 26 States;
(6) those data are likely underestimates of total drinking
water exposure, as illustrated by the finding of the
California Department of Health Services that perchlorate
contamination sites have affected approximately 276 drinking
water sources and 77 drinking water systems in the State of
California alone;
(7) Food and Drug Administration scientists and other
scientific researchers have detected perchlorate in the
United States food supply, including in lettuce, milk,
cucumbers, tomatoes, carrots, cantaloupe, wheat, and spinach,
and in human breast milk;
(8)(A) perchlorate can harm human health, especially in
pregnant women and children, by interfering with uptake of
iodide by the thyroid gland, which is necessary to produce
important hormones that help control human health and
development;
(B) in adults, the thyroid helps to regulate metabolism;
(C) in children, the thyroid helps to ensure proper mental
and physical development; and
(D) impairment of thyroid function in expectant mothers or
infants may result in effects including delayed development
and decreased learning capability;
(9)(A) in October 2006, researchers from the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention published the largest, most
comprehensive study to date on the effects of low levels of
perchlorate exposure in women, finding that--
(i) significant changes existed in thyroid hormones in
women with low iodine levels who were exposed to perchlorate;
and
(ii) even low-level perchlorate exposure may affect the
production of hormones by the thyroid in iodine-deficient
women; and
(B) in the United States, about 36 percent of women have
iodine levels equivalent to or below the levels of the women
in the study described in subparagraph (A);
(10) the Environmental Protection Agency has not
established a health advisory or national primary drinking
water regulation for perchlorate, but instead established a
``Drinking Water Equivalent Level'' of 24.5 parts per billion
for perchlorate, which--
(A) does not take into consideration all routes of exposure
to perchlorate;
(B) has been criticized by experts as failing to
sufficiently consider the body weight, unique exposure, and
vulnerabilities of certain pregnant women and fetuses,
infants, and children; and
(C) is based primarily on a small study and does not take
into account new, larger studies of the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention or other data indicating potential
effects at lower perchlorate levels than previously found;
(11) on August 22, 2005 (70 Fed. Reg. 49094), the
Administrator proposed to extend the requirement that
perchlorate be monitored in drinking water under the final
rule entitled ``Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation
(UCMR) for Public Water Systems Revisions'' promulgated
pursuant to section 1445(a)(2) of the Safe Drinking Water Act
(42 U.S.C. 300j-4(a)(2)); and
(12) on December 20, 2006, the Administrator signed a final
rule removing perchlorate from the list of contaminants for
which monitoring is required under the final rule entitled
``Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation (UCMR) for
Public Water Systems Revisions'' (72 Fed. Reg. 368 (January
4, 2007)).
(b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to require the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency--
(1) to establish, not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, a health advisory that--
(A) is fully protective of, and considers, the body weight
and exposure patterns of pregnant women, fetuses, newborns,
and children;
(B) provides an adequate margin of safety; and
(C) takes into account all routes of exposure to
perchlorate;
(2) to promulgate, not later than 120 days after the date
of enactment of this Act, a final regulation requiring
monitoring for perchlorate in drinking water; and
(3) to ensure the right of the public to know about
perchlorate in drinking water by requiring that consumer
confidence reports disclose the presence and potential health
effects of perchlorate in drinking water.
SEC. 3. MONITORING AND HEALTH ADVISORY FOR PERCHLORATE.
Section 1412(b)(12) of the Safe Drinking Water Act (42
U.S.C. 300g-1(b)(12)) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(C) Perchlorate.--
``(i) Health advisory.--Not later than 90 days after the
date of enactment of this subparagraph, the Administrator
shall publish a health advisory for perchlorate that fully
protects, with an adequate margin of safety, the health of
vulnerable persons (including pregnant women, fetuses,
newborns, and children), considering body weight and exposure
patterns and all routes of exposure.
``(ii) Monitoring regulations.--
``(I) In general.--The Administrator shall propose (not
later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this
subparagraph) and promulgate (not later than 120 days after
the date of enactment of this subparagraph) a final
regulation requiring--
``(aa) each public water system serving more than 10,000
individuals to monitor for perchlorate beginning not later
than October 31, 2007; and
``(bb) the collection of a representative sample of public
water systems serving 10,000 individuals or fewer to monitor
for perchlorate in accordance with section 1445(a)(2).
``(II) Duration.--The regulation shall be in effect unless
and until monitoring for perchlorate is required under a
national primary drinking water regulation for perchlorate.
``(iii) Consumer confidence reports.--Each consumer
confidence report issued under section 1414(c)(4) shall
disclose the presence of any perchlorate in drinking water,
and the potential health risks of exposure to perchlorate in
drinking water, consistent with guidance issued by the
Administrator.''.
______
By Mr. KOHL (for himself and Mr. Leahy):
S. 25. A bill to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to
establish requirements for certain petitions submitted to the Food and
Drug Administration, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
[[Page 127]]
Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today on the first day of this new
Congress to introduce the Citizen Petition Fairness and Accuracy Act of
2007. This legislation will help speed the introduction of cost-saving
generic drugs by preventing abuses of the Food and Drug Administration
citizen petition process.
Consumers continue to suffer all across our country from the high--
and ever rising--cost of prescription drugs. A recent independent study
found that prescription drug spending has more than quadrupled since
1990, and now accounts for 11 percent of all health care spending. At
the same time, the pharmaceutical industry is one of the most
profitable industries in the world, returning more than 15 percent on
their investments.
One key method to bring prescription drug prices down is to promote
the introduction of generic alternatives to expensive brand name drugs.
Consumers realize substantial savings once generic drugs enter the
market. Generic drugs cost on average 63 percent less than their brand-
name equivalents. One study estimates that every 1 percent increase in
the use of generic drugs could save $4 billion in health care costs.
This is why I have been so active in pursuing legislation designed to
combat practices which impede the introduction of generic drugs. The
legislation I introduce today, which I first introduced last year with
Senator Leahy in last Congress, targets one particularly pernicious
practice by brand name drug companies to impede or block the marketing
of generic drugs--abuse of the FDA citizen petition process.
FDA rules permit any person to file a so-called ``citizen petition''
to raise concerns about the safety or efficacy of a generic drug that a
manufacturer is seeking FDA approval to bring to market. While this
citizen petition process was put in place for a laudable purpose,
unfortunately in recent years it has been abused by frivolous petitions
submitted by brand name drug manufacturers (or individuals acting at
their behest) whose only purpose is to delay the introduction of
generic competition. The FDA has a policy of not granting any new
generic manufacturer's drug application until after it has considered
and evaluated any citizen petitions regarding that drug. The process of
resolving a citizen petition (even if ultimately found to be
groundless) can delay the approval by months or years. Indeed, brand
name drug manufacturers often wait to file citizen petitions until just
before the FDA is about to grant the application to market the new
generic drug solely for the purpose of delaying the introduction of the
generic competitor for the maximum amount of time possible. This gaming
of the system should not be tolerated.
In recent years, FDA officials have expressed serious concerns about
the abuse of the citizen petition process. In 2005, FDA Chief Counsel
Sheldon Bradshaw noted that ``[t]he citizen petition process is in some
cases being abused. Sometimes, stakeholders try to use this mechanism
to unnecessarily delay approval of a competitor's products.'' He added
that he found it ``particularly troublesome'' that he had ``seen
several examples of citizen petitions that appear designed not to raise
timely concerns with respect to the legality or scientific soundness of
approving a drug application, but rather to delay approval by
compelling the agency to take the time to consider the arguments raised
in the petition, regardless of their merits, and regardless of whether
the petitioner could have made those very arguments months and months
before.''
And a simple look at the statistics gives credence to these concerns.
Of the 21 citizen petitions for which the FDA has reached a decision
since 2003, 20--or 95 percent of them--have been found to be without
merit. Of these, ten were identified as ``eleventh hour petitions'',
defined as those filed less than 6 months prior to the estimated entry
date of the generic drug. None of these ten ``eleventh hour petitions''
were found to have merit, but each caused unnecessary delays in the
marketing of the generic drug by months or over a year, causing
consumers to spend millions and millions of dollars for their
prescription drugs than they would have spent without these abusive
filings.
Despite the expense these frivolous citizen petitions cause consumers
and the FDA, under current law the government has absolutely no ability
to sanction or penalize those who abuse the citizen petition process,
or who file citizen petitions simply to keep competition off the
market. Our legislation will correct this obvious shortcoming and give
the Department of Health and Human Services--the FDA's parent agency
the power to sanction those who abuse the process.
Our bill will, for the first time, require all those who file citizen
petitions to affirm certain basic facts about the truthfulness and good
faith of the petition, similar to what is required of every litigant
who makes a filing in court. The party filing the citizen petition will
be required to affirm that the petition is well grounded in fact and
warranted by law; is not submitted for an improper purpose, such as to
harass or cause unnecessary delay in approval of competing drugs; and
does not contain any materially false, misleading or fraudulent
statement. The Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services
is empowered to investigate a citizen petition to determine if it has
violated any of these principles, was submitted for an improper
purpose, or contained false or misleading statements. Further, the
Secretary is authorized to penalize anyone found to have submitted an
abusive citizen petition. Possible sanctions include a fine up to one
million dollars, a suspension or permanent revocation of the right of
the violator to file future citizens' petition, and a dismissal of the
petition at issue. HHS is also authorized to refer the matter to the
Federal Trade Commission so that the FTC can undertake its own
investigation as to the competitive consequences of the frivolous
petition and take any action it finds appropriate. Finally, the bill
directs the HHS that all citizen petitions be adjudicated within six
months of filing, which will put an end to excessive delays in bringing
needed generic drugs to market because of the filings of these
petitions.
While our bill will not have any effect on any person filing a truly
meritorious citizen petition, this legislation will serve as a strong
deterrent to attempts by brand name drug manufacturers or any other
party that seeks to abuse the citizen petition process to thwart
competition. It will thereby remove one significant obstacle exploiting
by brand name drug companies to prevent or delay the introduction of
generic drugs. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 25
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 ``Citizen Petition Fairness
and Accuracy Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. CITIZEN PETITIONS AND PETITIONS FOR STAY OF AGENCY
ACTION.
Section 505(j)(5) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (21 U.S.C. 355(j)(5)) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(G)(i) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any
petition submitted under section 10.30 or section 10.35 of
title 21, Code of Federal Regulations (or any successor
regulation), shall include a statement that to the
petitioner's best knowledge and belief, the petition--
``(I) includes all information and views on which the
petitioner relies, including all representative data and
information known to the petitioner that is favorable or
unfavorable to the petition;
``(II) is well grounded in fact and is warranted by law;
``(III) is not submitted for an improper purpose, such as
to harass or cause unnecessary delay (including unnecessary
delay of competition or agency action); and
``(IV) does not contain a materially false, misleading, or
fraudulent statement.
``(ii) The Secretary shall investigate, on receipt of a
complaint, a request under clause (vi), or on its own
initiative, any petition submitted under such section 10.30
or section 10.35 (or any successor regulation), that--
[[Page 128]]
``(I) does not comply with the requirements of clause (i);
``(II) may have been submitted for an improper purpose as
described in clause (i)(III); or
``(III) may contain a materially false, misleading, or
fraudulent statement as described in clause (i)(IV).
``(iii) If the Secretary finds that the petitioner has
knowingly and willingly submitted the petition for an
improper purpose as described in clause (i)(III), or which
contains a materially false, misleading, or fraudulent
statement as described in clause (i)(IV), the Secretary may--
``(I) impose a civil penalty of not more than $1,000,000,
plus attorneys fees and costs of reviewing the petition and
any related proceedings;
``(II) suspend the authority of the petitioner to submit a
petition under such section 10.30 or section 10.35 (or any
successor regulation), for a period of not more than 10
years;
``(III) revoke permanently the authority of the petitioner
to submit a petition under such section 10.30 or section
10.35 (or any successor regulation); or
``(IV) dismiss the petition at issue in its entirety.
``(iv) If the Secretary takes an enforcement action
described in subclause (I), (II), (III), or (IV) of clause
(iii) with respect to a petition, the Secretary shall refer
that petition to the Federal Trade Commission for further
action as the Federal Trade Commission finds appropriate.
``(v) In determining whether to take an enforcement action
described in subclause (I), (II), (III), or (IV) of clause
(iii) with respect to a petition, and in determining the
amount of any civil penalty or the length of any suspension
imposed under that clause, the Secretary shall consider the
specific circumstances of the situation, such as the gravity
and seriousness of the violation involved, the amount of
resources expended in reviewing the petition at issue, the
effect on marketing of competing drugs of the pendency of the
improperly submitted petition, including whether the timing
of the submission of the petition appears to have been
calculated to cause delay in the marketing of any drug
awaiting approval, and whether the petitioner has a history
of submitting petitions in violation of this subparagraph.
``(vi)(I) Any person aggrieved by a petition filed under
such section 10.30 or section 10.35 (or any successor
regulation), including a person filing an application under
subsection (b)(2) or (j) of this section to which such
petition relates, may request that the Secretary initiate an
investigation described under clause (ii) for an enforcement
action described under clause (iii).
``(II) The aggrieved person shall specify the basis for its
belief that the petition at issue is false, misleading,
fraudulent, or submitted for an improper purpose. The
aggrieved person shall certify that the request is submitted
in good faith, is well grounded in fact, and not submitted
for any improper purpose. Any aggrieved person who knowingly
and intentionally violates the preceding sentence shall be
subject to the civil penalty described under clause (iii)(I).
``(vii) The Secretary shall take final agency action with
respect to a petition filed under such section 10.30 or
section 10.35 (or any successor regulation) within 6 months
of receipt of such petition. The Secretary shall not extend
such 6-month review period, even with consent of the
petitioner, for any reason, including based upon the
submission of comments relating to a petition or supplemental
information supplied by the petitioner. If the Secretary has
not taken final agency action on a petition by the date that
is 6 months after the date of receipt of the petition, such
petition shall be deemed to have been denied on such date.
``(viii) The Secretary may promulgate regulations to carry
out this subparagraph, including to determine whether
petitions filed under such section 10.30 or section 10.35 (or
any successor regulation) merit enforcement action by the
Secretary under this subparagraph.''.
______
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. Boxer):
S. 27. A bill to authorize the implementation of the San Joaquin
River Restoration Settlement; to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation
that will bring to a close 18 years of litigation between the Natural
Resources Defense Council, the Friant Water Users Authority and the
U.S. Department of the Interior. It is identical to the bill that we
introduced in the waning days of the 109th Congress.
This historic bill will enact a settlement that restores California's
second longest river, the San Joaquin, while maintaining a stable water
supply for the farmers who have made the Valley the richest
agricultural area in the world.
Without this consensus resolution to a long-running western water
battle the parties will continue the fight, resulting in a court
imposed settlement. To my knowledge, every farmer and every
environmentalist who has considered the possibility of continued
litigation believes that an outcome imposed by a judge is likely to be
worse for everyone on all counts: more costly, riskier for the farmers,
and less beneficial for the environment.
The Settlement provides a framework that the affected interests can
accept. As a result, this legislation has the strong support of the
Bush Administration, the Schwarzenegger Administration, the
environmental and fishing communities and numerous California farmers
and water districts, including all 22 Friant water districts that have
been part of the litigation.
In announcing the signing of this San Joaquin River settlement in
September, the Assistant Secretary of the Interior praised it as a
``monumental agreement.'' And when the Federal Court then approved the
Settlement in late October, Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne
further praised Settlement for launching ``one of the largest
environmental restoration projects in California's history.'' The
Secretary further observed that, ``This Settlement closes a long
chapter of conflict and uncertainty in California's San Joaquin Valley
. . . and open[s] a new chapter of environmental restoration and water
supply certainty for the farmers and their communities.''
I share the Secretary's strong support for this balanced and historic
agreement, and it is my honor to join with Senator Boxer and a
bipartisan group of California House Members in introducing legislation
to approve and authorize this Settlement.
The legislation indicates how the settlement forged by the parties is
going to be implemented. It involves the Departments of the Interior
and Commerce, and essentially gives the Secretary of the Interior the
additional authority to: take the actions to restore the San Joaquin
River; reintroduce the California Central Valley Spring Run Chinook
Salmon; minimize water supply impacts on Friant water districts; and
avoid reductions in water supply for third-party water contractors.
One of the major benefits of this settlement is the restoration of a
long-lost salmon fishery. The return of one of California's most
important salmon runs will create significant benefits for local
communities in the San Joaquin Valley, helping to restore a beleaguered
fishing industry while improving recreation and quality of life.
The legislation provides for improvements to the San Joaquin river
channel to allow salmon restoration to begin in 2014. Beginning in that
year, the river would see an annual flow regime mandated by the
Settlement, with pulses of additional water in the spring and greater
flows available in wetter years. There is flexibility to add or
subtract up to 10 percent from the annual flows, as the best science
dictates.
A visitor to the revitalized river channel in a decade will find an
entirely different place providing recreation for residents of small
towns like Mendota, and a refuge for residents of larger cities like
Fresno.
The legislation I am introducing today includes provisions to benefit
the farmers of the San Joaquin Valley as well as the salmon. In wet
years, Friant contractors can purchase surplus flows at $10 per acre-
foot for use in dry years, far less than the approximately $35 per
acre-foot that they would otherwise pay for this water.
The Secretary of the Interior is authorized to recirculate new
restoration flows from the Delta via the California aqueduct and the
Cross-Valley Canal to provide additional supply for Friant.
Today's legislation also includes substantial protections for other
water districts in California who were not party to the original
settlement negotiations. These other water contractors will be able to
avoid all but the smallest water impacts as a result of the settlement,
except on a voluntary basis.
In addition, the restoration of flows for over 150 miles below Friant
Dam, and reconnecting the upper River to the critical San Joaquin-
Sacramento Delta, will be a welcome change for the
[[Page 129]]
more than 22 million Californians who rely on that crucial source for
their drinking water.
Finally, restoring the San Joaquin as a living salmon river may
ultimately help struggling fishing communities on California's North
Coast--and even into Southern Oregon. The restoration of the San
Joaquin and the government's commitment to reintroduce and rebuild
historic salmon populations provide a rare bright spot for these
communities.
In addition to congratulating the parties for making a settlement
that will enable the long-sought restoration of the San Joaquin River,
I am mindful of and remain committed to progress in implementing and
funding the December 19, 2000, Trinity River restoration record of
decision and the Hoopa Valley Tribe's co-management of the decision's
important goal of restoring the fishery resources that the United
States holds in trust for the Tribe.
Support of this agreement is almost as far reaching as its benefits.
This historic agreement would not have been possible without the
participation of a remarkably broad group of agencies, stakeholders and
legislators, reaching far beyond the settling parties. The Department
of the Interior, the State of California, the Friant Water Users
Authority, the Natural Resources Defense Council on behalf of 13 other
environmental organizations and countless other stakeholders came
together and spent countless hours with legislators in Washington to
ensure that we found a solution that the large majority of those
affected could support.
In November of last year, California voters showed their support by
approving Propositions 84 and 1E that will help pay for the Settlement
by committing at least $100 million and likely $200 million or more
toward the restoration costs. Indeed, this Legislation includes a
diverse mix of approximately $200 million in direct Water User
payments, new State payments, $240 million in dedicated Friant Central
Valley Project capital repayments, and future Federal appropriations
limited to $250 million. This mix of funding sources is intended to
ensure that the river restoration program will be sustainable over time
and truly a joint effort of Federal, state and local agencies.
I would like to emphasize that the Federal funding in the bill is for
implementation of both the Restoration Goal to reestablish a salmon
fishery in the river, and the Water Management Goal to avoid or
minimize water supply losses supplied by Friant Water Districts. It is
critical to recognize that these efforts are of equal importance.
At the end of the day, I believe that this agreement is something
that we can all feel very proud of, and I urge my colleagues in the
Senate to move quickly to approve this legislation and provide the
Administration the authorization it needs to fully carry out its legal
obligations and the extensive restoration opportunities under the
settlement.
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. 27
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 ``San Joaquin River
Restoration Settlement Act''.
SEC. 2. PURPOSE.
The purpose of this Act is to authorize implementation of
the Stipulation of Settlement dated September 13, 2006
(referred to in this Act as the ``Settlement''), in the
litigation entitled NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, et al.
v. KIRK RODGERS, et al., United States District Court,
Eastern District of California, No. CIV. S-88-1658-LKK/GGH.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act, the terms ``Friant Division long-term
contractors'', ``Interim Flows'', ``Restoration Flows'',
``Recovered Water Account'', ``Restoration Goal'', and
``Water Management Goal'' have the meanings given the terms
in the Settlement.
SEC. 4. IMPLEMENTATION OF SETTLEMENT.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of the Interior (referred to
in this Act as the ``Secretary'') is hereby authorized and
directed to implement the terms and conditions of the
Settlement in cooperation with the State of California,
including the following measures as these measures are
prescribed in the Settlement:
(1) Design and construct channel and structural
improvements as described in paragraph 11 of the Settlement,
provided, however, that the Secretary shall not make or fund
any such improvements to facilities or property of the State
of California without the approval of the State of California
and the State's agreement in 1 or more Memoranda of
Understanding to participate where appropriate.
(2) Modify Friant Dam operations so as to provide
Restoration Flows and Interim Flows.
(3) Acquire water, water rights, or options to acquire
water as described in paragraph 13 of the Settlement,
provided, however, such acquisitions shall only be made from
willing sellers and not through eminent domain.
(4) Implement the terms and conditions of paragraph 16 of
the Settlement related to recirculation, recapture, reuse,
exchange, or transfer of water released for Restoration Flows
or Interim Flows, for the purpose of accomplishing the Water
Management Goal of the Settlement, subject to--
(A) applicable provisions of California water law;
(B) the Secretary's use of Central Valley Project
facilities to make Project water (other than water released
from Friant Dam pursuant to the Settlement) and water
acquired through transfers available to existing south-of-
Delta Central Valley Project contractors; and
(C) the Secretary's performance of the Agreement of
November 24, 1986, between the United States of America and
the Department of Water Resources of the State of California
for the coordinated operation of the Central Valley Project
and the State Water Project as authorized by Congress in
section 2(d) of the Act of August 26, 1937 (50 Stat. 850, 100
Stat. 3051), including any agreement to resolve conflicts
arising from said Agreement.
(5) Develop and implement the Recovered Water Account as
specified in paragraph 16(b) of the Settlement, including the
pricing and payment crediting provisions described in
paragraph 16(b)(3) of the Settlement, provided that all other
provisions of Federal reclamation law shall remain
applicable.
(b) Agreements.--
(1) Agreements with the state.--In order to facilitate or
expedite implementation of the Settlement, the Secretary is
authorized and directed to enter into appropriate agreements,
including cost sharing agreements, with the State of
California.
(2) Other agreements.--The Secretary is authorized to enter
into contracts, memoranda of understanding, financial
assistance agreements, cost sharing agreements, and other
appropriate agreements with State, tribal, and local
governmental agencies, and with private parties, including
agreements related to construction, improvement, and
operation and maintenance of facilities, subject to any terms
and conditions that the Secretary deems necessary to achieve
the purposes of the Settlement.
(c) Acceptance and Expenditure of Non-Federal Funds.--The
Secretary is authorized to accept and expend non-Federal
funds in order to facilitate implementation of the
Settlement.
(d) Mitigation of Impacts.--Prior to the implementation of
decisions or agreements to construct, improve, operate, or
maintain facilities that the Secretary determines are needed
to implement the Settlement, the Secretary shall identify--
(1) the impacts associated with such actions; and
(2) the measures which shall be implemented to mitigate
impacts on adjacent and downstream water users and
landowners.
(e) Design and Engineering Studies.--The Secretary is
authorized to conduct any design or engineering studies that
are necessary to implement the Settlement.
(f) Effect on Contract Water Allocations.--Except as
otherwise provided in this section, the implementation of the
Settlement and the reintroduction of California Central
Valley Spring Run Chinook salmon pursuant to the Settlement
and section 10, shall not result in the involuntary reduction
in contract water allocations to Central Valley Project long-
term contractors, other than Friant Division long-term
contractors.
(g) Effect on Existing Water Contracts.--Except as provided
in the Settlement and this Act, nothing in this Act shall
modify or amend the rights and obligations of the parties to
any existing water service, repayment, purchase or exchange
contract.
SEC. 5. ACQUISITION AND DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY; TITLE TO
FACILITIES.
(a) Title to Facilities.--Unless acquired pursuant to
subsection (b), title to any facility or facilities, stream
channel, levees, or other real property modified or improved
in the course of implementing the Settlement authorized by
this Act, and title to any modifications or improvements of
such facility or facilities, stream channel, levees, or other
real property--
(1) shall remain in the owner of the property; and
(2) shall not be transferred to the United States on
account of such modifications or improvements.
[[Page 130]]
(b) Acquisition of Property.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary is authorized to acquire
through purchase from willing sellers any property, interests
in property, or options to acquire real property needed to
implement the Settlement authorized by this Act.
(2) Applicable law.--The Secretary is authorized, but not
required, to exercise all of the authorities provided in
section 2 of the Act of August 26, 1937 (50 Stat. 844,
chapter 832), to carry out the measures authorized in this
section and section 4.
(c) Disposal of Property.--
(1) In general.--Upon the Secretary's determination that
retention of title to property or interests in property
acquired pursuant to this Act is no longer needed to be held
by the United States for the furtherance of the Settlement,
the Secretary is authorized to dispose of such property or
interest in property on such terms and conditions as the
Secretary deems appropriate and in the best interest of the
United States, including possible transfer of such property
to the State of California.
(2) Right of first refusal.--In the event the Secretary
determines that property acquired pursuant to this Act
through the exercise of its eminent domain authority is no
longer necessary for implementation of the Settlement, the
Secretary shall provide a right of first refusal to the
property owner from whom the property was initially acquired,
or his or her successor in interest, on the same terms and
conditions as the property is being offered to other parties.
(3) Disposition of proceeds.--Proceeds from the disposal by
sale or transfer of any such property or interests in such
property shall be deposited in the fund established by
section 9(c).
SEC. 6. COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAW.
(a) Applicable Law.--
(1) In general.--In undertaking the measures authorized by
this Act, the Secretary and the Secretary of Commerce shall
comply with all applicable Federal and State laws, rules, and
regulations, including the National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the Endangered Species
Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), as necessary.
(2) Environmental reviews.--The Secretary and the Secretary
of Commerce are authorized and directed to initiate and
expeditiously complete applicable environmental reviews and
consultations as may be necessary to effectuate the purposes
of the Settlement.
(b) Effect on State Law.--Nothing in this Act shall preempt
State law or modify any existing obligation of the United
States under Federal reclamation law to operate the Central
Valley Project in conformity with State law.
(c) Use of Funds for Environmental Reviews.--
(1) Definition of environmental review.--For purposes of
this subsection, the term ``environmental review'' includes
any consultation and planning necessary to comply with
subsection (a).
(2) Participation in environmental review process.--In
undertaking the measures authorized by section 4, and for
which environmental review is required, the Secretary may
provide funds made available under this Act to affected
Federal agencies, State agencies, local agencies, and Indian
tribes if the Secretary determines that such funds are
necessary to allow the Federal agencies, State agencies,
local agencies, or Indian tribes to effectively participate
in the environmental review process.
(3) Limitation.--Funds may be provided under paragraph (2)
only to support activities that directly contribute to the
implementation of the terms and conditions of the Settlement.
(d) Nonreimbursable Funds.--The United States' share of the
costs of implementing this Act shall be nonreimbursable under
Federal reclamation law, provided that nothing in this
subsection shall limit or be construed to limit the use of
the funds assessed and collected pursuant to sections
3406(c)(1) and 3407(d)(2) of the Reclamation Projects
Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-575;
106 Stat. 4721, 4727), for implementation of the Settlement,
nor shall it be construed to limit or modify existing or
future Central Valley Project Ratesetting Policies.
SEC. 7. COMPLIANCE WITH CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT IMPROVEMENT
ACT.
Congress hereby finds and declares that the Settlement
satisfies and discharges all of the obligations of the
Secretary contained in section 3406(c)(1) of the Reclamation
Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 (Public Law
102-575; 106 Stat. 4721), provided, however, that--
(1) the Secretary shall continue to assess and collect the
charges provided in section 3406(c)(1) of the Reclamation
Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 (Public Law
102-575; 106 Stat. 4721), as provided in the Settlement and
section 9(d); and
(2) those assessments and collections shall continue to be
counted towards the requirements of the Secretary contained
in section 3407(c)(2) of the Reclamation Projects
Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-575;
106 Stat. 4726).
SEC. 8. NO PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION.
(a) In General.--Nothing in this Act confers upon any
person or entity not a party to the Settlement a private
right of action or claim for relief to interpret or enforce
the provisions of this Act or the Settlement.
(b) Applicable Law.--This section shall not alter or
curtail any right of action or claim for relief under any
other applicable law.
SEC. 9. APPROPRIATIONS; SETTLEMENT FUND.
(a) Implementation Costs.--
(1) In general.--The costs of implementing the Settlement
shall be covered by payments or in kind contributions made by
Friant Division contractors and other non-Federal parties,
including the funds provided in paragraphs (1) through (5) of
subsection (c), estimated to total $440,000,000, of which the
non-Federal payments are estimated to total $200,000,000 (at
October 2006 price levels) and the amount from repaid Central
Valley Project capital obligations is estimated to total
$240,000,000, the additional Federal appropriation of
$250,000,000 authorized pursuant to subsection (b)(1), and
such additional funds authorized pursuant to subsection
(b)(2); provided however, that the costs of implementing the
provisions of section 4(a)(1) shall be shared by the State of
California pursuant to the terms of a Memorandum of
Understanding executed by the State of California and the
Parties to the Settlement on September 13, 2006, which
includes at least $110,000,000 of State funds.
(2) Additional agreements.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary shall enter into 1 or more
agreements to fund or implement improvements on a project-by-
project basis with the State of California.
(B) Requirements.--Any agreements entered into under
subparagraph (A) shall provide for recognition of either
monetary or in-kind contributions toward the State of
California's share of the cost of implementing the provisions
of section 4(a)(1).
(3) Limitation.--Except as provided in the Settlement, to
the extent that costs incurred solely to implement this
Settlement would not otherwise have been incurred by any
entity or public or local agency or subdivision of the State
of California, such costs shall not be borne by any such
entity, agency, or subdivision of the State of California,
unless such costs are incurred on a voluntary basis.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--
(1) In general.--In addition to the funds provided in
paragraphs (1) through (5) of subsection (c), there are also
authorized to be appropriated not to exceed $250,000,000 (at
October 2006 price levels) to implement this Act and the
Settlement, to be available until expended; provided however,
that the Secretary is authorized to spend such additional
appropriations only in amounts equal to the amount of funds
deposited in the Fund (not including payments under
subsection (c)(2), proceeds under subsection (c)(3) other
than an amount equal to what would otherwise have been
deposited under subsection (c)(1) in the absence of issuance
of the bond, and proceeds under subsection (c)(4)), the
amount of in-kind contributions, and other non-Federal
payments actually committed to the implementation of this Act
or the Settlement.
(2) Other funds.--The Secretary is authorized to use monies
from the Fund created under section 3407 of the Reclamation
Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 (Public Law
102-575; 106 Stat. 4727) for purposes of this Act.
(c) Fund.--There is hereby established within the Treasury
of the United States a fund, to be known as the ``San Joaquin
River Restoration Fund'', into which the following shall be
deposited and used solely for the purpose of implementing the
Settlement, to be available for expenditure without further
appropriation:
(1) Subject to subsection (d), at the beginning of the
fiscal year following enactment of this Act, all payments
received pursuant to section 3406(c)(1) of the Reclamation
Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 (Public Law
102-575; 106 Stat. 4721).
(2) Subject to subsection (d), the capital component (not
otherwise needed to cover operation and maintenance costs) of
payments made by Friant Division long-term contractors
pursuant to long-term water service contracts beginning the
first fiscal year after the date of enactment of this Act.
The capital repayment obligation of such contractors under
such contracts shall be reduced by the amount paid pursuant
to this paragraph and the appropriate share of the existing
Federal investment in the Central Valley Project to be
recovered by the Secretary pursuant to Public Law 99-546 (100
Stat. 3050) shall be reduced by an equivalent sum.
(3) Proceeds from a bond issue, federally-guaranteed loan,
or other appropriate financing instrument, to be issued or
entered into by an appropriate public agency or subdivision
of the State of California pursuant to subsection (d)(2).
(4) Proceeds from the sale of water pursuant to the
Settlement, or from the sale of property or interests in
property as provided in section 5.
(5) Any non-Federal funds, including State cost-sharing
funds, contributed to the United States for implementation of
the Settlement, which the Secretary may expend without
further appropriation for the purposes for which contributed.
[[Page 131]]
(d) Guaranteed Loans and Other Financing Instruments.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary is authorized to enter into
agreements with appropriate agencies or subdivisions of the
State of California in order to facilitate a bond issue,
federally-guaranteed loan, or other appropriate financing
instrument, for the purpose of implementing this Settlement.
(2) Requirements.--If the Secretary and an appropriate
agency or subdivision of the State of California enter into
such an agreement, and if such agency or subdivision issues 1
or more revenue bonds, procures a federally secured loan, or
other appropriate financing to fund implementation of the
Settlement, and if such agency deposits the proceeds received
from such bonds, loans, or financing into the Fund pursuant
to subsection (c)(3), monies specified in paragraphs (1) and
(2) of subsection (c) shall be provided by the Friant
Division long-term contractors directly to such public agency
or subdivision of the State of California to repay the bond,
loan or financing rather than into the Fund.
(3) Disposition of payments.--After the satisfaction of any
such bond, loan, or financing, the payments specified in
paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (c) shall be paid
directly into the Fund authorized by this section.
(e) Limitation on Contributions.--Payments made by long-
term contractors who receive water from the Friant Division
and Hidden and Buchanan Units of the Central Valley Project
pursuant to sections 3406(c)(1) and 3407(d)(2) of the
Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992
(Public Law 102-575; 106 Stat. 4721, 4727) and payments made
pursuant to paragraph 16(b)(3) of the Settlement and
subsection (c)(2) shall be the limitation of such entities'
direct financial contribution to the Settlement, subject to
the terms and conditions of paragraph 21 of the Settlement.
(f) No Additional Expenditures Required.--Nothing in this
Act shall be construed to require a Federal official to
expend Federal funds not appropriated by Congress, or to seek
the appropriation of additional funds by Congress, for the
implementation of the Settlement.
(g) Reach 4B.--
(1) Study.--
(A) In general.--In accordance with the Settlement and the
Memorandum of Understanding executed pursuant to paragraph 6
of the Settlement, the Secretary shall conduct a study that
specifies--
(i) the costs of undertaking any work required under
paragraph 11(a)(3) of the Settlement to increase the capacity
of Reach 4B prior to reinitiation of Restoration Flows;
(ii) the impacts associated with reinitiation of such
flows; and
(iii) measures that shall be implemented to mitigate
impacts.
(B) Deadline.--The study under subparagraph (A) shall be
completed prior to restoration of any flows other than
Interim Flows.
(2) Report.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary shall file a report with
Congress not later than 90 days after issuing a
determination, as required by the Settlement, on whether to
expand channel conveyance capacity to 4500 cubic feet per
second in Reach 4B of the San Joaquin River, or use an
alternative route for pulse flows, that--
(i) explains whether the Secretary has decided to expand
Reach 4B capacity to 4500 cubic feet per second; and
(ii) addresses the following matters:
(I) The basis for the Secretary's determination, whether
set out in environmental review documents or otherwise, as to
whether the expansion of Reach 4B would be the preferable
means to achieve the Restoration Goal as provided in the
Settlement, including how different factors were assessed
such as comparative biological and habitat benefits,
comparative costs, relative availability of State cost-
sharing funds, and the comparative benefits and impacts on
water temperature, water supply, private property, and local
and downstream flood control.
(II) The Secretary's final cost estimate for expanding
Reach 4B capacity to 4500 cubic feet per second, or any
alternative route selected, as well as the alternative cost
estimates provided by the State, by the Restoration
Administrator, and by the other parties to the Settlement.
(III) The Secretary's plan for funding the costs of
expanding Reach 4B or any alternative route selected, whether
by existing Federal funds provided under this Act, by non-
Federal funds, by future Federal appropriations, or some
combination of such sources.
(B) Determination required.--The Secretary shall, to the
extent feasible, make the determination in subparagraph (A)
prior to undertaking any substantial construction work to
increase capacity in Reach 4B.
(3) Costs.--If the Secretary's estimated Federal cost for
expanding Reach 4B in paragraph (2), in light of the
Secretary's funding plan set out in paragraph (2), would
exceed the remaining Federal funding authorized by this Act
(including all funds reallocated, all funds dedicated, and
all new funds authorized by this Act and separate from all
commitments of State and other non-Federal funds and in-kind
commitments), then before the Secretary commences actual
construction work in Reach 4B (other than planning, design,
feasibility, or other preliminary measures) to expand
capacity to 4500 cubic feet per second to implement this
Settlement, Congress must have increased the applicable
authorization ceiling provided by this Act in an amount at
least sufficient to cover the higher estimated Federal costs.
SEC. 10. CALIFORNIA CENTRAL VALLEY SPRING RUN CHINOOK SALMON.
(a) Finding.--Congress finds that the implementation of the
Settlement to resolve 18 years of contentious litigation
regarding restoration of the San Joaquin River and the
reintroduction of the California Central Valley Spring Run
Chinook salmon is a unique and unprecedented circumstance
that requires clear expressions of Congressional intent
regarding how the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of
1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) are utilized to achieve the
goals of restoration of the San Joaquin River and the
successful reintroduction of California Central Valley Spring
Run Chinook salmon.
(b) Reintroduction in the San Joaquin River.--California
Central Valley Spring Run Chinook salmon shall be
reintroduced in the San Joaquin River below Friant Dam
pursuant to section 10(j) of the Endangered Species Act of
1973 (16 U.S.C. 1539(j)) and the Settlement, provided that
the Secretary of Commerce finds that a permit for the
reintroduction of California Central Valley Spring Run
Chinook salmon may be issued pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(A)
of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C.
1539(a)(1)(A)).
(c) Final Rule.--
(1) Definition of third party.--For the purpose of this
subsection, the term ``third party'' means persons or
entities diverting or receiving water pursuant to applicable
State and Federal law and shall include Central Valley
Project contractors outside of the Friant Division of the
Central Valley Project and the State Water Project.
(2) Issuance.--The Secretary of Commerce shall issue a
final rule pursuant to section 4(d) of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1533(d)) governing the incidental take
of reintroduced California Central Valley Spring Run Chinook
salmon prior to the reintroduction.
(3) Required components.--The rule issued under paragraph
(2) shall provide that the reintroduction will not impose
more than de minimus: water supply reductions, additional
storage releases, or bypass flows on unwilling third parties
due to such reintroduction.
(4) Applicable law.--Nothing in this section--
(A) diminishes the statutory or regulatory protections
provided in the Endangered Species Act for any species listed
pursuant to section 4 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973
(16 U.S.C. 1533) other than the reintroduced population of
California Central Valley Spring Run Chinook salmon,
including protections pursuant to existing biological
opinions or new biological opinions issued by the Secretary
or Secretary of Commerce; or
(B) precludes the Secretary or Secretary of Commerce from
imposing protections under the Endangered Species Act of 1973
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) for other species listed pursuant to
section 4 of that Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) because those
protections provide incidental benefits to such reintroduced
California Central Valley Spring Run Chinook salmon.
(d) Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than December 31, 2024, the
Secretary of Commerce shall report to Congress on the
progress made on the reintroduction set forth in this section
and the Secretary's plans for future implementation of this
section.
(2) Inclusions.--The report under paragraph (1) shall
include--
(A) an assessment of the major challenges, if any, to
successful reintroduction;
(B) an evaluation of the effect, if any, of the
reintroduction on the existing population of California
Central Valley Spring Run Chinook salmon existing on the
Sacramento River or its tributaries; and
(C) an assessment regarding the future of the
reintroduction.
(e) FERC Projects.--
(1) In general.--With regard to California Central Valley
Spring Run Chinook salmon reintroduced pursuant to the
Settlement, the Secretary of Commerce shall exercise its
authority under section 18 of the Federal Power Act (16
U.S.C. 811) by reserving its right to file prescriptions in
proceedings for projects licensed by the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission on the Calaveras, Stanislaus, Tuolumne,
Merced, and San Joaquin rivers and otherwise consistent with
subsection (c) until after the expiration of the term of the
Settlement, December 31, 2025, or the expiration of the
designation made pursuant to subsection (b), whichever ends
first.
(2) Effect of subsection.--Nothing in this subsection shall
preclude the Secretary of Commerce from imposing
prescriptions pursuant to section 18 of the Federal Power Act
(16 U.S.C. 811) solely for other anadromous fish species
because those prescriptions provide incidental benefits to
such reintroduced California Central Valley Spring Run
Chinook salmon.
(f) Effect of Section.--Nothing in this section is intended
or shall be construed--
[[Page 132]]
(1) to modify the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.) or the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 791a et
seq.); or
(2) to establish a precedent with respect to any other
application of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.) or the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 791a et
seq.).
______
By Mr. KOHL:
S. 28. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to
require the use of generic drugs under the Medicare part D prescription
drug program when available unless the brand name drug is determined to
be medically necessary; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Generics First
Act. This legislation requires the use of available generic drugs under
the Medicare Part D prescription drug program, unless the brand name
drug is determined to be medically necessary by a physician.
Everywhere I go in Wisconsin, I see how prescription drug costs are a
drain on seniors, families, and businesses that are struggling to pay
their health care bills. They want help now and we can respond by
expanding access to generic drugs. Generics, which on average cost 63
percent less than their brand-name counterparts, are a big part of the
solution to health care costs that are spiraling out of control.
The private and public sectors, as well as individuals, are seeking
relief from high drug costs, and Senate Special Committee on Aging has
heard some remarkable success stories from some who have turned to
generic drugs. Last year, General Motors testified that, in 2005, they
spent $1.9 billion dollars on prescription drugs, 40 percent of their
total health care spending. Their program to use generics first, when a
generic drug is available, saves GM nearly $400 million a year.
Last year, millions of seniors exceeded the initial $2,250 Medicare
drug benefit and fell into the ``donut hole,'' where they had to pay
the full price of their drugs. Using less expensive, but equally
effective, generic drugs will keep seniors out of the ``donut hole''
longer and help them survive the gap in coverage.
Generic drugs approved by the FDA must meet the same rigorous
standards for safety and effectiveness as brand-name drugs. In addition
to being safe and effective, the generic must have the same active
ingredient or ingredients, be the same strength, and have the same
labeling for the approved uses as the brand drug. Generics perform the
same as their respective brand name product.
Modeled after similar provisions in many state-administered Medicaid
programs, this measure would reduce the high costs of the new
prescription drug program and keep seniors from reaching the current
gap in coverage or ``donut hole'' by guiding beneficiaries toward cost-
saving generic drug alternatives.
We know generic drugs have the potential to save seniors thousands of
dollars, and curb health spending for the Federal Government,
employers, and families. And every year, more blockbuster drugs are
coming off patent, setting up the potential for billions of dollars in
savings. This legislation is one piece of a larger agenda I'm pushing
to remove the obstacles that prevent generics from getting to market,
and making sure that every senior, every family, every business, and
every government program knows the value of generics and uses them to
bring costs down. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 28
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 ``Generics First Act of
2007''.
SEC. 2. REQUIRED USE OF GENERIC DRUGS UNDER THE MEDICARE PART
D PRESCRIPTION DRUG PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--Section 1860D-2(e)(2) of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-102(e)(2)) is amended by adding
at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(C) Non-generic drugs unless certain requirements are
met.--
``(i) In general.--Such term does not include a drug that
is a nongeneric drug unless-
``(I) no generic drug has been approved under the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with respect to the drug; or
``(II) the nongeneric drug is determined to be medically
necessary by the individual prescribing the drug and prior
authorization for the drug is obtained from the Secretary.
``(ii) Definitions.--In this subparagraph:
``(I) Generic drug.--The term `generic drug' means a drug
that is the subject of an application approved under
subsection (b)(2) or (j) of section 505 of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act, for which the Secretary has made a
determination that the drug is the therapeutic equivalent of
a listed drug under section 505(j)(7) of such Act.
``(II) Nongeneric drug.--The term `nongeneric drug' means a
drug that is the subject of an application approved under--
``(aa) section 505(b)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act; or
``(bb) section 505(b)(2) of such Act and that has been
determined to be not therapeutically equivalent to any listed
drug.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall apply to drugs dispensed on or after the date of
enactment of this Act.
______
By Ms. LANDRIEU:
S. 29. A bill to clarify the tax treatment of certain payments made
to homeowners by the Louisiana Recovery Authority and the Mississippi
Development Authority; to the Committee on Finance.
Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, at the end of the 109th Congress, I
learned that the Internal Revenue Service had a tax surprise for
citizens in my state of Louisiana and in Mississippi who are trying to
rebuild after Katrina. This tax surprise will set back our recovery and
discourage our citizens from coming home.
Let me explain to my colleagues what I am talking about. Both
Louisiana and Mississippi have established programs to help families
rebuild their homes and their lives after Katrina and Rita. Congress
appropriated the money for these initiatives--more than $10 billion in
all, and we are very grateful for the assistance. The Louisiana program
is called the ``Road Home'' and it is administered by the Louisiana
Recovery Authority (LRA). The program is now starting to get going.
Homeowners are eligible to receive grants from the Road Home of up to
$150,000 to help them rebuild or repair their homes. Rental properties
are also eligible. Grants can also be used to buy out homes. The
Louisianians who were displaced by the storms want to go home and the
Road Home program will get them there.
But the IRS has dug a big pothole in the middle of the Road Home by
making some of these payments taxable. The way this tax surprise works
is by requiring that any hurricane victim who claimed a casualty loss
deduction for damage to their home on their tax return for 2005 will
have to reduce that loss by the amount of any payment from the LRA. So
if they had their taxes reduced in one year and received a Road Home
grant the next year, they have to essentially eliminate any benefit of
the earlier casualty loss deduction. Their taxes will go up.
Now I realize that under normal circumstances, when a person's home
burns down, the roof caves in, or they are a victim of theft, they can
take a casualty loss deduction, provided it meets certain requirements.
The loss must exceed ten percent of the taxpayer's adjusted gross
income, with a per loss floor of $100. In some circumstances, taxpayers
are permitted to include a current-year casualty loss on an amended
prior year return.
Immediately after Katrina, we enacted the Katrina Emergency Tax
Relief Act (KETRA) that suspended the ten percent floor for casualty
losses incurred in the Hurricane Katrina disaster area, including those
claimed on amended returns. The purpose of the change in KETRA was
simple: we wanted to put money in the hands of Katrina victims as
quickly as possible. We essentially encouraged taxpayers to take this
casualty loss, even by amending a past return. The IRS would then
provide them with a refund.
This was a very helpful proposal in the days immediately following
Katrina, Mr. President. Hurricane victims needed that money. If you had
lost your home, that money could help
[[Page 133]]
you pay for a place to live. Many hurricane victims lost their jobs and
needed this money to see them through until they started working again.
They used the money to begin the rebuilding of their lives.
Congress encouraged people to take the new deduction by changing the
law. Now the IRS wants to take it back.
I fully understand the policy behind what the IRS is doing. Casualty
loss deductions are normally reduced by the amount of any insurance or
other recovery they make on the loss. In fact, at the time the taxpayer
makes the deduction he or she is supposed to reduce the amount of the
loss by any insurance recovery they reasonably expect to receive. If
you receive a larger payment than you expected at a future time, you
must claim it on your income tax return when you receive it.
The problem is that this policy will encourage people to leave
Louisiana. If you took the casualty loss on your return, and you
receive a $150,000 Road Home payment to rebuild your house, you will
have a tax consequence. But if you took the casualty loss and sold your
house to the LRA for the $150,000 payment, it is treated like a home
sale and there is no tax. This policy creates a disincentive to
recovery. The Road Home will become the Road Out.
Congress has done a tremendous job passing legislation to encourage
investment and the rebuilding of the Gulf Coast. At the end of the last
session we passed a tax extenders bill that contained a two-year
extension of the bonus depreciation for investment in the most
seriously damaged areas in the GO Zone. That investment is supposed to
attract businesses and people to Louisiana and the Gulf. The IRS's
actions will only keep people away. We should not put road blocks in
the way of the Road Home.
Today, I am introducing legislation to eliminate this road block to
our recovery and to clarify that Road Home payments are not to be
taxed. The hurricanes in 2005 were remarkable events causing
unprecedented damage. As Congress has done in the past, we must
continue to respond in unprecedented and innovative ways. I encourage
my colleagues to support this bill.
______
By Mr. BAUCUS:
S. 41. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide
incentives to improve America's research competitiveness, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, back in 1962, Marshall McLuhan wrote,
``The new electronic interdependence recreates the world in the image
of a global village.'' Certainly, 40 years later, that concept is truer
than ever. As we prepare for the future in this global village, we need
to affirm America's leadership role in the world.
The United States accounts for one-third of the world's spending on
scientific research and development, ranking first among all countries.
While this is impressive, relative to GDP, though, the United States
falls to sixth place. And the trends show that maintaining American
leadership in the future depends on increased commitment to research
and science.
Asia has recognized this. Asia is plowing more funding into science
and education. China, in particular, understands that technological
advancement means security, independence, and economic growth. Spending
on research and development has increased by 140 percent in China,
Korea and Taiwan. In America, it has increased by only 34 percent.
Asia's commitment is already paying off. More than a hundred Fortune
500 companies have opened research centers in India and China. I have
visited some of them. I was impressed with the level of skill of the
workers I met there.
China's commitment to research, at $60 billion in expenditures, is
dramatic by any measure. Over the last few years, China has doubled the
share of its economy that it invests in research. China intends to
double the amount committed to basic research in the next decade.
Currently, only America beats out China in numbers of researchers in
the workforce.
Today, I am pleased to introduce the Research Competitiveness Act of
2007. This bill would improve our research competitiveness in four
major areas. All four address incentives in our tax code. Government
also supports research through federal spending. But I am not
addressing those areas today.
First, my bill improves and simplifies the credit for applied
research in section 41 of the tax code. This credit has grown to be
overly complex, both for taxpayers and the IRS. Beginning in 2008, my
bill would create a simpler 20 percent credit for qualifying research
expenses that exceed 50 percent of the average expenses for the prior 3
years.
And just as important: The bill makes the credit permanent. Because
the credit has been temporary, it has simply not been as effective as
it could be. Since its creation in 1981, it has been extended 11 times.
Congress even allowed it to lapse during one period.
The credit last expired in December of 2005. After much consternation
and delay, Congress passed a two-year extension just last month,
extending the credit for 2006 and 2007. These temporary extensions have
taken their toll on taxpayers. In 2005, the experts at the Joint
Committee on Taxation wrote: ``Perhaps the greatest criticism of the
R&E credit among taxpayers regards its temporary nature.'' Joint Tax
went on to say, ``A credit of longer duration may more successfully
induce additional research than would a temporary credit, even if the
temporary credit is periodically renewed.''
Currently, there are three different ways to claim a tax credit for
qualifying research expenses. First, the ``traditional'' credit relies
on incremental increases in expenses compared to a mid-1980s base
period. Second, the ``alternative incremental'' credit measures the
increase in research over the average of the prior 4 years.
Both of these credits have base periods involving gross receipts.
Under the new tax bill enacted last month, a third formula was created,
which does not rely on gross receipts and is available only for 2007.
My bill simplifies these credits by using this new credit only, known
as the ``Alternative Simplified Credit,'' based on research spending
without reference to gross receipts. The current formulas hurt
companies that have fluctuating sales. And it hurts companies that take
on a new line of business not dependent on research.
This new, simpler formula in my bill would not start until 2008. That
start date would give companies plenty of time to adjust their
accounting.
The main complaint about the existing credits is that they are very
complex, particularly the reference to the 20-year-old base period.
This base period creates problems for the taxpayer in trying to
calculate the credit. And it creates problems for the IRS in trying to
administer and audit those claims.
The new credit focuses only on expenses, not gross receipts. And it
is still an incremental credit, so that companies must continue to
increase research spending over time. Further, this bill adds a mandate
for a Treasury study to look at substantiation issues and ensure that
current recordkeeping requirements assist the IRS without unduly
burdening the taxpayer.
A tax credit is a cost-effective way to promote R&E. A report by the
Congressional Research Service finds that without government support,
investment in R&E would fall short of the socially optimal amount. Thus
CRS endorses Government policies to boost private sector R&E.
Also, American workers who are engaged in R&E activities benefit from
some of the most intellectually stimulating, high-paying, high-skilled
jobs in the economy.
My own State of Montana has excellent examples of this economic
activity. During the 1990s, about 400 establishments in Montana
provided high-technology services, at an average wage of about $35,000
per year. These jobs paid nearly 80 percent more than the average
private sector wage, which was less than $20,000 a year during the same
period. Many of these jobs would never have been created without the
assistance of the R&E credit.
My research bill would also establish a uniform reimbursement rate
for all contract and consortia R&E. It would provide that 80 percent of
expenses for
[[Page 134]]
research performed for the taxpayer by other parties count as
qualifying research expenses under the regular credit.
Currently, when a taxpayer pays someone else to perform research for
the taxpayer, the taxpayer can claim one of three rates in order to
determine how much the taxpayer can include for the research credit.
The lower amount is meant to assure overhead expenses that normally do
not qualify for the R&E credit are not counted. Different rates,
however, create unnecessary complexity. Therefore, my bill creates a
uniform rate of 80 percent.
The second major research area that this bill addresses is the need
to enhance and simplify the credit for basic research. This credit
benefits universities and other entities committed to basic research.
And it benefits the companies or individuals who donate to them. My
bill provides that payments under the university basic research credit
would count as contractor expenses at the rate of 100 percent.
The current formula for calculating the university basic research
credit--defined as research ``for the advancement of science with no
specific commercial objective''--is even more complex than the regular
traditional R&E credit. Because of this complexity, this credit costs
less than one-half of 1 percent of the cost of the regular R&E credit.
It is completely underutilized. It needs to be simplified to encourage
businesses to give more for basic research.
American universities have been powerful engines of scientific
discovery. To maintain our premier global position in basic research,
America relies on sustained high levels of basic research funding and
the ability to recruit the most talented students in the world. The
gestation of scientific discovery is long. At least at first, we cannot
know the commercial applications of a discovery. But America leads the
world in biotechnology today because of support for basic research in
chemistry and physics in the 1960s. Maintaining a commitment to
scientific inquiry, therefore, must be part of our vision for sustained
competitiveness.
Translating university discoveries into commercial products also
takes innovation, capital, and risk. The Center for Strategic and
International Studies asked what kind of government intervention can
maintain technological leadership. One source of technological
innovation that provides America with comparative advantage is the
combination of university research programs, entrepreneurs, and risk
capital from venture capitalists, corporations, or governments.
Research clusters around Silicon Valley and North Carolina's Research
Triangle exemplify this sort of combination.
The National Academies reached a similar conclusion in a 2002 review
of the National Nanotechnology Initiatives. In a report, they wrote:
``To enhance the transition from basic to applied research, the
committee recommends that industrial partnerships be stimulated and
nurtured to help accelerate the commercialization of national
nanotechnology developments.''
To further that goal, the third major area this bill addresses is
fostering the creation of research parks. This part of the bill would
benefit state and local governments and universities that want to
create research centers for businesses incubating scientific
discoveries with promise for commercial development.
Stanford created the nation's first high-tech research park in 1951,
in response to the demand for industrial land near the university and
an emerging electronics industry tied closely to the School of
Engineering. The Stanford Research Park traces its origins to a
business started with $538 in a Palo Alto garage by two men named Bill
Hewlett and Dave Packard. The Park is now home to 140 companies in
electronics, software, biotechnology, and other high tech fields.
Similarly, the North Carolina Research Triangle was founded in 1959
by university, government, and business leaders with money from private
contributions. It now has 112 research and development organizations,
37,600 employees, and capital investment of more than $2.7 billion.
More recently, Virginia has fostered a research park now housing 53
private-sector companies, nonprofits, VCU research institutes, and
state laboratories. The Virginia park employs more than 1,300 people.
The creation of these parks would seem to be an obvious choice. But
it takes a significant commitment from a range of sources to bring them
into being. To foster the creation and expansion of these successful
parks, my bill will encourage their creation through the use of tax-
exempt bond financing. Allowing tax-exempt bond authority would bring
down the cost to establish such parks.
Foreign countries are emulating this successful formula. They are
establishing high-tech clusters through government and university
partnerships with private industry.
Back in 2000, a partnership was formed to foster TechRanch to assist
Montana State University and other Montana-based research institutions
in their efforts to commercialize research. But TechRanch is
desperately in need of some new high-tech facilities. It could surely
benefit from a provision such as this. I encourage my Colleagues to
visit research parks in their states to see how my bill could be
helpful in fostering more successful ventures.
A related item is a small fix to help universities that use tax-
exempt bonds to build research facilities primarily for federal
research in the basic or fundamental research area. Some of these
facilities housing federal research--mostly NIH and NSF funded
projects--are in danger of losing their tax-exempt bond status. Counsel
have notified some state officials that they may be running afoul of a
prohibition on ``private use'' in the tax code, because one private
party has a superior claim to others in the use of inventions that
result from research.
The complication comes from a 1980 law. In 1980, Congress enacted the
Patent and Trademark Law Amendments Act, also known as the Bayh-Dole
Act. The Bayh-Dole Act requires the Federal Government to retain a non-
exclusive, royalty-free right on any discovery. In order to foster more
basic research through Federal-state-university partnerships, we need
to clarify that this provision of the Bayh-Dole act does not cause
these bonds to lose their taxexempt status. And my bill directs the
Treasury Department to do so. I understand that the Treasury Department
is aware of this significant concern. Whether or not Congress enacts my
legislation, I hope that the Treasury Department will clarify the
situation soon.
The fourth major area that my bill addresses is innovation at the
small business level. Last year, representatives of a number of small
nanotechnology companies came to visit me. They told me that their
greatest problem was surviving what they called the ``valley of
death.'' That's what they called the first few years of business, when
an entrepreneur has a promising technology but little money to test or
develop it. Many businesses simply do not survive the ``valley of
death.'' I believe that Congress should find a way to assist these
businesses with promising technology.
Nanotechnology, for instance, shows much promise. According to a
recent report, over the next decade, nanotechnology will affect most
manufactured goods. As stated in Senate testimony by one National
Science Foundation official last year, ``Nanotechnology is truly our
next great frontier in science and engineering.'' It took me a while to
understand just what nanotechnology is. But it is basically the control
of things at very, very small dimensions. By understanding and
controlling at that dimension, people can find new and unique
applications. These applications range from common consumer products--
such as making our sunblocks better--to improving disease-fighting
medicines--to designing more fuel-efficient cars.
So, to help these small businesses convert their promising science
into successful businesses, my bill would establish tax credits for
investments in qualifying small technology innovation companies. These
struggling start-up
[[Page 135]]
ventures often cannot utilize existing incentives in the tax code--like
the R&E tax credit--because they have no tax liability and may have
little income for the first few years. They need access to cheap
capital to get through those first few research-intensive years.
The credit in my bill would be similar to the existing and successful
New Markets Tax Credit. The New Markets Credit has provided billions of
dollars of investment to low-income communities across the country. In
my bill, entities with some expertise and knowledge of research would
receive an allocation from Treasury to analyze and select qualifying
research investments. These investment entities would then target small
business with promising technologies that focus the majority of their
expenditures on activity qualifying as research expenses under the R&E
credit.
In sum, my bill would boost both applied and basic research. It would
boost research by businesses big and small. And it would foster
research by for-profit and non-profits alike.
McLuhan's quote about the global village was taken by many at the
time as a wake-up call to a changing world. Since then, many more
leaders in this village have emerged. Let us work to see that the next
big technological advance is discovered here in America. Only through
continued commitment to research can We ensure that it is.
______
By Mr. McCONNELL (for Ms. Murkowski):
S. 42. A bill to make improvements to the Arctic Research and Policy
Act of 1984; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the test
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. 42
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 ``Arctic Research and Policy
Amendments Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. CHAIRPERSON OF THE ARCTIC RESEARCH COMMISSION.
(a) Compensation.--Section 103(d)(1) of the Arctic Research
and Policy Act of 1984 (15 U.S.C. 4102(d)(1)) is amended in
the second sentence by striking ``90 days'' and inserting ``,
in the case of the chairperson, 120 days, and, in the case of
any other member, 90 days,''.
(b) Redesignation.--Section 103(d)(2) of the Arctic
Research and Policy Act of 1984 (15 U.S.C. 4102(d)(2)) is
amended by striking ``Chairman'' and inserting
``chairperson''.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 53. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide
health care practitioners in rural areas with training in preventive
health care, including both physical and mental care, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Rural
Preventive Health Care Training Act, a bill that responds to the dire
need of our rural communities for quality health care and disease
prevention programs. Almost one fourth of Americans live in rural areas
and frequently lack access to adequate physical and mental health care.
As many as 21 million of the 34 million people living in underserved
rural areas are without access to a primary care provider. Even in
areas where providers do exist, there are numerous limits to access,
such as geography, distance, lack of transportation, and lack of
knowledge about available resources. Due to the diversity of rural
populations, language and cultural obstacles are often a factor in the
access to medical care.
Compound these problems with limited financial resources, and the
result is that many Americans living in rural communities go without
vital health care, especially preventive care. Children fail to receive
immunizations and routine checkups. Preventable illnesses and injuries
occur needlessly, and lead to expensive hospitalizations. Early
symptoms of emotional problems and substance abuse go undetected, and
often develop into full-blown disorders.
An Institute of Medicine (IOM) report entitled, ``Reducing Risks for
Mental Disorders: Frontiers for Preventive Intervention Research,''
highlights the benefits of preventive care for all health problems. The
training of health care providers in prevention is crucial in order to
meet the demand for care in underserved areas. Currently, rural health
care providers lack preventive care training opportunities.
Interdisciplinary preventive training of rural health care providers
must be encouraged. Through such training, rural health care providers
can build a strong educational foundation from the behavioral,
biological, and psychological sciences. Interdisciplinary team
prevention training will also facilitate operations at sites with both
health and mental health clinics by facilitating routine consultation
between groups. Emphasizing the mental health disciplines and their
services as part of the health care team will contribute to the overall
health of rural communities.
The Rural Preventive Health Care Training Act would implement the
risk-reduction model described in the IOM study. This model is based on
the identification of risk factors and targets specific interventions
for those risk factors. The human suffering caused by poor health is
immeasurable, and places a huge financial burden on communities,
families, and individuals. By implementing preventive measures to
reduce this suffering, the potential psychological and financial
savings are enormous.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 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. 53
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 ``Rural Preventive Health Care
Training Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. PREVENTIVE HEALTH CARE TRAINING.
Part D of title VII of the Public Health Service Act (42
U.S.C. 294 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 754
the following:
``SEC. 754A. PREVENTIVE HEALTH CARE TRAINING.
``(a) In General.--The Secretary may make grants to, and
enter into contracts with, eligible applicants to enable such
applicants to provide preventive health care training, in
accordance with subsection (c), to health care practitioners
practicing in rural areas. Such training shall, to the extent
practicable, include training in health care to prevent both
physical and mental disorders before the initial occurrence
of such disorders. In carrying out this subsection, the
Secretary shall encourage, but may not require, the use of
interdisciplinary training project applications.
``(b) Limitation.--To be eligible to receive training using
assistance provided under subsection (a), a health care
practitioner shall be determined by the eligible applicant
involved to be practicing, or desiring to practice, in a
rural area.
``(c) Use of Assistance.--Amounts received under a grant
made or contract entered into under this section shall be
used--
``(1) to provide student stipends to individuals attending
rural community colleges or other institutions that service
predominantly rural communities, for the purpose of enabling
the individuals to receive preventive health care training;
``(2) to increase staff support at rural community colleges
or other institutions that service predominantly rural
communities to facilitate the provision of preventive health
care training;
``(3) to provide training in appropriate research and
program evaluation skills in rural communities;
``(4) to create and implement innovative programs and
curricula with a specific prevention component; and
``(5) for other purposes as the Secretary determines to be
appropriate.
``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section,
$5,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2011.''.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 54. A bill to amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to
provide for coverage of services provided by nursing school clinics
under State medicaid programs; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, today I introduce the Nursing School
Clinics Act. This measure builds on our concerted efforts to provide
access to quality health care for all Americans by offering grants and
incentives for nursing schools to establish primary care
[[Page 136]]
clinics in underserved areas where additional medical services are most
needed. In addition, this measure provides the opportunity for nursing
schools to enhance the scope of student training and education by
providing firsthand clinical experience in primary care facilities.
Primary care clinics administered by nursing schools are university
or nonprofit primary care centers developed mainly in collaboration
with university schools of nursing and the communities they serve.
These centers are staffed by faculty and staff who are nurse
practitioners and public health nurses. Students supplement patient
care while receiving preceptorships provided by college of nursing
faculty and primary care physicians, often associated with academic
institutions, who serve as collaborators with nurse practitioners. To
date, the comprehensive models of care provided by nursing clinics have
yielded excellent results, including significantly fewer emergency room
visits, fewer hospital inpatient days, and less use of specialists, as
compared to conventional primary health care.
This bill reinforces the principle of combining health care delivery
in underserved areas with the education of advanced practice nurses. To
accomplish these objectives, Title XIX of the Social Security Act would
be amended to designate that the services provided in these nursing
school clinics are reimbursable under Medicaid. The combination of
grants and the provision of Medicaid reimbursement furnishes the
financial incentives for clinic operators to establish the clinics.
In order to meet the increasing challenges of bringing cost-effective
and quality health care to all Americans, we must consider a wide range
of proposals, both large and small. Most importantly, we must approach
the issue of health care with creativity and determination, ensuring
that all reasonable avenues are pursued. Nurses have always been an
integral part of health care delivery. The Nursing School Clinics Act
recognizes the central role nurses can perform as care givers to the
medically underserved.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 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. 54
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 ``Nursing School Clinics Act
of 2007''.
SEC. 2. MEDICAID COVERAGE OF SERVICES PROVIDED BY NURSING
SCHOOL CLINICS.
(a) In General.--Section 1905(a) of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 1396d(a)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (27), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating paragraph (28) as paragraph (29); and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (27), the following new
paragraph:
``(28) nursing school clinic services (as defined in
subsection (y)) furnished by or under the supervision of a
nurse practitioner or a clinical nurse specialist (as defined
in section 1861(aa)(5)), whether or not the nurse
practitioner or clinical nurse specialist is under the
supervision of, or associated with, a physician or other
health care provider; and''.
(b) Nursing School Clinic Services Defined.--Section 1905
of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396d) is amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(y) The term `nursing school clinic services' means
services provided by a health care facility operated by an
accredited school of nursing which provides primary care,
long-term care, mental health counseling, home health
counseling, home health care, or other health care services
which are within the scope of practice of a registered
nurse.''.
(c) Conforming Amendment.--Section 1902(a)(10)(C)(iv) of
the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396a(a)(10)(C)(iv)) is
amended by inserting ``and (28)'' after ``(24)''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall be effective with respect to payments made under a
State plan under title XIX of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 1396 et seq.) for calendar quarters commencing with
the first calendar quarter beginning after the date of
enactment of this Act.
______
By Mr. BAUCUS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Kyl,
and Mr. Crapo):
S. 55. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal
the individual alternative minimum tax; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, there is a monster in the tax code. Like
Frankenstein, the Alternative Minimum Tax brings back to life higher
taxes. Higher taxes that families had been told not to worry about are
brought back because of the Alternative Minimum Tax, or AMT. It is a
monster that really cannot be improved. It cannot be made to work
right. It is time to draw the curtain on this monster.
That is why I am pleased to join with my friend Chuck Grassley, and
our fellow Committee colleagues, Senators Schumer, Kyl, and Crapo to
introduce legislation today that will repeal the individual AMT. Our
bill simply says that beginning January 1, 2007, individuals will owe
zero dollars under the AMT. Further, our bill provides that individuals
with AMT credits can continue to use those credits up to 90 percent of
their regular tax liability.
If we don't act, in 2007, the family-unfriendly AMT will hit middle-
income families earning $61,000 with three children. What was once
meant to ensure that a handful of millionaires did not eliminate all
taxes through excessive deductions is now meaning millions of working
families, including thousands in my home State of Montana, are subject
to a higher stealth tax. It is truly bizarre that we've designed a tax
that deems more children ``excessive deductions'' and punishes duly
paying your State taxes. Already, 5,000 Montana families pay a higher
tax because of the AMT. But this number could multiply many times over
if we don't act soon.
Not only is the AMT unfair and poorly targeted, it is an awful mess
to figure out. The National Taxpayer Advocate has singled out this item
as causing the most complexity for individual taxpayers.
Of course, repeal does not come without cost and that cost is
significant even if we assume the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts aren't
extended. We are committed to working together to identify reasonable
offsets. Certainly, I don't think we want a tax system unfairly placing
a higher tax burden on millions of middle-income families with
children. But it doesn't serve those families either if our budget
deficit is significantly worse.
Like Frankenstein's monster, the AMT brings a most unpleasant
reaction from those whom it encounters. It is time we end this drama
and repeal the AMT.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 56. A bill to provide relief to the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada
for settlement of certain claims against the United States; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, almost twelve years ago, I stood before
you to introduce a bill ``to provide an opportunity for the Pottawatomi
Nation in Canada to have the merits of their claims against the United
States determined by the United States Court of Federal Claims.''
That bill was introduced as Senate Resolution 223, which referred the
Pottawatomi's claim to the Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Federal
Claims and required the Chief Judge to report back to the Senate and
provide sufficient findings of fact and conclusions of law to enable
the Congress to determine whether the claim of the Pottawatomi Nation
in Canada is legal or equitable in nature, and the amount of damages,
if any, which may be legally or equitably due from the United States.
Seven years ago, the Chief Judge of the Court of Federal Claims
reported back that the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada has a legitimate
and credible legal claim. Thereafter, by settlement stipulation, the
United States has taken the position that it would be ``fair, just and
equitable'' to settle the claims of the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada
for the sum of $1,830,000. This settlement amount was reached by the
parties after seven years of extensive, fact-intensive litigation.
Independently, the court concluded that the settlement amount is ``not
a gratuity''
[[Page 137]]
and that the ``settlement was predicated on a credible legal claim.''
Pottawatomi Nation in Canada, et al. v. United States, Cong. Ref. 94-
1037X at 28 (Ct. Fed. Cl., September 15, 2000) (Report of Hearing
Officer).
The bill I introduce today is to authorize the appropriation of those
funds that the United States has concluded would be ``fair, just and
equitable'' to satisfy this legal claim. If enacted, this bill will
finally achieve a measure of justice for a tribal nation that has for
far too long been denied.
For the information of our colleagues, this is the historical
background that informs the underlying legal claim of the Canadian
Pottawatomi.
The members of the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada are one of the
descendant groups--successors-in-interest--of the historical
Pottawatomi Nation and their claim originates in the latter part of the
18th century. The historical Pottawatomi Nation was aboriginal to the
United States. They occupied and possessed a vast expanse in what is
now the States of Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, llinois, and Wisconsin. From
1795 to 1833, the United States annexed most of the traditional land of
the Pottawatomi Nation through a series of treaties of cession--many of
these cessions were made under extreme duress and the threat of
military action. In exchange, the Pottawatomis were repeatedly made
promises that the remainder of their lands would be secure and, in
addition, that the United States would pay certain annuities to the
Pottawatomi.
In 1829, the United States formally adopted a Federal the policy of
removal--an effort to remove all Indian tribes from their traditional
lands east of the Mississippi River to the west. As part of that
effort, the government increasingly pressured the Pottawatomis to cede
the remainder of their traditional lands--some five million acres in
and around the city of Chicago and remove themselves west. For years,
the Pottawatomis steadfastly refused to cede the remainder of their
tribal territory. Then in 1833, the United States, pressed by settlers
seeking more land, sent a Treaty Commission to the Pottawatomi with
orders to extract a cession of the remaining lands. The Treaty
Commissioners spent 2 weeks using extraordinarily coercive tactics--
including threats of war--in an attempt to get the Pottawatomis to
agree to cede their territory. Finally, those Pottawatomis who were
present relented and on September 26, 1933, they ceded their remaining
tribal estate through what would be known as the Treaty of Chicago.
Seventy-seven members of the Pottawatomi Nation signed the Treaty of
Chicago. Members of the ``Wisconsin Band'' were not present and did not
assent to the cession.
In exchange for their land, the Treaty of Chicago provided that the
United States would give to the Pottawatomis 5 million acres of
comparable land in what is now Missouri. The Pottawatomi were familiar
with the Missouri land, aware that it was similar to their homeland.
But the Senate refused to ratify that negotiated agreement and
unilaterally switched the land to five million acres in Iowa. The
Treaty Commissioners were sent back to acquire Pottawatomi assent to
the Iowa land. All but seven of the original 77 signatories refused to
accept the change even with promises that if they were dissatisfied
``justice would be done.''
Treaty of Chicago, as amended, Article 4. Nevertheless, the Treaty of
Chicago was ratified as amended by the Senate in 1834. Subsequently,
the Pottawatomis sent a delegation to evaluate the land in Iowa. The
delegation reported back that the land was ``not fit for snakes to live
on.''
While some Pottawatomis removed westward, many of the Pottawatomis--
particularly the Wisconsin Band, whose leaders never agreed to the
Treaty--refused to do so. By 1836, the United States began to
forcefully remove Pottawatomis who remained in the east--with
devastating consequences. As is true with many other American Indian
tribes, the forced removal westward came at great human cost. Many of
the Pottawatomi were forcefully removed by mercenaries who were paid on
a per capita basis government contract. Over one-half of the Indians
removed by these means died en route. Those who reached Iowa were
almost immediately removed further to inhospitable parts of Kansas
against their will and without their consent.
Knowing of these conditions, many of the Pottawatomis including most
of those in the Wisconsin Band vigorously resisted forced removal. To
avoid Federal troops and mercenaries, much of the Wisconsin Band
ultimately found it necessary to flee to Canada. They were often
pursued to the border by government troops, government-paid mercenaries
or both. Official files of the Canadian and United States governments
disclose that many Pottawatomis were forced to leave their homes
without their horses or any of their possessions other than the clothes
on their backs.
By the late 1830s, the government refused payment of annuities to any
Pottawatomi groups that had not removed west. In the 1860s, members of
the Wisconsin Band--those still in their traditional territory and
those forced to flee to Canada--petitioned Congress for the payment of
their treaty annuities promised under the Treaty of Chicago and all
other cession treaties. By the Act of June 25, 1864 (13 Stat. 172) the
Congress declared that the Wisconsin Band did not forfeit their
annuities by not removing and directed that the share of the
Pottawatomi Indians who had refused to relocate to the west should be
retained for their use in the United States Treasury. (H.R. Rep. No.
470, 64th Cong., p. 5, as quoted on page 3 of memo dated October 7,
1949.) Nevertheless, much of the money was never paid to the Wisconsin
Band.
In 1903, the Wisconsin Band--most of whom now resided in three areas,
the States of Michigan and Wisconsin and the Province of Ontario--
petitioned the Senate once again to pay them their fair portion of
annuities as required by the law and treaties. (Sen. Doc. No. 185, 57th
Cong., 2d Sess.) By the Act of June 21, 1906 (34 Stat. 380), the
Congress directed the Secretary of the Interior to investigate claims
made by the Wisconsin Band and establish a roll of the Wisconsin Band
Pottawatomis that still remained in the East. In addition, the Congress
ordered the Secretary to determine ``the[] [Wisconsin Bands]
proportionate shares of the annuities, trust funds, and other moneys
paid to or expended for the tribe to which they belong in which the
claimant Indians have not shared, [and] the amount of such monies
retained in the Treasury of the United States to the credit of the
clamant Indians as directed the provision of the Act of June 25,
1864.''
In order to carry out the 1906 Act, the Secretary of Interior
directed Dr. W.M. Wooster to conduct an enumeration of Wisconsin Band
Pottawatomi in both the United States and Canada. Dr. Wooster
documented 2007 Wisconsin Pottawatomis: 457 in Wisconsin and Michigan
and 1550 in Canada. He also concluded that the proportionate share of
annuities for the Pottawatomis in Wisconsin and Michigan was $477,339
and that the proportionate share of annuities due the Pottawatomi
Nation in Canada was $1,517,226. The Congress thereafter enacted a
series of appropriation Acts from June 30, 1913 to May 29, 1928 to
satisfy most of money owed to those Wisconsin Band Pottawatomis
residing in the United States. However, the Wisconsin Band Pottawatomis
who resided in Canada were never paid their share of the tribal funds.
Since that time, the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada has diligently and
continuously sought to enforce their treaty rights, although until this
congressional reference, they had never been provided their day in
court. In 1910, the United States and Great Britain entered into an
agreement for the purpose of dealing with claims between both
countries, including claims of Indian tribes within their respective
jurisdictions, by creating the Pecuniary Claims Tribunal. From 1910 to
1938, the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada diligently sought to have their
claim heard in this international forum. Overlooked for more pressing
international matters of the period, including the intervention of
World War I,
[[Page 138]]
the Pottawatomis then came to the U.S. Congress for redress of their
claim.
In 1946, the Congress waived its sovereign immunity and established
the Indian Claims Commission for the purpose of granting tribes their
long-delayed day in court. The Indian Claims Commission Act (ICCA)
granted the Commission jurisdiction over claims such as the type
involved here. In 1948, the Wisconsin Band Pottawatomis from both sides
of the border--brought suit together in the Indian Claims Commission
for recovery of damages. Hannahville Indian Community v. U.S., No. 28
(Ind. Cl. Comm. Filed May 4, 1948). Unfortunately, the Indian Claims
Commission dismissed Pottawatomi Nation in Canada's part of the claim
ruling that the Commission had no jurisdiction to consider claims of
Indians living outside territorial limits of the United States.
Hannahville Indian Community v. U.S., 115 Ct. Cl. 823 (1950). The claim
of the Wisconsin Band residing in the United States that was filed in
the Indian Claims Commission was finally decided in favor of the
Wisconsin Band by the U.S. Claims Court in 1983. Hannahville Indian
Community v. United States, 4 Ct. Cl. 445 (1983). The Court of Claims
concluded that the Wisconsin Band was owed a member's proportionate
share of unpaid annuities from 1838 through 1907 due under various
treaties, including the Treaty of Chicago and entered judgment for the
American Wisconsin Band Pottawatomis for any monies not paid. Still the
Pottawatomi Nation in Canada was excluded because of the jurisdictional
limits of the ICCA.
Undaunted, the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada came to the Senate and
after careful consideration, we finally gave them their long-awaited
day in court through the congressional reference process. The court has
now reported back to us that their claim is meritorious and that the
payment that this bill would make constitutes a ``fair, just and
equitable'' resolution to this claim.
The Pottawatomi Nation in Canada has sought justice for over 150
years. They have done all that we asked in order to establish their
claim. Now it is time for us to finally live up to the promise our
government made so many years ago. It will not correct all the wrongs
of the past, but it is a demonstration that this government is willing
to admit when it has left unfulfilled an obligation and that the United
States is willing to do what we can to see that justice--so long
delayed is not now denied.
Finally, I would just note that the claim of the Pottawatomi Nation
in Canada is supported through specific resolutions by the National
Congress of American Indians, the oldest, largest and most-
representative tribal organization here in the United States, the
Assembly of First Nations (which includes all recognized tribal
entities in Canada), and each and every of the Pottawatomi tribal
groups that remain in the United States today.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 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. 56
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SETTLEMENT OF CERTAIN CLAIMS.
(a) Authorization for Payment.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, subject to subsection (b), the Secretary of
the Treasury shall pay to the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada
$1,830,000 from amounts appropriated under section 1304 of
title 31, United States Code.
(b) Payment in Accordance With Stipulation for
Recommendation of Settlement.--The payment under subsection
(a) shall--
(1) be made in accordance with the terms and conditions of
the Stipulation for Recommendation of Settlement dated May
22, 2000, entered into between the Pottawatomi Nation in
Canada and the United States (referred to in this Act as the
``Stipulation for Recommendation of Settlement''); and
(2) be included in the report of the Chief Judge of the
United States Court of Federal Claims regarding Congressional
Reference No. 94-1037X, submitted to the Senate on January 4,
2001, in accordance with sections 1492 and 2509 of title 28,
United States Code.
(c) Full Satisfaction of Claims.--The payment under
subsection (a) shall be in full satisfaction of all claims of
the Pottawatomi Nation in Canada against the United States
that are referred to or described in the Stipulation for
Recommendation of Settlement.
(d) Nonapplicability.--Notwithstanding any other provision
of law, the Indian Tribal Judgment Funds Use or Distribution
Act (25 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.) does not apply to the payment
under subsection (a).
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 57. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to deem certain
service in the organized military forces of the Government of the
Commonwealth of the Philippines and the Philippine Scouts to have been
active service for purposes of benefits under programs administered by
the Secretary of Veterans Affairs; to the Committee on Veterans'
Affairs.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, many of you know of my continued support
and advocacy on the importance of addressing the plight of Filipino
World War II veterans. As an American, I believe the treatment of
Filipino World War II veterans is bleak and shameful. The Philippines
became a United States possession in 1898, when it was ceded by Spain,
following the Spanish-American War. In 1934, the Congress enacted the
Philippine Independence Act, Public Law 73-127, which provided a 10-
year time frame for the independence of the Philippines. Between 1934
and final independence in 1946, the United States retained certain
powers over the Philippines including the right to call military forces
organized by the newly-formed Commonwealth government into the service
of the United States Armed Forces.
The Commonwealth Army of the Philippines was called to serve with the
United States Armed Forces in the Far East during World War II under
President Roosevelt's July 26, 1941 military order. The Filipinos who
served were entitled to full veterans' benefits by reason of their
active service with our armed forces. Hundreds were wounded in battle
and many hundreds more died in battle. Shortly after Japan's surrender,
the Congress enacted the Armed Forces Voluntary Recruitment Act of 1945
for the purpose of sending Filipino troops to occupy enemy lands, and
to oversee military installations at various overseas locations. These
troops were authorized to receive pay and allowances for services
performed throughout the Western Pacific. Although hostilities had
ceased, wartime service of these troops continued as a matter of law
until the end of 1946.
Despite all of their sacrifices, on February 18, 1946, the Congress
passed the Rescission Act of 1946, now codified as Section 107 of Title
38 of the United States Code. The 1946 Act deemed that the service
performed by these Filipino veterans would not be recognized as
``active service'' for the purpose of any U.S. law conferring ``rights,
privileges, or benefits.'' Accordingly, Section 107 denied Filipino
veterans access to health care, particularly for non-service-connected
disabilities, and pension benefits. Section 107 also limited service-
connected disability and death compensation for Filipino veterans to 50
percent of what their American counterparts receive.
On May 27, 1946, the Congress enacted the Second Supplemental Surplus
Appropriations Rescission Act, which duplicated the language that had
eliminated Filipino veterans' benefits under the First Rescission Act.
Thus, Filipino veterans who fought in the service of the United States
during World War II have been precluded from receiving most of the
veterans' benefits that had been available to them before 1946, and
that are available to all other veterans of our armed forces regardless
of race, national origin, or citizenship status.
The Filipino Veterans Equity Act, which I introduce today, would
restore the benefits due to these veterans by granting full recognition
of service for the sacrifices they made during World War II. These
benefits include veterans health care, service-connected disability
compensation, non-service connected disability compensation, dependent
indemnity compensation, death pension, and full burial benefits.
Throughout the years, I have sponsored several measures to rectify
the lack of appreciation America has
[[Page 139]]
shown to these gallant men and women who stood in harm's way with our
American soldiers and fought the common enemy during World War II. It
is time that we as a Nation recognize our long-standing history and
friendship with the Philippines. Of the 120,000 that served in the
Commonwealth Army during World War II, there are approximately 60,000
Filipino veterans currently residing in the United States and the
Philippines. According to the Department of Veterans Affairs, the
Filipino veteran population is expected to decrease to approximately
20,000 or roughly one-third of the current population by 2010.
Heroes should never be forgotten or ignored; let us not turn our
backs on those who sacrificed so much. Let us instead work to replay
all of these brave men for their sacrifices by providing them the
veterans, benefits they deserve.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of my bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 57
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 ``Filipino Veterans Equity Act
of 2007''.
SEC. 2. CERTAIN SERVICE IN THE ORGANIZED MILITARY FORCES OF
THE PHILIPPINES AND THE PHILIPPINE SCOUTS
DEEMED TO BE ACTIVE SERVICE.
(a) In General.--Section 107 of title 38, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking ``not'' after ``Army of the United States,
shall''; and
(B) by striking ``, except benefits under--'' and all that
follows in that subsection and inserting a period;
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking ``not'' after ``Armed Forces Voluntary
Recruitment Act of 1945 shall''; and
(B) by striking ``except--'' and all that follows in that
subsection and inserting a period; and
(3) by striking subsections (c) and (d).
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Heading amendment.--The heading of such section is
amended to read as follows:
``Sec. 107. Certain service deemed to be active service:
service in organized military forces of the Philippines and
in the Philippine Scouts''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The item relating to such section
in the table of sections at the beginning of chapter 1 of
such title is amended to read as follows:
``107. Certain service deemed to be active service: service in
organized military forces of the Philippines and in the
Philippine Scouts.''.
SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.
(a) In General.--The amendments made by this Act shall take
effect on January 1, 2007.
(b) Applicability.--No benefits shall accrue to any person
for any period before the effective date of this Act by
reason of the amendments made by this Act.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 58. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal
the reduction in the deductible portion of expenses for business meals
and entertainment; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation to repeal
the current 50 percent tax deduction for business meals and
entertainment expenses, and to restore the tax deduction to 80 percent
gradually over a five-year period. Restoration of this deduction is
essential to the livelihood of small and independent businesses as well
as food service, travel, tourism, and entertainment industries
throughout the United States. These industries are being economically
harmed as a result of the 50 percent tax deduction.
Small businesses rely heavily on the business meal to conduct
business, even more so than larger corporations. In releasing its study
in May 2004, entitled he Impact of Tax Expenditure Policies on
Incorporated Small Business, the Small Business Administration, SBA,
Office of Advocacy, found that small incorporated businesses benefit
more than their larger counterparts from the meal and entertainment tax
deduction. According to the study, small firms that take advantage of
the business-meal deduction reduce their effective tax rate by 0.75
percent on average, while larger firms only receive a 0.11 percent
reduction in the effective tax rate. More importantly, the study
strongly suggests that full reinstatement of the business meal and
entertainment deduction should be a major policy priority for small
businesses.
Small companies often use restaurants as onference space to conduct
meetings or close deals. Meals are their best and sometimes only
marketing tool. Certainly, an increase in the meal and entertainment
deduction would have a significant impact on a small business bottom
line. In addition, the effects on the overall economy would be
significant.
Accompanying my statement is the National Restaurant Association
(NRA), State-by-State chart reflecting the estimated economic impact of
increasing the business meal deductibility from 50 to 80 percent. The
NRA estimates that an increase to 80 percent would increase business
meal sales by $8 billion and create a $26 billion increase to the
overall economy.
I urge my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring this important
legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the NRA State by State chart
and the text of my bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the material was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
ESTIMATED IMPACT OF INCREASING BUSINESS MEAL DEDUCTIBILITY FROM 50% TO 80%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Increase in Business Meal
Spending 50% to 80% Total Economic Impact in the
State Deductibility ($ in State ($ in millions)
millions)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama............................................. 99 203
Alaska.............................................. 21 35
Arizona............................................. 150 297
Arkansas............................................ 57 114
California.......................................... 1,022 2,265
Colorado............................................ 152 327
Connecticut......................................... 95 177
Delaware............................................ 25 44
District of Columbia................................ 41 54
Florida............................................. 485 991
Georgia............................................. 252 565
Hawaii.............................................. 56 108
Idaho............................................... 29 57
Illinois............................................ 335 785
Indiana............................................. 156 320
Iowa................................................ 59 126
Kansas.............................................. 63 129
Kentucky............................................ 100 200
Louisiana........................................... 95 185
Maine............................................... 33 63
Maryland............................................ 153 319
Massachusetts....................................... 221 440
Michigan............................................ 242 471
Minnesota........................................... 139 314
Mississippi......................................... 54 103
Missouri............................................ 153 348
Montana............................................. 22 40
Nebraska............................................ 40 83
Nevada.............................................. 76 134
[[Page 140]]
New Hampshire....................................... 39 72
New Jersey.......................................... 225 467
New Mexico.......................................... 49 92
New York............................................ 508 993
North Carolina...................................... 224 469
North Dakota........................................ 13 24
Ohio................................................ 303 663
Oklahoma............................................ 83 177
Oregon.............................................. 100 206
Pennsylvania........................................ 287 638
Rhode Island........................................ 34 62
South Carolina...................................... 110 220
South Dakota........................................ 18 36
Tennessee........................................... 153 337
Texas............................................... 604 1,411
Utah................................................ 54 118
Vermont............................................. 15 28
Virginia............................................ 203 428
Washington.......................................... 166 337
West Virginia....................................... 36 62
Wisconsin........................................... 123 266
Wyoming............................................. 13 21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: National Restaurant Association estimates, 2006.
____
S. 58
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. REPEAL OF REDUCTION IN BUSINESS MEALS AND
ENTERTAINMENT TAX DEDUCTION.
(a) In General.--Section 274(n)(1) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 (relating to only 50 percent of meal and
entertainment expenses allowed as deduction) is amended by
striking ``50 percent'' and inserting ``the applicable
percentage''.
(b) Applicable Percentage.--Section 274(n) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking paragraph (3) and
inserting the following:
``(3) Applicable percentage.--For purposes of paragraph
(1), the term `applicable percentage' means the percentage
determined under the following table:
``For taxable years beginning in calendarThe applicable percentage is--
2007..........................................................75 ....
2008 or thereafter.........................................80.''.....
(c) Conforming Amendment.--The heading for section 274(n)
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking
``Only 50 Percent'' and inserting ``Portion''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2006.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 59. A bill to amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to
improve access to advanced practice nurses and physician assistants
under the Medicaid Program; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, today I introduce the ``Medicaid Advanced
Practice Nurse and Physician Assistants Access Act of 2007.'' This
legislation would change Federal law to expand fee-for-service Medicaid
to include direct payment for services provided by all nurse
practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, and physician assistants. It
would ensure all nurse practitioners, certified nurse midwives, and
physician assistants are recognized as primary care case managers, and
require Medicaid panels to include advanced practice nurses on their
managed care panels.
Advanced practice nurses are registered nurses who have attained
additional expertise in the clinical management of health conditions.
Typically, an advanced practice nurse holds a master's degree with
didactic and clinical preparation beyond that of the registered nurse.
They are employed in clinics, hospitals, and private practices. While
there are many titles given to these advanced practice nurses, such as
pediatric nurse practitioners, family nurse practitioners, certified
nurse midwives, certified registered nurse anesthetists, and clinical
nurse specialists, our current Medicaid law has not kept up with the
multiple specialties and titles of these advanced practitioners, nor
has it recognized the critical role physician assistants play in the
delivery of primary care.
I have been a long-time advocate of advanced practice nurses and
their ability to extend health care services to our most rural and
underserved communities. They have improved access to health care in
Hawaii and throughout the United States by their willingness to
practice in what some providers might see as undesirable locations--the
extremely rural, frontier, or urban areas. This legislation ensures
they are recognized and reimbursed for providing the necessary health
care services patients need, and it gives those patients the choice of
selecting advanced practice nurses and physician assistants as their
primary care providers.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 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. 59
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 ``Medicaid Advanced Practice
Nurses and Physician Assistants Access Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. IMPROVED ACCESS TO SERVICES OF ADVANCED PRACTICE
NURSES AND PHYSICIAN ASSISTANTS UNDER STATE
MEDICAID PROGRAMS.
(a) Primary Care Case Management.--Section 1905(t)(2) of
the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396d(t)(2)) is amended by
striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the following:
``(B) A nurse practitioner (as defined in section
1861(aa)(5)(A)).
``(C) A certified nurse-midwife (as defined in section
1861(gg)).
``(D) A physician assistant (as defined in section
1861(aa)(5)(A)).''.
(b) Fee-for-Service Program.--Section 1905(a)(21) of such
Act (42 U.S.C. 1396d(a)(21)) is amended--
(1) by inserting ``(A)'' after ``(21)'';
(2) by striking ``services furnished by a certified
pediatric nurse practitioner or certified family nurse
practitioner (as defined by the Secretary) which the
certified pediatric nurse practitioner or certified family
nurse practitioner'' and inserting ``services furnished by a
nurse practitioner (as defined in section 1861(aa)(5)(A)) or
by a clinical nurse specialist (as defined in section
1861(aa)(5)(B)) which the nurse practitioner or clinical
nurse specialist'';
(3) by striking ``the certified pediatric nurse
practitioner or certified family nurse practitioner'' and
inserting ``the nurse practitioner or clinical nurse
specialist''; and
(4) by inserting before the semicolon at the end the
following: ``and (B) services furnished by a physician
assistant (as defined in section 1861(aa)(5)) with the
supervision of a physician which the physician assistant is
legally authorized to perform under State law''.
(c) Including in Mix of Service Providers Under Medicaid
Managed Care Organizations.--Section 1932(b)(5)(B) of such
Act (42 U.S.C. 1396u-2(b)(5)(B)) is amended by inserting ``,
with such mix including nurse practitioners, clinical nurse
specialists, physician assistants, certified nurse midwives,
and certified registered nurse anesthetists (as defined in
section 1861(bb)(2))'' after ``services''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to items and services furnished in calendar
quarters beginning on or after 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, without regard to whether or not final
regulations to carry out such amendments have been
promulgated by such date.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
[[Page 141]]
S. 60. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide a
means for continued improvement in emergency medical services for
children; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, today, along with my colleagues; Senators
Akaka, Kennedy, Conrad and Dorgan, I introduce ``The Wakefield Act,''
also known as the ``Emergency Medical Services for Children Act of
2007.'' Since Senator Hatch and I worked toward authorization of EMSC
in 1984, this program has become the impetus for improving children's
emergency services Nationwide. From specialized training for emergency
care providers to ensuring ambulances and emergency departments have
state-of-the-art pediatric sized equipment, EMSC has served as the
vehicle for improving survival of our smallest and most vulnerable
citizens when accidents or medical emergencies threatened their lives.
It remains no secret that children present unique anatomic,
physiologic, emotional and developmental challenges to our primarily
adult-oriented emergency medical system. As has been said many times
before, children are not little adults. Evaluation and treatment must
take into account their special needs, or we risk letting them fall
through the gap between adult and pediatric care. The EMSC has bridged
that gap while fostering collaborative relationships among emergency
medical technicians, paramedics, nurses, emergency physicians,
surgeons, and pediatricians.
The Institute of Medicine's recently released study on Emergency Care
for Children, indicated that our Nation is not as well prepared as once
we thought. Only 6 percent of all emergency departments have the
essential pediatric supplies and equipment necessary to manage
pediatric emergencies. Many of the providers of emergency care have
received fragmented and little training in the skills necessary to
resuscitate this specialized population. Even our disaster preparedness
plans have not fully addressed the unique needs posed by children
injured in such events.
EMSC remains the only federal program dedicated to examining the best
ways to deliver various forms of care to children in emergency
settings. Re-authorization of EMSC will ensure that children's needs
will be given the due attention they deserve and that coordination and
expansion of services for victims of life-threatening illnesses and
injuries will be available throughout the United States.
I look forward to re-authorization of this important legislation and
the continued advances in our emergency healthcare delivery system.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 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. 60
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 ``Wakefield Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.
(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) There are 31,000,000 child and adolescent visits to the
nation's emergency departments every year, with children
under the age of 3 years accounting for most of these visits.
(2) Ninety percent of children requiring emergency care are
seen in general hospitals, not in free-standing children's
hospitals, with one-quarter to one-third of the patients
being children in the typical general hospital emergency
department.
(3) Severe asthma and respiratory distress are the most
common emergencies for pediatric patients, representing
nearly one-third of all hospitalizations among children under
the age of 15 years, while seizures, shock, and airway
obstruction are other common pediatric emergencies, followed
by cardiac arrest and severe trauma.
(4) Up to 20 percent of children needing emergency care
have underlying medical conditions such as asthma, diabetes,
sickle-cell disease, low birthweight, and bronchopulmonary
dysplasia.
(5) Significant gaps remain in emergency medical care
delivered to children, with 43 percent of hospitals lacking
cervical collars (used to stabilize spinal injuries) for
infants, less than half (47 percent) of hospitals with no
pediatric intensive care unit having a written transfer
agreement with a hospital that does have such a unit, one-
third of States lacking a physician available on-call 24
hours a day to provide medical direction to emergency medical
technicians or other non-physician emergency care providers,
and even those States with such availability lacking full
State coverage.
(6) Providers must be educated and trained to manage
children's unique physical and psychological needs in
emergency situations, and emergency systems must be equipped
with the resources needed to care for this especially
vulnerable population.
(7) The Emergency Medical Services for Children (EMSC)
Program under section 1910 of the Public Health Service Act
(42 U.S.C. 300w-9) is the only Federal program that focuses
specifically on improving the pediatric components of
emergency medical care.
(8) The EMSC Program promotes the nationwide exchange of
pediatric emergency medical care knowledge and collaboration
by those with an interest in such care and is depended upon
by Federal agencies and national organizations to ensure that
this exchange of knowledge and collaboration takes place.
(9) The EMSC Program also supports a multi-institutional
network for research in pediatric emergency medicine, thus
allowing providers to rely on evidence rather than anecdotal
experience when treating ill or injured children.
(10) States are better equipped to handle occurrences of
critical or traumatic injury due to advances fostered by the
EMSC program, with--
(A) forty-eight States identifying and requiring all EMSC-
recommended pediatric equipment on Advanced Life Support
ambulances;
(B) forty-four States employing pediatric protocols for
medical direction;
(C) forty-one States utilizing pediatric guidelines for
acute care facility identification, ensuring that children
get to the right hospital in a timely manner; and
(D) thirty-six of the forty-two States having statewide
computerized data collection systems now producing reports on
pediatric emergency medical services using statewide data.
(11) Systems of care must be continually maintained,
updated, and improved to ensure that research is translated
into practice, best practices are adopted, training is
current, and standards and protocols are appropriate.
(12) Now celebrating its twentieth anniversary, the EMSC
Program has proven effective over two decades in driving key
improvements in emergency medical services to children, and
should continue its mission to reduce child and youth
morbidity and mortality by supporting improvements in the
quality of all emergency medical and emergency surgical care
children receive.
(b) Purpose.--It is the purpose of this Act to reduce child
and youth morbidity and mortality by supporting improvements
in the quality of all emergency medical care children
receive.
SEC. 3. REAUTHORIZATION OF EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES FOR
CHILDREN PROGRAM.
Section 1910 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
300w-9) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``3-year period (with an
optional 4th year'' and inserting ``4-year period (with an
optional 5th year'';
(2) in subsection (d)--
(A) by striking ``and such sums'' and inserting ``such
sums''; and
(B) by inserting before the period the following:
``$23,000,000 for fiscal year 2008, and such sums as may be
necessary for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2011'';
(3) by redesignating subsections (b) through (d) as
subsections (c) through (e), respectively; and
(4) by inserting after subsection (a) the following:
``(b)(1) The purpose of the program established under this
section is to reduce child and youth morbidity and mortality
by supporting improvements in the quality of all emergency
medical care children receive, through the promotion of
projects focused on the expansion and improvement of such
services, including those in rural areas and those for
children with special healthcare needs. In carrying out this
purpose, the Secretary shall support emergency medical
services for children by supporting projects that--
``(A) develop and present scientific evidence;
``(B) promote existing and innovative technologies
appropriate for the care of children: or
``(C) provide information on health outcomes and
effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.
``(2) The program established under this section shall--
``(A) strive to enhance the pediatric capability of
emergency medical service systems originally designed
primarily for adults; and
``(B) in order to avoid duplication and ensure that Federal
resources are used efficiently and effectively, be
coordinated with all research, evaluations, and awards
related to emergency medical services for children
[[Page 142]]
undertaken and supported by the Federal Government.''.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 61. A bill to amend chapter 81 of title 5, United States Code, to
authorize the use of clinical social workers to conduct evaluations to
determine work-related emotional and mental illnesses; to the Committee
on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, today I introduce the Clinical Social
Workers' Recognition Act to correct a continuing problem in the Federal
Employees Compensation Act. This bill will also provide clinical social
workers the recognition they deserve as independent providers of
quality mental health care services.
Clinical social workers are authorized to independently diagnose and
treat mental illnesses through public and private health insurance
plans across the Nation. However, Title V of the United States Code,
does not permit the use of mental health evaluations conducted by
clinical social workers for use as evidence in determining workers'
compensation claims brought by federal employees. The bill I am
introducing corrects this problem.
It is a sad irony that federal employees may select a clinical social
worker through their health plans to provide mental health services,
but may not go to this same professional for workers' compensation
evaluations. The failure to recognize the validity of evaluations
provided by clinical social workers unnecessarily limits federal
employees' selection of a provider to conduct the workers' compensation
mental health evaluations. Lack of this recognition may well impose an
undue burden on Federal employees where clinical social workers are the
only available providers of mental health care.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 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. 61
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 ``Clinical Social Workers'
Recognition Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. EXAMINATIONS BY CLINICAL SOCIAL WORKERS FOR FEDERAL
WORKER COMPENSATION CLAIMS.
Section 8101 of title 5, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``and osteopathic
practitioners'' and inserting ``osteopathic practitioners,
and clinical social workers''; and
(2) in paragraph (3), by striking ``osteopathic
practitioners'' and inserting ``osteopathic practitioners,
clinical social workers,''.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 62. A bill to treat certain hospital support organizations as
qualified organizaitons for purposes of determining acquisition
indebtedness; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, the legislation I have introduced will
extend to qualified teaching hospital support organizations the
existing debt-financed safe harbor rule. Congress enacted that rule to
support the public service activities of tax-exempt schools,
universities, pension funds, and consortia of such institutions. Our
teaching hospitals require similar support.
A New York Times article on June 21, 2002, described the financial
problems which nonprofit hospitals are facing to modernize their
facilities and meet the growing demand for charitable medical care. The
problems have grown more urgent since that article appeared.
On November 22, 2006, the Wall Street Journal noted the rising
numbers of uninsured patients who fill hospital emergency rooms without
paying their bills. In 2005, 46.6 million Americans had no health
insurance. Compounding the growing demand for charitable care, new
safety and infection-prevention standards require hospitals to
undertake massive improvements.
As a result, the article stated, for-profit hospitals are moving from
older areas to affluent locations where residents can afford to pay for
treatment. These private hospitals, the reporter pointed out, typically
have no mandate for community service. In contrast, nonprofit hospitals
must fulfill a community service requirement. They must stretch their
resources to provide increased charitable care, update their
facilities, and maintain skilled staffing. Both the Wall Street Journal
and the New York Times noted the resulting closures of nonprofit
hospitals due to this financial strain.
The problem is particularly severe for teaching hospitals. As the
Times article said, nonprofit hospitals provide nearly all the
postgraduate medical education in the United States. Post-graduate
medical instruction is by nature not profitable. Instruction in the
treatment of mental disorders and trauma is especially costly.
Despite their financial problem the nation's nonprofit hospitals
strive to deliver a very high level of service. A study in the December
2006 issue of Archives of Internal Medicine had surveyed hospitals'
qualify of care in four areas of treatment. It found that nonprofit
hospitals consistently outperformed for-profit hospitals. It also found
that teaching hospitals had a higher level of performance in treatment
and diagnosis. It said that investment in technology and staffing leads
to better care. And it recommended that alternative payments and
sources of payments be considered to finance these improvements.
The success and financial constraints of nonprofit teaching hospitals
is evident in the work of the Queen's Health Systems in my State. This
146-year-old organization maintains the largest, private, nonprofit
hospital in Hawaii. It serves as the primary clinical teaching facility
for the University of Hawaii's medical residency programs in medicine,
general surgery, orthopedic surgery, obstetrics-gynecology, pathology,
and psychiatry. It conducts educational and training programs for
nurses and allied health personnel. It operates the only trauma unit as
well as the chief behavioral health program in the State. It maintains
clinics throughout Hawaii, health programs for Native Hawaiians, and a
small hospital on a rural, economically depressed island. Its medical
reference library is the largest in the State. Not the least, it
annually provides millions of dollars in uncompensated health services.
To help pay for these community benefits, the Queen's Health Systems,
as other nonprofit teaching hospitals, relies significantly on income
from its endowment.
In the past, the Congress has allowed tax-exempt schools, colleges,
universities, and pension funds to invest their endowment in real
estate so as to better meet their financial needs. Under the tax code
these organizations can incur debt for real estate investments without
triggering the tax on unrelated business activities.
If the Queen's Health Systems were part of a university, it could
borrow without incurring an unrelated business income tax. Not being
part of a university, however, a teaching hospital and its support
organization run into the tax code's debt financing prohibition.
Nonprofit teaching hospitals have the same if not more pressing needs
as universities, school, and pension trusts. The same safe harbor rule
should be extended to teaching hospitals.
My bill would allow the support organizations for qualified teaching
hospitals to engage in limited borrowing to enhance their endowment
income. The proposal for teaching hospitals is actually more restricted
than current law for schools, universities, and pension trusts. Under
safeguards developed by the Joint Committee on Taxation staff, a
support organization for a teaching hospital can not buy and develop
land on a commercial basis. The proposal is tied directly to the
organization endowment. The staff's revenue estimate show that the
provision with its general application will help a number a teaching
hospitals.
The U.S. Senate several times has acted favorably on this proposal.
The Senate adopted a similar provision in H.R. 1836 the Economic Growth
and Tax Relief Act of 2001. The House conferees on that bill, however,
objected that the provision was unrelated to the bill's focus on
individual tax relief and the conference deleted the provision
[[Page 143]]
from the final legislation. Subsequently, the Finance Committee
included the provision in H.R. 7 the CARE Act of 2002 and in S. 476 the
CARE Act of 2003 which the Senate passed. In the last Congress S. 6 the
Marriage, Opportunity, Relief, and Empowerment Act of 2005, which the
Senate leadership introduced, also included the proposal.
As the Senate Finance Committee's recent hearings show, substantial
health needs would go unmet if not for our charitable hospitals. It is
time for the Congress to assist the nation's teaching hospitals in
their charitable, educational service.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of my bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 62
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN HOSPITAL SUPPORT
ORGANIZATIONS AS QUALIFIED ORGANIZATIONS FOR
PURPOSES OF DETERMINING ACQUISITION
INDEBTEDNESS.
(a) In General.--Subparagraph (C) of section 514(c)(9) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to real property
acquired by a qualified organization) is amended by striking
``or'' at the end of clause (ii), by striking the period at
the end of clause (iii) and inserting ``; or'', and by adding
at the end the following new clause:
``(iv) a qualified hospital support organization (as
defined in subparagraph (I)).''.
(b) Qualified Hospital Support Organizations.--Paragraph
(9) of section 514(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is
amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(I) Qualified hospital support organizations.--For
purposes of subparagraph (C)(iv), the term `qualified
hospital support organization' means, with respect to any
eligible indebtedness (including any qualified refinancing of
such eligible indebtedness), a support organization (as
defined in section 509(a)(3)) which supports a hospital
described in section 119(d)(4)(B) and with respect to which--
``(i) more than half of its assets (by value) at any time
since its organization--
``(I) were acquired, directly or indirectly, by
testamentary gift or devise, and
``(II) consisted of real property, and
``(ii) the fair market value of the organization's real
estate acquired, directly or indirectly, by gift or devise,
exceeded 25 percent of the fair market value of all
investment assets held by the organization immediately prior
to the time that the eligible indebtedness was incurred.
For purposes of this subparagraph, the term `eligible
indebtedness' means indebtedness secured by real property
acquired by the organization, directly or indirectly, by gift
or devise, the proceeds of which are used exclusively to
acquire any leasehold interest in such real property or for
improvements on, or repairs to, such real property. A
determination under clauses (i) and (ii) of this subparagraph
shall be made each time such an eligible indebtedness (or the
qualified refinancing of such an eligible indebtedness) is
incurred. For purposes of this subparagraph, a refinancing of
such an eligible indebtedness shall be considered qualified
if such refinancing does not exceed the amount of the
refinanced eligible indebtedness immediately before the
refinancing.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to indebtedness incurred on or after the date of
the enactment of this Act.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 63. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to
remove the restriction that a clinical psychologist or clinical social
worker provide services in a comprehensive outpatient rehabilitation
facility to a patient only under the care of a physician; to the
Committee on Finance.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, today I introduce legislation to authorize
the autonomous functioning of clinical psychologists and clinical
social workers within the Medicare comprehensive outpatient
rehabilitation facility program.
In my judgment, it is unfortunate that Medicare requires clinical
supervision of the services provided by certain health professionals
and does not allow them to function to the full extent of their state
practice licenses. Those who need the services of outpatient
rehabilitation facilities should have access to a wide range of social
and behavioral science expertise. Clinical psychologists and clinical
social workers are recognized as independent providers of mental health
care services under the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program, the
TRICARE Military Health Program of the Uniformed Services, the Medicare
(Part B) Program, and numerous private insurance plans. This
legislation will ensure that these qualified professionals achieve the
same recognition under the Medicare comprehensive outpatient
rehabilitation facility program.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 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. 63
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 ``Autonomy for Psychologists
and Social Workers Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. REMOVAL OF RESTRICTION THAT A CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST
OR CLINICAL SOCIAL WORKER PROVIDE SERVICES IN A
COMPREHENSIVE OUTPATIENT REHABILITATION
FACILITY TO A PATIENT ONLY UNDER THE CARE OF A
PHYSICIAN.
(a) In General.--Section 1861(cc)(2)(E) of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(cc)(2)(E)) is amended by
striking ``physician'' and inserting ``physician, except that
a patient receiving qualified psychologist services (as
defined in subsection (ii)) may be under the care of a
clinical psychologist with respect to such services to the
extent permitted under State law and except that a patient
receiving clinical social worker services (as defined in
subsection (hh)(2)) may be under the care of a clinical
social worker with respect to such services to the extent
permitted under State law''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall apply to services provided on or after January 1, 2008.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 64. A bill to amend title VII of the Public Health Service Act to
ensure that social work students or social work schools are eligible
for support under certain programs to assist individuals in pursuing
health careers and programs of grants for training projects in
geriatrics, and to establish a social work training program to the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, on behalf of our Nation's clinical social
workers, I am introducing legislation to amend the Public Health
Service Act. This legislation would: 1. establish a new social work
training program, 2. ensure that social work students are eligible for
support under the Health Careers Opportunity Program, 3. provide social
work schools with eligibility for support under the Minority Centers of
Excellence programs, 4. permit schools offering degrees in social work
to obtain grants for training projects in geriatrics, and 5. ensure
that social work is recognized as a profession under the Public Health
Maintenance Organization Act.
Despite the impressive range of services social workers provide to
people of this nation, few federal programs exist to provide
opportunities for social work training in health and mental health
care.
Social workers have long provided quality mental health services to
our citizens and continue to be at the forefront of establishing
innovative programs to serve our disadvantaged populations. I believe
it is important to ensure that the special expertise social workers
possess continues to be available to the citizens of this nation. This
bill, by providing financial assistance to schools of social work and
social work students, acknowledges the long history and critical
importance of the services provided by social work professionals. I
believe it is time to provide them with the recognition they deserve.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 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. 64
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 ``Strengthen Social Work
Training Act of 2007''.
[[Page 144]]
SEC. 2. SOCIAL WORK STUDENTS.
(a) Health Professions Schools.--Section 736(g)(1)(A) of
the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 293(g)(1)(A)) is
amended by striking ``graduate program in behavioral or
mental health'' and inserting ``graduate program in
behavioral or mental health, including a school offering
graduate programs in clinical social work, or programs in
social work''.
(b) Scholarships.--Section 737(d)(1)(A) of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 293a(d)(1)(A)) is amended by
striking ``mental health practice'' and inserting ``mental
health practice (including graduate programs in clinical
psychology, graduate programs in clinical social work, or
programs in social work)''.
(c) Faculty Positions.--Section 738(a)(3) of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 293b(a)(3)) is amended by
striking ``offering graduate programs in behavioral and
mental health'' and inserting ``offering graduate programs in
behavioral and mental health, including graduate programs in
clinical psychology, graduate programs in clinical social
work, or programs in social work''.
SEC. 3. GERIATRICS TRAINING PROJECTS.
Section 753(b)(1) of the Public Health Service Act (42
U.S.C. 294c(b)(1)) is amended by inserting ``schools offering
degrees in social work,'' after ``teaching hospitals,''.
SEC. 4. SOCIAL WORK TRAINING PROGRAM.
Subpart 2 of part E of title VII of the Public Health
Service Act (42 U.S.C. 295 et seq.) is amended--
(1) by redesignating section 770 as section 770A;
(2) by inserting after section 769, the following:
``SEC. 770. SOCIAL WORK TRAINING PROGRAM.
``(a) Training Generally.--The Secretary may make grants
to, or enter into contracts with, any public or nonprofit
private hospital, any school offering programs in social
work, or to or with a public or private nonprofit entity that
the Secretary has determined is capable of carrying out such
grant or contract--
``(1) to plan, develop, and operate, or participate in, an
approved social work training program (including an approved
residency or internship program) for students, interns,
residents, or practicing physicians;
``(2) to provide financial assistance (in the form of
traineeships and fellowships) to students, interns,
residents, practicing physicians, or other individuals, who--
``(A) are in need of such assistance;
``(B) are participants in any such program; and
``(C) plan to specialize or work in the practice of social
work;
``(3) to plan, develop, and operate a program for the
training of individuals who plan to teach in social work
training programs; and
``(4) to provide financial assistance (in the form of
traineeships and fellowships) to individuals who are
participants in any such program and who plan to teach in a
social work training program.
``(b) Academic Administrative Units.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary may make grants to or
enter into contracts with schools offering programs in social
work to meet the costs of projects to establish, maintain, or
improve academic administrative units (which may be
departments, divisions, or other units) to provide clinical
instruction in social work.
``(2) Preference in making awards.--In making awards of
grants and contracts under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall
give preference to any qualified applicant for such an award
that agrees to expend the award for the purpose of--
``(A) establishing an academic administrative unit for
programs in social work; or
``(B) substantially expanding the programs of such a unit.
``(c) Duration of Award.--The period during which payments
are made to an entity from an award of a grant or contract
under subsection (a) may not exceed 5 years. The provision of
such payments shall be subject to annual approval by the
Secretary and subject to the availability of appropriations
for the fiscal year involved to make the payments.
``(d) Funding.--
``(1) Authorization of appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section
$10,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2008 through 2010.
``(2) Allocation.--Of the amounts appropriated under
paragraph (1) for a fiscal year, the Secretary shall make
available not less than 20 percent for awards of grants and
contracts under subsection (b).''; and
(3) in section 770A (as redesignated by paragraph (1)) by
inserting ``other than section 770,'' after ``carrying out
this subpart,''.
SEC. 5. CLINICAL SOCIAL WORKER SERVICES.
Section 1302 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
300e-1) is amended--
(1) in paragraphs (1) and (2), by inserting ``clinical
social worker,'' after ``psychologist,'' each place the term
appears;
(2) in paragraph (4)(A), by striking ``and psychologists''
and inserting ``psychologists, and clinical social workers'';
and
(3) in paragraph (5), by inserting ``clinical social
work,'' after ``psychology,''.
______
By Mr. INHOFE (for himself, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Lieberman, and Mr.
Feingold):
S. 65. A bill to modify the age-60 standard for certain pilots and
for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I rise today, as an experienced pilot over
age 60, along with my colleagues, Senator Stevens, Senator Lieberman
and Senator Feingold, to once again introduce a bill that will help end
age discrimination among commercial airline pilots. Our bill will
abolish the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) arcane Age 60 Rule
a regulation that has unjustly forced the retirement of airline pilots
the day they turn 60 for more than 45 years.
Our bipartisan bill called the ``Freedom to Fly Act'' would replace
the dated FAA rule with a new international standard adopted this past
November by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) which
allows pilots to fly to 65 as long as the copilot is under 60.
Since the adoption of the ICAO standard in November of this year,
foreign pilots have been flying and working in U.S. Airspace under this
new standard up to 65 years of age a privilege the FAA has not been
willing to grant to American pilots flying the same aircraft in the
same airspace.
This bill may seem familiar; I have introduced similar legislation in
the past two Congresses and I am dedicated to ensuring its passage this
year. And it has never been more urgent.
We cannot continue to allow our FAA to force the retirement of
America's most experienced commercial pilots at the ripe young age of
60 while they say to their counterparts flying for foreign flags
``Welcome to our airspace.''
Many of these great American pilots are veterans who have served our
country and the flying public for decades. Many of them have suffered
wage concessions and lost their pensions as the airline industry has
faced hard times and bankruptcies. But these American pilots are not
asking for a handout.
They are just saying to the FAA; ``Give me the same right you granted
our foreign counterparts with the stroke of a pen this November. Let us
continue to fly, continue to work, continue to contribute to the tax
rolls for an additional 5 years.'' We join them and echo their
sentiments to FAA Administrator Blakey. As far as we are concerned,
that is the least we can do for America's pilots, who are considered
the best and the safest pilots in the world.
Most nations have abolished mandatory age 60 retirement rules. Many
countries, including Canada, Australia, and New Zealand have no upper
age limit at all and consider an age-based retirement rule
discriminatory. Sadly though, the United States was one of only four
member countries of ICAO, along with Pakistan, Colombia, and France, to
dissent to the ICAO decision to increase the retirement age to 65 last
year.
The Age 60 Rule has no basis in science or safety and never has. The
Aerospace Medical Association says that ``There is insufficient medical
evidence to support restriction of pilot certification based upon age
alone.'' Similarly, the American Association of Retired Persons, Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission, the Seniors Coalition, and the
National Institute of Aging of NIH all agree that the Age 60 Rule is
simply age discrimination and should end. My colleagues and I agree.
When the rule was implemented in 1960 life expectancies were much
lower at just over 69 and a half years. Today they are much higher at
more than 77 years. The FAA's own data shows that pilots over age 60
are as safe as, and in some cases safer than, their younger
counterparts. In the process of adopting the new international
standard, ICAO studied more than 3,000 over-60 pilots from 64 nations,
totaling at least 15,000 pilot-years of flying experience and found the
risk of medical incapacitation ``a risk so low that it can be safely
disregarded.''
Furthermore, a recent economic study shows that allowing pilots to
fly to age 65 would save almost $1 billion per year in added Social
Security,
[[Page 145]]
Medicare, and tax payments and delayed Pension Benefit Guarantee
Corporation (PBGC) payments.
I am encouraged by the progress that has been made. In the 109th
Congress, the Senate Commerce Committee reported the modified bill with
the ICAO standard favorably and the Senate Transportation, Treasury,
the Judiciary, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Committee included a version of S. 65 in its bill. The
FAA recently convened an Aviation Rulemaking Committee to study the
issue of forced retirement. We have yet to see that report but it is
our understanding the report was persuasive enough that the
Administrator is considering a change in the rule now.
We are encouraged by that, but we also know that legislation will be
needed to direct the FAA to pursue these changes in a timely manner and
in a way that will protect companies and their unions from new lawsuits
that might arise as a result of the changes. Our bill accomplishes
that. Whether the FAA decides to change the rule on its own or not,
Congress needs to do the right thing and pass S. 65 to fully ensure
that our own American pilots have the same rights and privileges to
work at least until age 65 that were accorded to foreign pilots over
the age of 60 this fall.
I urge the rest of my colleagues to support the Freedom to Fly Act
and help us keep America's most experienced pilots in the air.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 66. A bill to require the Secretary of the Army to determine the
validity of the claims of certain Filipinos that they performed
military service on behalf of the United States during World War II; to
the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I am reintroducing legislation today that
would direct the Secretary of the Army to determine whether certain
nationals of the Philippine Islands performed military service on
behalf of the United States during World War II.
Our Filipino veterans fought side by side with Americans and
sacrificed their lives on behalf of the United States. This legislation
would confirm the validity of their claims and further allow qualified
individuals the opportunity to apply for military and veterans benefits
that, I believe, they are entitled to. As this population becomes
older, it is important for our Nation to extend its firm commitment to
the Filipino veterans and their families who participated in making us
the great Nation that we are today.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of my bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 66
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. DETERMINATIONS BY THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY.
(a) In General.--Upon the written application of any person
who is a national of the Philippine Islands, the Secretary of
the Army shall determine whether such person performed any
military service in the Philippine Islands in aid of the
Armed Forces of the United States during World War II which
qualifies such person to receive any military, veterans', or
other benefits under the laws of the United States.
(b) Information To Be Considered.--In making a
determination for the purpose of subsection (a), the
Secretary shall consider all information and evidence
(relating to service referred to in subsection (a)) that is
available to the Secretary, including information and
evidence submitted by the applicant, if any.
SEC. 2. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE.
(a) Issuance of Certificate of Service.--The Secretary of
the Army shall issue a certificate of service to each person
determined by the Secretary to have performed military
service described in section 1(a).
(b) Effect of Certificate of Service.--A certificate of
service issued to any person under subsection (a) shall, for
the purpose of any law of the United States, conclusively
establish the period, nature, and character of the military
service described in the certificate.
SEC. 3. APPLICATIONS BY SURVIVORS.
An application submitted by a surviving spouse, child, or
parent of a deceased person described in section 1(a) shall
be treated as an application submitted by such person.
SEC. 4. LIMITATION PERIOD.
The Secretary of the Army may not consider for the purpose
of this Act any application received by the Secretary more
than two years after the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 5. PROSPECTIVE APPLICATION OF DETERMINATIONS BY THE
SECRETARY OF THE ARMY.
No benefits shall accrue to any person for any period
before the date of the enactment of this Act as a result of
the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 6. REGULATIONS.
The Secretary of the Army shall prescribe regulations to
carry out sections 1, 3, and 4.
SEC. 7. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE SECRETARY OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS.
Any entitlement of a person to receive veterans' benefits
by reason of this Act shall be administered by the Department
of Veterans Affairs pursuant to regulations prescribed by the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
SEC. 8. DEFINITION.
In this Act, the term ``World War II'' means the period
beginning on December 7, 1941, and ending on December 31,
1946.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 67. A bill to amend title 10, United States Code, to permit former
members of the Armed Forces who have a service-connected disability
rated as total to travel on military aircraft in the same manner and to
the same extent as retired members of the Armed Forces are entitled to
travel on such aircraft; to the Committee on Armed Services.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing a bill which is
of great importance to a group of patriotic Americans. This legislation
is designed to extend space-available travel privileges on military
aircraft to those who have been totally disabled in the service of our
country.
Currently, retired members of the Armed Services are permitted to
travel on a space-available basis on non-scheduled military flights
within the continental United States, and on scheduled overseas flights
operated by the Military Airlift Command. My bill would provide the
same benefits for veterans with 100 percent service-connected
disabilities.
We owe these heroic men and women who have given so much to our
country a debt of gratitude. Of course, we can never repay them for the
sacrifices they have made on behalf of our Nation, but we can surely
try to make their lives more pleasant and fulfilling. One way in which
we can help is to extend military travel privileges to these
distinguished American veterans. I have received numerous letters from
all over the country attesting to the importance attached to this issue
by veterans. Therefore, I ask that my colleagues show their concern and
join me in saying ``thank you'' by supporting this legislation.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of my bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 67
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. TRAVEL ON MILITARY AIRCRAFT OF CERTAIN DISABLED
FORMER MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES.
(a) In General.--Chapter 53 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after section 1060b the
following new section:
``Sec. 1060c. Travel on military aircraft: certain disabled
former members of the armed forces
``The Secretary of Defense shall permit any former member
of the armed forces who is entitled to compensation under the
laws administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs for a
service-connected disability rated as total to travel, in the
same manner and to the same extent as retired members of the
armed forces, on unscheduled military flights within the
continental United States and on scheduled overseas flights
operated by the Air Mobility Command. The Secretary of
Defense shall permit such travel on a space-available
basis.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 1060b the following new item:
``1060c. Travel on military aircraft: certain disabled former members
of the armed forces.''.
______
By Mr. KOHL (for himself and Ms. Snowe):
S. 69. A bill to authorize appropriations for the Hollings
Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program, and
[[Page 146]]
for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise in support of the Kohl-Snowe
legislation which would fund the Manufacturing Extension Partnership,
MEP, for fiscal year 2008-fiscal year 2012. I am a long-time supporter
of the MEP program and believe manufacturing is crucial to the U.S.
economy. American manufacturers are a cornerstone of the American
economy and embody the best in American values. A healthy manufacturing
sector is key to better jobs, rising productivity and higher standards
of living in the United States. Every individual and industry depends
on manufactured goods. In addition, innovations and productivity gains
in the manufacturing sector provide benefits far beyond the products
themselves.
Small- and medium-sized manufacturers face unprecedented challenges
in today's global economy which threaten the existence of manufacturing
jobs in the United States. If it isn't China pirating our technologies
and promising a low-wage workforce, it is soaring heath care and energy
costs that cut into profits. Manufacturers today are seeking ways to
level the playing field so they can compete globally.
One way to level the playing field--and increase the competitiveness
of manufacturers--is through the MEP program. MEP streamlines
operations, integrates new technologies, shortens production times and
lowers costs, leading to improved efficiency by offering resources to
manufacturers, including organized workshops and consulting projects.
In Wisconsin, three of our largest corporations--John Deere, Harley-
Davidson, and Oshkosh Truck--are working with Wisconsin MEP centers to
develop domestic supply chains. I am proud to say that these companies
found it more profitable to work with small- and medium-sized Wisconsin
firms than to look overseas for cheap labor.
You would be hard pressed to find another program that has produced
the results that MEP has. In Wisconsin alone in fiscal year 2006, WMEP
reported 2,696 new or retained workers, sales of $163 million, cost
savings of $33 million, and plant and equipment investments of $37
million.
Manufacturing is an integral part of a web of inter-industry
relationships that create a stronger economy. Manufacturing sells goods
to other sectors in the economy and, in turn, buys products and
services from them. Manufacturing spurs demand for everything from raw
materials to intermediate components to software to financial, legal,
health, accounting, transportation, and other services in the course of
doing business.
The future of manufacturing in the United States will be largely
determined by how well small- and medium-sized companies cope with the
changes in today's global economy. To be successful, businesses need
state-of-the-art technologies to craft products more efficiently, a
skilled workforce to meet the demands of modern manufacturers and a
commitment from the government to provide the resources to allow
companies to remain competitive.
At a time when economic recovery and global competitiveness are
national priorities, I believe MEP continues to be a wise investment.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 70. A bill to restore the traditional day of observance of
Memorial Day, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, in our effort to accommodate many
Americans by making Memorial Day the last Monday in May, we have lost
sight of the significance of this day to our Nation. My bill would
restore Memorial Day to May 30 and authorize our flag to fly at half
mast on that day. In addition, this legislation would authorize the
President to issue a proclamation designating Memorial Day and Veterans
Day as days for prayer and ceremonies. This legislation would help
restore the recognition our veterans deserve for the sacrifices they
have made on behalf of our nation.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of my bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 70
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. RESTORATION OF TRADITIONAL DAY OF OBSERVANCE OF
MEMORIAL DAY.
(a) Designation of Legal Public Holiday.--Section 6103(a)
of title 5, United States Code, is amended by striking
``Memorial Day, the last Monday in May.'' and inserting the
following: ``Memorial Day, May 30.''.
(b) Observances and Ceremonies.--Section 116 of title 36,
United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``The last Monday in
May'' and inserting ``May 30''; and
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (3);
(B) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (5); and
(C) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new
paragraph (4):
``(4) calling on the people of the United States to observe
Memorial Day as a day of ceremonies for showing respect for
American veterans of wars and other military conflicts;
and''.
(c) Display of Flag.--Section 6(d) of title 4, United
States Code, is amended by striking ``the last Monday in
May;'' and inserting ``May 30;''.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 71. A bill to amend title 10, United States Code, to authorize
certain disabled former prisoners of war to use Department of Defense
commissary and exchange stores; to the Committee on Armed Services.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing legislation to
enable those former prisoners of war who have been separated honorably
from their respective services and who have been rated as having a 30
percent service-connected disability to have the use of both the
military commissary and post exchange privileges. While I realize it is
impossible to adequately compensate one who has endured long periods of
incarceration at the hands of our Nation's enemies, I do feel this
gesture is both meaningful and important to those concerned because it
serves as a reminder that our Nation has not forgotten their
sacrifices.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of my bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 71
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. USE OF COMMISSARY AND EXCHANGE STORES BY CERTAIN
DISABLED FORMER PRISONERS OF WAR.
(a) In General.--Chapter 54 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after section 1064 the
following new section:
``Sec. 1064a. Use of commissary and exchange stores by
certain disabled former prisoners of war
``(a) In General.--Under regulations prescribed by the
Secretary of Defense, former prisoners of war described in
subsection (b) may use commissary and exchange stores.
``(b) Covered Individuals.--Subsection (a) applies to any
former prisoner of war who--
``(1) separated from active duty in the armed forces under
honorable conditions; and
``(2) has a service-connected disability rated by the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs at 30 percent or more.
``(c) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) The term `former prisoner of war' has the meaning
given that term in section 101(32) of title 38.
``(2) The term `service-connected' has the meaning given
that term in section 101(16) of title 38.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 1064 the following new item:
``1064a. Use of commissary and exchange stores by certain disabled
former prisoners of war.''.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 72. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to
provide improved reimbursement for clinical social worker services
under the medicare program; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to
amend Title XVIII of the Social Security Act to correct discrepancies
in the reimbursement of clinical social workers
[[Page 147]]
covered through Medicare, Part B. The three proposed changes contained
in this legislation clarify the current payment process for clinical
social workers and establish a reimbursement methodology for the
profession that is similar to other health care professionals
reimbursed through the Medicare program.
First, this legislation sets payment for clinical social worker
services according to a fee schedule established by the Secretary.
Second, it explicitly states that services and supplies furnished by a
clinical social worker are a covered Medicare expense, just as these
services are covered for other mental health professionals in Medicare.
Third, the bill allows clinical social workers to be reimbursed for
services provided to a client who is hospitalized.
Clinical social workers are valued members of our health care
provider network. They are legally regulated in every State of the
Nation and are recognized as independent providers of mental health
care throughout the health care system. It is time to correct the
disparate reimbursement treatment of this profession under Medicare.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 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. 72
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 ``Equity for Clinical Social
Workers Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. IMPROVED REIMBURSEMENT FOR CLINICAL SOCIAL WORKER
SERVICES UNDER MEDICARE.
(a) In General.--Section 1833(a)(1)(F)(ii) of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395l(a)(1)(F)(ii)) is amended to
read as follows: ``(ii) the amount determined by a fee
schedule established by the Secretary,''.
(b) Definition of Clinical Social Worker Services
Expanded.--Section 1861(hh)(2) of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 1395x(hh)(2)) is amended by striking ``services
performed by a clinical social worker (as defined in
paragraph (1))'' and inserting ``such services and such
services and supplies furnished as an incident to such
services performed by a clinical social worker (as defined in
paragraph (1))''.
(c) Clinical Social Worker Services Not to Be Included in
Inpatient Hospital Services.--Section 1861(b)(4) of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(b)(4)) is amended by
striking ``and services'' and inserting ``clinical social
worker services, and services''.
(d) Treatment of Services Furnished in Inpatient Setting.--
Section 1832(a)(2)(B)(iii) of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 1395k(a)(2)(B)(iii)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``and services'' and inserting ``clinical
social worker services, and services''; and
(2) by adding ``and'' at the end.
(e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to payments made for clinical social worker
services furnished on or after January 1, 2008.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 73. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to
provide for patient protection by establishing minimum nurse staffing
ratios at certain Medicare providers, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Finance.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, today I introduce the Registered Nurse
Safe Staffing Act. For over four decades I have been a committed
supporter of nurses and the delivery of safe patient care. While
enforceable regulations will help to ensure patient safety, the
complexity and variability of today's hospitals require that staffing
patterns be determined at the hospital and unit level, with the
professional input of registered nurses. More than a decade of research
demonstrates that nurse staff levels and the skill mix of nursing staff
directly affect the clinical outcomes of hospitalized patients. Studies
show that when there are more registered nurses, there are lower
mortality rates, shorter lengths of stay, reduced costs, and fewer
complications.
A study published in the Journal of The American Medical Association
found that the risks of patient mortality rose by 7 percent for every
additional patient added to the average nurse's workload. In the midst
of a nursing shortage and increasing financial pressures, hospitals
often find it difficult to maintain adequate staffing. While nursing
research indicates that adequate registered nurse staffing is vital to
the health and safety of patients, there is no standardized public
reporting mechanism, nor enforcement of adequate staffing plans. The
only regulations addressing nursing staff exists vaguely in Medicare
Conditions of Participation which states: ``The nursing service must
have an adequate number of licensed registered nurses, licensed
practice (vocational) nurse, and other personnel to provide nursing
care to all patients as needed''.
This bill will require Medicare Participating Hospitals to develop
and maintain reliable and valid systems to determine sufficient
registered nurse staffing. Given the demands that the healthcare
industry faces today, it is our responsibility to ensure that patients
have access to adequate nursing care. However, we must ensure that the
decisions by which care is provided are made by the clinical experts,
the registered nurses caring for these patients. Support of this bill
supports our nation's nurses during a critical shortage, but more
importantly, works to ensure the safety of their patients.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 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. 73
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 ``Registered Nurse Safe
Staffing Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) There are hospitals throughout the United States that
have inadequate staffing of registered nurses to protect the
well-being and health of the patients.
(2) Studies show that the health of patients in hospitals
is directly proportionate to the number of registered nurses
working in the hospital.
(3) There is a critical shortage of registered nurses in
the United States.
(4) The effect of that shortage is revealed in unsafe
staffing levels in hospitals.
(5) Patient safety is adversely affected by these unsafe
staffing levels, creating a public health crisis.
(6) Registered nurses are being required to perform
professional services under conditions that do not support
quality health care or a healthful work environment for
registered nurses.
(7) As a payer for inpatient and outpatient hospital
services for individuals entitled to benefits under the
Medicare program established under title XVIII of the Social
Security Act, the Federal Government has a compelling
interest in promoting the safety of such individuals by
requiring any hospital participating in such program to
establish minimum safe staffing levels for registered nurses.
SEC. 3. ESTABLISHMENT OF MINIMUM STAFFING RATIOS BY MEDICARE
PARTICIPATING HOSPITALS.
(a) Requirement of Medicare Provider Agreement.--Section
1866(a)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1395cc(a)(1)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (U), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in subparagraph (V), by striking the period at the end
and inserting ``, and''; and
(3) by inserting after subparagraph (V) the following new
subparagraph:
``(W) in the case of a hospital, to meet the requirements
of section 1890.''.
(b) Requirements.--Title XVIII of the Social Security Act
is amended by inserting after section 1889 the following new
section:
``STAFFING REQUIREMENTS FOR MEDICARE PARTICIPATING HOSPITALS
``Sec. 1890. (a) Establishment of Staffing System.--
``(1) In general.--Each participating hospital shall adopt
and implement a staffing system that ensures a number of
registered nurses on each shift and in each unit of the
hospital to ensure appropriate staffing levels for patient
care.
``(2) Staffing system requirements.--Subject to paragraph
(3), a staffing system adopted and implemented under this
section shall--
``(A) be based upon input from the direct care-giving
registered nurse staff or their exclusive representatives, as
well as the chief nurse executive;
``(B) be based upon the number of patients and the level
and variability of intensity of care to be provided, with
appropriate consideration given to admissions, discharges,
and transfers during each shift;
``(C) account for contextual issues affecting staffing and
the delivery of care, including architecture and geography of
the environment and available technology;
[[Page 148]]
``(D) reflect the level of preparation and experience of
those providing care;
``(E) account for staffing level effectiveness or
deficiencies in related health care classifications,
including but not limited to, certified nurse assistants,
licensed vocational nurses, licensed psychiatric technicians,
nursing assistants, aides, and orderlies;
``(F) reflect staffing levels recommended by specialty
nursing organizations;
``(G) establish upwardly adjustable registered nurse-to-
patient ratios based upon registered nurses' assessment of
patient acuity and existing conditions;
``(H) provide that a registered nurse shall not be assigned
to work in a particular unit without first having established
the ability to provide professional care in such unit; and
``(I) be based on methods that assure validity and
reliability.
``(3) Limitation.--A staffing system adopted and
implemented under paragraph (1) may not--
``(A) set registered-nurse levels below those required by
any Federal or State law or regulation; or
``(B) utilize any minimum registered nurse-to-patient ratio
established pursuant to paragraph (2)(G) as an upper limit on
the staffing of the hospital to which such ratio applies.
``(b) Reporting, and Release to Public, of Certain Staffing
Information.--
``(1) Requirements for hospitals.--Each participating
hospital shall--
``(A) post daily for each shift, in a clearly visible
place, a document that specifies in a uniform manner (as
prescribed by the Secretary) the current number of licensed
and unlicensed nursing staff directly responsible for patient
care in each unit of the hospital, identifying specifically
the number of registered nurses;
``(B) upon request, make available to the public--
``(i) the nursing staff information described in
subparagraph (A); and
``(ii) a detailed written description of the staffing
system established by the hospital pursuant to subsection
(a); and
``(C) submit to the Secretary in a uniform manner (as
prescribed by the Secretary) the nursing staff information
described in subparagraph (A) through electronic data
submission not less frequently than quarterly.
``(2) Secretarial responsibilities.--The Secretary shall--
``(A) make the information submitted pursuant to paragraph
(1)(C) publicly available, including by publication of such
information on the Internet site of the Department of Health
and Human Services; and
``(B) provide for the auditing of such information for
accuracy as a part of the process of determining whether an
institution is a hospital for purposes of this title.
``(c) Recordkeeping; Data Collection; Evaluation.--
``(1) Recordkeeping.--Each participating hospital shall
maintain for a period of at least 3 years (or, if longer,
until the conclusion of pending enforcement activities) such
records as the Secretary deems necessary to determine whether
the hospital has adopted and implemented a staffing system
pursuant to subsection (a).
``(2) Data collection on certain outcomes.--The Secretary
shall require the collection, maintenance, and submission of
data by each participating hospital sufficient to establish
the link between the staffing system established pursuant to
subsection (a) and--
``(A) patient acuity from maintenance of acuity data
through entries on patients' charts;
``(B) patient outcomes that are nursing sensitive, such as
patient falls, adverse drug events, injuries to patients,
skin breakdown, pneumonia, infection rates, upper
gastrointestinal bleeding, shock, cardiac arrest, length of
stay, and patient readmissions;
``(C) operational outcomes, such as work-related injury or
illness, vacancy and turnover rates, nursing care hours per
patient day, on-call use, overtime rates, and needle-stick
injuries; and
``(D) patient complaints related to staffing levels.
``(3) Evaluation.--Each participating hospital shall
annually evaluate its staffing system and establish minimum
registered nurse staffing ratios to assure ongoing
reliability and validity of the system and ratios. The
evaluation shall be conducted by a joint management-staff
committee comprised of at least 50 percent of registered
nurses who provide direct patient care.
``(d) Enforcement.--
``(1) Responsibility.--The Secretary shall enforce the
requirements and prohibitions of this section in accordance
with the succeeding provisions of this subsection.
``(2) Procedures for receiving and investigating
complaints.--The Secretary shall establish procedures under
which--
``(A) any person may file a complaint that a participating
hospital has violated a requirement or a prohibition of this
section; and
``(B) such complaints are investigated by the Secretary.
``(3) Remedies.--If the Secretary determines that a
participating hospital has violated a requirement of this
section, the Secretary--
``(A) shall require the facility to establish a corrective
action plan to prevent the recurrence of such violation; and
``(B) may impose civil money penalties under paragraph (4).
``(4) Civil money penalties.--
``(A) In general.--In addition to any other penalties
prescribed by law, the Secretary may impose a civil money
penalty of not more than $10,000 for each knowing violation
of a requirement of this section, except that the Secretary
shall impose a civil money penalty of more than $10,000 for
each such violation in the case of a participating hospital
that the Secretary determines has a pattern or practice of
such violations (with the amount of such additional penalties
being determined in accordance with a schedule or methodology
specified in regulations).
``(B) Procedures.--The provisions of section 1128A (other
than subsections (a) and (b)) shall apply to a civil money
penalty under this paragraph in the same manner as such
provisions apply to a penalty or proceeding under section
1128A.
``(C) Public notice of violations.--
``(i) Internet site.--The Secretary shall publish on the
Internet site of the Department of Health and Human Services
the names of participating hospitals on which civil money
penalties have been imposed under this section, the violation
for which the penalty was imposed, and such additional
information as the Secretary determines appropriate.
``(ii) Change of ownership.--With respect to a
participating hospital that had a change in ownership, as
determined by the Secretary, penalties imposed on the
hospital while under previous ownership shall no longer be
published by the Secretary of such Internet site after the 1-
year period beginning on the date of change in ownership.
``(e) Whistleblower Protections.--
``(1) Prohibition of discrimination and retaliation.--A
participating hospital shall not discriminate or retaliate in
any manner against any patient or employee of the hospital
because that patient or employee, or any other person, has
presented a grievance or complaint, or has initiated or
cooperated in any investigation or proceeding of any kind,
relating to the staffing system or other requirements and
prohibitions of this section.
``(2) Relief for prevailing employees.--An employee of a
participating hospital who has been discriminated or
retaliated against in employment in violation of this
subsection may initiate judicial action in a United States
district court and shall be entitled to reinstatement,
reimbursement for lost wages, and work benefits caused by the
unlawful acts of the employing hospital. Prevailing employees
are entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs
associated with pursuing the case.
``(3) Relief for prevailing patients.--A patient who has
been discriminated or retaliated against in violation of this
subsection may initiate judicial action in a United States
district court. A prevailing patient shall be entitled to
liquidated damages of $5,000 for a violation of this statute
in addition to any other damages under other applicable
statutes, regulations, or common law. Prevailing patients are
entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs associated
with pursuing the case.
``(4) Limitation on actions.--No action may be brought
under paragraph (2) or (3) more than 2 years after the
discrimination or retaliation with respect to which the
action is brought.
``(5) Treatment of adverse employment actions.--For
purposes of this subsection--
``(A) an adverse employment action shall be treated as
retaliation or discrimination; and
``(B) the term `adverse employment action' includes--
``(i) the failure to promote an individual or provide any
other employment-related benefit for which the individual
would otherwise be eligible;
``(ii) an adverse evaluation or decision made in relation
to accreditation, certification, credentialing, or licensing
of the individual; and
``(iii) a personnel action that is adverse to the
individual concerned.
``(f) Relationship to State Laws.--Nothing in this section
shall be construed as exempting or relieving any person from
any liability, duty, penalty, or punishment provided by any
present or future law of any State or political subdivision
of a State, other than any such law which purports to require
or permit the doing of any act which would be an unlawful
practice under this title.
``(g) Relationship To Conduct Prohibited Under the National
Labor Relations Act or Other Collective Bargaining Laws.--
Nothing in this section shall be construed as permitting
conduct prohibited under the National Labor Relations Act or
under any other Federal, State, or local collective
bargaining law.
``(h) Regulations.--The Secretary shall promulgate such
regulations as are appropriate and necessary to implement
this section.
``(i) Definitions.--In this section:
[[Page 149]]
``(1) Participating hospital.--The term `participating
hospital' means a hospital that has entered into a provider
agreement under section 1866.
``(2) Registered nurse.--The term `registered nurse' means
an individual who has been granted a license to practice as a
registered nurse in at least 1 State.
``(3) Unit.--The term `unit' of a hospital is an
organizational department or separate geographic area of a
hospital, such as a burn unit, a labor and delivery room, a
post-anesthesia service area, an emergency department, an
operating room, a pediatric unit, a stepdown or intermediate
care unit, a specialty care unit, a telemetry unit, a general
medical care unit, a subacute care unit, and a transitional
inpatient care unit.
``(4) Shift.--The term `shift' means a scheduled set of
hours or duty period to be worked at a participating
hospital.
``(5) Person.--The term `person' means 1 or more
individuals, associations, corporations, unincorporated
organizations, or labor unions.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect on January 1, 2008.
______
By Mr. AKAKA (for himself and Mr. Lautenberg):
S. 82. A bill to reaffirm the authority of the Comptroller General to
audit and evaluate the programs, activities, and financial transactions
of the intelligence community, and for other purposes; to the Select
Committee on Intelligence.
Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise to introduce ``The Intelligence
Community Audit Act of 2007,'' with Senator Lautenberg. This
legislation reaffirms the authority of the Comptroller General of the
United States and head of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to
audit the financial transactions and evaluate the programs and
activities of the intelligence community (IC).
Our bill is identical to S. 3968, introduced in the last Congress by
Senator Lautenberg and myself, and to H.R. 6252, introduced in the
House by Representative Bennie Thompson.
The need for more effective oversight and accountability of our
intelligence community has never been greater. In the war against
terrorism, intelligence agencies are both the spear and the shield: the
first line of our attack and of our defense. Failure can bear terrible
consequences.
Congress has two responsibilities: the first is to ensure that our
intelligence community is performing its mission effectively, and the
second is to ensure that in performing its mission, the intelligence
community is not violating the constitutional rights of individual
Americans.
Yet the ability of Congress to ensure that the intelligence community
has sufficient resources and capability of performing its mission has
never been more in question. The establishment of the Department of
Homeland Security and the passage of the Intelligence Reform and
Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 created a new institutional landscape
littered by new intelligence agencies with ever increasing demands and
responsibilities. These new agencies became members of an already
populated club of organizations performing intelligence related
functions.
The intelligence community today consists of 19 different agencies or
components: the Office of the Director of National Intelligence;
Central Intelligence Agency; Department of Defense; Defense
Intelligence Agency; National Security Agency; Departments of the Army,
Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force; Department of State; Department of
Treasury; Department of Energy; Department of Justice; Federal Bureau
of Investigation; National Reconnaissance Office; National Geospatial-
Intelligence Agency; Coast Guard; Department of Homeland Security, and
the Drug Enforcement Administration.
Congress too has increased its oversight responsibilities. Committees
other than the intelligence committees of the House and Senate have
jurisdiction over such departments as Homeland Security, State,
Defense, Justice, Energy, Treasury, and Commerce.
But all of these ``non-intelligence'' committees are restricted in
their ability to conduct effective oversight of intelligence function
of the agencies under their jurisdiction because, unfortunately, the
intelligence community stonewalls the Government Accountability Office
(GAO) when committees of jurisdiction request that GAO investigate
problems. This is happening despite the clear responsibility of
Congress to ensure that these agencies are operating effectively to
protect America.
It is inconceivable that the GAO--the audit arm of the U.S.
Congress--has been unable to conduct evaluations of the CIA for over 40
years. If the GAO had been able to conduct basic auditing functions of
the CIA, perhaps some of the problems that were so clearly exposed
following the terrorist attacks in September 2001 would have been
resolved. And yet, it is extraordinary that five years after 9-11, the
same problems persist.
Two recent incidents have made this situation disturbingly clear. At
a hearing entitled, ``Access Delayed: Fixing the Security Clearance
Process, Part II,'' before my Subcommittee on Oversight of Government
Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia, on
November 9, 2005, GAO was asked about steps it would take to ensure
that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), the Office of Management
and Budget, and the intelligence community met the goals and objectives
outlined in the OPM security clearance strategic plan. Fixing the
security clearance process, which is on GAO's high-risk list, is
essential to our national security. But as GAO observed in a written
response to a question raised by Senator Voinovich, ``while we have the
authority to do such work, we lack the cooperation we need to get our
job done in that area.''
A similar case arose in response to a GAO investigation for the
Senate Homeland Security Committee and the House Government Reform
Committee on how agencies are sharing terrorism-related and sensitive
but unclassified information. The report, entitled ``Information
Sharing, the Federal Government Needs to Establish Policies and
Processes for Sharing Terrorism-Related and Sensitive but Unclassified
Information'' (GAO-06-385), was released in March 2006.
At a time when Congress is criticized by members of the 9-11
Commission for failing to implement its recommendations, we should
remember that improving terrorism information sharing among agencies
was one of the critical recommendations of the Commission. Moreover,
the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 mandated
the sharing of terrorism information through the creation of an
Information Sharing Environment. Yet, when asked by GAO for comments on
the GAO report, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence
refused, stating that ``the review of intelligence activities is beyond
GAO's purview.''
A Congressional Research Service memorandum entitled, ``Overview of
`Classified' and `Sensitive but Unclassified' Information,'' concludes,
``it appears that pseudo-classification markings have, in some
instances, had the effect of deterring information sharing for homeland
security.''
Unfortunately I have more examples that predate the post 9-11
reforms. Indeed, in July 2001, in testimony, entitled ``Central
Intelligence Agency, Observations on GAO Access to Information on CIA
Programs and Activities'' (GAO-01-975T) before the House Committee on
Government Reform, the GAO noted, as a practical manner, ``our access
is generally limited to obtaining information on threat assessments
when the CIA does not perceives [sic] our audits as oversight of its
activities.''
The bill I introduce today does not detract from the authority of the
intelligence committees. In fact, the language makes explicit that the
Comptroller General may conduct an audit or evaluation of intelligence
sources and methods or covert actions only upon the request of the
intelligence committees or at the request of the congressional majority
or minority leaders. The measure also prescribes for the security of
the information collected by the Comptroller General.
As both House Rule 48 and Senate Resolution 400 establishing the
intelligence oversight committees state, ``Nothing in this [charter]
shall be construed as amending, limiting, or otherwise changing the
authority of any
[[Page 150]]
standing committee of the, House/Senate, to obtain full and prompt
access to the product of the intelligence activities of any department
or agency of the Government relevant to a matter otherwise within the
jurisdiction of such committee.''
Despite this clear and unambiguous statement, the ability of non-
intelligence committees to obtain information, no matter how vital to
improving the security of our nation, has been restricted by the
various elements of the intelligence community.
My bill reaffirms the authority of the Comptroller General to conduct
audits and evaluations--other than those relating to sources and
methods, or covert actions--relating to the management and
administration of elements of the intelligence community in areas such
as strategic planning, financial management, information technology,
human capital, knowledge management, information sharing, and change
management for other relevant committees of the Congress.
As I mentioned earlier in my statement, Congress also has the
responsibility of ensuring that unfettered intelligence collection does
not trample civil liberties. New technologies and new personal
information data bases threaten our individual right to a secure
private life, free from unlawful government invasion. We must ensure
that private information collected by the intelligence community is not
misused and is secure. Intelligence agencies have a legitimate mission
to protect the country against potential threats. However, Congress'
role is to ensure that their mission remains legitimate.
Attached is a detailed description of the legislation that I ask
unanimous consent be printed in the Record.
I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the legislation I am
introducing be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the material was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
Report Language
Section 1 of the Act provides that the Act may be cited as
the ``Intelligence Community Audit Act of 2007''.
Section 2(a) of the Act adds a new Section (3523a) to title
31, United States Code, with respect to the Comptroller
General's authority to audit or evaluate activities of the
intelligence community. New Section 3523a(b)(1) reaffirms
that the Comptroller General possesses, under his existing
statutory authority, the authority to perform audits and
evaluations of financial transactions, programs, and
activities of elements of the intelligence community and to
obtain access to records for the purposes of such audits and
evaluations. Such work could be done at the request of the
congressional intelligence committees or any committee of
jurisdiction of the House of Representatives or Senate
(including the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate), or at the Comptroller
General's initiative, pursuant to the existing authorities
referenced in new Section 3523a(b)(1). New Section
3523a(b)(2) further provides that these audits and
evaluations under the Comptroller General's existing
authority may include, but are not limited to, matters
relating to the management and administration of elements of
the intelligence community in areas such as strategic
planning, financial management, information technology, human
capital, knowledge management, information sharing, and
change management. These audits and evaluations would be
accompanied by the safeguards that the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) has in place to protect
classified and other sensitive information, including
physical security arrangements, classification and
sensitivity reviews, and restricted distribution of certain
products.
This reaffirmation is designed to respond to Executive
Branch assertions that GAO does not have the authority to
review activities of the intelligence community. To the
contrary, GAO's current statutory audit and access
authorities permit it to evaluate a wide range of activities
in the intelligence community. To further ensure that GAO's
authorities are appropriately construed in the future, the
new Section 3523a(e), which is described below, makes clear
that nothing in this or any other provision of law shall be
construed as restricting or limiting the Comptroller
General's authority to audit and evaluate, or obtain access
to the records of, elements of the intelligence community
absent specific statutory language restricting or limiting
such audits, evaluations, or access to records.
New Section 3523a(c)(1) provides that Comptroller General
audits or evaluations of intelligence sources and methods, or
covert actions may be undertaken only upon the request of the
Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate, or the
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of
Representatives, or the majority or the minority leader of
the Senate or the House of Representatives. This limitation
is intended to recognize the heightened sensitivity of audits
and evaluations relating to intelligence sources and methods,
or covert actions.
The new Section 3523a(c)(2)(A) provides that the results of
such audits or evaluations under Section 3523a(c) may be
disclosed only to the original requestor, the Director of
National Intelligence, and the head of the relevant element
of the intelligence community. Since the methods GAO uses to
communicate the results of its audits or evaluations vary,
this provision restricts the dissemination of GAO's findings
under Section 3523a(c), whether through testimony, oral
briefings, or written reports, to only the original
requestor, the Director of National Intelligence, and the
head of the relevant element of the intelligence community.
Similarly, under new Section 3523a(c)(2)(B), the Comptroller
General may only provide information obtained in the course
of such an audit or evaluation to the original requestor, the
Director of National Intelligence, and the head of the
relevant element of the intelligence community.
The new Section 3523a(c)(3)(A) provides that
notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Comptroller
General may inspect records of any element of the
intelligence community relating to intelligence sources and
methods, or covert actions in order to perform audits and
evaluations pursuant to Section 3523a(c). The Comptroller
General's access extends to any records which belong to, or
are in the possession and control of, the element of the
intelligence community regardless of who was the original
owner of such information. Under new Section 3523a(c)(3)(B),
the Comptroller General may enforce the access rights
provided under this subsection pursuant to section 716 of
title 31. However, before the Comptroller General files a
report pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 716(b)(1), the Comptroller
General must consult with the original requestor concerning
the Comptroller General's intent to file a report.
The new Section 3523a(c)(4) reiterates the Comptroller
General's obligations to protect the confidentiality of
information and adds special safeguards to protect records
and information obtained from elements of the intelligence
community for audits and evaluations performed under Section
3523a(c). For example, pursuant to new Section
3523a(c)(4)(B), the Comptroller General is to maintain on
site, in facilities furnished by the element of the
intelligence community subject to audit or evaluation, all
workpapers and records obtained for the audit or evaluation.
Under new Section 3523a(c)(4)(C), the Comptroller General is
directed, after consulting with the Select Committee on
Intelligence of the Senate and the Permanent Select Committee
on Intelligence of the House of Representatives, to establish
procedures to protect from unauthorized disclosure all
classified and other sensitive information furnished to the
Comptroller General under Section 3523a(c). Under new Section
3523a(c)(4)(D), prior to initiating an audit or evaluation
under Section 3523a(c), the Comptroller General shall provide
the Director of National Intelligence and the head of the
relevant element of the intelligence community with the name
of each officer and employee of the Government Accountability
Office who has obtained appropriate security clearances.
The new Section 3523a(d) provides that elements of the
intelligence community shall cooperate fully with the
Comptroller General and provide timely responses to
Comptroller General requests for documentation and
information.
The new Section 3523a(e) makes clear that nothing in this
or any other provision of law shall be construed as
restricting or limiting the Comptroller General's authority
to audit and evaluate, or obtain access to the records of,
elements of the intelligence community absent specific
statutory language restricting or limiting such audits,
evaluations, or access to records.
____
Congressional Research Service,
July 18, 2006.
From: Harold C. Relyea, Specialist in American National
Government, Government and Finance Division.
Subject: Overview of ``Classified'' and ``Sensitive but
Unclassified'' Information.
Prescribed in various ways, federal policies may require
the protection of, or a privileged status for, particular
kinds of information. This memorandom provides a brief
introduction to, and overview of, two categories of such
information policy. The first category is demarcated largely
in a single policy instrument--a presidential executive
order--with a clear focus and in considerable detail: the
classification of national security information in terms of
three degrees of harm the disclosure of such information
could cause to the nation, resulting in Confidential, Secret,
and Top Secret designations. The second category is, by
contrast with the first, much
[[Page 151]]
broader in terms of the kinds of information it covers, to
the point of even being nebulous in some instances, and is
expressed in various instruments, the majority of which are
non-statutory: the marking of sensitive but unclassified
(SBU) information for protective management, although its
public disclosure may be permissible pursuant to the Freedom
of Information Act (FOIA). These two categories are reviewed
in the discussion set out below.
security classified information
Current security classification arrangements, prescribed by
an executive order of the President, trace their origins to a
March 1940 directive issued by President Franklin D.
Roosevelt as E.O. 8381. This development was probably
prompted somewhat by desires to clarify the authority of
civilian personnel in the national defense community to
classify information, to establish a broader basis for
protecting military information in view of growing global
hostilities, and to manage better a discretionary power
seemingly of increasing importance to the entire executive
branch. Prior to this 1940 order, information had been
designated officially secret by armed forces personnel
pursuant to Army and Navy general orders and regulations. The
first systematic procedures for the protection of national
defense information, devoid of special markings, were
established by War Department General Orders No. 3 of
February 1912. Records determined to be ``confidential'' were
to be kept under lock, ``accessible only to the officer to
whom intrusted.'' Serial numbers were issued for all such
``confidential'' materials, with the numbers marked on the
documents, and lists of same kept at the offices from which
they emanated. With the enlargement of the armed forces after
the entry of the United States into World War I, the registry
system was abandoned and a tripartite system of
classification markings was inaugurated in November 1917 with
General Order No. 64 of the General Headquarters of the
American Expenditionary Force.
The entry of the United States into World War II prompted
some additional arrangements for the protection of
information pertaining to the nation's security. Personnel
cleared to work on the Manhattan Project for the production
of the atomic bomb, for instance, in committing themselves
not to disclose protected information improperly, were
``required to read and sign either the Espionage Act or a
special secrecy agreement,'' establishing their awareness of
their secrecy obligations and a fiduciary trust which, if
breached, constituted a basis for their dismissal.
A few years after the conclusion of World War II, President
Harry S. Truman, in February 1950, issued E.O. 10104, which,
while superseding E.O. 8381, basically reiterated its text,
but added a fourth Top Secret classification designation to
existing Restricted, Confidential, and Secret markings,
making American information security categories consistent
with those of our allies. At the time of the promulgation of
this order, however, plans were underway for a complete
overhaul of the classification program, which would result in
a dramatic change in policy.
E.O. 10290, issued in September 1951, introduced three
sweeping innovations in security classification policy.
First, the order indicated the Chief Executive was relying
upon ``the authority vested in me by the Constitution and
statutes, and as President of the United States'' in issuing
the directive. This formula appeared to strengthen the
President's discretion to make official secrecy policy: it
intertwined his responsibility as Commander in Chief with the
constitutional obligation to ``take care that the laws be
faithfully executed.'' Second, information was now classified
in the interest of ``national security,'' a somewhat new, but
nebulous, concept, which, in the view of some, conveyed more
latitude for the creation of official secrets. It replaced
the heretofore relied upon ``national defense'' standard for
classification. Third, the order extended classified
authority to nonmilitary entitie throughout the executive
branch, to be exercised by, presumably, but not explicitly
limited to, those having some role in ``national security''
policy.
The broad discretion to create official secrets granted by
E.O. 10290 engendered widespread criticism from the public
and the press. In response, President Dwight D. Eisenhower,
shortly after his election to office, instructed Attorney
General Herbert Brownell to review the order with a view to
revising or rescinding it. The subsequent recommendation was
for a new directive, which was issued in November 1953 as
E.O. 10501. It withdrew classification authority from 28
entities, limited this discretion in 17 other units to the
agency head, returned to the ``national defense'' standard
for applying secrecy, eliminated the ``Restricted'' category,
which was the lowest level of protection, and explicitly
defined the remaining three classification areas to prevent
their indiscriminate use.
Thereafter, E.O. 10501, with slight amendment, prescribed
operative security classification policy and procedure for
the next two decades. Successor orders built on this reform.
These included E.O. 11652, issued by President Richard M.
Nixon in March 1972, followed by E.O. 12065, promulgated by
President Jimmy Carter in June 1978. For 30 years, these
classification directives narrowed the bases and discretion
for assigning official secrecy to executive branch documents
and materials. Then, in April 1982, this trend was reversed
with E.O. 12356, issued by President Ronald Reagan. This
order expanded the categories of classifiable information,
mandated that information falling within these categories be
classified, authorized the reclassification of previously
declassified documents, admonished classifiers to err on the
side classification, and eliminated automatic
declassification arrangements.
President William Clinton returned security classification
policy and procedure to the reform trend of the Eisenhower,
Nixon, and Carter Administrations with E.O. 12958 in April
1995. Adding impetus to the development and issuance of the
new order were changing world conditions: the democratization
of many eastern European countries, the demise of the Soviet
Union, and the end of the Cold War. Accountability and cost
considerations were also significant influences. In 1985, the
temporary Department of Defense (DOD) Security Review
Commission, chaired by retired General Richard G. Stilwell,
declared that there were ``no verifiable figures as to the
amount of classified material produced in DOD and in defense
industry each year.'' Nonetheless, it concluded that ``too
much information appears to be classified and much at higher
levels than is warranted.'' In October 1993, the cost of the
security classification program became clearer when the
General Accounting Office (GAO) reported that it was ``able
to identify government-wide costs directly applicable to
national security information totaling over $350 million for
1992.'' After breaking this figure down--it included only $6
million for declassification work--the report added that
``the U.S. government also spends additional billions of
dollars annually to safeguard information, personnel, and
property.'' E.O. 12958 set limits for the duration of
classification, prohibited the reclassification of properly
declassified records, authorized government employees to
challenge the classification status of records, reestablished
the balancing test of E.O. 12065 weighing the need to protect
information vis-a-vis the public interest in its disclosure,
and created two review panels--one on classification and
declassification actions and one to advise on policy and
procedure.
Most recently, in March 2003, President George W. Bush
issued E.O. 13292, amending E.O. 12958. Among the changes
made by this order were adding infrastructure vulnerabilities
or capabilities, protection services relating to national
security, and weapons of mass destruction to the categories
of classifiable information; easing the reclassification of
declassified records; postponing the automatic
declassification of protected records 25 or more years old,
beginning in mid-April 2003 to the end of December 2006;
eliminating the requirement that agencies prepare plans for
declassifying records; and permitting the Director of Central
Intelligence to block declassification actions of the
Interagency Security Classification Appeals Panel, unless
overruled by the President.
The security classification program has evolved during the
past 66 years. One may not agree with all of its rules and
requirements. but attention to detail in its policy and
procedure result in a significant management regime. The
operative executive order, as amended, defines its principal
terms. Those who are authorized to exercise original
classification authority are identified. Exclusive categories
of classifiable information are specified, as are the terms
of the duration of classification, as well as classification
prohibitions and limitations. Classified information is
required to be marked appropriately along with the identity
of the original classifier, the agency or office of origin,
and a date or event for declassification. Authorized holders
of classified information who believe that its protected
status is improper are ``encouraged and expected'' to
challenge that status through prescribed arrangements.
Mandatory declassification reviews are also authorized to
determine if protected records merit continued classification
at their present level, a lower level, or at all.
Unsuccessful classification challenges and mandatory
declassification reviews are subject to review by the
Intragency Security Classification Appeals Panel. General
restrictions on access to classified information are
prescribed, as are distribution controls for classified
information. The Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO)
within the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA) is mandated to provide central management and
oversight of the security classification program. If the
director of this entity finds that a violation of the order
or its implementing directives has occurred, it must be
reported to the head of the agency or to the appropriate
senior agency official so that corrective steps, if
appropriate, may be taken
While Congress, thus far, has elected not to create
statutorily mandated security classification policy and
procedures, the option to do so has been explored in the
past, and its legislative authority to do so has been
recognized by the Supreme Court. Congress, however, has
established protections for certain
[[Page 152]]
kinds of information--such as Restricted Data in the Atomic
Energy Acts of 1946 and 1954, and inte1ligence sources and
methods in the National Security Act of 1947--which have been
realized through security classification arrangements. It has
acknowledged properly applied security classification as a
basis for withholding records sought pursuant to the Freedom
of Information Act. Also, with a view to efficiency and
economy, as well as effective records management, committees
of Congress, on various occasions, have conducted oversight
of security classification policy and practice, and have been
assisted by GAO and CRS in this regard.
Sensitive but Unclassified Information
The widespread existence and use of information control
markings other than those prescribed for the security
classification of information came to congressional attention
in March 1972 when a subcommittee of what is now the House
Committee on Government Reform launched the first oversight
hearings on the administration and operation of the Freedom
of Information Act (FOIA). Enacted in 1966, FOIA had become
operative in July 1967. In the early months of 1972, the
Nixon Administration was developing new security
classification policy and procedure, which wou1d be
prescribed in E.O. 11652, issued in early March. Preparatory
to this hearing, the panel had surveyed the departments and
agencies in August 1971, asking, among other questions,
``What legend is used by your agency to identify records
which are not classifiable under Executive Order 10501 [the
operative order at the time] but which are not to be made
available outside the government?'' Of 58 information control
markings identified in response to this question, the most
common were For Official Use Only (11 agencies); Limited
Official Use (nine agencies); Official Use Only (eight
agencies); Restricted Data (five agencies); Administratively
Restricted (four agencies); Formerly Restricted Data (four
agencies); and Nodis, or no dissemination (four agencies).
Seven other markings were used by two agencies in each case.
A CRS review of the agency responses to the control markings
question prompted the following observation.
Often no authority is cited for the establishment or origin
of these labels; even when some reference is provided it is a
handbook, manual, administrative order, or a circular but not
statutory authority. Exceptions to this are the Atomic Energy
Commission, the Defense Department and the Arms Control and
Disarmament Agency. These agencies cite the Atomic Atomic
Energy Act, N.A.T.O. related laws, and international
agreements as a basis for certain additional labels. The Arms
Control and Disarmament Agency acknowledged it honored and
adopted State and Defense Department labels.
Over three decades later, it appears that approximately the
same number of these information control markings are in use;
that the majority of them are administratively, not
statutorily, prescribed; and that many of them have an
inadequate management regime, particularly when compared with
the detailed arrangements which govern the management of
classified information. A recent press account illustrates
another problem. In late January 2005, GCN Update, the
online, electronic news service of Government Computer News,
reported that ``dozens of classified Homeland Security
Department documents'' had been accidently made available on
a public Internet site for several days due to an apparent
security glitch at the Department of Energy. Describing the
contents of the compromised materials and reactions to the
breach, the account stated the ``documents were marked `for
official use only,' the lowest secret-level classification.''
The documents, of course, were not security classified,
because the marking cited is not authorized by E.O. 12958.
Interestingly, however, in view of the fact that this
misinterpretation appeared in a story to which three
reporters contributed, perhaps it reflects, to some extent,
the current confusion of these information control markings
with security classification designations.
Broadly considering the contemporary situation regarding
information control markings, a recent information security
report by the JASON Program Office of the MITRE Corporation
proffered the following assessment.
The status of sensitive information outside of the present
classification system is murkier than ever. . . . ``Sensitive
but unclassified'' data is increasingly defined by the eye of
the beholder. Lacking in definition, it is correspondingly
lacking in policies and procedures for protecting (or not
protecting) it, and regarding how and by whom it is generated
and used.
A contemporaneous Heritage Foundation report appeared to
agree with this appraisal, saying:
The process for classifying secret information in the
federal government is disciplined and explicit. The same
cannot be said for unclassified but security-related
information for which there is no usable definition, no
common understanding about how to control it, no agreement on
what significance it has for U.S. national security, and no
means for adjudicating concerns regarding appropriate levels
of protection.
Concerning the current Sensitive but Unclassified (SBU)
marking, a 2004 report by the Federal Research Division of
the Library of Congress commented that guidelines for its use
are needed, and noted that ``a uniform legal definition or
set of procedures applicable to all Federal government
agencies does not now exist.'' Indeed, the report indicates
that SBU has been utilized in different contexts with little
precision as to its scope or meaning, and, to add a bit of
chaos to an already confusing situation, is ``often referred
to as Sensitive Homeland Security Information.''
Assessments of the variety, management, and impact of
information control markings, other than those prescribed for
the classification of national security information, have
been conducted by CRS, GAO, and the National Security
Archive, a private sector research and resource center
located at The George Washington University. In March 2006,
GAO indicated that, in a recent survey, 26 federal agencies
reported using 56 different information control markings to
protect sensitive information other than classified national
security material. That same month, the National Security
Archive offered that, of 37 agencies surveyed, 24 used 28
control markings based on internal policies, procedures, or
practices, and eight used 10 markings based on statutory
authority. These numbers are important in terms of the
variety of such markings. GAO explained this dimension of the
management problem.
[T]here are at least 13 agencies that use the designation
For Official Use Only [FOUO], but there are at least five
different definitions of FOUO. At least seven agencies or
agency components use the term Law Enforcement Sensitive
(LES), including the U.S. Marshals Service, the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS), the Department of Commerce, and the
Office of Personnel Management (OPM). These agencies gave
differing definitions for the term. While DHS does not
formally define the designation, the Department of Commerce
defines it to include information pertaining to the
protection of senior government officials, and OPM defines it
as unclassified information used by law enforcement personnel
that requires protection against unauthorized disclosure to
protect the sources and methods of investigative activity,
evidence, and the integrity of pretrial investigative
reports.
Apart from the numbers, however, is another aspect of the
management problem, which GAO described in the following
terms.
There are no governmentwide policies or procedures that
describe the basis on which agencies should use most of these
sensitive but unclassified designations, explain what the
different designations mean across agencies, or ensure that
they will be used consistently from one agency to another. In
this absence, each agency determines what designations to
apply to the sensitive but unclassified information it
develops or shares.
These markings also have implications in another regard.
The importance of information sharing for combating terrorism
and realizing homeland security was emphasized by the
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United
States. That the variously identified and marked forms of
sensitive but unclassified (SBU) information could be
problematic with regard to information sharing was recognized
by Congress when fashioning the Homeland Security Act of
2002. Section 892 of that statute specifically directed the
President to prescribe and implement procedures for the
sharing of information by relevant federal agencies,
including the accommodation of ``homeland security
information that is sensitive but unclassified.'' On July 29,
2003, the President assigned this responsibility largely to
the Secretary of Homeland Security. Nothing resulted. The
importance of information sharing was reinforced two years
later in the report of the Commission on the Intelligence
Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass
Destruction. Congress again responded by mandating the
creation of an Information Sharing Environment (ISE) when
legislating the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention
Act of 2004. Preparatory to implementing the ISE provisions,
the President issued a December 16, 2005, memorandum
recognizing the need for standardized procedures for SBU
information and directing department and agency officials to
take certain actions relative to that objective. In May 2006,
the newly appointed manager of the ISE agreed with a March
GAO assessment that, oftentimes, SBU information, designated
as such with some marking, was not being shared due to
concerns about the ability of recipients to adequately
protect it. In brief, it appears that pseudo-classification
markings have, in some instances, had the effect of deterring
information sharing for homeland security purposes.
Congressional overseers have probed executive use and
management of information control markings other than those
prescribed for the classification of national security
information, and the extent to which they result in ``pseudo-
classification'' or a form of overclassification. Relevant
remedial legislation proposed during the 109th Congress
includes two bills (H.R. 2331 and H.R. 5112) containing
sections which would require the Archivist of the United
States to prepare a detailed report regarding the number,
use, and management of these information control markings and
submit it to specified congressional committees, and to
promulgate regulations banning the use of these
[[Page 153]]
markings and otherwise establish standards for information
control designations established by statute or an executive
order relating to the classification of national security
information. A section in the Department of Homeland Security
appropriations legislation (H.R. 5441), as approved by the
House, would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to
revise DHS MD (Management Directive) 11056 to include (1)
provision that information that is three years old and not
incorporated in a current, active transportation security
directive or security plan shall be determined automatically
to be releasable unless, for each specific document, the
Secretary makes a written determination that identifies a
compelling reason why the information must remain Sensitive
Security Information (SS1); (2) common and extensive examples
of the individual categories of SSI cited in order to
minimize and standardize judgment in the application of SSI
marking; and (3) provision that, in all judicial proceedings
where the judge overseeing the proceedings has adjudicated
that a party needs to have access to SSI, the party shall be
deemed a covered person for purposes of access to the SSI at
issue in the case unless TSA or DHS demonstrates a compelling
reason why the specific individual presents a risk of harm to
the nation. A May 25, 2006, statement of administration
policy on the bill strongly opposed the section, saying it
``would jeopardize an important program that protects
Sensitive Security Information (SSI) from public release by
deeming it automatically releaseable in three years,
potentially conflict with requirements of the Privacy and
Freedom of Information Acts, and negate statutory provisions
providing original jurisdiction for lawsuits challenging. the
designation of SSI materials in the U.S. Courts of Appeals.''
The statement further indicated that the section would create
a burdensome review process'' for the Secretary of Homeland
Security and would result in different statutory requirements
being applied to SSI programs administered by the Departments
of Homeland Security and Transportation.''
____
Congressional Research Service,
Washington, DC., September 14, 2006.
From: Alfred Cumming, Specialist in Intelligence and National
Security, Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division.
Subject: Congressional Oversight of Intelligence.
This memorandum examines the intelligence oversight
structure established by Congress in the 1970s, including the
creation of the congressional select intelligence committees
by the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate,
respectively. It also looks at the intelligence oversight
role that Congress reserved for congressional committees
other than the intelligence committees; examines certain
existing statutory procedures that govern how the executive
branch is to keep the congressional intelligence committees
informed of U.S. intelligence activities; and looks at the
circumstances under which the two intelligence committees are
expected to keep congressional standing committees, as well
as both chambers, informed of intelligence activities.
If can be of further assistance, please call at 707-7739.
Background
In the wake of congressional investigations into
Intelligence Community activities in the mid-1970s, the U.S.
Senate in 1976 created a select committee on intelligence to
conduct more effective oversight on a continuing basis. The
U.S. House of Representatives established its own
intelligence oversight committee the following year.
Until the two intelligence committees were created, other
congressional standing committees--principally the Senate and
House Armed Services and Appropriations committees--shared
responsibility for overseeing the intelligence community.
Although willing to cede primary jurisdiction over the
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to the two new select
intelligence committees, these congressional standing
committees wanted to retain jurisdiction over the
intelligence activities of the other departments and agencies
they oversaw. According to one observer, the standing
committees asserted their jurisdictional prerogatives for two
reasons--to protect ``turf,'' but also to provide ``a hedge
against the possibility that the newly launched experiment in
oversight might go badly.''
intelligence committees; statutory obligations
Under current statute, the President is required to ensure
that the congressional intelligence committees are kept
``fully and currently informed'' of U.S. intelligence
activities, including any ``significant anticipated
intelligence activity,'' and the President and the
intelligence committees are to establish any procedures as
may be necessary to carry out these provisions.
The statute, however, stipulates that the intelligence
committees in turn are responsible for alerting the
respective chambers or congressional standing committees of
any intelligence activities requiring further attention. The
intelligence committees are to carry out this responsibility
in accordance with procedures established by the House of
Representatives and the Senate, in consultation with the
Director of National Intelligence, in order to protect
against unauthorized disclosure of classified information,
and all information relating to sources and methods.
The statute stipulates that: ``each of the congressional
intelligence committees shall promptly call to the attention
of its respective House, or to any appropriate committee or
committees of its respective House, any matter relating to
intelligence activities requiring the attention of such House
or such committee or committees.
This provision was included in statute after being
specifically requested in a letter from then Senate Foreign
Relations Chairman Frank Church and Ranking Minority Member
Jacob Javits in an Apr. 30, 1980 letter to then-intelligence
committee Chairman Birch Bayh and Vice Chairman Barry
Goldwater.
Intelligence Committee Obligations Under Resolution
In an apparent effort to address various concerns relating
to committee jurisdiction, the House of Representatives and
the Senate, in the resolutions establishing each of the
intelligence committees, included language preserving
oversight roles for those standing committees with
jurisdiction over matters affected by intelligence
activities.
Specifically, each intelligence committee's resolution
states that: ``Nothing in this [Charter] shall be construed
as prohibiting or otherwise restricting the authority of any
other committee to study and review any intelligence activity
to the extent that such activity directly affects a matter
otherwise within the jurisdiction of such committee.''
Both resolutions also stipulate that:
Nothing in this [charter] shall be construed as amending,
limiting, or otherwise changing the authority of any standing
committee of the [House/Senate] to obtain full and prompt
access to the product of the intelligence activities of any
department or agency of the Government relevant to a matter
otherwise within the jurisdiction of such committee.
Finally, both charters direct that each intelligence
committee alert the appropriate standing committees, or the
respective chambers, of any matter requiring attention. The
charters state:
The select committee, for the purposes of accountability to
the [House/Senate] shall make regular and periodic reports to
the [House/Senate] on the nature and extent of the
intelligence activities of the various departments and
agencies of the United States. Such committee shall promptly
call to the attention of the [House/Senate] or to any other
appropriate committee or committees of the [House/Senate] any
matters requiring the attention of the [House/Senate] or such
other appropriate committee or committees.
Cross-over Membership
Both resolutions also direct that the membership of each
intelligence committee include members who serve on the four
standing committees that historically have been involved in
intelligence oversight. The respective resolutions designate
the following committees as falling in this category:
Appropriations, Armed Services, Judiciary, and the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee and the House International
Relations Committee.
Although each resolution directs that such cross-over
members be designated, neither specifies whether cross-over
members are to play any additional role beyond serving on the
intelligence committees. For example, neither resolution
outlines whether cross-over members are to inform colleagues
on standing committees they represent. Rather, each
resolution directs only that the ``intelligence committee''
shall promptly call such matters to the attention of standing
committees and the respective chambers if the committees
determine that they require further attention by those
entities.
Summary Conclusions
Although the President is statutorily obligated to keep the
congressional intelligence committees fully and currently
informed of intelligence activities, the statute obligates
the intelligence committees to inform the respective
chambers, or standing committees, of such activities, if
either of the two committees determine that further oversight
attention is required.
Further, resolutions establishing the two intelligence
committees make clear that the intelligence committees share
intelligence oversight responsibilities with other standing
committees, to the extent that certain intelligence
activities affect matters that fall under the jurisdiction of
a committee other than the intelligence committees.
Finally, the resolutions establishing the intelligence
committees provide for the designation of ``cross-over''
members representing certain standing committees that played
a role in intelligence oversight prior to the establishment
of the intelligence committees in the 1970s. The resolutions,
however, do not specify what role, if any, these ``cross-
over'' members play in keeping standing committees on which
they serve informed of certain intelligence activities.
Rather, each resolution states that the respective
intelligence committee shall make that determination.
[[Page 154]]
____
S. 82
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 ``Intelligence Community Audit
Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. COMPTROLLER GENERAL AUDITS AND EVALUATIONS OF
ACTIVITIES OF ELEMENTS OF THE INTELLIGENCE
COMMUNITY.
(a) Reaffirmation of Authority; Audits of Intelligence
Community Activities.--Chapter 35 of title 31, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after section 3523 the
following:
``Sec. 3523a. Audits of intelligence community; audit
requesters
``(a) In this section, the term `element of the
intelligence community' means an element of the intelligence
community specified in or designated under section 3(4) of
the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 401a(4)).
``(b) Congress finds that--
``(1) the authority of the Comptroller General to perform
audits and evaluations of financial transactions, programs,
and activities of elements of the intelligence community
under sections 712, 717, 3523, and 3524, and to obtain access
to records for purposes of such audits and evaluations under
section 716, is reaffirmed; and
``(2) such audits and evaluations may be requested by any
committee of jurisdiction (including the Committee on
Homeland Security of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of
the Senate), and may include matters relating to the
management and administration of elements of the intelligence
community in areas such as strategic planning, financial
management, information technology, human capital, knowledge
management, information sharing (including information
sharing by and with the Department of Homeland Security), and
change management.
``(c)(1) The Comptroller General may conduct an audit or
evaluation of intelligence sources and methods or covert
actions only upon request of the Select Committee on
Intelligence of the Senate or the Permanent Select Committee
on Intelligence of the House of Representatives, or the
majority or the minority leader of the Senate or the House of
Representatives.
``(2)(A) Whenever the Comptroller General conducts an audit
or evaluation under paragraph (1), the Comptroller General
shall provide the results of such audit or evaluation only to
the original requestor, the Director of National
Intelligence, and the head of the relevant element of the
intelligence community.
``(B) The Comptroller General may only provide information
obtained in the course of an audit or evaluation under
paragraph (1) to the original requestor, the Director of
National Intelligence, and the head of the relevant element
of the intelligence community.
``(3)(A) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
Comptroller General may inspect records of any element of the
intelligence community relating to intelligence sources and
methods, or covert actions in order to conduct audits and
evaluations under paragraph (1).
``(B) If in the conduct of an audit or evaluation under
paragraph (1), an agency record is not made available to the
Comptroller General in accordance with section 716, the
Comptroller General shall consult with the original requestor
before filing a report under subsection (b)(1) of that
section.
``(4)(A) The Comptroller General shall maintain the same
level of confidentiality for a record made available for
conducting an audit under paragraph (1) as is required of the
head of the element of the intelligence community from which
it is obtained. Officers and employees of the Government
Accountability Office are subject to the same statutory
penalties for unauthorized disclosure or use as officers or
employees of the intelligence community element that provided
the Comptroller General or officers and employees of the
Government Accountability Office with access to such records.
``(B) All workpapers of the Comptroller General and all
records and property of any element of the intelligence
community that the Comptroller General uses during an audit
or evaluation under paragraph (1) shall remain in facilities
provided by that element of the intelligence community.
Elements of the intelligence community shall give the
Comptroller General suitable and secure offices and
furniture, telephones, and access to copying facilities, for
purposes of audits and evaluations under paragraph (1).
``(C) After consultation with the Select Committee on
Intelligence of the Senate and with the Permanent Select
Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives,
the Comptroller General shall establish procedures to protect
from unauthorized disclosure all classified and other
sensitive information furnished to the Comptroller General or
any representative of the Comptroller General for conducting
an audit or evaluation under paragraph (1).
``(D) Before initiating an audit or evaluation under
paragraph (1), the Comptroller General shall provide the
Director of National Intelligence and the head of the
relevant element with the name of each officer and employee
of the Government Accountability Office who has obtained
appropriate security clearance and to whom, upon proper
identification, records, and information of the element of
the intelligence community shall be made available in
conducting the audit or evaluation.
``(d) Elements of the intelligence community shall
cooperate fully with the Comptroller General and provide
timely responses to Comptroller General requests for
documentation and information.
``(e) Nothing in this section or any other provision of law
shall be construed as restricting or limiting the authority
of the Comptroller General to audit and evaluate, or obtain
access to the records of, elements of the intelligence
community absent specific statutory language restricting or
limiting such audits, evaluations, or access to records.''.
(b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of
sections for chapter 35 of title 31, United States Code, is
amended by inserting after the item relating to section 3523
the following:
``3523a. Audits of intelligence community; audits and requesters.''.
______
By Mr. McCAIN (for himself, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Biden, and Mr.
Lieberman):
S. 83. A bill to provide increased rail transportation security; to
the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to be joined today by
Senators Snowe, Biden, and Lieberman in introducing the Rail Security
Act of 2007. This legislation is nearly identical to the rail security
measures approved by the Senate during both the 108th and 109th
Congresses. Unfortunately, the House of Representatives has yet to act
on rail security legislation. I remain hopeful that rail security will
be made a top priority for the 110th Congress.
We have taken important steps and expended considerable resources to
secure the homeland since 9/11. I think all would agree that air travel
is safer than it was five years ago. And, we have worked to address
port security in a comprehensive manner. However, we need to do more to
better secure other transportation modes, a fact well documented by the
9/11 Commission. Unfortunately, only relatively modest resources have
been dedicated to rail security in recent years. As a result, our
Nation's transit system, Amtrak, and the freight railroads remain
vulnerable to terrorist attacks.
The Rail Security Act would authorize a total of almost $1.2 billion
dollars for rail security. More than half of this funding would be
authorized to complete tunnel safety and security improvements at New
York's Penn Station, which is used by over 500,000 transit, commuter,
and intercity passengers each workday. The legislation would also
establish a grant program to encourage security enhancements by the
freight railroads, Amtrak, shippers of hazardous materials, and local
governments with responsibility for passenger stations. It would help
to address identified security weaknesses in a manner that also seeks
to protect the taxpayers' interests.
As we continue fight the War on Terror, we need to do all we can to
address our vulnerabilities. We have witnessed the tragic attacks on
rail systems in other countries, including the cities of London, Mumbai
and Madrid, and the devastating consequences of those attacks. It is
essential that we move expeditiously to protect all the modes of
transportation from potential attack, and this legislation will help to
do just that.
As I mentioned earlier, the Senate has consistently supported
legislation to promote rail security. Most recently, rail security
provisions were adopted last Fall as part of the port security
legislation. But again, the House failed to allow these important
security provisions to move ahead, and the provisions were stripped
from the conference agreement. As a result, our rail network continues
to remain vulnerable to terrorist attack. That is unacceptable in my
judgement.
I urge the Senate to move quickly to again pass this important
legislation.
______
Mr. McCAIN (for himself, Mr. Stevens, and Mr. Dorgan):
[[Page 155]]
S. 84. A bill to establish a United States Boxing Commission to
administer the Act, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to be joined by
Senators Stevens and Dorgan in introducing the Professional Boxing
Amendments Act of 2007. This legislation is virtually identical to a
measure approved unanimously by the Senate in 2005. I remain committed
to moving the Professional Boxing Amendments Act through the Senate and
I trust that my colleagues will once again vote favorably on this
important legislation. Simply put, this legislation would better
protect professional boxing from the fraud, corruption, and ineffective
regulation that have plagued the sport for far too many years, and that
have devastated physically and financially many of our Nation's
professional boxers.
For almost a decade, Congress has made efforts to improve the sport
of professional boxing and for very good reason. With rare exception,
professional boxers come from the lowest rung on our economic ladder.
Often they are the least educated and most exploited athletes in our
nation. The Professional Boxing Safety Act of 1996 and the Muhammad Ali
Boxing Reform Act of 2000 established uniform health and safety
standards for professional boxers, as well as basic protections for
boxers against the sometimes coercive, exploitative, and unethical
business practices of promoters, managers, and sanctioning
organizations. But further action is needed.
The Professional Boxing Amendments Act would strengthen existing
Federal boxing law by improving the basic health and safety standards
for professional boxers, establishing a centralized medical registry to
be used by local commissions to protect boxers, reducing the arbitrary
practices of sanctioning organizations, and enhancing the uniformity
and basic standards for professional boxing contracts. Most
importantly, this legislation would establish a Federal regulatory
entity to oversee professional boxing and set basic uniform standards
for certain aspects of the sport.
Current law has improved to some extent the state of professional
boxing. However, I remain concerned, as do many others, that the sport
remains at risk. In 2003, the Government Accountability Office (GAO)
spent more than six months studying ten of the country's busiest State
and tribal boxing commissions. Government auditors found that many
State and tribal boxing commissions still do not comply with Federal
boxing law, and that there is a troubling lack of enforcement by both
Federal and State officials.
Ineffective and inconsistent oversight of professional boxing has
contributed to the continuing scandals, controversies, unethical
practices, and unnecessary deaths in the sport. These problems have led
many in professional boxing to conclude that the only solution is an
effective and accountable Federal boxing commission. The Professional
Boxing Amendments Act would create such an entity.
Professional boxing remains the only major sport in the United States
that does not have a strong, centralized association, league, or other
regulatory body to establish and enforce uniform rules and practices.
Because a powerful few benefit greatly from the current system of
patchwork compliance and enforcement of Federal boxing law, a national
self-regulating organization though preferable to Federal government
oversight is not a realistic option.
This bill would establish the United States Boxing Commission, USBC
or Commission. The Commission would be responsible for protecting the
health, safety, and general interests of professional boxers. The USBC
would also be responsible for ensuring uniformity, fairness, and
integrity in professional boxing. More specifically, the Commission
would administer Federal boxing law and coordinate with other Federal
regulatory agencies to ensure that this law is enforced; oversee all
professional boxing matches in the United States; and work with the
boxing industry and local commissions to improve the safety, integrity,
and professionalism of professional boxing in the United States.
The USBC would also license boxers, promoters, managers, and
sanctioning organizations. The Commission would have the authority to
revoke such a license for violations of Federal boxing law, to stop
unethical or illegal conduct, to protect the health and safety of a
boxer, or if the revocation is otherwise in the public interest.
Mr. President, it is important to state clearly and plainly for the
record that the purpose of the USBC is not to interfere with the daily
operations of State and tribal boxing commissions. Instead, the
Commission would work in consultation with local commissions, and it
would only exercise its authority when reasonable grounds exist for
such intervention. In point of fact, the Professional Boxing Amendments
Act states explicitly that it would not prohibit any boxing commission
from exercising any of its powers, duties, or functions with respect to
the regulation or supervision of professional boxing to the extent not
inconsistent with the provisions of Federal boxing law.
Let there be no doubt, however, of the very basic and pressing need
in professional boxing for a Federal boxing commission. The
establishment of the USBC would address that need. The problems that
plague the sport of professional boxing undermine the credibility of
the sport in the eyes of the public and--more importantly--compromise
the safety of boxers. The Professional Boxing Amendments Act provides
an effective approach to curbing these problems. I urge my colleagues
to support this legislation.
______
By Mr. McCAIN (for himself, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Baucus. Mr. Grassley,
Mr. Reid, Mrs. Feinstein, and Mr. Feingold):
S. 85. 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. McCAIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Indian Tribes
Methamphetamine Reduction Grants Act of 2007. This bill is identical to
S. 4113, a bipartisan measure that was passed by unanimous consent in
the Senate on December 8, 2006, the last day of the 109th Congress. The
legislation would allow Indian tribes to be eligible for funding
through the Department of Justice to eradicate the scourge of
methamphetamine use, sale and manufacture in Native American
communities. I am pleased to be joined by Senators Dorgan, Baucus,
Grassley, Reid, Feinstein, and Feingold in introducing this important
legislation.
The impacts of methamphetamine use on communities across the Nation
are well known and cannot be overstated. Methamphetamine is the leading
drug-related law enforcement problem in the country. Unfortunately, the
meth crisis is affecting Indian Country most severely. Very serious
concerns have been raised by the U.S. Department of Justice, States,
and other non-tribal law enforcement agencies over the rapidly growing
levels of methamphetamine production and trafficking on reservations
with large geographic areas or tribes adjacent to the U.S.-Mexico
border. But because of the sovereign status of the tribes, criminals
are generally not subject to state jurisdiction in many cases. As a
result, local law enforcement often has no jurisdiction in Indian
country, and tribal law enforcement agencies bear the brunt of most law
enforcement functions.
The problem of meth in Indian country, which the National Congress of
American Indians identified last year as its top priority, is
ubiquitous, and has strained already overburdened law enforcement,
health, social welfare, housing, and child protective and placement
services on Indian reservations. Last year a former tribal judge on the
Wind River Reservation in Wyoming pled guilty to conspiracy to
distribute methamphetamine and other drugs. The day before, the Navajo
Nation police arrested an 81 year old grandmother, her daughter, and
her
[[Page 156]]
granddaughter, for selling meth. One tribe in Arizona had over 60
babies born with meth in their systems. In 2005, the National Indian
Housing Council expanded its training for dealing with meth in tribal
housing: the average cost of decontaminating a single residence that
has been used a meth lab is $10,000.
During the 109th Congress, as the Chairman of the Senate Indian
Affairs Committee, I held hearings on this serious matter. Committee
witnesses testified that the methamphetamine epidemic in Indian country
has contributed to a rise in child abuse and neglect cases, among other
social ills, and some tribes reported dramatic increases in suicide
rates among young people linked to methamphetamine use. Following our
hearings, I was pleased to work with Senators Dorgan, Sessions,
Bingaman and others in improving upon our legislation to assist Indian
Country in fighting this terrible drug crisis.
To avoid any potential misinterpretation of the intent of this
legislation, this bill includes language developed and agreed to during
the last Congress that is designed to clarify the intent of the bill.
This clarifying language, provided in section 2(a)(4) of the bill, is
intended to make it clear that by authorizing the Department of
Justice's Bureau of Justice Assistance to award grant funds to a state,
territory or Indian tribe to ``investigate, arrest and prosecute
individuals'' involved in illegal methamphetamine activities, the
legislation does not somehow authorize a grantee state, territory or
Indian tribe to pursue law enforcement activities that it otherwise has
no jurisdiction to pursue. And similarly, this provision also clarifies
that an award or denial of a grant by the Bureau of Justice Assistance
does not somehow allow a state, territory or Indian tribe to pursue law
enforcement activities that it otherwise lacks jurisdiction to pursue.
For example, a law enforcement agency in one state, territory or Indian
reservation is not somehow enabled by this section, or by an award made
pursuant to this section, to prosecute a methamphetamine crime arising
in some other jurisdiction unless that agency already has such
jurisdiction.
The legislation further clarifies that authority under the bill to
award grants would have no effect beyond simply authorizing, awarding
or denying a grant of funds to a state, territory or Indian tribe. So,
for example, if a state, territory or Indian tribe is awarded or denied
a grant of funds under this section, that award or denial has no
relevance to or effect on the eligibility of the state, territory or
Indian tribe to participate in any other program or activity unrelated
to the award or denial of grants as permitted under this legislation.
The award or denial of a grant under this subsection, in other words,
is relevant only to the award or denial of the grant under this
subsection, and nothing else.
The measure I am introducing today takes but a small step on the long
journey toward our fight against methamphetamine. I encourage my
colleagues to support it.
______
By Mr. McCAIN (for himself and Mr. Kyl):
S. 86. A bill to designate segments of Fossil Creek, a tributary to
the Verde River in the State of Arizona, as wild and scenic rivers; to
the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I am please to be joined by my colleague,
Senator Kyl, in reintroducing a bill to designate Fossil Creek as a
Wild and Scenic River. A companion measure is being introduced today by
Congressman Renzi and other members of the Arizona congressional
delegation.
Fossil Creek is a thing of beauty. With its picturesque scenery, lush
riparian ecosystem, unique geological features, and deep iridescent
blue pools and waterfalls, this tributary to the Wild and Scenic Verde
River and Lower Colorado River Watershed stretches 14 miles through
east central Arizona. It is home to a wide variety of wildlife, some of
which are threatened or endangered species. Over 100 bird species
inhabit the Fossil Creek area and use it to migrate between the range
lowlands and the Mogollon-Colorado Plateau highlands. Fossil Creek also
supports a variety of aquatic species and is one of the few perennial
streams in Arizona with multiple native fish.
Fossil Creek was named in the 1800's when early explorers described
the fossil-like appearance of creek-side rocks and vegetation coated
with calcium carbonate deposits from the creek's water. In the early
1900's, pioneers recognized the potential for hydroelectric power
generation in the creek's constant and abundant spring fed base-flow.
They claimed the channel's water rights and built a dam system and
generating facilities known as the Childs-Irving hydro-project. Over
time, the project was acquired by Arizona Public Service (APS), one of
the state's largest eclectic utility providers serving more than a
million Arizonans. Because Childs-Irving produced less then half of 1
percent of the total power generated by APS, the decision was made
ultimately to decommission the aging dam and restore Fossil Creek to
its pre-settlement conditions.
APS has partnered with various environmental groups, federal land
managers, and state, tribal and local governments to safely remove the
Childs-Irving power generating facilities and restore the riparian
ecosystem. In 2005, APS removed the dam system and returned full flows
to Fossil Creek. Researchers predict Fossil Creek will soon become a
fully regenerated Southwest native fishery providing a most-valuable
opportunity to reintroduce at least six Threatened and Endangered
native fish species as well as rebuild the native populations presently
living in the creek.
There is a growing need to provide additional protection and adequate
staffing and management at Fossil Creek. Recreational visitation to the
riverbed is expected to increase dramatically, and by the Forest
Service's own admission, they aren't able to manage current levels of
visitation or the pressures of increased use. While responsible
recreation and other activities at Fossil Creek are to be encouraged,
we must also ensure the long-term success of the ongoing restoration
efforts. Designation under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act would help to
ensure the appropriate level of protection and resources are devoted to
Fossil Creek. Already, Fossil Creek has been found eligible for Wild
and Scenic designation by the Forest Service and the proposal has
widespread support from surrounding communities. All of the lands
potentially affected by a designation are owned and managed by the
Forest Service and will not affect private property owners.
Fossil Creek is a unique Arizona treasure, and would benefit greatly
from the protection and recognition offered through Wild and Scenic
designation. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
______
By Mr. KERRY (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, Ms. Cantwell, Ms.
Landrieu, Mr. Lautenberg, and Mrs. Murray):
S. 95. A bill to amend titles XIX and XXI of the Social Security Act
to ensure that every uninsured child in America has health insurance
coverage, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, today the first bill I am introducing in
the 110th Congress is the Kids Come First Act, legislation that would
ensure every child in America has health care coverage. The Kids Come
First Act was also the first bill I introduced in the 109th Congress
and I feel just as strongly today as I did at the beginning of the last
Congress that insuring all children must be a top agenda item. In the
two years since I last introduced this bill, the problem of uninsured
children in this nation has actually worsened.
The 110th Congress faces many challenges, from the war in Iraq to
lobbying reform. But perhaps no issue bears more directly on the lives
of more Americans than health care reform. Today 47 million Americans
are uninsured, including 11 million under age 21. Health care has
become a slow-motion Katrina that is ruining lives and bankrupting
families all over the country. We cannot stand by as the
[[Page 157]]
ranks of the uninsured rise and American families find themselves in
peril.
A recent Census Bureau report revealed that for the first time in
almost a decade the number of uninsured children increased. In 2005
there were 361,000 children under the age of 18 added to the uninsured
rolls. And the number of Americans without health care continues to
rise.
The Kids Come First Act calls for a Federal-State partnership to
mandate health coverage to every child in America. The proposal makes
the states an offer they can't refuse. The federal government will pay
for the most expensive part: enrolling all low-income children in
Medicaid, automatically. The states will pay to expand coverage to
higher income children. In the end, states across the country will save
more than $6 billion a year, and every child will have health care.
It is totally unacceptable that, in the greatest country in the
world, millions of children are not getting the health care they need.
The Kids Come First Act expands coverage for children up to age of 21.
Through expanding the programs that work, such as Medicaid and SCHIP,
we can cover all eleven million children uninsured children.
Insuring children improves their health and helps families cover the
spiraling costs of insuring them. Covering all kids will reduce
avoidable hospitalizations by 22 percent and replace expensive critical
care with inexpensive preventative care. Also, when children get the
medical attention they need, they pay much better attention in the
classroom and studies show their performance improves.
To pay for the expansion of health insurance for children, the Kids
Come First Act includes a provision that provides the Secretary of
Treasury with the authority to raise the highest income tax rate of 35
percent to a rate not higher than 39.6 percent in order to offset the
costs. Prior to the enactment of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Act
Reconciliation Act of 2001, the top marginal rate was 39.6 percent.
Less than one percent of taxpayers pay the top rate and for 2007, this
rate only affects individual with income above $349,700.
The health care of our children is a priority that we must address
and it can be done in a fiscally responsible manner. I will continue to
work to find ways to offset the cost of my proposal. The wealthiest of
all Americans do not need a tax cut when 11 million children do not
even have health insurance. President Bush has called for this rate cut
to be made permanent, but I believe it would be a better use of our
resources to invest in our future by improving health care for
children.
Since I first introduced the Kids Come First Act in the 109th
Congress, more than 500,000 people have shown their support for the
bill by becoming Citizen Cosponsors and another 20,000 Americans called
into our ``Give Voices to Our Values'' hotline to share their personal
stories. In addition, a coalition of 24 non-profit organizations
representing 20 million people from across the country have endorsed
Kids Come First, including the National Association of Children's
Hospitals, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of
Family Physicians, March of Dimes, the Small Business Service Bureau,
AFL-CIO, SEIU, and AFSCME.
It is clear that providing health care coverage for our uninsured
children is a priority for our nation's workers, businesses, and health
care community. They know, as I do, that further delay only results in
graver health problems for America's children. Their future, and ours,
depends on us doing better. I urge my colleagues to support and help
enacting the Kids Come First Act of 2007 during this Congress.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the Kids Come First Act of
2007 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. 95
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 ``Kids Come
First Act of 2007''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Findings.
TITLE I--EXPANDED COVERAGE OF CHILDREN UNDER MEDICAID AND SCHIP
Sec. 101. State option to receive 100 percent FMAP for medical
assistance for children in poverty in exchange for
expanded coverage of children in working poor families
under Medicaid or SCHIP.
Sec. 102. Elimination of cap on SCHIP funding for States that expand
eligibility for children.
TITLE II--STATE OPTIONS FOR INCREMENTAL CHILD COVERAGE EXPANSIONS
Sec. 201. State option to provide wrap-around SCHIP coverage to
children who have other health coverage.
Sec. 202. State option to enroll low-income children of State employees
in SCHIP.
Sec. 203. Optional coverage of legal immigrant children under Medicaid
and SCHIP.
Sec. 204. State option for passive renewal of eligibility for children
under Medicaid and SCHIP.
TITLE III--TAX INCENTIVES FOR HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE OF CHILDREN
Sec. 301. Refundable credit for health insurance coverage of children.
Sec. 302. Forfeiture of personal exemption for any child not covered by
health insurance.
TITLE IV--MISCELLANEOUS
Sec. 401. Requirement for group market health insurers to offer
dependent coverage option for workers with children.
Sec. 402. Effective date.
TITLE V--REVENUE PROVISION
Sec. 501. Partial repeal of rate reduction in the highest income tax
bracket.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Need for universal coverage.--
(A) Currently, there are 9,000,000 children under the age
of 19 that are uninsured. One out of every 8 children are
uninsured while 1 in 5 Hispanic children and 1 in 7 African
American children are uninsured. Three-quarters,
approximately 6,800,000, of these children are eligible but
not enrolled in the Medicaid program or the State Children's
Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). Long-range studies found
that 1 in 3 children went without health insurance for all or
part of 2002 and 2003.
(B) Low-income children are 3 times as likely as children
in higher income families to be uninsured. It is estimated
that 65 percent of uninsured children have at least 1 parent
working full time over the course of the year.
(C) It is estimated that 50 percent of all legal immigrant
children in families with income that is less than 200
percent of the Federal poverty line are uninsured. In States
without programs to cover immigrant children, 57 percent of
noncitizen children are uninsured.
(D) Children in the Southern and Western parts of the
United States were nearly 1.7 times more likely to be
uninsured than children in the Northeast. In the Northeast,
9.4 percent of children are uninsured while in the Midwest,
8.3 percent are uninsured. The South's rate of uninsured
children is 14.3 percent while the West has an uninsured rate
of 13 percent.
(E) Children's health care needs are neglected in the
United States. One out of every 5 children has problems
accessing needed care and one-quarter of young children in
the United States are not fully up to date on their basic
immunizations. One-third of children with chronic asthma do
not get a prescription for the necessary medications to
manage the disease and 1 out of every 4 children do not
receive annual dental exams.
(F) Children without health insurance are twice as likely
as insured children to not receive any medical care in a
given year. According to the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, nearly \1/2\ of all uninsured children have not
had a well-child visit in the past year. One in 6 uninsured
children had a delayed or unmet medical need in the past
year. Minority children are less likely to receive proven
treatments such as prescription medications to treat chronic
disease.
(G) There are 7,600,000 young adults between the ages of 19
and 20. In the United States, approximately 28 percent, or
2,100,000 individuals, of this group are uninsured.
(H) Chronic illness and disability among children are on
the rise. Children most at risk for chronic illness and
disability are children who are most likely to be poor and
uninsured.
(2) Role of the medicaid and state children's health
insurance programs.--
(A) The Medicaid program and SCHIP serve as a crucial
health safety net for 30,000,000 children. During the recent
economic downturn and the highest number of uninsured
individuals ever recorded in the United States,
[[Page 158]]
the Medicaid program and SCHIP offset losses in employer-
sponsored coverage. While the number of children living in
low-income families increased between 2000 and 2005, the
number of uninsured children fell due to the Medicaid program
and SCHIP.
(B) 28,000,000 children are enrolled today in the Medicaid
program, accounting for \1/2\ of all enrollees and only 18
percent of total program costs.
(C) The Medicaid program and SCHIP do more than just fill
in the gaps. Gains in public coverage have reduced the
percentage of low-income uninsured children by \1/3\ from
1997 to 2005. In addition, a study found that publicly-
insured children are more likely to obtain medical care,
preventive care, and dental care than similar low-income
privately-insured children.
(D) Publicly funded programs such as the Medicaid program
and SCHIP actually improve children's health. Children who
are currently insured by public programs are in better health
than they were a year ago. Expansion of coverage for children
and pregnant women under the Medicaid program and SCHIP
reduces rates of avoidable hospitalizations by 22 percent and
has been proven to reduce childhood deaths, infant mortality
rates, and the incidence of low birth weight.
(E) Studies have found that children enrolled in public
insurance programs experienced a 68-percent improvement in
measures of school performance.
(F) Despite the success of expansions in general under the
Medicaid program and SCHIP, due to current budget
constraints, many States have stopped doing aggressive
outreach and have raised premiums and cost-sharing
requirements on families under these programs. In addition, 8
States stopped enrollment in SCHIP for a period of time
between April 2003 and July 2004. As a result, SCHIP
enrollment fell by 200,000 children for the first time in the
program's history.
(G) It is estimated that nearly 50 percent of children
covered through SCHIP do not remain in the program due to
reenrollment barriers. A recent study found that between 10
and 40 percent of these children are ``lost'' in the system.
Difficult renewal policies and reenrollment barriers make
seamless coverage in SCHIP unattainable. Studies indicate
that as many as 67 percent of children who were eligible but
not enrolled for SCHIP had applied for coverage but were
denied due to procedural issues.
(H) While the Medicaid program and SCHIP expansions to date
have done much to offset what otherwise would have been a
significant loss of coverage among children because of
declining access to employer coverage, the shortcomings of
previous expansions, such as the failure to enroll all
eligible children and caps on enrollment in SCHIP because of
under-funding, also are clear.
TITLE I--EXPANDED COVERAGE OF CHILDREN UNDER MEDICAID AND SCHIP
SEC. 101. STATE OPTION TO RECEIVE 100 PERCENT FMAP FOR
MEDICAL ASSISTANCE FOR CHILDREN IN POVERTY IN
EXCHANGE FOR EXPANDED COVERAGE OF CHILDREN IN
WORKING POOR FAMILIES UNDER MEDICAID OR SCHIP.
(a) State Option.--Title XIX of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 1396 et seq.) is amended by redesignating section 1939
as section 1940, and by inserting after section 1938 the
following:
``STATE OPTION FOR INCREASED FMAP FOR MEDICAL ASSISTANCE FOR CHILDREN
IN POVERTY IN EXCHANGE FOR EXPANDED COVERAGE OF CHILDREN IN WORKING
POOR FAMILIES UNDER THIS TITLE OR TITLE XXI
``Sec. 1939. (a) 100 Percent FMAP.--
``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
this title, in the case of a State that, through an amendment
to each of its State plans under this title and title XXI (or
to a waiver of either such plan), agrees to satisfy the
conditions described in subsections (b), (c), and (d), the
Federal medical assistance percentage shall be 100 percent
with respect to the total amount expended by the State for
providing medical assistance under this title for each fiscal
year quarter beginning on or after the date described in
subsection (e) for children whose family income does not
exceed 100 percent of the poverty line.
``(2) Limitation on scope of application of increase.--The
increase in the Federal medical assistance percentage for a
State under this section shall apply only with respect to the
total amount expended for providing medical assistance under
this title for a fiscal year quarter for children described
in paragraph (1) and shall not apply with respect to--
``(A) any other payments made under this title, including
disproportionate share hospital payments described in section
1923;
``(B) payments under title IV or XXI; or
``(C) any payments made under this title or title XXI that
are based on the enhanced FMAP described in section 2105(b).
``(b) Eligibility Expansions.--The condition described in
this subsection is that the State agrees to do the following:
``(1) Coverage under medicaid or schip for children in
families whose income does not exceed 300 percent of the
poverty line.--
``(A) In general.--The State agrees to provide medical
assistance under this title or child health assistance under
title XXI to children whose family income exceeds the
medicaid applicable income level (as defined in section
2110(b)(4) but by substituting `January 1, 2007' for `March
31, 1997'), but does not exceed 300 percent of the poverty
line.
``(B) State option to expand coverage through subsidized
purchase of family coverage.--A State may elect to carry out
subparagraph (A) through the provision of assistance for the
purchase of dependent coverage under a group health plan or
health insurance coverage if--
``(i) the dependent coverage is consistent with the benefit
standards under this title or title XXI, as approved by the
Secretary; and
``(ii) the State provides `wrap-around' coverage under this
title or title XXI.
``(C) Deemed satisfaction for certain states.--A State
that, as of January 1, 2007, provides medical assistance
under this title or child health assistance under title XXI
to children whose family income is 300 percent of the poverty
line shall be deemed to satisfy this paragraph.
``(2) Coverage for children under age 21.--The State agrees
to define a child for purposes of this title and title XXI as
an individual who has not attained 21 years of age.
``(3) Opportunity for higher income children to purchase
schip coverage.--The State agrees to permit any child whose
family income exceeds 300 percent of the poverty line to
purchase full or `wrap-around' coverage under title XXI at
the full cost of providing such coverage, as determined by
the State.
``(4) Coverage for legal immigrant children.--The State
agrees to--
``(A) provide medical assistance under this title and child
health assistance under title XXI for alien children who are
lawfully residing in the United States (including battered
aliens described in section 431(c) of the Personal
Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of
1996) and who are otherwise eligible for such assistance in
accordance with section 1903(v)(4) and 2107(e)(1)(F); and
``(B) not establish or enforce barriers that deter
applications by such aliens, including through the
application of the removal of the barriers described in
subsection (c).
``(c) Removal of Enrollment and Access Barriers.--The
condition described in this subsection is that the State
agrees to do the following:
``(1) Presumptive eligibility for children.--The State
agrees to--
``(A) provide presumptive eligibility for children under
this title and title XXI in accordance with section 1920A;
and
``(B) treat any items or services that are provided to an
uncovered child (as defined in section 2110(c)(8)) who is
determined ineligible for medical assistance under this title
as child health assistance for purposes of paying a provider
of such items or services, so long as such items or services
would be considered child health assistance for a targeted
low-income child under title XXI.
``(2) Adoption of 12-month continuous enrollment.--The
State agrees to provide that eligibility for assistance under
this title and title XXI shall not be regularly redetermined
more often than once every year for children.
``(3) Acceptance of self-declaration of income.--The State
agrees to permit the family of a child applying for medical
assistance under this title or child health assistance under
title XXI to declare and certify by signature under penalty
of perjury family income for purposes of collecting financial
eligibility information.
``(4) Adoption of acceptance of eligibility determinations
for other assistance programs.--The State agrees to accept
determinations (made within a reasonable period, as found by
the State, before its use for this purpose) of an
individual's family or household income made by a Federal or
State agency (or a public or private entity making such
determination on behalf of such agency), including the
agencies administering the Food Stamp Act of 1977, the
Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, and the Child
Nutrition Act of 1966, notwithstanding any differences in
budget unit, disregard, deeming, or other methodology, but
only if--
``(A) such agency has fiscal liabilities or
responsibilities affected or potentially affected by such
determinations; and
``(B) any information furnished by such agency pursuant to
this subparagraph is used solely for purposes of determining
eligibility for medical assistance under this title or for
child health assistance under title XXI.
``(5) No assets test.--The State agrees to not (or
demonstrates that it does not) apply any assets or resources
test for eligibility under this title or title XXI with
respect to children.
``(6) Eligibility determinations and redeterminations.--
``(A) In general.--The State agrees for purposes of initial
eligibility determinations and redeterminations of children
under this title and title XXI not to require a face-to-face
interview and to permit applications
[[Page 159]]
and renewals by mail, telephone, and the Internet.
``(B) Nonduplication of information.--
``(i) In general.--For purposes of redeterminations of
eligibility for currently or previously enrolled children
under this title and title XXI, the State agrees to use all
information in its possession (including information
available to the State under other Federal or State programs)
to determine eligibility or redetermine continued eligibility
before seeking similar information from parents.
``(ii) Rule of construction.--Nothing in clause (i) shall
be construed as limiting any obligation of a State to provide
notice and a fair hearing before denying, terminating, or
reducing a child's coverage based on such information in the
possession of the State.
``(7) No waiting list for children under schip.--The State
agrees to not impose any numerical limitation, waiting list,
waiting period, or similar limitation on the eligibility of
children for child health assistance under title XXI or to
establish or enforce other barriers to the enrollment of
eligible children based on the date of their application for
coverage.
``(8) Adequate provider payment rates.--The State agrees
to--
``(A) establish payment rates for children's health care
providers under this title that are no less than the average
of payment rates for similar services for such providers
provided under the benchmark benefit packages described in
section 2103(b);
``(B) establish such rates in amounts that are sufficient
to ensure that children enrolled under this title or title
XXI have adequate access to comprehensive care, in accordance
with the requirements of section 1902(a)(30)(A); and
``(C) include provisions in its contracts with providers
under this title guaranteeing compliance with these
requirements.
``(d) Maintenance of Medicaid Eligibility Levels for
Children.--
``(1) In general.--The condition described in this
subsection is that the State agrees to maintain eligibility
income, resources, and methodologies applied under this title
(including under a waiver of such title or under section
1115) with respect to children that are no more restrictive
than the eligibility income, resources, and methodologies
applied with respect to children under this title (including
under such a waiver) as of January 1, 2007.
``(2) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this section shall
be construed as implying that a State does not have to comply
with the minimum income levels required for children under
section 1902(l)(2).
``(e) Date Described.--The date described in this
subsection is the date on which, with respect to a State, a
plan amendment that satisfies the requirements of subsections
(b), (c), and (d) is approved by the Secretary.
``(f) Definition of Poverty Line.--In this section, the
term `poverty line' has the meaning given that term in
section 2110(c)(5).''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) The third sentence of section 1905(b) of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396d(b)) is amended by inserting
before the period the following: ``, and with respect to
amounts expended for medical assistance for children on or
after the date described in subsection (e) of section 1939,
in the case of a State that has, in accordance with such
section, an approved plan amendment under this title and
title XXI''.
(2) Section 1903(f)(4) of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 1396b(f)(4)) is amended--
(A) in subparagraph (C), by adding ``or'' after ``section
1611(b)(1),''; and
(B) by inserting after subparagraph (C), the following:
``(D) who would not receive such medical assistance but for
State electing the option under section 1939 and satisfying
the conditions described in subsections (b), (c), and (d) of
such section,''.
SEC. 102. ELIMINATION OF CAP ON SCHIP FUNDING FOR STATES THAT
EXPAND ELIGIBILITY FOR CHILDREN.
(a) In General.--Section 2105 of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 1397dd) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(h) Guaranteed Funding for Child Health Assistance for
Coverage Expansion States.--
``(1) In general.--Only in the case of a State that has, in
accordance with section 1939, an approved plan amendment
under this title and title XIX, any payment cap that would
otherwise apply to the State under this title as a result of
having expended all allotments available for expenditure by
the State with respect to a fiscal year shall not apply with
respect to amounts expended by the State on or after the date
described in section 1939(e).
``(2) Appropriation.--There is appropriated, out of any
money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such sums
as may be necessary for the purpose of paying a State
described in paragraph (1) for each quarter beginning on or
after the date described in section 1939(e), an amount equal
to the enhanced FMAP of expenditures described in paragraph
(1) and incurred during such quarter.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 2104 of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1397dd) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by inserting ``and section 2105(h)''
after ``subsection (d)'';
(2) in subsection (b)(1), by striking ``and subsection
(d)'' and inserting ``, subsection (d), and section
2105(h)''; and
(3) in subsection (c)(1), by inserting ``and section
2105(h)'' after ``subsection (d)''.
TITLE II--STATE OPTIONS FOR INCREMENTAL CHILD COVERAGE EXPANSIONS
SEC. 201. STATE OPTION TO PROVIDE WRAP-AROUND SCHIP COVERAGE
TO CHILDREN WHO HAVE OTHER HEALTH COVERAGE.
(a) In General.--Section 2110(b) of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 1397jj(b)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)(C), by inserting ``, subject to
paragraph (5),'' after ``under title XIX or''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(5) State option to provide wrap-around coverage.--
``(A) In general.--A State may waive the requirement of
paragraph (1)(C) that a targeted low-income child may not be
covered under a group health plan or under health insurance
coverage in order to provide--
``(i) items or services that are not covered, or are only
partially covered, under such plan or coverage; or
``(ii) cost-sharing protection.
``(B) Eligibility.--In waiving such requirement, a State
may limit the application of the waiver to children whose
family income does not exceed a level specified by the State,
so long as the level so specified does not exceed the maximum
income level otherwise established for other children under
the State child health plan.
``(C) Continued application of duty to prevent substitution
of existing coverage.--Nothing in this paragraph shall be
construed as modifying the application of section
2102(b)(3)(C) to a State.''.
(b) Application of Enhanced Match Under Medicaid.--Section
1905 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1396d) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b), in the fourth sentence, by striking
``subsection (u)(3)'' and inserting ``, (u)(3), or (u)(4)'';
and
(2) in subsection (u), by redesignating paragraph (4) as
paragraph (5) and by inserting after paragraph (3) the
following:
``(4) For purposes of subsection (b), the expenditures
described in this paragraph are expenditures for items and
services for children described in section 2110(b)(5).''.
(c) Application of Secondary Payor Provisions.--Section
2107(e)(1) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1397gg(e)(1)) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subparagraphs (B) through (D) as
subparagraphs (C) through (E), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following new
subparagraph:
``(B) Section 1902(a)(25) (relating to coordination of
benefits and secondary payor provisions) with respect to
children covered under a waiver described in section
2110(b)(5).''.
SEC. 202. STATE OPTION TO ENROLL LOW-INCOME CHILDREN OF STATE
EMPLOYEES IN SCHIP.
Section 2110(b)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1397jj(b)(2)) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) and (B) as clauses
(i) and (ii), respectively and realigning the left margins of
such clauses appropriately;
(2) by striking ``Such term'' and inserting the following:
``(A) In general.--Such term''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(B) State option to enroll low-income children of state
employees.--At the option of a State, subparagraph (A)(ii)
shall not apply to any low-income child who would otherwise
be eligible for child health assistance under this title but
for such subparagraph.''.
SEC. 203. OPTIONAL COVERAGE OF LEGAL IMMIGRANT CHILDREN UNDER
MEDICAID AND SCHIP.
(a) Medicaid Program.--Section 1903(v) of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396b(v)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``paragraph (2)'' and
inserting ``paragraphs (2) and (4)''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(4)(A) A State may elect (in a plan amendment under this
title) to provide medical assistance under this title for
aliens--
``(i) who are lawfully residing in the United States
(including battered aliens described in section 431(c) of the
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation
Act of 1996); and
``(ii) who are otherwise eligible for such assistance,
within the eligibility category of children (as defined under
such plan), including optional targeted low-income children
described in section 1905(u)(2)(B).
``(B)(i) In the case of a State that has elected to provide
medical assistance to a category of aliens under subparagraph
(A), no debt shall accrue under an affidavit of support
against any sponsor of such an alien on the basis of
provision of assistance to such category and the cost of such
assistance shall not be considered as an unreimbursed cost.
``(ii) The provisions of sections 401(a), 402(b), 403, and
421 of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act of 1996 shall not apply to a State that
makes an election under subparagraph (A).''.
[[Page 160]]
(b) Title XXI.--Section 2107(e)(1) of the Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C. 1397gg(e)(1)), as amended by section 201(c),
is amended redesignating subparagraph (E) as subparagraph (F)
and by inserting after subparagraph (D) the following:
``(E) Section 1903(v)(4) (relating to optional coverage of
permanent resident alien children), but only if the State has
elected to apply such section to that category of children
under title XIX.''.
SEC. 204. STATE OPTION FOR PASSIVE RENEWAL OF ELIGIBILITY FOR
CHILDREN UNDER MEDICAID AND SCHIP.
(a) In General.--Section 1902(l) of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 1396a(l)) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(5) Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, a
State may provide that an individual who has not attained 21
years of age who has been determined eligible for medical
assistance under this title shall remain eligible for medical
assistance until such time as the State has information
demonstrating that the individual is no longer so
eligible.''.
(b) Application Under Title XXI.--Section 2107(e)(1) of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1397gg(e)), as amended by
section 201(c) and 203(b), is amended--
(1) by redesignating subparagraphs (C) through (F) as
subparagraphs (D) through (G), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after subparagraph (B), the following:
``(C) Section 1902(l)(5) (relating to passive renewal of
eligibility for children).''.
TITLE III--TAX INCENTIVES FOR HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE OF CHILDREN
SEC. 301. REFUNDABLE CREDIT FOR HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE OF
CHILDREN.
(a) In General.--Subpart C of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to
refundable credits) is amended by redesignating section 36 as
section 37 and by inserting after section 35 the following
new section:
``SEC. 36. HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE OF CHILDREN.
``(a) In General.--In the case of an individual, there
shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by this
subtitle an amount equal to so much of the amount paid during
the taxable year, not compensated for by insurance or
otherwise, for qualified health insurance for each dependent
child of the taxpayer, as exceeds 5 percent of the adjusted
gross income of such taxpayer for such taxable year.
``(b) Dependent Child.--For purposes of this section, the
term `dependent child' means any child (as defined in section
152(f)(1)) who has not attained the age of 19 as of the close
of the calendar year in which the taxable year of the
taxpayer begins and with respect to whom a deduction under
section 151 is allowable to the taxpayer.
``(c) Qualified Health Insurance.--For purposes of this
section--
``(1) In general.--The term `qualified health insurance'
means insurance, either employer-provided or made available
under title XIX or XXI of the Social Security Act, which
constitutes medical care as defined in section 213(d) without
regard to--
``(A) paragraph (1)(C) thereof, and
``(B) so much of paragraph (1)(D) thereof as relates to
qualified long-term care insurance contracts.
``(2) Exclusion of certain other contracts.--Such term
shall not include insurance if a substantial portion of its
benefits are excepted benefits (as defined in section
9832(c)).
``(d) Medical Savings Account and Health Savings Account
Contributions.--
``(1) In general.--If a deduction would (but for paragraph
(2)) be allowed under section 220 or 223 to the taxpayer for
a payment for the taxable year to the medical savings account
or health savings account of an individual, subsection (a)
shall be applied by treating such payment as a payment for
qualified health insurance for such individual.
``(2) Denial of double benefit.--No deduction shall be
allowed under section 220 or 223 for that portion of the
payments otherwise allowable as a deduction under section 220
or 223 for the taxable year which is equal to the amount of
credit allowed for such taxable year by reason of this
subsection.
``(e) Special Rules.--
``(1) Determination of insurance costs.--The Secretary
shall provide rules for the allocation of the cost of any
qualified health insurance for family coverage to the
coverage of any dependent child under such insurance.
``(2) Coordination with deduction for health insurance
costs of self-employed individuals.--In the case of a
taxpayer who is eligible to deduct any amount under section
162(l) for the taxable year, this section shall apply only if
the taxpayer elects not to claim any amount as a deduction
under such section for such year.
``(3) Coordination with medical expense and high deductible
health plan deductions.--The amount which would (but for this
paragraph) be taken into account by the taxpayer under
section 213 or 223 for the taxable year shall be reduced by
the credit (if any) allowed by this section to the taxpayer
for such year.
``(4) Denial of credit to dependents.--No credit shall be
allowed under this section to any individual with respect to
whom a deduction under section 151 is allowable to another
taxpayer for a taxable year beginning in the calendar year in
which such individual's taxable year begins.
``(5) Denial of double benefit.--No credit shall be allowed
under subsection (a) if the credit under section 35 is
allowed and no credit shall be allowed under 35 if a credit
is allowed under this section.
``(6) Election not to claim credit.--This section shall not
apply to a taxpayer for any taxable year if such taxpayer
elects to have this section not apply for such taxable
year.''.
(b) Information Reporting.--
(1) In general.--Subpart B of part III of subchapter A of
chapter 61 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to
information concerning transactions with other persons) is
amended by inserting after section 6050V the following new
section:
``SEC. 6050W. RETURNS RELATING TO PAYMENTS FOR QUALIFIED
HEALTH INSURANCE.
``(a) In General.--Any governmental unit or any person who,
in connection with a trade or business conducted by such
person, receives payments during any calendar year from any
individual for coverage of a dependent child (as defined in
section 36(b)) of such individual under creditable health
insurance, shall make the return described in subsection (b)
(at such time as the Secretary may by regulations prescribe)
with respect to each individual from whom such payments were
received.
``(b) Form and Manner of Returns.--A return is described in
this subsection if such return--
``(1) is in such form as the Secretary may prescribe, and
``(2) contains--
``(A) the name, address, and TIN of the individual from
whom payments described in subsection (a) were received,
``(B) the name, address, and TIN of each dependent child
(as so defined) who was provided by such person with coverage
under creditable health insurance by reason of such payments
and the period of such coverage, and
``(C) such other information as the Secretary may
reasonably prescribe.
``(c) Creditable Health Insurance.--For purposes of this
section, the term `creditable health insurance' means
qualified health insurance (as defined in section 36(c)).
``(d) Statements To Be Furnished to Individuals With
Respect to Whom Information Is Required.--Every person
required to make a return under subsection (a) shall furnish
to each individual whose name is required under subsection
(b)(2)(A) to be set forth in such return a written statement
showing--
``(1) the name and address of the person required to make
such return and the phone number of the information contact
for such person,
``(2) the aggregate amount of payments described in
subsection (a) received by the person required to make such
return from the individual to whom the statement is required
to be furnished, and
``(3) the information required under subsection (b)(2)(B)
with respect to such payments.
The written statement required under the preceding sentence
shall be furnished on or before January 31 of the year
following the calendar year for which the return under
subsection (a) is required to be made.
``(e) Returns Which Would Be Required To Be Made by 2 or
More Persons.--Except to the extent provided in regulations
prescribed by the Secretary, in the case of any amount
received by any person on behalf of another person, only the
person first receiving such amount shall be required to make
the return under subsection (a).''.
(2) Assessable penalties.--
(A) Subparagraph (B) of section 6724(d)(1) of such Code
(relating to definitions) is amended by striking ``and'' at
the end of clause (xx) and by inserting at the end the
following new clause:
``(xxi) section 6050W (relating to returns relating to
payments for qualified health insurance), and''.
(B) Paragraph (2) of section 6724(d) of such Code is
amended by striking ``or'' at the end of the next to last
subparagraph, by striking the period at the end of the last
subparagraph and inserting ``, or'', and by adding at the end
the following new subparagraph:
``(DD) section 6050W(d) (relating to returns relating to
payments for qualified health insurance).''.
(3) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections for subpart
B of part III of subchapter A of chapter 61 of such Code is
amended by inserting after the item relating to section 6050V
the following new item:
``Sec. 6050W. Returns relating to payments for qualified health
insurance''.
(c) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Paragraph (2) of section 1324(b) of title 31, United
States Code, is amended by inserting before the period ``, or
from section 36 of such Code''.
(2) The table of sections for subpart C of part IV of
subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 is amended by striking the last item and inserting the
following new items:
[[Page 161]]
``Sec. 36. Health insurance coverage of children
``Sec. 37. Overpayments of tax''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2006.
SEC. 302. FORFEITURE OF PERSONAL EXEMPTION FOR ANY CHILD NOT
COVERED BY HEALTH INSURANCE.
(a) In General.--Section 151(d) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 (relating to exemption amount) is amended by
adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(5) Reduction of exemption amount for any child not
covered by health insurance.--
``(A) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this
paragraph, the exemption amount otherwise determined under
this subsection for any dependent child (as defined in
section 36(b)) for any taxable year shall be reduced by the
same percentage as the percentage of such taxable year during
which such dependent child was not covered by qualified
health insurance (as defined in section 36(c)).
``(B) Full reduction if no proof of coverage is provided.--
For purposes of subparagraph (A), in the case of any taxpayer
who fails to attach to the return of tax for any taxable year
a copy of the statement furnished to such taxpayer under
section 6050W, the percentage reduction under such
subparagraph shall be deemed to be 100 percent.
``(C) Nonapplication of paragraph to taxpayers in lowest
tax bracket.--This paragraph shall not apply to any taxpayer
whose taxable income for the taxable year does not exceed the
initial bracket amount determined under section
1(i)(1)(B).''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2006.
TITLE IV--MISCELLANEOUS
SEC. 401. REQUIREMENT FOR GROUP MARKET HEALTH INSURERS TO
OFFER DEPENDENT COVERAGE OPTION FOR WORKERS
WITH CHILDREN.
(a) ERISA.--
(1) In general.--Subpart B of part 7 of subtitle B of title
I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29
U.S.C. 1185 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``SEC. 714. REQUIREMENT TO OFFER OPTION TO PURCHASE DEPENDENT
COVERAGE FOR CHILDREN.
``(a) Requirements for Coverage.--A group health plan, and
a health insurance issuer providing health insurance coverage
in connection with a group health plan, shall offer an
individual who is enrolled in such coverage the option to
purchase dependent coverage for a child of the individual.
``(b) No Employer Contribution Required.--An employer shall
not be required to contribute to the cost of purchasing
dependent coverage for a child by an individual who is an
employee of such employer.
``(c) Definition of Child.--In this section, the term
`child' means an individual who has not attained 21 years of
age.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of contents in section 1
of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29
U.S.C. 1001) is amended by inserting after the item relating
to section 713 the following:
``Sec. 714. Requirement to offer option to purchase dependent coverage
for children''.
(b) Public Health Service Act.--Subpart 2 of part A of
title XXVII of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
300gg-4 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``SEC. 2707. REQUIREMENT TO OFFER OPTION TO PURCHASE
DEPENDENT COVERAGE FOR CHILDREN.
``(a) Requirements for Coverage.--A group health plan, and
a health insurance issuer providing health insurance coverage
in connection with a group health plan, shall offer an
individual who is enrolled in such coverage the option to
purchase dependent coverage for a child of the individual.
``(b) No Employer Contribution Required.--An employer shall
not be required to contribute to the cost of purchasing
dependent coverage for a child by an individual who is an
employee of such employer.
``(c) Definition of Child.--In this section, the term
`child' means an individual who has not attained 21 years of
age.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply with respect to plan years beginning on or after
January 1, 2007.
SEC. 402. EFFECTIVE DATE.
Unless otherwise provided, the amendments made by this
title shall take effect on October 1, 2007, and shall apply
to child health assistance and medical assistance provided on
or after that date without regard to whether or not final
regulations to carry out such amendments have been
promulgated by such date.
TITLE V--REVENUE PROVISION
SEC. 501. PARTIAL REPEAL OF RATE REDUCTION IN THE HIGHEST
INCOME TAX BRACKET.
Section 1(i)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is
amended by adding at the end the following flush sentence:
``In the case of taxable years beginning during calendar year
2007 and thereafter, the final item in the fourth column in
the preceding table shall be applied by substituting for
``35.0%'' a rate equal to the lesser of 39.6% or the rate the
Secretary determines is necessary to provide sufficient
revenues to offset the Federal outlays required to implement
the provisions of, and amendments made by, the Kids Come
First Act of 2007.''.
______
By Mr. KERRY:
S. 96. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to ensure a
fairer and simpler method of taxing controlled foreign corporations of
United States shareholders, to treat certain foreign corporations
managed and controlled in the United States as domestic corporations,
to codify the economic substance doctrine, and to eliminate the top
corporate income tax rate, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Finance.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, today I am introducing the ``Export
Products Not Jobs Act.'' Our tax code is extremely complicated. In
1994, the IRS estimated that a family that itemized their deductions
and had some interest and capital gains would spend 11\1/2\ hours
preparing their Federal income tax return. A decade later in 2004, this
estimate increased to 19 hours and 45 minutes. It is time for Congress
to pass bipartisan tax legislation in the style of the Tax Reform Act
of 1986, which greatly simplified the tax code. And our tax reform
should be based upon the following three principles: fairness,
simplicity, and opportunity for economic growth.
Citizens and businesses struggle to comply with rules governing
taxation of business income, capital gains, income phase-outs,
extenders, the myriad savings vehicles, recordkeeping for itemized
deductions, the alternative minimum tax (AMT), the earned income tax
credit (EITC), and taxation of foreign business income. I believe that
our international tax system needs to be simplified and reformed to
encourage businesses to remain in the United States. And today, I am
introducing legislation that I hope will be fully considered as we
continue our discussions on tax reform.
Presently, the complexities of our international tax system actually
encourage U.S. corporations to invest overseas. Current tax laws allow
companies to defer paying U.S. taxes on income earned by their foreign
subsidiaries, which provides a substantial tax break for companies that
move investment and jobs overseas. Today, under U.S. tax law, a company
that is trying to decide where to locate production or services--either
in the United States or in a foreign low-tax haven--is actually given a
substantial tax incentive not only to move jobs overseas, but to
reinvest profits permanently, as opposed to bringing the profits back
to re-invest in the United States.
Recent press articles have revealed examples of companies taking
advantage of this perverse incentive in our tax code. For instance,
some companies have taken advantage of this initiative by opening
subsidiaries to serve markets throughout Europe. Much of the profit
earned by these subsidiaries will stay in the European countries and
the companies therefore avoid paying U.S. taxes. Other companies have
announced the expansion of jobs in India. This reflects a continued
pattern among some U.S. multinational companies of shifting software
development and call centers to India, and this trend is starting to
expand include the shifting critical functions like design and research
and development to India as well. Some companies are even outsourcing
the preparation of U.S. tax returns.
The Export Products Not Jobs Act would put an to end to these
practices by eliminating tax breaks that encourage companies to move
jobs overseas and by using the savings to create jobs in the United
States by repealing the top corporate rate. This legislation ends tax
breaks that encourage companies to move jobs by: 1. eliminating the
ability of companies to defer, paying U.S. taxes on foreign income; 2.
closing abusive corporate tax loopholes; and 3. repealing the top
corporate rate. It removes the incentive to shift jobs overseas by
eliminating deferral so that
[[Page 162]]
companies pay taxes on their international income as they earn it,
rather than being allowed to defer taxes.
Last Congress, the Ways and Means Subcommittee on Revenue held a
hearing on international tax laws. Stephen Shay, a former Reagan
Treasury official, testified that our tax rules ``provide incentives to
locate business activity outside the United States.'' Furthermore, he
suggested that taxation of U.S. shareholders under an expansion of
Subpart F would be a ``substantial improvement'' over our current
system. The Export Products Not Jobs Act does just that.
Our current tax system punishes U.S. companies that choose to create
and maintain jobs in the United States. These companies pay higher
taxes and suffer a competitive disadvantage with a company that chooses
to move jobs to a foreign tax haven. There is no reason why our tax
code should provide an incentive that encourages investment and job
creation overseas. Under my legislation, companies would be taxed the
same whether they invest abroad or at home; they will be taxed on their
foreign subsidiary profits just like they are taxed on their domestic
profits.
This legislation reflects the most sweeping simplification of
international taxes in over 40 years. Our economy has changed in the
last 40 years and our tax laws need to be updated to keep pace. Our
current global economy was not even envisioned when existing law was
written.
My Export Products Not Jobs Act will in no way hinder our global
competitiveness. Companies will be able to continue to defer income
they earn when they locate production in a foreign country that serves
that foreign country's markets. For example, if a U.S. company wants to
open a hotel in Bermuda or a car factory in India to sell cars, foreign
income can still be deferred. But if a company wants to open a call
center in India to answer calls from outside India or relocate abroad
to sell cars back to the United States or Canada, the company must pay
taxes just like call centers and auto manufacturers located in the
United States.
Currently, American companies allocate their revenue not in search of
the highest return, but in search of lower taxes. Eliminating deferral
will improve the efficiency of the economy by making taxes neutral so
that they do not encourage companies to overinvest abroad solely for
tax reasons.
The Congressional Research Service stated in a 2003 report that,
``[a]ccording to traditional economic theory, deferral thus reduces
economic welfare by encouraging firms to undertake overseas investments
that are less productive--before taxes are considered--than alternative
investments in the United States.'' Additionally, a 2000 Department of
Treasury study on deferral stated, ``[a]mong all of the options
considered, ending deferral would also be likely to have the most
positive long-term effect on economic efficiency and welfare because it
would do the most to eliminate tax considerations from decisions
regarding the location of investment.''
The ``Export Products Not Jobs Act'' would modify the rules for
determining residency for publicly-traded companies by basing a
corporation's residence on the location of its primary place of
management and control. This will prevent companies from locating in
tax havens, but basically maintaining their operations in the United
States. This provision should not hinder foreign investment in the
United States. Existing companies that are incorporated in foreign
countries with a comprehensive tax treaty with the United States will
not be affected by this provision.
Massachusetts is an example of a state that benefits from foreign
investment. Two foreign companies have recently expanded investment in
Massachusetts. Our tax system should not discourage foreign investment,
but it should not encourage companies to locate in tax havens.
The revenue raised from the repeal of deferral and closing corporate
loopholes would be used to repeal the top corporate tax rate of 35
percent. The tax differential between U.S. corporate rates and foreign
corporate rates has grown over the last two decades and the repeal of
the top corporate rate is a start in narrowing this gap.
The Export Products Not Jobs Act would promote equity among U.S.
taxpayers by ensuring that corporations could not eliminate or
substantially reduce taxation of foreign income by separately
incorporating their foreign operations. This legislation will eliminate
the tax incentives to encourage U.S. companies to invest abroad and
reward those companies that have chosen to invest in the United States.
I urge my colleagues to join me in this effort, and I ask unanimous
consent that summary of the Export Products Not Jobs Act, as well as
the text of the legislation, be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the material was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
Export Products Not Jobs Act
overview
The Export Products Not Jobs Act makes sweeping changes to
the current international tax laws by: (1) ending tax breaks
that encourage companies to move jobs overseas by eliminating
the ability of companies to defer paying U.S. taxes on
foreign income; (2) simplifying current-law Subpart F rules;
(3) closing abusive corporate tax loopholes; and (4)
repealing the top corporate tax rate.
Current tax laws allow companies to defer paying U.S. taxes
on income earned by their foreign subsidiaries, providing a
substantial tax break for companies to move investment and
jobs overseas. Except as provided under the Subpart F rules,
American companies generally do not have to pay taxes on
their active foreign income until they repatriate it to the
United States.
The Export Products Not Jobs Act eliminates deferral so
companies will be taxed on their foreign subsidiary profits
in the same way they are taxed on their domestic profits.
This new system will apply to profits in future years. In
order to ensure that American companies can compete in
international markets, income companies earn when they locate
production in a foreign country that serves that foreign
country's home markets can still be deferred.
The Subpart F rules which govern the taxation of foreign
subsidiaries controlled by American companies have become
increasingly complicated over time, adding to the overall
complexity of the tax code and making it easier for companies
to exploit loopholes to escape paying taxes. Under this bill,
the complexity created by the current Subpart F rules will be
eliminated and a simpler, more transparent system will be put
into place.
In a tax system without deferral, U.S.-based multinational
corporations might be tempted to locate their top-tiered
entity overseas to avoid taxation on the income of a foreign
subsidiary. This legislation would strengthen the corporate
residency test by preventing companies from incorporating in
a foreign jurisdiction to avoid U.S. taxation on a worldwide
basis. The current law test that is based solely on where the
company is incorporated is artificial, and allows foreign
corporations that are economically similar to American
companies to avoid being taxed like American companies.
Determining residency based on the location of a company's
primary place of management and control will provide a more
meaningful standard.
In order to prevent abusive tax transactions, the
legislation includes a provision that would codify the
judicially-developed economic substance test, which disallows
transactions where the profit potential is insubstantial
compared to the tax benefits. This proposal is identical to
the economic substance provisions that have been passed
repeatedly by the Senate.
The revenue saved from ending deferral, strengthening the
corporate residency test, and shutting down abusive tax
shelters will be used to lower the maximum corporate tax rate
from 35 percent to 34 percent. The tax differential between
U.S. corporations and foreign corporate rates has grown over
the last two decades. This proposal, in combination with the
deduction for domestic manufacturing activity when fully
phased-in in 2009, will result in a corporate tax rate of 31
percent for domestic manufacturing activity. The ``Export
Products Not Jobs Act'' moves in the right direction towards
narrowing this gap.
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS
I. Reform and Simplification of Subpart F Income
Subpart F Income Defined
Present law
Generally within the U.S., 10-percent shareholders of a
controlled foreign corporation (CFC) are taxed on the pro
rata shares of certain income referred to as Subpart F
income. A CFC generally is defined as any foreign corporation
in which U.S. persons (directly, indirectly, or
constructively) own more than 50 percent of the corporation's
stock (measured by vote or value), taking into account only
those U.S. persons that own at least 10 percent of the stock
(measured by vote only). Typically, Subpart F income is
passive income or income that is
[[Page 163]]
readily movable from one taxing jurisdiction to another.
Subpart F income is defined in code section 952 as foreign
base company income, insurance income, and certain income
relating to international boycotts and other violations of
public policy.
Export Products Not Jobs Act
This legislation strikes code section 952 and replaces it
with a new definition of Subpart F income. Generally, Subpart
F income is defined as all gross income of the controlled
foreign corporation with exceptions for certain types of
income. Subpart F income of a CFC for any taxable year is
limited to the earnings and profits of the CFC for that
taxable year. Subpart F will continue to include income
related to international boycotts.
Exceptions to Subpart F Income
Present law
Subpart F income is defined in the code rather narrowly and
the definition lists the income that it includes. Subpart F
income is currently taxed, and other income of a U.S.
person's CFC that conducts foreign operations generally is
subject to U.S. tax only when it is repatriated to the United
States.
Temporary Active Financing Exception
Under current law, there are temporary exceptions from the
Subpart F provisions for certain active financing income,
which is income derived in the active conduct of a banking,
financing, or similar business, or in the conduct of an
insurance business. This temporary exception expires at the
end of 2008. To be eligible for this exception, substantially
all transactions must be conducted directly by the CFC or a
qualified business unit of a CFC in its home country.
Export Products Not Jobs Act
Under the legislation, Subpart F income is generally all
income of a CFC except for active home country income of the
CFC. Active home country income constitutes qualified
property income or qualified service income and is derived
from the active and regular conduct of one or more trades or
businesses within the home country. The home country is
defined as the country in which the CFC is created or
organized.
Qualified property income is defined as income derived in
connection with: (1) the manufacture, production, growth, or
extraction of any personal property within the home country
of the CFC; or (2) the resale in the home country of the CFC
of personal property manufactured, produced, grown, or
extracted within the home country of such corporation for the
resale of such property by the CFC in the home country. The
property has to be sold for use or consumption within the
home country in either case.
Qualified services income is defined as income derived in
connection with the providing of services in transactions
with customers who, at the time the services are provided,
are located in the home country. Services are required: (1)
to be used in the home country; or (2) to be used in the
active conduct of trade or business by the recipient where
substantially all of the activities in connection with the
trade or business are conducted by the recipient in the home
country.
Under the ``Export Products Not Jobs Act,'' the current-law
temporary active financing exception is repealed. The
legislation includes a de minimis exception providing that if
the Subpart F income of a CFC is less than the lesser of five
percent of gross income, or $1 million, the Subpart F income
of the CFC is zero for that taxable year.
For purposes of calculating the Subpart F income of a CFC,
properly allocated deductions are allowed.
A CFC can elect to be treated as a domestic corporation.
The election will apply to the taxable year for which it is
made and all subsequent taxable years unless revoked with the
consent of the Secretary. If a CFC chooses to make an
election to be treated as a domestic corporation, pre-2008
earnings and profits are not included in gross income.
Captive Insurance Income
Present Law
Under current law, special rules apply to captive insurance
companies that have related person insurance income which is
defined as any insurance income attributable to a policy of
insurance or reinsurance with respect to which the person
(directly or indirectly) insured is a U.S. shareholder in the
foreign corporation or a related person to such a
shareholder. These companies are formed to insure the risks
of the owners. Under current law, a lower ownership threshold
applies to determine whether a captive insurance company is
treated as a CFC subject to the current-law income inclusion
rules of Subpart F. Under this lower ownership threshold, a
captive insurance company is treated as a CFC if 25 percent
or more of the stock is owned by U.S. persons.
The special rules for captive insurance companies were
added in 1986 because Congress was concerned that the
ownership of these companies was often dispersed widely and
that these companies were not covered by the otherwise
applicable ownership threshold for a CFC.
Export Products Not Jobs Act
The bill retains, in simplified form, the present-law
concept of related person insurance income, and also retains
the lower ownership threshold for captive insurance companies
that are treated as CFCs. Captive insurance income that meets
the requirements of the active home exception, like other
active home country services income, however, can be
deferred.
Effective Date
The above described provisions apply to taxable years
beginning after December 31, 2007.
II. Corporate Residency Definition
Present Law
The place of incorporation or organization determines
whether a corporation is treated as foreign or domestic for
purposes of U.S. tax law. A corporation is treated as
domestic if it is incorporated or organized under the laws of
the United States or of any State.
Export Products Not Jobs Act
The bill amends the rules for determining corporate
residency for publicly-traded companies incorporated or
organized in a foreign country, by basing such corporation's
residence on the location of its primary place of management
and control. A company incorporated or organized in the
United States is still considered a domestic corporation in
any event. Primary place of management and control is defined
as the place where the executive officers and senior
management of the corporation exercise day-to-day
responsibility for the strategic, financial, and operational
decision-making for the company (including direct and
indirect subsidiaries).
Effective Date
The proposal would be effective for taxable years beginning
on or after two years after the date of enactment. A
corporation that is in existence on the date of enactment and
is incorporated in a country in which the United States has a
comprehensive tax treaty is not affected by this provision.
III. Shutdown of Abusive Tax Shelters
Clarification of Economic Substance Doctrine
Present Law
Under current law, there are specific rules regarding the
computation of taxable income. In addition to these statutory
provisions, courts have developed several doctrines that can
be applied to deny the tax benefits of motivated
transactions, even though the transaction meets the
requirements of a specific tax provision. Generally, courts
have denied tax benefits if the transaction lacks economic
substance independent of tax considerations.
Export Products Not Jobs Act
Clarifies that a transaction has economic substance only if
the taxpayer establishes that: (1) the transaction changes in
a meaningful way (aside from Federal income tax consequences)
the taxpayer's economic position; and (2) the taxpayer has a
substantial non-tax purpose for entering into such a
transaction and the transaction is a reasonable means of
accomplishing such purpose. This proposal applies to
transactions entered into after the date of enactment.
Penalty for Understatements Attributable to Transactions
Lacking Economic Substance
Present Law
Under current law, there are various penalties for
understatements. There is a 20 percent accuracy-related
penalty imposed on any understatement attributable to any
adequately disclosed listed transaction or certain reportable
transactions (``reportable transaction understatement''). The
penalty is increased to 30 percent if such a transaction is
not adequately disclosed in accordance with regulations.
Export Products Not Jobs Act
The bill imposes a 40 percent penalty on any understatement
attributable to any transaction that lacks economic substance
(``noneconomic substance underpayment''). The rate is reduced
to 20 percent if the taxpayer discloses the transaction in
accordance with regulations. This proposal applies to
transactions entered into after the date of enactment.
Denial of Deduction for Interest on Underpayments
Attributable to Noneconomic Substance Transactions
Present Law
Under current law, no deduction for interest is allowed for
interest paid or accrued on any underpayment of tax which is
attributable to the portion of any reportable transaction
understatement for which the facts were not adequately
disclosed.
Export Products Not Jobs Act of 2006
The bill extends the disallowance of interest deductions to
interest paid or accrued on any underpayment of tax
attributable to any noneconomic substance underpayment. The
proposal applies to transactions after the date of enactment
in taxable years ending after such date.
IV. Repeal of Top Corporate Marginal Income Tax Rate
Present Law
The maximum corporate rate is 35 percent and this rate
applies to taxable income in excess of $10 million. The
maximum rate on corporate taxable gains is 35 percent. A
corporation with taxable income in excess of $15 million is
required to increase its tax liability by the lesser of three
percent of the excess, or $100,000.
[[Page 164]]
Export Products Not Jobs Act
The bill repeals the top corporate rate of 35 percent. The
highest marginal tax rate will be 34 percent and the maximum
rate of tax on corporate net capital gains will also be 34
percent. The 34 percent rate applies to income in excess of
$75,000. The proposal applies to taxable years beginning
after December 31, 2007.
____
S. 96
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; AMENDMENT OF 1986 CODE.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Export
Products Not Jobs Act''.
(b) Amendment of 1986 Code.--Except as otherwise expressly
provided, whenever in this Act an amendment or repeal is
expressed in terms of an amendment to, or repeal of, a
section or other provision, the reference shall be considered
to be made to a section or other provision of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986.
TITLE I--FOREIGN TAX REFORM AND SIMPLIFICATION
SEC. 101. REFORM AND SIMPLIFICATION OF SUBPART F.
(a) In General.--Subpart F of part III of subchapter N of
chapter 1 (relating to controlled foreign corporations) is
amended by striking sections 952, 953, and 954 and inserting
the following:
``SEC. 952. SUBPART F INCOME DEFINED.
``(a) In General.--For purposes of this subpart, except as
provided in this section, the term `subpart F income' means
the gross income of the controlled foreign corporation.
``(b) Exceptions for Certain Types of Income.--Subpart F
income shall not include--
``(1) the active home country income (as defined in section
953) of the controlled foreign corporation for the taxable
year, or
``(2) any item of income for the taxable year from sources
within the United States which is effectively connected with
the conduct by the controlled foreign corporation of a trade
or business within the United States unless such item is
exempt from taxation (or is subject to a reduced rate of tax)
pursuant to a treaty obligation of the United States.
For purposes of paragraph (2), income described in paragraph
(2) or (3) of section 921(d) shall be treated as derived from
sources within the United States and any exemption (or
reduction) with respect to the tax imposed by section 884
shall not be taken into account.
``(c) Limitation Based on Earnings and Profits.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of subsection (a), the
subpart F income of any controlled foreign corporation for
any taxable year shall not exceed the earnings and profits of
such corporation for such taxable year.
``(2) Recharacterization in subsequent taxable years.--If
the subpart F income of any controlled foreign corporation
for any taxable year was reduced by reason of paragraph (1),
any excess of the earnings and profits of such corporation
for any subsequent taxable year over the subpart F income of
such foreign corporation for such taxable year shall be
recharacterized as subpart F income under rules similar to
the rules applicable under section 904(f)(5).
``(3) Special rule for determining earnings and profits.--
For purposes of this subsection, earnings and profits of any
controlled foreign corporation shall be determined without
regard to paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) of section 312(n).
Under regulations, the preceding sentence shall not apply to
the extent it would increase earnings and profits by an
amount which was previously distributed by the controlled
foreign corporation.
``(d) De Minimis Exception.--If the subpart F income of a
controlled foreign corporation for any taxable year
(determined without regard to this subsection and section
954(a)) is less than the lesser of--
``(1) 5 percent of gross income, or
``(2) $1,000,000,
the subpart F income of such corporation for such taxable
year shall be treated as being equal to zero.
``(e) Special Rules Relating to Boycotts, Bribes, and
Certain Foreign Countries.--
``(1) In general.--Subpart F income of a controlled foreign
corporation for any taxable year (determined without regard
to this subsection) shall be increased by the sum of--
``(A) the product of--
``(i) the gross income of the corporation reduced by its
subpart F income (as so determined), and
``(ii) the international boycott factor (as determined
under section 999),
``(B) the sum of the amounts of any illegal bribes,
kickbacks, or other payments (within the meaning of section
162(c)) paid by or on behalf of the corporation during the
taxable year of the corporation directly or indirectly to an
official, employee, or agent in fact of a government, and
``(C) the gross income of such corporation which is derived
from any foreign country during any period during which
section 901(j) applies to such foreign country and which is
not otherwise treated as subpart F income (as so determined).
``(2) Special rule for illegal payments.--The payments
referred to in paragraph (1)(B) are payments which would be
unlawful under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 if
the payor were a United States person.
``(3) Income derived from foreign country.--The Secretary
shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary or
appropriate to carry out the purposes of paragraph (1)(C),
including regulations which treat income paid through 1 or
more entities as derived from a foreign country to which
section 901(j) applies if such income was, without regard to
such entities, derived from such country.
``SEC. 953. ACTIVE HOME COUNTRY INCOME.
``(a) In General.--For purposes of section 952(b), the term
`active home country income' means, with respect to any
controlled foreign corporation, income derived from the
active and regular conduct of 1 or more trades or businesses
within the home country of such corporation which
constitutes--
``(1) qualified property income, or
``(2) qualified services income.
``(b) Qualified Property Income.--For purposes of this
section--
``(1) In general.--The term `qualified property income'
means income derived in connection with--
``(A) the manufacture, production, growth, or extraction
(in whole or in substantial part)of any personal property
within the home country of the controlled foreign
corporation, or
``(B) the resale by the controlled foreign corporation
within its home country of personal property manufactured,
produced, grown, or extracted (in whole or in substantial
part) within that home country.
``(2) Property must be used or consumed in home country.--
Paragraph (1) shall only apply to income if the personal
property is sold for use or consumption within the home
country.
``(c) Qualified Services Income.--For purposes of this
section--
``(1) In general.--The term `qualified services income'
means income (other than qualified property income) derived
in connection with the providing of services in transactions
with customers which, at the time the services are provided,
are located in the home country of such corporation.
``(2) Services must be used in home country.--Paragraph (1)
shall only apply to income if the services--
``(A) are used or consumed in the home country of the
controlled foreign corporation, or
``(B) are used in the active conduct of a trade or business
by the recipient and substantially all of the activities in
connection with the trade or business are conducted by the
recipient in such home country.
``(3) Special rule for insurance income.--If income of a
controlled foreign corporation--
``(A) is attributable to the issuing (or reinsuring) of an
insurance or annuity contract, and
``(B) would (subject to the modifications under section
954(c)(2)(B)) be taxed under subchapter L of this chapter if
such income were the income of a domestic corporation,
such income shall be treated as qualified services income
only if the contract covers only risks in connection with
property in, liability arising out of activity in, or lives
or health of residents of, the home country of such
corporation.
``(4) Anti-abuse rule.--For purposes of this subsection,
there shall be disregarded any item of income of a controlled
foreign corporation derived in connection with any trade or
business if, in the conduct of the trade or business, the
corporation is not engaged in regular and continuous
transactions with customers which are not related persons.
``(d) Home Country.--For purposes of this section, the term
`home country' means, with respect to a controlled foreign
corporation, the country in which such corporation is created
or organized.
``SEC. 954. OTHER RULES AND DEFINITIONS RELATING TO SUBPART F
INCOME.
``(a) Deductions To Be Taken Into Account.--For purposes of
determining the subpart F income of a controlled foreign
corporation for any taxable year, gross income, and any
category of income described in subsection (b) or (c) of
section 953, shall be reduced by deductions (including taxes)
properly allocable to such income or category. The Secretary
shall prescribe regulations for the application of this
subsection.
``(b) Election by Controlled Foreign Corporation To Be
Treated as Domestic Corporation.--
``(1) In general.--If--
``(A) a foreign corporation is a controlled foreign
corporation which makes an election to have this subsection
apply and waives all benefits to such corporation granted by
the United States under any treaty, and
``(B) such foreign corporation meets such requirements as
the Secretary shall prescribe to ensure that the taxes
imposed by this chapter on such foreign corporation are paid,
such corporation shall be treated as a domestic corporation
for purposes of this title.
``(2) Period during which election is in effect.--
[[Page 165]]
``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B),
an election under paragraph (1) shall apply to the taxable
year for which made and all subsequent taxable years unless
revoked with the consent of the Secretary.
``(B) Termination.--If a corporation which made an election
under paragraph (1) for any taxable year fails to meet the
requirements of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) for any
subsequent taxable year, such election shall not apply to
such subsequent taxable year and all succeeding taxable
years.
``(3) Treatment of losses.--If any corporation treated as a
domestic corporation under this subsection is treated as a
member of an affiliated group for purposes of chapter 6
(relating to consolidated returns), any loss of such
corporation shall be treated as a dual consolidated loss for
purposes of section 1503(d) without regard to paragraph
(2)(B) thereof.
``(4) Effect of election.--
``(A) In general.--For purposes of section 367, any foreign
corporation making an election under paragraph (1) shall be
treated as transferring (as of the 1st day of the 1st taxable
year to which such election applies) all of its assets to a
domestic corporation in connection with an exchange to which
section 354 applies.
``(B) Exception for pre-2008 earnings and profit.--
``(i) In general.--Earnings and profits of the foreign
corporation accumulated in taxable years beginning before
January 1, 2008, shall not be included in the gross income of
the persons holding stock in such corporation by reason of
subparagraph (A).
``(ii) Treatment of distributions.--For purposes of this
title, any distribution made by a corporation to which an
election under paragraph (1) applies out of earnings and
profits accumulated in taxable years beginning before January
1, 2008, shall be treated as a distribution made by a foreign
corporation.
``(iii) Certain rules to continue to apply to pre-2008
earnings.--The provisions specified in clause (iv) shall be
applied without regard to paragraph (1), except that, in the
case of a corporation to which an election under paragraph
(1) applies, only earnings and profits accumulated in taxable
years beginning before January 1, 2008, shall be taken into
account.
``(iv) Specified provisions.--The provisions specified in
this clause are:
``(I) Section 1248 (relating to gain from certain sales or
exchanges of stock in certain foreign corporations).
``(II) Subpart F of part III of subchapter N to the extent
such subpart relates to earnings invested in United States
property or amounts referred to in clause (ii) or (iii) of
section 951(a)(1)(A).
``(5) Effect of termination.--For purposes of section 367,
if--
``(A) an election is made by a corporation under paragraph
(1) for any taxable year, and
``(B) such election ceases to apply for any subsequent
taxable year,
such corporation shall be treated as a domestic corporation
transferring (as of the 1st day of such subsequent taxable
year) all of its property to a foreign corporation in
connection with an exchange to which section 354 applies.
``(c) Special Rule for Certain Captive Insurance
Companies.--
``(1) In general.--Solely for purposes of applying this
subpart to related person insurance income--
``(A) the term `United States shareholder' means, with
respect to any foreign corporation, a United States person
(as defined in section 957(c)) who owns (within the meaning
of section 958(a)) any stock of the foreign corporation,
``(B) the term `controlled foreign corporation' has the
meaning given to such term by section 957(a) determined by
substituting `25 percent or more' for `more than 50 percent',
and
``(C) the pro rata share referred to in section
951(a)(1)(A)(i) shall be determined under paragraph (5) of
this subsection.
``(2) Related person insurance income.--For purposes of
this subsection--
``(A) In general.--The term `related person insurance
income' means any income which--
``(i) is attributable to a policy of insurance or
reinsurance with respect to which the person (directly or
indirectly) insured is a United States shareholder in the
foreign corporation or a related person to such a
shareholder, and
``(ii) would (subject to the modifications provided by
subparagraph (B)) be taxed under subchapter L of this chapter
if such income were the income of a domestic insurance
company.
``(B) Special rules.--For purposes of subparagraph (A)--
``(i) The following provisions of subchapter L shall not
apply:
``(I) The small life insurance company deduction.
``(II) Section 805(a)(5) (relating to operations loss
deduction).
``(III) Section 832(c)(5) (relating to certain capital
losses).
``(ii) The items referred to in--
``(I) section 803(a)(1) (relating to gross amount of
premiums and other considerations),
``(II) section 803(a)(2) (relating to net decrease in
reserves),
``(III) section 805(a)(2) (relating to net increase in
reserves), and
``(IV) section 832(b)(4) (relating to premiums earned on
insurance contracts),
shall be taken into account only to the extent they are in
respect of any reinsurance or the issuing of any insurance or
annuity contract described in subparagraph (A).
``(iii) Reserves for any insurance or annuity contract
shall be determined in the same manner as if the controlled
foreign corporation were subject to tax under subchapter L,
except that in applying such subchapter--
``(I) the interest rate determined for the functional
currency of the corporation and which, except as provided by
the Secretary, is calculated in the same manner as the
Federal mid-term rate under section 1274(d), shall be
substituted for the applicable Federal interest rate,
``(II) the highest assumed interest rate permitted to be
used in determining foreign statement reserves shall be
substituted for the prevailing State assumed interest rate,
and
``(III) tables for mortality and morbidity which reasonably
reflect the current mortality and morbidity risks in the
corporation's home country shall be substituted for the
mortality and morbidity tables otherwise used for such
subchapter.
``(iv) All items of income, expenses, losses, and
deductions shall be properly allocated or apportioned under
regulations prescribed by the Secretary.
``(3) Exception for corporations not held by insureds.--
Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any foreign corporation if
at all times during the taxable year of such foreign
corporation--
``(A) less than 20 percent of the total combined voting
power of all classes of stock of such corporation entitled to
vote, and
``(B) less than 20 percent of the total value of such
corporation,
is owned (directly or indirectly under the principles of
section 883(c)(4)) by persons who are (directly or
indirectly) insured under any policy of insurance or
reinsurance issued by such corporation or who are related
persons to any such person.
``(4) Treatment of mutual insurance companies.--In the case
of a mutual insurance company--
``(A) this subsection shall apply,
``(B) policyholders of such company shall be treated as
shareholders, and
``(C) appropriate adjustments in the application of this
subpart shall be made under regulations prescribed by the
Secretary.
``(5) Determination of pro rata share.--
``(A) In general.--The pro rata share determined under this
paragraph for any United States shareholder is the lesser
of--
``(i) the amount which would be determined under paragraph
(2) of section 951(a) if--
``(I) only related person insurance income were taken into
account,
``(II) stock owned (within the meaning of section 958(a))
by United States shareholders on the last day of the taxable
year were the only stock in the foreign corporation, and
``(III) only distributions received by United States
shareholders were taken into account under subparagraph (B)
of such paragraph (2), or
``(ii) the amount which would be determined under paragraph
(2) of section 951(a) if the entire earnings and profits of
the foreign corporation for the taxable year were subpart F
income.
``(B) Coordination with other provisions.--The Secretary
shall prescribe regulations providing for such modifications
to the provisions of this subpart as may be necessary or
appropriate by reason of subparagraph (A).
``(6) Related person.--For purposes of this subsection--
``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B),
the term `related person' has the meaning given such term by
subsection (d)(3).
``(B) Treatment of certain liability insurance policies.--
In the case of any policy of insurance covering liability
arising from services performed as a director, officer, or
employee of a corporation or as a partner or employee of a
partnership, the person performing such services and the
entity for which such services are performed shall be treated
as related persons.
``(7) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe such
regulations as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of
this subsection, including--
``(A) regulations preventing the avoidance of this
subsection through cross insurance arrangements or otherwise,
and
``(B) regulations which may provide that a person will not
be treated as a United States shareholder under paragraph (1)
with respect to any foreign corporation if neither such
person (nor any related person to such person) is (directly
or indirectly) insured under any policy of insurance or
reinsurance issued by such foreign corporation.
``(d) Other Definitions and Rules.--For purposes of this
section--
``(1) Treatment of branches.--If--
``(A) a controlled foreign corporation carries on
activities through a branch or similar establishment with a
home country other
[[Page 166]]
than the home country of such corporation, and
``(B) the carrying on of such activities in such manner has
substantially the same effect as if such branch or similar
establishment were a wholly owned subsidiary of such
corporation,
this subpart shall, under regulations prescribed by the
Secretary, be applied as if such branch or other
establishment were a wholly owned subsidiary of such
corporation.
``(2) Home country.--For purposes of paragraph (1)--
``(A) In general.--The term `home country' has the meaning
given such term by section 953(d).
``(B) Branch.--In the case of a branch or similar
establishment, the term `home country' means the foreign
country in which--
``(i) the principal place of business of the branch or
similar establishment is located, and
``(ii) separate books and accounts are maintained.
``(3) Related person defined.--For purposes of this
section, a person is a related person with respect to a
controlled foreign corporation, if--
``(A) such person is an individual, corporation,
partnership, trust, or estate which controls, or is
controlled by, the controlled foreign corporation, or
``(B) such person is a corporation, partnership, trust, or
estate which is controlled by the same person or persons
which control the controlled foreign corporation.
For purposes of the preceding sentence, control means, with
respect to a corporation, the ownership, directly or
indirectly, of stock possessing more than 50 percent of the
total voting power of all classes of stock entitled to vote
or of the total value of stock of such corporation. In the
case of a partnership, trust, or estate, control means the
ownership, directly or indirectly, of more than 50 percent
(by value) of the beneficial interests in such partnership,
trust, or estate. For purposes of this paragraph, rules
similar to the rules of section 958 shall apply.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of sections for
subpart F of part III of subchapter N of chapter 1 is amended
by striking the items relating to sections 953 and 954 and
inserting:
``Sec. 953. Active home country income.
``Sec. 954. Other rules and definitions relating to subpart F
income.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years of controlled foreign
corporations beginning after December 31, 2007, and taxable
years of United States shareholders with or within which such
taxable years of such corporations end.
SEC. 102. TREATMENT OF FOREIGN CORPORATIONS MANAGED AND
CONTROLLED IN THE UNITED STATES AS DOMESTIC
CORPORATIONS.
(a) In General.--Section 7701(a)(4) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 (defining domestic) is amended to read as
follows:
``(4) Domestic.--
``(A) In general.--The term `domestic' means, when applied
to a corporation or partnership, a corporation or partnership
which is created or organized in the United States or under
the law of the United States or of any State unless, in the
case of a partnership, the Secretary provides otherwise by
regulations.
``(B) Income tax exception for publicly-traded corporations
managed and controlled in the united states.--Notwithstanding
subparagraph (A), in the case of a corporation the stock of
which is regularly traded on an established securities
market, if--
``(i) the corporation would not otherwise be treated as a
domestic corporation for purposes of this title, but
``(ii) the management and control of the corporation occurs
primarily within the United States,
then, solely for purposes of chapter 1 (and any other
provision of this title relating to chapter 1), the
corporation shall be treated as a domestic corporation.
``(C) Management and control.--For purposes of this
paragraph, the management and control of a corporation shall
be treated as primarily occurring within the United States if
substantially all of the executive officers and senior
management of the corporation who exercise day-to-day
responsibility for making decisions involving strategic,
financial, and operational policies of the corporation are
primarily located within the United States. The Secretary may
by regulations include other individuals not described in the
preceding sentence in the determination of whether the
management and control of the corporation occurs primarily
within the United States if such other individuals exercise
the day-to day responsibilities described in the preceding
sentence.''.
(b) Effective Dates.--
(1) In general.--The amendments made by this section shall
apply to taxable years beginning on or after the date which
is 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(2) Transition rule for corporations organized in treaty
countries.--If--
(A) a corporation is in existence on the date of the
enactment of this Act, and
(B) the corporation was created or organized under the laws
of a foreign country with which the United States has, on
such date, a comprehensive income tax treaty which the
Secretary of the Treasury determines is satisfactory for
purposes of this paragraph and which includes an exchange of
information program,
section 7701(a)(4)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
(as added by the amendments made by this section) shall not
apply to the corporation with respect to taxable years ending
in any continuous period beginning on such date during which
the corporation is eligible for the benefits of such treaty
(or any successor treaty with such foreign country meeting
the requirements of this paragraph).
TITLE II--ECONOMIC SUBSTANCE DOCTRINE
SEC. 201. CLARIFICATION OF ECONOMIC SUBSTANCE DOCTRINE.
(a) In General.--Section 7701 is amended by redesignating
subsection (o) as subsection (p) and by inserting after
subsection (n) the following new subsection:
``(o) Clarification of Economic Substance Doctrine; etc.--
``(1) General rules.--
``(A) In general.--In any case in which a court determines
that the economic substance doctrine is relevant for purposes
of this title to a transaction (or series of transactions),
such transaction (or series of transactions) shall have
economic substance only if the requirements of this paragraph
are met.
``(B) Definition of economic substance.--For purposes of
subparagraph (A)--
``(i) In general.--A transaction has economic substance
only if--
``(I) the transaction changes in a meaningful way (apart
from Federal tax effects) the taxpayer's economic position,
and
``(II) the taxpayer has a substantial nontax purpose for
entering into such transaction and the transaction is a
reasonable means of accomplishing such purpose.
In applying subclause (II), a purpose of achieving a
financial accounting benefit shall not be taken into account
in determining whether a transaction has a substantial nontax
purpose if the origin of such financial accounting benefit is
a reduction of income tax.
``(ii) Special rule where taxpayer relies on profit
potential.--A transaction shall not be treated as having
economic substance by reason of having a potential for profit
unless--
``(I) the present value of the reasonably expected pre-tax
profit from the transaction is substantial in relation to the
present value of the expected net tax benefits that would be
allowed if the transaction were respected, and
``(II) the reasonably expected pre-tax profit from the
transaction exceeds a risk-free rate of return.
``(C) Treatment of fees and foreign taxes.--Fees and other
transaction expenses and foreign taxes shall be taken into
account as expenses in determining pre-tax profit under
subparagraph (B)(ii).
``(2) Special rules for transactions with tax-indifferent
parties.--
``(A) Special rules for financing transactions.--The form
of a transaction which is in substance the borrowing of money
or the acquisition of financial capital directly or
indirectly from a tax-indifferent party shall not be
respected if the present value of the deductions to be
claimed with respect to the transaction is substantially in
excess of the present value of the anticipated economic
returns of the person lending the money or providing the
financial capital. A public offering shall be treated as a
borrowing, or an acquisition of financial capital, from a
tax-indifferent party if it is reasonably expected that at
least 50 percent of the offering will be placed with tax-
indifferent parties.
``(B) Artificial income shifting and basis adjustments.--
The form of a transaction with a tax-indifferent party shall
not be respected if--
``(i) it results in an allocation of income or gain to the
tax-indifferent party in excess of such party's economic
income or gain, or
``(ii) it results in a basis adjustment or shifting of
basis on account of overstating the income or gain of the
tax-indifferent party.
``(3) Definitions and special rules.--For purposes of this
subsection--
``(A) Economic substance doctrine.--The term `economic
substance doctrine' means the common law doctrine under which
tax benefits under subtitle A with respect to a transaction
are not allowable if the transaction does not have economic
substance or lacks a business purpose.
``(B) Tax-indifferent party.--The term `tax-indifferent
party' means any person or entity not subject to tax imposed
by subtitle A. A person shall be treated as a tax-indifferent
party with respect to a transaction if the items taken into
account with respect to the transaction have no substantial
impact on such person's liability under subtitle A.
``(C) Exception for personal transactions of individuals.--
In the case of an individual, this subsection shall apply
only to transactions entered into in connection with a trade
or business or an activity engaged in for the production of
income.
``(D) Treatment of lessors.--In applying paragraph
(1)(B)(ii) to the lessor of tangible property subject to a
lease--
[[Page 167]]
``(i) the expected net tax benefits with respect to the
leased property shall not include the benefits of--
``(I) depreciation,
``(II) any tax credit, or
``(III) any other deduction as provided in guidance by the
Secretary, and
``(ii) subclause (II) of paragraph (1)(B)(ii) shall be
disregarded in determining whether any of such benefits are
allowable.
``(4) Other common law doctrines not affected.--Except as
specifically provided in this subsection, the provisions of
this subsection shall not be construed as altering or
supplanting any other rule of law, and the requirements of
this subsection shall be construed as being in addition to
any such other rule of law.
``(5) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe such
regulations as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out
the purposes of this subsection. Such regulations may include
exemptions from the application of this subsection.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to transactions entered into after the date of
the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 202. PENALTY FOR UNDERSTATEMENTS ATTRIBUTABLE TO
TRANSACTIONS LACKING ECONOMIC SUBSTANCE, ETC.
(a) In General.--Subchapter A of chapter 68 is amended by
inserting after section 6662A the following new section:
``SEC. 6662B. PENALTY FOR UNDERSTATEMENTS ATTRIBUTABLE TO
TRANSACTIONS LACKING ECONOMIC SUBSTANCE, ETC.
``(a) Imposition of Penalty.--If a taxpayer has an
noneconomic substance transaction understatement for any
taxable year, there shall be added to the tax an amount equal
to 40 percent of the amount of such understatement.
``(b) Reduction of Penalty for Disclosed Transactions.--
Subsection (a) shall be applied by substituting `20 percent'
for `40 percent' with respect to the portion of any
noneconomic substance transaction understatement with respect
to which the relevant facts affecting the tax treatment of
the item are adequately disclosed in the return or a
statement attached to the return.
``(c) Noneconomic Substance Transaction Understatement.--
For purposes of this section--
``(1) In general.--The term `noneconomic substance
transaction understatement' means any amount which would be
an understatement under section 6662A(b)(1) if section 6662A
were applied by taking into account items attributable to
noneconomic substance transactions rather than items to which
section 6662A would apply without regard to this paragraph.
``(2) Noneconomic substance transaction.--The term
`noneconomic substance transaction' means any transaction
if--
``(A) there is a lack of economic substance (within the
meaning of section 7701(o)(1)) for the transaction giving
rise to the claimed benefit or the transaction was not
respected under section 7701(o)(2), or
``(B) the transaction fails to meet the requirements of any
similar rule of law.
``(d) Rules Applicable to Compromise of Penalty.--
``(1) In general.--If the 1st letter of proposed deficiency
which allows the taxpayer an opportunity for administrative
review in the Internal Revenue Service Office of Appeals has
been sent with respect to a penalty to which this section
applies, only the Commissioner of Internal Revenue may
compromise all or any portion of such penalty.
``(2) Applicable rules.--The rules of paragraphs (2) and
(3) of section 6707A(d) shall apply for purposes of paragraph
(1).
``(e) Coordination With Other Penalties.--Except as
otherwise provided in this part, the penalty imposed by this
section shall be in addition to any other penalty imposed by
this title.
``(f) Cross References.--
``(1) For coordination of penalty with understatements under
section 6662 and other special rules, see section 6662A(e).
``(2) For reporting of penalty imposed under this section to the
Securities and Exchange Commission, see section 6707A(e).''.
(b) Coordination With Other Understatements and
Penalties.--
(1) The second sentence of section 6662(d)(2)(A) is amended
by inserting ``and without regard to items with respect to
which a penalty is imposed by section 6662B'' before the
period at the end.
(2) Subsection (e) of section 6662A is amended--
(A) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``and noneconomic
substance transaction understatements'' after ``reportable
transaction understatements'' both places it appears,
(B) in paragraph (2)(A), by inserting ``and a noneconomic
substance transaction understatement'' after ``reportable
transaction understatement'',
(C) in paragraph (2)(B), by inserting ``6662B or'' before
``6663'',
(D) in paragraph (2)(C)(i), by inserting ``or section
6662B'' before the period at the end,
(E) in paragraph (2)(C)(ii), by inserting ``and section
6662B'' after ``This section'',
(F) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``or noneconomic
substance transaction understatement'' after ``reportable
transaction understatement'', and
(G) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(4) Noneconomic substance transaction understatement.--
For purposes of this subsection, the term `noneconomic
substance transaction understatement' has the meaning given
such term by section 6662B(c).''.
(3) Subsection (e) of section 6707A is amended--
(A) by striking ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (B), and
(B) by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting the
following new subparagraphs:
``(C) is required to pay a penalty under section 6662B with
respect to any noneconomic substance transaction, or
``(D) is required to pay a penalty under section 6662(h)
with respect to any transaction and would (but for section
6662A(e)(2)(C)) have been subject to penalty under section
6662A at a rate prescribed under section 6662A(c) or under
section 6662B,''.
(c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for part II
of subchapter A of chapter 68 is amended by inserting after
the item relating to section 6662A the following new item:
``Sec. 6662B. Penalty for understatements attributable to transactions
lacking economic substance, etc.''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to transactions entered into after the date of
the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 203. DENIAL OF DEDUCTION FOR INTEREST ON UNDERPAYMENTS
ATTRIBUTABLE TO NONECONOMIC SUBSTANCE
TRANSACTIONS.
(a) In General.--Section 163(m) (relating to interest on
unpaid taxes attributable to nondisclosed reportable
transactions) is amended--
(1) by striking ``attributable'' and all that follows and
inserting the following: ``attributable to--
``(1) the portion of any reportable transaction
understatement (as defined in section 6662A(b)) with respect
to which the requirement of section 6664(d)(2)(A) is not met,
or
``(2) any noneconomic substance transaction understatement
(as defined in section 6662B(c)).'', and
(2) by inserting ``AND NONECONOMIC SUBSTANCE TRANSACTIONS''
in the heading thereof after ``TRANSACTIONS''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to transactions after the date of the enactment
of this Act in taxable years ending after such date.
TITLE III--ELIMINATION OF HIGHEST CORPORATE MARGINAL INCOME TAX RATE
SEC. 301. ELIMINATION OF HIGHEST CORPORATE MARGINAL INCOME
TAX RATE.
(a) In General.--Section 11(b)(1) (relating to amount of
tax imposed on corporations) is amended by striking
subparagraphs (C) and (D) and inserting the following new
subparagraph:
``(C) 34 percent of so much of the taxable income as
exceeds $75,000.''.
(b) Certain Personal Service Corporations.--Section
11(b)(2) is amended by striking ``35 percent'' and inserting
``34 percent''.
(c) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 11(b)(1) is amended by striking the last
sentence.
(2) Section 1201(a) is amended--
(A) by striking ``35 percent'' each place it appears and
inserting ``34 percent'', and
(B) by striking ``last 2 sentences'' and inserting ``last
sentence''.
(3) Paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 1445(e) are each
amended by striking ``35 percent'' and inserting ``34
percent''.
(4) Section 1561(a) is amended by striking ``last 2
sentences'' and inserting ``last sentence''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2007.
______
By Mr. KERRY:
S. 97. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to replace
the Hope and Lifetime Learning credits with a partially refundable
college opportunity credit; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, today I am introducing the College
Opportunity Tax Credit Act of 2007. This legislation creates a new tax
credit that will put the cost of higher education in reach for American
families.
An October 2006 College Board report found that this year tuition and
other costs at public and private universities rose faster than
inflation. And, according to the report, tuition and fees at public
universities rose more in the past five years than at any other time in
the past 30 years, increasing by 35 percent to $5,836 this academic
year. Over the same time period, tuition and
[[Page 168]]
fees at private universities increased 22 percent to $22,218.
Unfortunately, neither student aid funds nor family incomes are
keeping pace with increasing tuition and fees. In my travels around the
country, I frequently hear from parents concerned they will not be able
to pay for their children's college. These parents know that earning a
college education will result in greater earnings for their children
and they desperately want to ensure their kids have the greatest
opportunities possible.
In 1997, we implemented two new tax credits to make college
affordable--the HOPE Credit and the Lifetime Learning Credit. These tax
credits were important and have put college in reach for families, but
I believe we can do more. In December, the Senate Finance Committee
held a hearing on tax incentives for higher education in which we
learned that the existing tax credits are not reaching enough students,
particularly lower-income students who are most severely impacted by
rising tuitions.
The HOPE and Lifetime Learning credits are not refundable, and
therefore a family of four must have an income over $30,000 in order to
receive the maximum credit. Almost half of families with college
students fail to receive the full credit because their income is too
low. In order to receive the full benefit of the Lifetime Learning
credit, a student has to spend $10,000 a year on tuition and fees. This
is nearly double the average annual public four-year college tuition
and four times the average annual tuition of a community college. Over
80 percent of college students attend schools with tuition and fees
under $10,000.
In 2004, I proposed a refundable tax credit to help pay for the cost
of four years of college. Currently the HOPE Credit applies only to the
first two years of college. The College Opportunity Tax Credit Act of
2007 (COTC) helps students and parents afford all four years of
college. It also builds on the proposal I made in 2004 by incorporating
some of the suggestions made by experts, including those at this week's
Finance Committee hearing. My legislation creates a new credit that
replaces the existing HOPE credit and Lifetime Learning credit and
ultimately makes these benefits more generous.
The COTC has two components. The first provides a refundable tax
credit for a student enrolled in a degree program at least on a half-
time basis. It would provide a 100 percent tax credit for the first
$1,000 of eligible expenses and a 50 percent tax credit to the next
$3,000 of expenses. The maximum credit would be $2,500 each year per
student. The second provides a nonrefundable tax credit for part-time
students, graduate students, and other students that do not qualify for
the refundable tax credit. It provides a 40 percent credit for the
first $1,000 of eligible expenses and a 20 percent credit for the next
$3,000 of expenses.
Both of these credits can be used for expenses associated with
tuition and fees. The same income limits that apply to the HOPE credit
and the Lifetime Learning credit apply to the COTC; the COTC will be
phased out ratably for taxpayers with income between $45,000 and
$55,000 ($90,000 and $110,000 for married taxpayers). These amounts are
indexed for inflation, as are the eligible amounts of expenses.
The College Opportunity Tax Credit Act of 2007 simplifies the
existing credits that make higher education more affordable and will
enable more students to be eligible for tax relief. I understand that
many of my colleagues are interested in making college more affordable.
I look forward to working with my colleagues to make a refundable tax
credit for college education a reality this Congress. 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. 97
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE
This Act may be cited as the ``College Opportunity Tax
Credit Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. COLLEGE OPPORTUNITY TAXT CREDIT.
(a) In General.--
(1) Allowance of credit.--Section 25A(a) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to allowance of credit) is
amended--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``the Hope Scholarship
Credit'' and inserting ``the eligible student credit amount
determined under subsection (b)'', and
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``the Lifetime Learning
Credit'' and inserting ``the part-time, graduate, and other
student credit amount determined under subsection (c)''.
(2) Name of credit.--The heading for section 25A of such
Code is amended to read as follows:
``SEC. 25A. COLLEGE OPPORTUNITY CREDIT.''.
(3) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections for subpart
A of parti IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of such Code is
amended by striking the item relating to section 25A and
inserting the following:
``Sec. 25A. College opportunity credit.''.
(b) Eligible Students.--
(1) In general.--Paragraph (1) of section 25A(b) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
(A) by striking ``the Hope Scholarship Credit'' and
inserting ``the eligible student credit amount determined
under this subsection'', and
(B) by striking ``Per student credit'' in the heading and
inserting ``In general''.
(2) Amount of credit.--Paragraph (4) of section 25A(b) of
such Code (relating to applicable limit) is amended by
striking ``2'' and inserting ``3''.
(3) Credit refundable.--
(A) In general.--Section 25A of such Code is amended by
redesignating subsection (i) as subsection (j) and by
inserting after subsection (h) the following new subsection:
``(i) Portion of Credit Refundable.--
``(1) In general.--The aggregate credits allowed under
subpart C shall be increased by the amount of the credit
which would be allowed under this section--
``(A) by reason of subsection (b), and
``(B) without regard to this subsection and the limitation
under section 26(a) or subsection (j), as the case may be.
``(2) Treatment of credit.--The amount of the credit
allowed under this subsection shall not be treated as a
credit allowed under this subpart and shall reduce the amount
of credit otherwise allowable under subsection (a) without
regard to section 26(a) or subsection (j), as the case may
be.''.
(B) Technical amendment.--Section 1324(b) of title 31,
United States Code, is amended by inserting ``, or enacted by
the College Opportunity Tax Credit Act of 2007'' before the
period at the end.
(4) Limitations.--
(A) Credit allowed for 4 years.--Subparagraph (A) of
section 25A(b)(2) of such Code is amended--
(i) by striking ``2'' in the text and in the heading and
inserting ``4'', and
(ii) by striking ``the Hope Scholarship Credit'' and
inserting ``the credit allowable''.
(B) Elimination of limitation on first 2 years of
postsecondary education.--Section 25A(b)(2) of such Code is
amended by striking subparagraph (C) and by redesignating
subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (C).
(5) Conforming amendments.--
(A) The heading of subsection (b) of section 25A of such
Code is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Eligible Students.--''.
(B) Section 25A(b)(2) of such Code is amended--
(i) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``the Hope Scholarship
Credit'' and inserting ``the credit allowable'', and
(ii) in subparagraph (C), as redesignated by paragraph
(4)(B), by striking ``the Hope Scholarship Credit'' and
inserting ``the credit allowable''.
(c) Part-Time, Graduate, and Other Students.--
(1) In general.--Subsection (c) of section 25A of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as follows:
``(c) Part-Time, Graduate, and Other Students.--
``(1) In general.--In the case of any student for whom an
election is in effect under this section for any taxable
year, the part-time, graduate, and other student credit
amount determined under this subsection for any taxable year
is an amount equal to the sum of--
``(A) 40 percent of so much of the qualified tuition and
related expenses paid by the taxpayer during the taxable year
(for education furnished to the student during any academic
period beginning in such taxable year) as does not exceed
$1,000, plus
``(B) 20 percent of such expenses so paid as exceeds $1,000
but does not exceed the applicable limit.
``(2) Applicable limit.--For purposes of paragraph (1)(B),
the applicable limit for any taxable year is an amount equal
to 3 times the dollar amount in effect under paragraph (1)(A)
for such taxable year.
``(3) Special rules for determining expenses.--
``(A) Coordination with credit for eligible students.--The
qualified tuition and related expenses with respect to a
student who is an eligible student for whom a credit is
allowed under subsection (a)(1) for the taxable year shall
not be taken into account under this subsection.
[[Page 169]]
``(B) Expenses for job skills courses allowed.--For
purposes of paragraph (1), qualified tuition and related
expenses shall include expenses described in subsection
(f)(1) with respect to any course of instruction at an
eligible educational institution to acquire or improve job
skills of the student.''.
(2) Inflation adjustment.--
(A) In general.--Subsection (h) of section 25A of such Code
(relating to inflation adjustments) is amended by adding at
the end the following new paragraph:
``(3) Dollar limitation on amount of credit under
subsection (a)(2).--
``(A) In general.--In the case of a taxable year beginning
after 2007, each of the $1,000 amounts under subsection
(c)(1) shall be increased by an amount equal to--
``(i) such dollar amount, multiplied by
``(ii) the cost-of-living adjustment determined under
section 1(f)(3) for the calendar year in which the taxable
year begins, determined by substituting `calendar year 2006'
for `calendar year 1992' in subparagraph (B) thereof.
``(B) Rounding.--If any amount as adjusted under
subparagraph (A) is not a multiple of $100, such amount shall
be rounded to the next lowest multiple of $100.''.
(B) Conforming amendment.--The heading for paragraph (1) of
section 25A(h) of such code is amended by inserting ``under
subsection (a)(1)'' after ``credit''.
(d) Credit Allowed Against Alternative Minimum Tax.--
(1) In general.--Section 25A of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986, as amended by subsection (b)(3), is amended by
redesignating subsection (j) as subsection (k) and by
inserting after subsection (h) the following new subsection:
``(j) Limitation Based on Amount of Tax.--In the case of a
taxable year to which section 26(a)(2) does not apply, the
credit allowed under subsection (a) for the taxable year
shall not exceed the excess of--
``(1) the sum of the regular tax liability (as defined in
section 26(b)) plus the tax imposed by section 55, over
``(2) the sum of the credits allowed under this subpart
(other than this section and sections 23, 24, and 25B) and
section 27 for the taxable year.''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 25(a)(1) of such Code is
amended by inserting ``25A,'' after ``24,''.
(e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2006.
______
By Mr. KERRY (for himself and Ms. Landrieu):
S. 98. A bill to foster the development of minority-owned small
businesses; to the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that this statement
be printed in the record. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the
Minority Entrepreneurship Development Act of 2007. At the beginning of
a new Congress it is important to set priorities for the nation because
every new Congress brings with it the hope for a brighter future. One
of the ways that this new Senate will lead is by creating opportunities
for more Americans to pursue the American dream. As incoming Chair of
the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee, I hope to help in
that effort by fostering the development of entrepreneurship in
minority communities. It's vital that current and future entrepreneurs
from minority communities are given the opportunity to build their own
piece of the American dream. I believe that this legislation the
Minority Entrepreneurship Development Act of 2007 will help in that
effort.
I want to take a moment and tell you why it's so important to expand
the numbers of entrepreneurs in the minority community. As a member of
the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I have
received firsthand testimony and countless reports documenting the
positive economic impact that occurs when we foster entrepreneurship in
under-served communities. There are signs of significant economic
returns when minority businesses are created and are able to grow in
size and capacity. Between 1987 and 1997, revenue from minority owned
firms rose by 22.5 percent, an increase equivalent to an annual growth
rate of 10 percent. Employment opportunities within minority owned
firms increased by 23 percent during that same period. There is a clear
correlation between the growth of minority owned firms and the economic
viability of the minority community.
Although these economic numbers tell a significant part of the story
they don't tell the whole story of what these firms mean to the
minority communities they serve and represent. Many of these business
leaders are first generation immigrants; many are first generation
business owners and many represent, for those in their communities,
what hard work, determination and patience can do.
We must encourage those kinds of values in our minority communities
and, quite frankly, in our nation as a whole. For generations, millions
have come to our shores in search of a better life. Millions of others
were brought here by force and for years were not given a voice in how
their lives would turn out. But, how ever we got here, we all have
become branches of this great tree we call America. This tree is still
nourished by roots planted by our forefathers more than 200 years ago.
Those men and women planted the roots of hard work, innovation, faith
and risk taking.
When you think about it, those words are the perfect description of
an entrepreneur. It is the spirit of entrepreneurship that has made our
nation great. And that is why it is absolutely imperative that we
continue to support and develop that spirit in our minority
communities. To that end, this legislation provides several tools to
help minority entrepreneurs as they develop and grow their businesses.
First, this legislation will create an Office of Minority Small
Business Development at the Small Business Administration. One of its
primary functions will be to increase the number of small business
loans that minority businesses receive. Latinos, African-Americans,
Asian-Americans and women have been receiving far fewer small business
loans than they reasonably should.
To ensure that this trend is reversed and minorities begin to get a
greater share of loan dollars, venture capital investments, counseling,
and contracting opportunities, this bill will give the new office the
authority to monitor the outcomes for SBA's Capital Access,
Entrepreneurial Development, and Government Contracting programs. It
also requires the head of the Office to work with SBA's partners, trade
associations and business groups to identify more effective ways to
market to minority business owners, and to work with the head of SBA's
Field Operations to ensure that district offices have staff and
resources to market to minorities.
Second, this legislation will create the Minority Entrepreneurship
and Innovation Pilot Program. This program will offer a competitive
grant to Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Tribal Colleges,
and Hispanic-Serving Institutions to create an entrepreneurship
curriculum at these institutions and to open Small Business Development
Centers on those campus' to serve local businesses.
The goal of this program is to target students in highly skilled
fields such as engineering, manufacturing, science and technology, and
guide them towards entrepreneurship as a career option. Traditionally,
minority-owned businesses are disproportionately represented in the
service sectors. Promoting entrepreneurial education to undergraduate
students will help expand business ownership beyond the service sectors
to higher yielding technical and financial sectors.
Third, this legislation will create the Minority Access to
Information Distance Learning Pilot Program. This program will offer
competitive grants to well established national minority non-profit and
business organizations to create distance learning programs for small
business owners who are interested in doing business with the federal
government.
The goal of this program is to provide low cost training to the many
small business owners who cannot afford to pay a consultant thousands
of dollars for advice or training on how to prepare themselves to
contract with the Federal Government. There are thousands of small
businesses in this country that are excellent and efficient. They are
primed to provide the goods and services that this nation needs to stay
competitive. This program will help prepare them to do just that.
Finally, this legislation will extend the Socially and Economically
Disadvantaged Business Program which
[[Page 170]]
expired in 2003. This program provides a price evaluation adjustment
for socially and economically disadvantaged businesses as a way of
increasing their competitiveness when bidding against larger firms.
This is one more tool to increase opportunities for our minority small
business owners.
I have outlined several ways that we can create a more positive
environment for our minority small business community. These are
reasonable steps that we ought to take without delay. Moreover, these
are important steps that will help bolster a movement that is already
underway. According to U.S. Census data, Hispanics are opening
businesses 3 times faster than the national average. Also, business
development and entrepreneurship have played a significant role in the
expansion of the black middle class in this country for over a century.
These business owners are embodying the entrepreneurial spirit that our
forefathers carried with them as they established this nation.
With this legislation and in my role as incoming Chair of the
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I hope to play a part
in helping to extend that spirit to the next generation of
entrepreneurs. Not only is this vital for our minority communities, but
it is vital for America. I urge my colleagues to join with me in
support of the Minority Entrepreneurship Development Act of 2007.
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. 98
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 ``Minority Entrepreneurship
Development Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that--
(1) in 2005, the African American unemployment rate was 9.5
percent and the Hispanic American unemployment rate was 6
percent, well above the national average of 4.7 percent;
(2) Hispanics Americans represent 12.5 percent of the
United States population and approximately 6 percent of all
United States businesses;
(3) African Americans account for 12.3 percent of the
population and only 4 percent of all United States
businesses;
(4) Native Americans account for approximately 1 percent of
the population and .9 percent of all United States
businesses;
(5) entrepreneurship has proven to be an effective tool for
economic growth and viability of all communities;
(6) minority-owned businesses are a key ingredient for
economic development in the community, an effective tool for
creating lasting and higher-paying jobs, and a source of
wealth in the minority community; and
(7) between 1987 and 1997, revenue from minority-owned
firms rose by 22.5 percent, an increase equivalent to an
annual growth rate of 10 percent, and employment
opportunities within minority-owned firms increased by 23
percent.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act--
(1) the terms ``Administration'' and ``Administrator'' mean
the Small Business Administration and the Administrator
thereof, respectively;
(2) the term ``eligible association or organization'' means
an association or organization that--
(A) is--
(i) a national minority business association organized in
accordance with section 501(c)(6) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986; or
(ii) a foundation of national minority business
associations organized in accordance with section 501(c)(3)
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986;
(B) has a well established national network of local
chapters, or a proven national membership; and
(C) has been in existence for at least the 10-year period
before the date of awarding a grant under section 6;
(3) the term ``eligible educational institution'' means an
institution that is--
(A) a public or private institution of higher education
(including any land-grant college or university, any college
or school of business, engineering, commerce, or agriculture,
or community college or junior college) or any entity formed
by 2 or more institutions of higher education; and
(B) a--
(i) historically Black college;
(ii) Hispanic-serving institution; or
(iii) tribal college;
(4) the term ``historically Black college'' means a part B
institution, as that term is defined in section 322 of the
Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1061);
(5) the term ``Hispanic-serving institution'' has the
meaning given that term in section 502 of the Higher
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1101a);
(6) the term ``institution of higher education'' has the
meaning given that term in section 101 of the Higher
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1101)
(7) the term ``small business concern'' has the meaning
given that term in section 3 of the Small Business Act (15
U.S.C. 532);
(8) the term ``small business development center'' has the
meaning given that term in section 21 of the Small Business
Act (15 U.S.C. 648); and
(9) the term ``tribal college'' has the same meaning as the
term ``tribally controlled college or university'' under
section 2(a)(4) of the Tribally Controlled Community College
Assistance Act of 1978 (25 U.S.C. 1801(a)(4)).
SEC. 4. MINORITY SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT.
(a) In General.--The Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 631 et
seq.) is amended--
(1) by redesignating section 37 as section 38; and
(2) by inserting after section 36 the following:
``SEC. 37. MINORITY SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT.
``(a) Office of Minority Small Business Development.--There
is established in the Administration an Office of Minority
Small Business Development, which shall be administered by
the Associate Administrator for Minority Small Business
Development appointed under section 4(b)(1) (in this section
referred to as the `Associate Administrator').
``(b) Associate Administrator for Minority Small Business
Development.--The Associate Administrator shall--
``(1) be--
``(A) an appointee in the Senior Executive Service who is a
career appointee; or
``(B) an employee in the competitive service;
``(2) be responsible for the formulation, execution, and
promotion of policies and programs of the Administration that
provide assistance to small business concerns owned and
controlled by minorities;
``(3) act as an ombudsman for full consideration of
minorities in all programs of the Administration (including
those under section 7(j) and 8(a));
``(4) work with the Associate Deputy Administrator for
Capital Access of the Administration to increase the
proportion of loans and loan dollars, and investments and
investment dollars, going to minorities through the finance
programs under this Act and the Small Business Investment Act
of 1958 (including subsections (a), (b), and (m) of section 7
of this Act and the programs under title V and parts A and B
of title III of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958);
``(5) work with the Associate Deputy Administrator for
Entrepreneurial Development of the Administration to increase
the proportion of counseling and training that goes to
minorities through the entrepreneurial development programs
of the Administration;
``(6) work with the Associate Deputy Administrator for
Government Contracting and Minority Enterprise Development of
the Administration to increase the proportion of contracts,
including through the Small Business Innovation Research
Program and the Small Business Technology Transfer Program,
to minorities;
``(7) work with the partners of the Administration, trade
associations, and business groups to identify and carry out
policies and procedures to more effectively market the
resources of the Administration to minorities;
``(8) work with the Office of Field Operations of the
Administration to ensure that district offices and regional
offices have adequate staff, funding, and other resources to
market the programs of the Administration to meet the
objectives described in paragraphs (4) through (7); and
``(9) report to and be responsible directly to the
Administrator.
``(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section--
``(1) $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2007;
``(2) $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2008; and
``(3) $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2009.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 4(b)(1) of the Small
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 633(b)(1)) is amended in the sixth
sentence, by striking ``Minority Small Business and Capital
Ownership Development'' and all that follows through the end
of the sentence and inserting ``Minority Small Business
Development.''.
SEC. 5. MINORITY ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND INNOVATION PILOT
PROGRAM OF 2007.
(a) In General.--The Administrator may make grants to
eligible educational institutions--
(1) to assist in establishing an entrepreneurship
curriculum for undergraduate or graduate studies; and
(2) for placement of a small business development center on
the physical campus of the institution.
(b) Use of Funds.--
[[Page 171]]
(1) Curriculum requirement.--
(A) In general.--An eligible educational institution
receiving a grant under this section shall develop a
curriculum that includes training in various skill sets
needed by successful entrepreneurs, including--
(i) business management and marketing, financial management
and accounting, market analysis and competitive analysis, and
innovation and strategic planning; and
(ii) additional entrepreneurial skill sets specific to the
needs of the student population and the surrounding
community, as determined by the institution.
(B) Focus.--The focus of the curriculum developed under
this paragraph shall be to help students in non-business
majors develop the tools necessary to use their area of
expertise as entrepreneurs.
(2) Small business development center requirement.--Each
eligible educational institution receiving a grant under this
section shall open a small business development center that--
(A) performs studies, research, and counseling concerning
the managing, financing, and operation of small business
concerns;
(B) performs management training and provides technical
assistance regarding small business concern participation in
international markets, export promotion and technology
transfer, and the delivery or distribution of such services
and information;
(C) offers referral services for entrepreneurs and small
business concerns to business development, financing, and
legal experts; and
(D) promotes market-specific innovation, niche marketing,
capacity building, international trade, and strategic
planning as keys to long term growth for its small business
concern and entrepreneur clients.
(c) Grant Awards.--
(1) In general.--The Administrator may not award a grant
under this section to a single eligible educational
institution--
(A) in excess of $1,000,000 in any fiscal year; or
(B) for a term of more than 2 years.
(2) Limitation on use of funds.--Funds made available under
this section may not be used for--
(A) any purpose other than those associated with the direct
costs incurred by the eligible educational institution to--
(i) develop and implement the curriculum described in
subsection (b)(1); or
(ii) organize and operate a small business development
center, as described in subsection (b)(2); or
(B) building expenses, administrative travel budgets, or
other expenses not directly related to the costs described in
subparagraph (A).
(d) Matching Not Required.--Subparagraphs (A) and (B) of
section 21(a)(4) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C.
648(a)(4)) shall not apply to a grant made under this
section.
(e) Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than November 1 of each year in
which funds are made available for grants under this section,
the Associate Administrator of Entrepreneurial Development of
the Administration shall submit to the Committee on Small
Business and Entrepreneurship of the Senate and the Committee
on Small Business of the House of Representatives, a report
evaluating the success of the program under this section
during the preceding fiscal year.
(2) Contents.--Each report under paragraph (1) shall
include--
(A) a description of each entrepreneurship program
developed with grant funds, the date of the award, and the
number of participants in each such program;
(B) the number of small business assisted through the small
business development center with grant funds; and
(C) data regarding the economic impact of the small
business development center counseling provided with grant
funds.
(f) Authorization of Appropriation.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $24,000,000 for
each of fiscal years 2007 through 2009, to remain available
until expended.
(g) Limitation on Use of Other Funds.--The Administrator
shall carry out this section only with amounts appropriated
in advance specifically to carry out this section.
SEC. 6. MINORITY ACCESS TO INFORMATION DISTANCE LEARNING
PILOT PROGRAM OF 2007.
(a) In General.--The Administrator may make grants to
eligible associations and organizations to--
(1) assist in establishing the technical capacity to
provide online or distance learning for businesses seeking to
contract with the Federal Government;
(2) develop curriculum for seminars that will provide
businesses with the technical expertise to contract with the
Federal government; and
(3) provide training and technical expertise through
distance learning at low cost, or no cost, to participant
business owners and other interested parties.
(b) Use of Funds.--An eligible association or organization
receiving a grant under this section shall develop a
curriculum that includes training in various areas needed by
the owners of small business concerns to successfully
contract with the Federal Government, which may include
training in accounting, marketing to the Federal Government,
applying for Federal certifications, use of offices of small
and disadvantaged businesses, procurement conferences, the
scope of Federal procurement contracts, and General Services
Administration schedules.
(c) Grant Awards.--
(1) In general.--The Administrator may not award a grant
under this section to a single eligible association or
organization--
(A) in excess of $250,000 in any fiscal year; or
(B) for a term of more than 2 years.
(2) Limitation on use of funds.--Funds made available under
this section may not be used--
(A) for any purpose other than those associated with the
direct costs incurred by the eligible association or
organization to develop the curriculum described in
subsection (b); or
(B) for building expenses, administrative travel budgets,
or other expenses not directly related to the costs described
in subparagraph (A).
(d) Matching Not Required.--Subparagraphs (A) and (B) of
section 21(a)(4) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C.
648(a)(4)) shall not apply to a grant made under this
section.
(e) Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than November 1 of each year,
the Associate Administrator of Entrepreneurial Development of
the Administration shall submit to the Committee on Small
Business and Entrepreneurship of the Senate and the Committee
on Small Business of the House of Representatives, a report
evaluating the success of the program under this section
during the preceding fiscal year.
(2) Contents.--Each report under paragraph (1) shall
include--
(A) a description of each distance learning program
developed with grant funds under this section, the date of
the award, and the number of participants in each program;
and
(B) data regarding the economic impact of the distance
learning technical assistance provided with such grant funds.
(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $4,000,000 for
each of fiscal years 2007 through 2009, to remain available
until expended.
(g) Limitation on Use of Other Funds.--The Administrator
shall carry out this section only with amounts appropriated
in advance specifically to carry out this section.
SEC. 7. EXTENSION OF SOCIALLY AND ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED
BUSINESS PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--Section 7102(c) of the Federal Acquisition
Streamlining Act of 1994 (15 U.S.C. 644 note) is amended by
striking ``September 30, 2003'' and inserting ``September 30,
2009''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
shall take effect 30 days after the date of enactment of this
Act.
______
By Mr. KERRY:
S. 99. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue code of 1986 to provide a
refundable credit for small business employee health insurance
expenses; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Small Business
Health Care Tax Credit Act which would provide small businesses with a
refundable tax credit to help with the cost of providing employees with
health insurance. Recent studies show that certain groups of
individuals are less likely to have employer-provided health insurance.
The 2006 Kaiser Family Foundation Employer Health Benefits Survey shows
that since 2000 the number of firms offering health benefits has
declined from 69 percent to 61 percent in 2006. This decline in
coverage is more prevalent in small businesses. Only 48 percent of the
firms with less than 10 employees offer health insurance whereas, 90
percent of the firms with 50 or more employees offer health benefits.
Approximately 32 million Americans work for firms with fewer than 50
employees.
The April 2006 Commonwealth Fund Biennial Health Insurance Survey
concluded that 41 percent of working-age Americans with incomes between
$20,000 and $40,000 were uninsured for at least part of the past year.
This reflects a dramatic increase in this income range, up from 28
percent in 2001. The survey found that of the 48 million American
adults who were uninsured in the past year, 67 percent were in families
where at least one person worked full time.
My legislation provides a refundable tax credit to small businesses
designed to help provide coverage to those who are currently uninsured.
Small businesses with less than 50 employees would be eligible to
receive a tax credit to help with the cost of health care premiums for
employees making more
[[Page 172]]
than $5,000 and less than $50,000 a year. To be eligible for the
credit, the employer has to pay at least 50 percent of the health care
insurance premium. The credit for businesses with fewer than 10
employees will be capped at 50 percent of the cost of the premium, and
the credit amount decreases for larger businesses.
Last year, Leonard Burman, Codirector of the Tax Policy Center,
testified before the Senate Finance Committee and suggested a
refundable tax credit as an incremental option to help defray higher
administrative costs faced by small employers in purchasing health
care. This credit will help small businesses afford health care
premiums. It is a refundable credit, so that it will help new
businesses that do not yet have taxable income be able to offer health
care and provide struggling businesses with assistance so that they can
offer health care.
This tax credit will cut the cost of health insurance by up to 50
percent for small business owners. It will enable small businesses to
provide health insurance for their low- and moderate-income employees.
Until we can agree on a comprehensive proposal that will help reduce
the cost of health care premiums for small businesses, this legislation
provides an appropriate option for increasing health insurance coverage
for small businesses and their employees.
I ask for 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. 99
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 Health Care
Tax Credit Act''.
SEC. 2. CREDIT FOR EMPLOYEE HEALTH INSURANCE EXPENSES.
(a) In General.--Subpart D of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to
business-related credits) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``SEC. 45O. EMPLOYEE HEALTH INSURANCE EXPENSES.
``(a) General Rule.--For purposes of section 38, in the
case of a qualified small employer, the employee health
insurance expenses credit determined under this section is an
amount equal to the applicable percentage of the amount paid
by the taxpayer during the taxable year for qualified
employee health insurance expenses.
``(b) Applicable Percentage.--For purposes of subsection
(a), the applicable percentage is--
``(1) 50 percent in the case of an employer with less than
10 qualified employees,
``(2) 25 percent in the case of an employer with more than
9 but less than 25 qualified employees, and
``(3) 20 percent in the case of an employer with more than
24 but less than 50 qualified employees.
``(c) Per Employee Dollar Limitation.--The amount of
qualified employee health insurance expenses taken into
account under subsection (a) with respect to any qualified
employee for any taxable year shall not exceed--
``(1) $4,000 for self-only coverage, and
``(2) $10,000 for family coverage.
``(d) Definitions and Special Rules.--For purposes of this
section--
``(1) Qualified small employer.--
``(A) In general.--The term `qualified small employer'
means any small employer which--
``(i) provides eligibility for health insurance coverage
(after any waiting period (as defined in section 9801(b)(4)))
to all qualified employees of the employer, and
``(ii) pays at least 50 percent of the cost of such
coverage for each qualified employee.
``(B) Small employer.--
``(i) In general.--For purposes of this paragraph, the term
`small employer' means, with respect to any taxable year, any
employer if--
``(I) the average gross receipts of such employer for the
preceding 3 taxable years does not exceed $5,000,000, and
``(II) such employer employed an average of more than 1 but
less than 50 qualified employees on business days during the
preceding taxable year.
``(ii) Aggregate gross assets.--For purposes of clause
(i)(I), the term `aggregate gross assets' shall have meaning
given such term by section 1202(d)(2).
``(iii) Employers not in existence in preceding year.--For
purposes of clause (i)(II)--
``(I) a preceding taxable year may be taken into account
only if the employer was in existence throughout such year,
and
``(II) in the case of an employer which was not in
existence throughout the preceding taxable year, the
determination of whether such employer is a qualified small
employer shall be based on the average number of employees
that it is reasonably expected such employer will employ on
business days in the current taxable year.
``(iv) Aggregation rules.--All persons treated as a single
employer under subsection (a) or (b) of section 52 or
subsection (m) or (o) of section 414 shall be treated as one
person for purposes of this subparagraph.
``(v) Predecessors.--The Secretary may prescribe
regulations which provide for references in this subparagraph
to an employer to be treated as including references to
predecessors of such employer.
``(2) Qualified employee health insurance expenses.--
``(A) In general.--The term `qualified employee health
insurance expenses' means any amount paid by an employer for
health insurance coverage to the extent such amount is
attributable to coverage provided to any employee while such
employee is a qualified employee.
``(B) Exception for amounts paid under salary reduction
arrangements.--No amount paid or incurred for health
insurance coverage pursuant to a salary reduction arrangement
shall be taken into account under subparagraph (A).
``(C) Health insurance coverage.--The term `health
insurance coverage' has the meaning given such term by
section 9832(b)(1).
``(3) Qualified employee.--
``(A) In general.--The term `qualified employee' means an
employee of an employer who, with respect to any period, is
not provided health insurance coverage under--
``(i) a health plan of the employee's spouse,
``(ii) title XVIII, XIX, or XXI of the Social Security Act,
``(iii) chapter 17 of title 38, United States Code,
``(iv) chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code,
``(v) chapter 89 of title 5, United States Code, or
``(vi) any other provision of law.
``(B) Employee.--The term `employee'--
``(i) means any individual, with respect to any calendar
year, who is reasonably expected to receive not more than
$50,000 of compensation from the employer during such year,
``(ii) does not include an employee within the meaning of
section 401(c)(1), and
``(iii) includes a leased employee within the meaning of
section 414(n).
``(C) Compensation.--The term `compensation' means amounts
described in section 6051(a)(3).
``(D) Inflation adjustment.--
``(i) In general.--In the case of a taxable year beginning
after 2007, the $50,000 amount in subparagraph (B)(i) shall
be increased by an amount equal to--
``(I) such dollar amount, multiplied by
``(II) the cost-of-living adjustment determined under
section 1(f)(3) for the calendar year in which the taxable
year begins, determined by substituting `calendar year 2006'
for `calendar year 1992' in subparagraph (B) thereof.
``(ii) Rounding.--If any amount as adjusted under clause
(i) is not a multiple of $1,000, such amount shall be rounded
to the next lowest multiple of $1,000.
``(4) No qualified employees excluded.--Subsection (a)
shall not apply to an employer for any period unless at all
times during such period health insurance coverage is
available to all qualified employees of such employer under
similar terms.
``(e) Portion of Credit Made Refundable.--
``(1) In general.--The aggregate credits allowed to a
taxpayer under subpart C shall be increased by the lesser
of--
``(A) the credit which would be allowed under subsection
(a) without regard to this subsection and the limitation
under section 38(c), or
``(B) the amount by which the aggregate amount of credits
allowed by this subpart (determined without regard to this
subsection) would increase if the limitation imposed by
section 38(c) for any taxable year were increased by the
amount of employer payroll taxes imposed on the taxpayer
during the calendar year in which the taxable year begins.
The amount of the credit allowed under this subsection shall
not be treated as a credit allowed under this subpart and
shall reduce the amount of the credit otherwise allowable
under subsection (a) without regard to section 38(c).
``(2) Employer payroll taxes.--For purposes of this
subsection--
``(A) In general.--The term `employer payroll taxes' means
the taxes imposed by--
``(i) section 3111(b), and
``(ii) sections 3211(a) and 3221(a) (determined at a rate
equal to the rate under section 3111(b)).
``(B) Special rule.--A rule similar to the rule of section
24(d)(2)(C) shall apply for purposes of subparagraph (A).
``(f) Denial of Double Benefit.--No deduction or credit
under any other provision of this chapter shall be allowed
with respect to qualified employee health insurance expenses
taken into account under subsection (a).''.
[[Page 173]]
(b) Credit to Be Part of General Business Credit.--Section
38(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to
current year business credit) is amended by striking ``plus''
at the end of paragraph (30), by striking the period at the
end of paragraph (31) and inserting ``, plus'', and by adding
at the end the following:
``(32) the employee health insurance expenses credit
determined under section 45O.''.
(c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for subpart
D of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``Sec. 45O. Employee health insurance expenses.''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to amounts paid or incurred in taxable years
beginning after December 31, 2006.
______
By Mrs. BOXER:
S. 100. A bill to encourage the health of children in schools by
promoting better nutrition and increased physical activity, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce the Healthy
Students Act, a bill that addresses the rising epidemic of childhood
obesity.
Over the past 30 years, obesity rates have doubled for teenagers and
tripled for children ages 6 to 11. Today, more than 30 percent of
children in America are overweight and more than 15 percent are obese.
As a result, more children are suffering from traditionally adult
diseases--including type 2 diabetes, hypertension and high
cholesterol--and putting their health in great danger.
While the reasons for the growing number of obese children problems
are complex, the underlying problem is simple. Children are becoming
obese because they are eating too much unhealthy food and getting too
little exercise.
Vending machines are in too many of our schools. Children today eat
five times as much fast food as they did 30 years ago. And the number
of students who eat green vegetables ``nearly every day or more'' has
dropped to only 30 percent.
Children are getting too little exercise. Nearly 23 percent of
children ages 9-13 do not engage in any free-time physical activity
during the school day, and nearly 60 percent do not participate in any
kind of organized sports or physical activity program outside of
school.
Also, the lack of qualified health professionals (school nurses)--
compounded with the access to them--is taking an adverse toll on
children's health in our public schools. With just one licensed nurse
for every 1,155 students, too many children don't have access to a
caring health care professional who can diagnose illness, administer
medicine, handle emergencies, or treat injuries.
We should ensure that during the school day, children have access to
better nutrition and health care, more physical activity, and the
skills necessary for a lifetime of good health. And that's what the
Healthy Students Act will do.
First, the bill creates a commission of children's health experts to
review existing school nutrition guidelines and develop new, healthier
standards that provide more fresh fruits and vegetables and eliminate
food of minimal nutritional value.
Second, the bill creates a grant program for school nutrition pilot
programs that promote alternative healthful food promotion in its
curriculum and lunch program.
I have seen firsthand what can be accomplished with such innovative
programs. For example in Berkeley, California, the ``Edible
Schoolyard'' program is changing the way kids eat and learn about
nutrition. Schools in the Edible Schoolyard program maintain an organic
garden and integrate the garden into both the curriculum and lunch
program. This hands-on approach educates students on healthy eating--
from planting, to harvesting, to their plates. By teaching kids about
the connection between what they eat and where it comes from, we can
help them develop good nutrition habits that will last a lifetime.
Third, the bill creates a ``Healthy Hour'' pilot program that
provides funding for an additional hour to the school day either
before, after or during school--set aside specifically for physical
activity. As more and more schools have cut recess and physical
education classes, the bill provides funding for programs that extend
physical activity time and highlight the importance of exercise for
children in schools across the country.
Fourth, to make sure that children have the equipment they need, the
bill provides tax incentives to individuals and businesses to donate
exercise and gymnasium equipment to schools and organizations serving
students.
And fifth, to address the shortage of qualified health care
professionals in schools, the bill creates a tuition loan forgiveness
program for those who earn a degree in nursing and make a minimum 3-
year commitment to work in a public elementary or secondary school. We
are saying to prospective nurses: If you make an investment in helping
kids, then we will make an investment in you.
Childhood obesity is a growing epidemic that we must address now. I
urge my colleagues to support the Healthy Students Act to ensure that
all children have the health they need to achieve their dreams.
______
By Mr. KERRY:
S. 102. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend
and expand relief from the alternative minimum tax and to repeal the
extension of the lower rates for capital gains and dividends for 2009
and 2010; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation which
addresses the individual alternative minimum tax (AMT) for 2007. Last
Congress, a choice was made to extend lower capital gains and dividends
rates that do not expire until the end of 2008 rather than address the
AMT for 2007. My preference was to address the AMT for 2007 and I
believe we still must take action to prevent taxpayers never intended
to pay the AMT from being penalized this year.
I opposed the Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005
because it contained the wrong priorities for America leaving behind
working families and substantially adding to the deficit. This law
extended the lower rates on capital gains and dividends for 2009 and
2010, but only addressed the individual AMT for 2006.
According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, those earning $200,000
or more will receive 84 percent of the benefit of the capital gains tax
cut and 63 percent of the benefit of the dividends tax cuts. According
to the Congressional Budget Office, 42.8 percent of taxpayers with
income between $50,000 and $100,000 will be impacted by the AMT if the
AMT is not fixed for 2007 a number that increases to 66 percent by
2010. The Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation of Act of 2005
extends a tax cut that does not expire to the end of 2008 with a price
tag of $50 billion, but fails to protect the hard working families that
will be impacted by the AMT. These families were never intended to be
impacted by the AMT, a tax originally designed to prevent a small
number of high-income taxpayers from avoiding taxation.
Today, I am introducing legislation that will address the AMT for
2007 and repeal the lower tax rates on capital dividends for 2009 and
2010. To calculate the AMT, individuals add back certain ``preference
items'' to their regular tax liability. These include personal
exemptions, the standard deduction, and the itemized deduction for
state and local taxes. From this amount, taxpayers subtract the AMT
exemption amount, commonly referred to as the ``patch'' which reverted
to lower levels at the end of 2005. The Tax Increase Prevention and
Reconciliation Act of 2005 increased and extended the patch for 2006.
The patch was increased in order to hold the same number of taxpayers
harmless from the AMT in 2006 as in 2005.
The problem with the AMT is that while the regular tax system is
indexed for inflation, the AMT exemption amounts and tax brackets
remain constant. This has the perverse consequence of punishing
taxpayers for the mere fact their incomes rose due to inflation.
[[Page 174]]
In 2001 Congress opted to provide more tax cuts to those with incomes
of over $1 million rather than fix a looming tax problem for the middle
class. The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001
did include a small adjustment to the AMT, but it was not enough. And
we knew then that the number of taxpayers subject to the AMT would
continue to rise steadily because the combination of tax cuts and a
minor adjustment to the AMT would cause the AMT to explode. We are
rapidly approaching this explosion and without immediate action
America's middle class will be harmed.
My legislation extends and expands the AMT exemption amount for 2007
to prevent additional taxpayers from being impacted by the AMT. Without
increasing and extending the AMT exemption for 2007, an additional 19.5
million taxpayers will be impacted by the AMT in 2007. Large families,
with incomes as low as $49,438, will be hurt by the AMT. My legislation
will allow nonrefundable personal credits such as the higher education
tax credits and the dependent care credit against the AMT for 2007.
This legislation is offset by repealing the lower rates on capital
gains and dividends.
My colleagues on the other side of the aisle have argued that the
extension of the capital gains and dividends benefits is necessary to
provide investor certainty. But I believe that the certainty of working
families worried about paying the AMT should come first.
About a third of long-term capital gains are reported by taxpayers
who are impacted by the AMT and due to the interaction of the AMT, they
do not fully benefit from the lower rates. Simply put, taxpayers forced
to carry the AMT burden will not benefit from the lower capital gains
and dividends rate.
The AMT is a looming problem that is impacting hard-working families
and for each year that we fail to address the AMT, it gets worse and
more expensive. At a minimum we must address the AMT for 2007. My
legislation is not a long-term cure to the AMT crisis, but it will
provide certainty for 2007 to hard working families who will be
impacted by the AMT just because of where they live and the number of
children they have, and it will addresses the AMT in a revenue neutral
manner for 2007 as well.
We all agree that the AMT should not be impacting families with
incomes below $100,000. My bill fixes the AMT for 2007 in a timely and
fiscally responsible manner and gives Congress time to work in a
bipartisan manner to find a fiscally responsible permanent solution to
the AMT.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 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. 102
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. EXTENSION AND INCREASE IN MINIMUM TAX RELIEF TO
INDIVIDUALS.
(a) In General.--Section 55(d)(1) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended--
(1) by striking ``$62,550 in the case of taxable years
beginning in 2006'' in subparagraph (A) and inserting
``$67,100 in the case of taxable years beginning in 2007'',
and
(2) by striking ``$42,500 in the case of taxable years
beginning in 2006'' in subparagraph (B) and inserting
``$44,800 in the case of taxable years beginning in 2007''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2006.
SEC. 2. ALLOWANCE OF NONREFUNDABLE PERSONAL CREDITS AGAINST
REGULAR AND ALTERNATIVE MINIMUM TAX LIABILITY.
(a) In General.--Paragraph (2) of section 26(a) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
(1) by striking ``2006'' in the heading thereof and
inserting ``2007'', and
(2) by striking ``or 2006'' and inserting ``2006, or
2007''.
(b) Conforming Provisions.--
(1) Section 30B(g) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is
amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(3) Special rule for 2007.--For purposes of any taxable
year beginning during 2007, the credit allowed under
subsection (a) (after the application of paragraph (1)) shall
not exceed the excess of--
``(A) the sum of the regular tax liability (as defined in
section 26(b)) plus the tax imposed by section 55, over
``(B) the sum of the credits allowable under subpart A and
this subpart (other than this section and section 30C).''.
(2) Section 30C(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is
amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(3) Special rule for 2007.--For purposes of any taxable
year beginning during 2007, the credit allowed under
subsection (a) (after the application of paragraph (1)) shall
not exceed the excess of--
``(A) the sum of the regular tax liability (as defined in
section 26(b)) plus the tax imposed by section 55, over
``(B) the sum of the credits allowable under subpart A and
this subpart (other than this section).''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2006.
SEC. 3. REPEAL OF EXTENSION OF LOWER RATES FOR CAPITAL GAINS
AND DIVIDENDS.
The amendment made by section 102 of the Tax Increase
Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005 is repealed and the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall be applied as if such
amendment had never been enacted.
______
By Mr. KERRY (for himself, Mrs. Feinstein, and Mr. Wyden):
S. 103. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide
that major oil and gas companies will not be eligible for the effective
rate reductions enacted in 2004 for domestic manufacturers; to
Committee on Finance.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, today, I am introducing the Restore a
Rational Tax Rate on Petroleum Act of 2007. This legislation repeals
the manufacturing deduction for big oil and gas companies that was
enacted by Congress in 2004. I introduced this legislation in the 109th
Congress and Congressman McDermott introduced companion legislation in
the House.
The domestic manufacturing deduction was designed to replace export-
related tax benefits that were successfully challenged by the European
Union. Producers of oil and gas did not benefit from this tax break.
Initial legislation proposed to address the repeal of the export-
related tax benefits and to replace them with a new domestic
manufacturing deduction. That legislation only provided the deduction
to industries that benefited from the export-related tax benefits.
However, the final product extended the deduction to include the oil
and gas industry as well.
My bill repeals the manufacturing deduction for oil and gas companies
because these industries suffered no detriment from the repeal of
export-related tax benefits. At a time when oil companies are reporting
mind-boggling record profits, there is no reason to reward them with a
tax deduction.
Like me, many Members of Congress support a windfall profits tax on
big oil and gas companies. Providing this deduction to oil and gas
companies actually functions as a reverse windfall profits tax. This
deduction lowers the tax rates on the windfall profits that they are
currently enjoying. And without Congressional action this benefit will
increase: upon enactment, the domestic manufacturing deduction was
three percent, but it increased to six percent in 2007 and it is
scheduled to increase to nine percent in 2010.
I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. We owe it to the
American people to eliminate tax benefits to the oil industry at a time
of record profits, record gas prices, and record deficits.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 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. 103
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 ``Restore a Rational Tax Rate
on Petroleum Production Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds that--
(1) like many other countries, the United States has long
provided export-related benefits under its tax law,
(2) producers and refiners of oil and natural gas were
specifically denied the benefits of those export-related tax
provisions,
(3) those export-related tax provisions were successfully
challenged by the European Union as being inconsistent with
our trade agreements,
[[Page 175]]
(4) the Congress responded by repealing the export-related
benefits and enacting a substitute benefit that was an
effective rate reduction for United States manufacturers,
(5) producers and refiners of oil and natural gas were made
eligible for the rate reduction even though they suffered no
detriment from repeal of the export-related benefits, and
(6) the decision to provide the effective rate reduction to
producers and refiners of oil and natural gas has operated as
a reverse windfall profits tax, lowering the tax rate on the
windfall profits they are currently enjoying.
SEC. 3. DENIAL OF DEDUCTION FOR INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO
DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF OIL, NATURAL GAS, OR
PRIMARY PRODUCTS THEREOF.
(a) In General.--Subparagraph (B) of section 199(c)(4) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to exceptions) is
amended by striking ``or'' at the end of clause (ii), by
striking the period at the end of clause (iii) and inserting
``, or'', and by inserting after clause (iii) the following
new clause:
``(iv) in the case of any major integrated oil company (as
defined in section 167(h)(5)(B)), the production, refining,
processing, transportation, or distribution of oil, natural
gas, or any primary product thereof during any taxable year
described in section 167(h)(A).''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 199(c)(4) of such Code
is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A)(i)(III) by striking ``electricity,
natural gas,'' and inserting ``electricity'', and
(2) in subparagraph (B)(ii) by striking ``electricity,
natural gas,'' and inserting ``electricity''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2006.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 106. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for
the establishment of a National Center for Social Work Research; to the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to
amend the Public Health Service Act for the establishment of a National
Center for Social Work Research. Social workers provide a multitude of
health care delivery services throughout America to our children,
families, the elderly, and persons suffering from various forms of
abuse and neglect. The purpose of this center is to support and
disseminate information about basic and clinical social work research,
and training, with emphasis on service to underserved and rural
populations.
While the Federal Government provides funding for various social work
research activities through the National Institutes of Health and other
Federal agencies, there presently is no coordination or direction of
these critical activities and no overall assessment of needs and
opportunities for empirical knowledge development. The establishment of
a Center for Social Work Research would result in improved behavioral
and mental health care outcomes for our nation's children, families,
the elderly, and others.
In order to meet the increasing challenges of bringing cost-
effective, research-based, quality health care to all Americans, we
must recognize the important contributions of social work researchers
to health care delivery and the central role that the Center for Social
Work can provide in facilitating their work.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 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. 106
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 ``National Center for Social
Work Research Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that--
(1) social workers focus on the improvement of individual
and family functioning and the creation of effective health
and mental health prevention and treatment interventions in
order for individuals to become more productive members of
society;
(2) social workers provide front line prevention and
treatment services in the areas of school violence, aging,
teen pregnancy, child abuse, domestic violence, juvenile
crime, and substance abuse, particularly in rural and
underserved communities; and
(3) social workers are in a unique position to provide
valuable research information on these complex social
concerns, taking into account a wide range of social,
medical, economic and community influences from an
interdisciplinary, family-centered and community-based
approach.
SEC. 3. ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL CENTER FOR SOCIAL WORK
RESEARCH.
(a) In General.--Section 401(a) of the Public Health
Service Act (42 U.S.C. 281(a)), as amended by the National
Institutes of Health Reform Act of 2006) is amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(26) The National Center for Social Work Research.''.
(b) Establishment.--Part E of title IV of the Public Health
Service Act (42 U.S.C. 287 et seq.) is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``Subpart 7--National Center for Social Work Research
``SEC. 485J. PURPOSE OF CENTER.
``The general purpose of the National Center for Social
Work Research (referred to in this subpart as the `Center')
is the conduct and support of, and dissemination of targeted
research concerning social work methods and outcomes related
to problems of significant social concern. The Center shall--
``(1) promote research and training that is designed to
inform social work practices, thus increasing the knowledge
base which promotes a healthier America; and
``(2) provide policymakers with empirically-based research
information to enable such policymakers to better understand
complex social issues and make informed funding decisions
about service effectiveness and cost efficiency.
``SEC. 485K. SPECIFIC AUTHORITIES.
``(a) In General.--To carry out the purpose described in
section 485J, the Director of the Center may provide research
training and instruction and establish, in the Center and in
other nonprofit institutions, research traineeships and
fellowships in the study and investigation of the prevention
of disease, health promotion, the association of
socioeconomic status, gender, ethnicity, age and geographical
location and health, the social work care of individuals
with, and families of individuals with, acute and chronic
illnesses, child abuse, neglect, and youth violence, and
child and family care to address problems of significant
social concern especially in underserved populations and
underserved geographical areas.
``(b) Stipends and Allowances.--The Director of the Center
may provide individuals receiving training and instruction or
traineeships or fellowships under subsection (a) with such
stipends and allowances (including amounts for travel and
subsistence and dependency allowances) as the Director
determines necessary.
``(c) Grants.--The Director of the Center may make grants
to nonprofit institutions to provide training and instruction
and traineeships and fellowships under subsection (a).
``SEC. 485L. ADVISORY COUNCIL.
``(a) Duties.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish an
advisory council for the Center that shall advise, assist,
consult with, and make recommendations to the Secretary and
the Director of the Center on matters related to the
activities carried out by and through the Center and the
policies with respect to such activities.
``(2) Gifts.--The advisory council for the Center may
recommend to the Secretary the acceptance, in accordance with
section 231, of conditional gifts for study, investigations,
and research and for the acquisition of grounds or
construction, equipment, or maintenance of facilities for the
Center.
``(3) Other duties and functions.--The advisory council for
the Center--
``(A)(i) may make recommendations to the Director of the
Center with respect to research to be conducted by the
Center;
``(ii) may review applications for grants and cooperative
agreements for research or training and recommend for
approval applications for projects that demonstrate the
probability of making valuable contributions to human
knowledge; and
``(iii) may review any grant, contract, or cooperative
agreement proposed to be made or entered into by the Center;
``(B) may collect, by correspondence or by personal
investigation, information relating to studies that are being
carried out in the United States or any other country and,
with the approval of the Director of the Center, make such
information available through appropriate publications; and
``(C) may appoint subcommittees and convene workshops and
conferences.
``(b) Membership.--
``(1) In general.--The advisory council shall be composed
of the ex officio members described in paragraph (2) and not
more than 18 individuals to be appointed by the Secretary
under paragraph (3).
``(2) Ex officio members.--The ex officio members of the
advisory council shall include--
``(A) the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the
Director of NIH, the Director of the Center, the Chief Social
Work Officer of the Veterans' Administration, the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, the Associate
Director of Prevention Research at the National Institute of
Mental Health, the Director of the Division of Epidemiology
and Services Research, the Assistant Secretary
[[Page 176]]
of Health and Human Services for the Administration for
Children and Families, the Assistant Secretary of Education
for the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, the
Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development for
Community Planning and Development, and the Assistant
Attorney General for Office of Justice Programs (or the
designees of such officers); and
``(B) such additional officers or employees of the United
States as the Secretary determines necessary for the advisory
council to effectively carry out its functions.
``(3) Appointed members.--The Secretary shall appoint not
to exceed 18 individuals to the advisory council, of which--
``(A) not more than two-thirds of such individual shall be
appointed from among the leading representatives of the
health and scientific disciplines (including public health
and the behavioral or social sciences) relevant to the
activities of the Center, and at least 7 such individuals
shall be professional social workers who are recognized
experts in the area of clinical practice, education, or
research; and
``(B) not more than one-third of such individuals shall be
appointed from the general public and shall include leaders
in fields of public policy, law, health policy, economics,
and management.
The Secretary shall make appointments to the advisory council
in such a manner as to ensure that the terms of the members
do not all expire in the same year.
``(4) Compensation.--Members of the advisory council who
are officers or employees of the United States shall not
receive any compensation for service on the advisory council.
The remaining members shall receive, for each day (including
travel time) they are engaged in the performance of the
functions of the advisory council, compensation at rates not
to exceed the daily equivalent of the annual rate in effect
for an individual at grade GS-18 of the General Schedule.
``(c) Terms.--
``(1) In general.--The term of office of an individual
appointed to the advisory council under subsection (b)(3)
shall be 4 years, except that any individual appointed to
fill a vacancy on the advisory council shall serve for the
remainder of the unexpired term. A member may serve after the
expiration of the member's term until a successor has been
appointed.
``(2) Reappointments.--A member of the advisory council who
has been appointed under subsection (b)(3) for a term of 4
years may not be reappointed to the advisory council prior to
the expiration of the 2-year period beginning on the date on
which the prior term expired.
``(3) Vacancy.--If a vacancy occurs on the advisory council
among the members under subsection (b)(3), the Secretary
shall make an appointment to fill that vacancy not later than
90 days after the date on which the vacancy occurs.
``(d) Chairperson.--The chairperson of the advisory council
shall be selected by the Secretary from among the members
appointed under subsection (b)(3), except that the Secretary
may select the Director of the Center to be the chairperson
of the advisory council. The term of office of the
chairperson shall be 2 years.
``(e) Meetings.--The advisory council shall meet at the
call of the chairperson or upon the request of the Director
of the Center, but not less than 3 times each fiscal year.
The location of the meetings of the advisory council shall be
subject to the approval of the Director of the Center.
``(f) Administrative Provisions.--The Director of the
Center shall designate a member of the staff of the Center to
serve as the executive secretary of the advisory council. The
Director of the Center shall make available to the advisory
council such staff, information, and other assistance as the
council may require to carry out its functions. The Director
of the Center shall provide orientation and training for new
members of the advisory council to provide such members with
such information and training as may be appropriate for their
effective participation in the functions of the advisory
council.
``(g) Comments and Recommendations.--The advisory council
may prepare, for inclusion in the biennial report under
section 485M--
``(1) comments with respect to the activities of the
advisory council in the fiscal years for which the report is
prepared;
``(2) comments on the progress of the Center in meeting its
objectives; and
``(3) recommendations with respect to the future direction
and program and policy emphasis of the center.
The advisory council may prepare such additional reports as
it may determine appropriate.
``SEC. 485M. BIENNIAL REPORT.
``The Director of the Center, after consultation with the
advisory council for the Center, shall prepare for inclusion
in the biennial report under section 403, a biennial report
that shall consist of a description of the activities of the
Center and program policies of the Director of the Center in
the fiscal years for which the report is prepared. The
Director of the Center may prepare such additional reports as
the Director determines appropriate. The Director of the
Center shall provide the advisory council of the Center an
opportunity for the submission of the written comments
described in section 485L(g).
``SEC. 485N. QUARTERLY REPORT.
``The Director of the Center shall prepare and submit to
Congress a quarterly report that contains a summary of
findings and policy implications derived from research
conducted or supported through the Center.''.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 107. A bill to amend title VII of the Public Health Service Act to
make certain graduate programs in professional psychology eligible to
participate in various health professions loan programs; to the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation today to
modify Title VII of the U.S. Public Health Service Act in order to
provide students enrolled in graduate psychology programs with the
opportunity to participate in various health professions loan programs.
Providing students enrolled in graduate psychology programs with
eligibility for financial assistance in the form of loans, loan
guarantees, and scholarships will facilitate a much-needed infusion of
behavioral science expertise into our community of public health
providers. There is a growing recognition of the valuable contribution
being made by psychologists toward solving some of our Nation's most
distressing problems.
The participation of students from all backgrounds and clinical
disciplines is vital to the success of health care training. The Title
VII programs play a significant role in providing financial support for
the recruitment of minorities, women, and individuals from economically
disadvantaged backgrounds. Minority therapists have an advantage in the
provision of critical services to minority populations because often
they can communicate with clients in their own language and cultural
framework. Minority therapists are more likely to work in community
settings where ethnic minority and economically disadvantaged
individuals are most likely to seek care. It is critical that continued
support be provided for the training of individuals who provide health
care services to underserved communities.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 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. 107
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 ``Strengthen the Public Health
Service Act''.
SEC. 2. PARTICIPATION IN VARIOUS HEALTH PROFESSIONS LOAN
PROGRAMS.
(a) Loan Agreements.--Section 721 of the Public Health
Service Act (42 U.S.C. 292q) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by inserting ``, or any public or
nonprofit school that offers a graduate program in
professional psychology'' after ``veterinary medicine'';
(2) in subsection (b)(4), by inserting ``, or to a graduate
degree in professional psychology'' after ``or doctor of
veterinary medicine or an equivalent degree''; and
(3) in subsection (c)(1), by inserting ``, or schools that
offer graduate programs in professional psychology'' after
``veterinary medicine''.
(b) Loan Provisions.--Section 722 of the Public Health
Service Act (42 U.S.C. 292r) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)(1), by inserting ``, or to a graduate
degree in professional psychology'' after ``or doctor of
veterinary medicine or an equivalent degree'';
(2) in subsection (c), in the matter preceding paragraph
(1), by inserting ``, or at a school that offers a graduate
program in professional psychology'' after ``veterinary
medicine''; and
(3) in subsection (k)--
(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking ``or
podiatry'' and inserting ``podiatry, or professional
psychology''; and
(B) in paragraph (4), by striking ``or podiatric medicine''
and inserting ``podiatric medicine, or professional
psychology''.
SEC. 3. GENERAL PROVISIONS.
(a) Health Professions Data.--Section 792(a) of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 295k(a)) is amended by striking
``clinical'' and inserting ``professional''.
(b) Prohibition Against Discrimination on Basis of Sex.--
Section 794 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 295m)
is amended in the matter preceding paragraph (1) by striking
``clinical'' and inserting ``professional''.
[[Page 177]]
(c) Definitions.--Section 799B(1)(B) of the Public Health
Service Act (42 U.S.C. 295p(1)(B)) is amended by striking
``clinical'' each place the term appears and inserting
``professional''.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 108. A bill to amend title VII of the Public Health Service Act to
make certain graduate programs in professional psychology eligible to
participate in various health professions loan programs; to the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I am introducing legislation today to
amend Title VII of the Public Health Service Act to establish a
psychology post-doctoral program. Psychologists have made a unique
contribution in reaching out to the Nation's medically underserved
populations. Expertise in behavioral science is useful in addressing
grave concerns such as violence, addiction, mental illness, adolescent
and child behavioral disorders, and family disruption. Establishment of
a psychology post-doctoral program could be an effective way to find
solutions to these issues.
Similar programs supporting additional, specialized training in
traditionally underserved settings have been successful in retaining
participants to serve the same populations. For example, mental health
professionals who have participated in these specialized federally
funded programs have tended not only to meet their repayment
obligations, but have continued to work in the public sector or with
the underserved.
While a doctorate in psychology provides broad-based knowledge and
mastery in a wide variety of clinical skills, specialized post-doctoral
fellowship programs help to develop particular diagnostic and treatment
skills required to respond effectively to underserved populations. For
example, what appears to be poor academic motivation in a child
recently relocated from Southeast Asia might actually reflect a
cultural value of reserve rather than a disinterest in academic
learning. Specialized assessment skills enable the clinician to
initiate effective treatment.
Domestic violence poses a significant public health problem and is
not just a problem for the criminal justice system. Violence against
women results in thousands of hospitalizations a year. Rates of child
and spouse abuse in rural areas are particularly high, as are the rates
of alcohol abuse and depression in adolescents. A post-doctoral
fellowship program in the psychology of the rural populations could be
of special benefit in addressing these problems.
Given the demonstrated success and effectiveness of specialized
training programs, it is incumbent upon us to encourage participation
in post-doctoral fellowships that respond to the needs of the nation's
underserved.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 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. 108
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 ``Psychologists in the Service
of the Public Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. GRANTS FOR FELLOWSHIPS IN PSYCHOLOGY.
Part C of title VII of the Public Health Service Act (42
D.S.C. 293k et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
SEC. 749. GRANTS FOR FELLOWSHIPS IN PSYCHOLOGY.
``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall establish a
psychology post-doctoral fellowship program to make grants to
and enter into contracts with eligible entities to encourage
the provision of psychological training and services in
underserved treatment areas.
``(b) Eligible Entities.--
``(1) Individuals.--In order to receive a grant under this
section an individual shall submit an application to the
Secretary at such time, in such form, and containing such
information as the Secretary shall require, including a
certification that such individual--
`` (A) has received a doctoral degree through a graduate
program in psychology provided by an accredited institution
at the time such grant is awarded;
``(B) will provide services to a medically underserved
population during the period of such grant;
``(C) will comply with the provisions of subsection (c);
and
``(D) will provide any other information or assurances as
the Secretary determines appropriate.
``(2) Institutions.--In order to receIve a grant or
contract under this section, an institution shall submit an
application to the Secretary at such time, in such form, and
containing such information as the Secretary shall require,
including a certification that such institution--
``(A) is an entity, approved by the State, that provides
psychological services in medically underserved areas or to
medically underserved populations (including entities that
care for the mentally retarded, mental health institutions,
and prisons);
``(B) will use amounts provided to such institution under
this section to provide financial assistance in the form of
fellowships to qualified individuals who meet the
requirements of subparagraphs (A) through (0) of paragraph
(1);
``(C) will not use more than 10 percent of amounts provided
under this section to pay for the administrative costs of any
fellowship programs established with such funds; and
``(D) will provide any other information or assurances as
the Secretary determines appropriate.
``(c) Continued Provision of Services.--Any in,dividual who
receives a grant or fellowship under this section shall
certify to the Secretary that such individual will continue
to provide the type of services for which such grant or
fellowship is awarded for not less than 1 year after the term
of the grant or fellowship has expired.
``(d) Regulations.--Not later than 180 days after the date
of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall promulgate
regulations necessary to carry out this section, including
regulations that define the terms `medically underserved
areas' and `medically underserved populations'.
``(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section
$5,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2008 through 2010.''.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 109. A bill to recognize the organization known as the National
Academics of Practice; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation that
would provide a Federal charter for the National Academies of Practice.
This organization represents outstanding health care professionals who
have made significant contributions to the practice of applied
psychology, medicine, dentistry, nursing, optometry, osteopathic
medicine, pharmacy, podiatry, social work, and veterinary medicine.
When fully established, each of the ten academies will possess 150
distinguished practitioners selected by their peers. This umbrella
organization will be able to provide the Congress of the United States
and the executive branch with considerable health policy expertise,
especially from the perspective of those individuals who are in the
forefront of actually providing health care.
As we continue to grapple with the many complex issues surrounding
the delivery of health care services, it is clearly in our best
interest to ensure that the Congress has direct and immediate access to
the recommendations of an interdisciplinary body of health care
practitioners.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 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. 109
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 ``National Academies of
Practice Recognition Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. CHARTER.
The National Academies of Practice organized and
incorporated under the laws of the District of Columbia, is
hereby recognized as such and is granted a Federal charter.
SEC. 3. CORPORATE POWERS.
The National Academies of Practice (referred to in this Act
as the ``corporation'') shall have only those powers granted
to it through its bylaws and articles of incorporation filed
in the State in which it is incorporated and subject to the
laws of such State.
SEC. 4. OBJECTIVES AND PURPOSES OF THE CORPORATION.
The objectives and purposes for which the corporation is
organized shall be provided for in the articles of
incorporation and shall include the following:
[[Page 178]]
(1) Honoring persons who have made significant
contributions to the practice of applied dentistry, medicine,
nursing, optometry, osteopathy, pharmacy, podiatry,
psychology, social work, veterinary medicine, and other
health care professions.
(2) Improving the effectiveness of such professions by
disseminating information about new techniques and
procedures, promoting interdisciplinary practices, and
stimulating multidisciplinary exchange of scientific and
professional information.
(3) Upon request, advising the President, the members of
the President's Cabinet, Congress, Federal agencies, and
other relevant groups about practitioner issues in health
care and health care policy, from a multidisciplinary
perspective.
SEC. 5. SERVICE OF PROCESS.
With respect to service of process, the corporation shall
comply with the laws of the State in which it is incorporated
and those States in which it carries on its activities in
furtherance of its corporate purposes.
SEC. 6. MEMBERSHIP.
Eligibility for membership in the corporation and the
rights and privileges of members shall be as provided in the
bylaws of the corporation.
SEC. 7. BOARD OF DIRECTORS; COMPOSITION; RESPONSIBILITIES.
The composition and the responsibilities of the board of
directors of the corporation shall be as provided in the
articles of incorporation of the corporation and in
conformity with the laws of the State in which it is
incorporated.
SEC. 8. OFFICERS OF THE CORPORATION.
The officers of the corporation and the election of such
officers shall be as provided in the articles of
incorporation of the corporation and in conformity with the
laws of the State in which it is incorporated.
SEC. 9. RESTRICTIONS.
(a) Use of Income and Assets.--No part of the income or
assets of the corporation shall inure to any member, officer,
or director of the corporation or be distributed to any such
person during the life of the charter under this Act. Nothing
in this subsection shall be construed to prevent the payment
of reasonable compensation to the officers of the corporation
or reimbursement for actual necessary expenses in amounts
approved by the board of directors.
(b) Loans.--The corporation shall not make any loan to any
officer, director, or employee of the corporation.
(c) Political Activity.--The corporation, any officer, or
any director of the corporation, acting as such officer or
director, shall not contribute to, support, or otherwise
participate in any political activity or in any manner
attempt to influence legislation.
(d) Issuance of Stock and Payment of Dividends.--The
corporation shall have no power to issue any shares of stock
nor to declare or pay any dividends.
(e) Claims of Federal Approval.--The corporation shall not
claim congressional approval or Federal Government authority
for any of its activities.
(f) Federal Advisory Activities.--While providing advice to
Federal agencies, the corporation shall be subject to the
Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. Appendix; 86 stat.
700).
SEC. 10. LIABILITY.
The corporation shall be liable for the acts of its
officers and agents when acting within the scope of their
authority.
SEC. 11. MAINTENANCE AND INSPECTION OF BOOKS AND RECORDS.
(a) Books and Records of Account.--The corporation shall
keep correct and complete books and records of account and
shall keep minutes of any proceeding of the corporation
involving any of its members, the board of directors, or any
committee having authority under the board of directors.
(b) Names and Addresses of Members.--The corporation shall
keep at its principal office a record of the names and
addresses of all members having the right to vote in any
proceeding of the corporation.
(c) Right to Inspect Books and Records.--All books and
records of the corporation may be inspected by any member
having the right to vote, or by any agent or attorney of such
member, for any proper purpose, at any reasonable time.
(d) Application of State Law.--Nothing in this section
shall be construed to contravene any applicable State law.
SEC. 12. ANNUAL REPORT.
The corporation shall report annually to the Congress
concerning the activities of the corporation during the
preceding fiscal year. The report shall not be printed as a
public document.
SEC. 13. RESERVATION OF RIGHT TO AMEND OR REPEAL CHARTER.
The right to alter, amend, or repeal this Act is expressly
reserved to Congress.
SEC. 14. DEFINITION.
In this Act, the term ``State'' includes the District of
Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the
territories and possessions of the United States.
SEC. 15. TAX-EXEMPT STATUS.
The corporation shall maintain its status as an
organization exempt from taxation as provided in the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 or any corresponding similar provision.
SEC. 16. TERMINATION.
If the corporation fails to comply with any of the
restrictions or provisions of this Act the charter granted by
this Act shall terminate.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 110. A bill to allow the psychiatric or psychological examinations
required under chapter 313 of title 18, United States Code, relating to
offenders with mental disease or defect, to be conducted by a clinical
social worker; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, today I introduce legislation to amend
Title 18 of the United States Code to allow our Nation's clinical
social workers to use their mental health expertise on behalf of the
Federal judiciary by conducting psychological and psychiatric exams.
I feel that the time has come to allow our Nation's judicial system
to have access to a wide range of behavioral science and mental health
expertise. I am confident that the enactment of this legislation would
be very much in our Nation's best interest.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 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. 110
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 ``Psychiatric and
Psychological Examinations Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. EXAMINATIONS BY CLINICAL SOCIAL WORKERS.
Section 4247(b) of title 18, United States Code, is
amended, in the first sentence, by striking ``psychiatrist or
psychologist'' and inserting ``psychiatrist, psychologist, or
clinical social worker''.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 111. A bill to amend title 10, United States Code, to recognize
the United States Military Cancer Institute as an establishment within
the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, to require
the Institute to promote the health of members of the Armed Forces and
their dependents by enhancing cancer research and treatment, to provide
for a study of the epidemiological causes of cancer among various
ethnic groups for cancer prevention and early detection efforts, and
for other purposes; to the Committee on Armed Services.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, Today I introduce the United States
Military Cancer Institute Research Collaborative Act. This legislation,
twice passed by the Senate yet unsuccessful in the House, would
formally establish the United States Military Cancer Institute, USMCI,
and support the collaborative augmentation of research efforts in
cancer epidemiology, prevention and control. Although the USMCI already
exists as an informal collaborative effort, this bill will formally
establish the institution with a mission of providing for the
maintenance of health in the military by enhancing cancer research and
treatment, and studying the epidemiological causes of cancer among
various ethnic groups. By formally establishing the USMCI, it will be
in a better position to unite military research efforts with other
cancer research centers.
Cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment are significant
issues for the military population, thus the USMCI was organized to
coordinate the existing military cancer assets. The USMCI has a
comprehensive database of its beneficiary population of 9 million
people. The military's nationwide tumor registry, the Automated Central
Tumor Registry, has acquired more than 180,000 cases in the last 14
years, and a serum repository of 30 million specimens from military
personnel collected sequentially since 1987. This population is
predominantly Caucasian, African-American, and Hispanic.
The USMCI currently resides in the Washington, D.C., area, and its
components are located at the National Naval Medical Center, the
Malcolm Grow Medical Center, the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology,
and the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute. There are more
than 70 research workers, both active duty and Department of Defense
civilian scientists, working in the USMCI.
The Director of the USMCI, Dr. John Potter, intends to expand
research activities to military medical centers
[[Page 179]]
across the nation. Special emphasis will be placed on the study of
genetic and environmental factors in carcinogenesis among the entire
population, including Asian, Caucasian, African-American and Hispanic
subpopulations.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 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. 111
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. THE UNITED STATES MILITARY CANCER INSTITUTE.
(a) Establishment.--Chapter 104 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:
``Sec. 2117. United States Military Cancer Institute
``(a) Establishment.--(1) There is a United States Military
Cancer Institute in the University. The Director of the
United States Military Cancer Institute is the head of the
Institute.
``(2) The Institute is composed of clinical and basic
scientists in the Department of Defense who have an expertise
in research, patient care, and education relating to oncology
and who meet applicable criteria for participation in the
Institute.
``(3) The components of the Institute include military
treatment and research facilities that meet applicable
criteria and are designated as affiliates of the Institute.
``(b) Research.--(1) The Director of the United States
Military Cancer Institute shall carry out research studies on
the following:
``(A) The epidemiological features of cancer, including
assessments of the carcinogenic effect of genetic and
environmental factors, and of disparities in health, inherent
or common among populations of various ethnic origins.
``(B) The prevention and early detection of cancer.
``(C) Basic, translational, and clinical investigation
matters relating to the matters described in subparagraphs
(A) and (B).
``(2) The research studies under paragraph (1) shall
include complementary research on oncologic nursing.
``(c) Collaborative Research.--The Director of the United
States Military Cancer Institute shall carry out the research
studies under subsection (b) in collaboration with other
cancer research organizations and entities selected by the
Institute for purposes of the research studies.
``(d) Annual Report.--(1) Promptly after the end of each
fiscal year, the Director of the United States Military
Cancer Institute shall submit to the President of the
University a report on the results of the research studies
carried out under subsection (b).
``(2) Not later than 60 days after receiving the annual
report under paragraph (1), the President of the University
shall transmit such report to the Secretary of Defense and to
Congress.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the
following new item:
``2117. United States Military Cancer Institute.''.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye):
S. 112. A bill to amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to
provide 100 percent reimbursement for medical assistance provided to a
Native Hawaiian through a federally-qualified health center or a Native
Hawaiian health care system; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, today I introduce the Native Hawaiian
Medicaid Coverage Act of 2004. This legislation would authorize a
Federal Medicaid Assistance Percent, FMAP, of 100 percent for the
payment of health care costs of Native Hawaiians who receive health
care from Federally Qualified Health Centers or the Native Hawaiian
Health Care System.
This bill was originally a provision within the Medicare Prescription
Drug Bill, which the Senate passed by an overwhelming majority of 76 to
21, but was dropped from the final Medicare Prescription Drug
Conference Report.
This bill is modeled on the Native Alaskan Health Care Act, which
provides for a Federal Medicaid Assistance Percent, FMAP, of 100
percent for payment of health care costs for Native Alaskans by the
Indian Health Service, an Indian tribe, or a tribal organization.
Community health centers serve as the ``safety net'' for uninsured
and medically underserved Native Hawaiians and other United States
citizens, providing comprehensive primary and preventive health
services to the entire community. Outpatient services offered to the
entire family include comprehensive primary care, preventive health
maintenance, and education outreach in the local community. Community
health centers, with their multi-disciplinary approach, offer cost
effective integration of health promotion and wellness with chronic
disease management and primary care focused on serving vulnerable
populations.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this 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. 112
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 ``Native Hawaiian Medicaid
Coverage Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. 100 PERCENT FMAP FOR MEDICAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDED TO A
NATIVE HAWAIIAN THROUGH A FEDERALLY-QUALIFIED
HEALTH CENTER OR A NATIVE HAWAIIAN HEALTH CARE
SYSTEM UNDER THE MEDICAID PROGRAM.
(a) Medicaid.--The third sentence of section 1905(b) of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396d(b)) is amended by
inserting ``, and with respect to medical assistance provided
to a Native Hawaiian (as defined in section 12 of the Native
Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act) through a federally-
qualified health center or a Native Hawaiian health care
system (as so defined) whether directly, by referral, or
under contract or other arrangement between a federally-
qualified health center or a Native Hawaiian health care
system and another health care provider'' before the period.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
applies to medical assistance provided on or after the date
of enactment of this Act.
______
By Mr. OBAMA (for himself and Ms. Snowe):
S. 117. A bill to amend titles 10 and 38, United States Code, to
improve benefits and services for members of the Armed Forces, veterans
of the Global War on Terrorism, and other veterans, to require reports
on the effects of the Global War on Terrorism, and for other purposes;
to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that
is significant both in the problems it seeks to address and the man it
seeks to honor.
Since the day he arrived in Congress more than two decades ago, Lane
Evans was a tireless advocate for the men and women with whom he
served. When Vietnam vets started falling ill from Agent Orange, he led
the effort to get them compensation. Lane was one of the first in
Congress to speak out about the health problems facing Persian Gulf War
veterans. He worked to help veterans suffering from Post-Traumatic
Stress Disorder, and he also helped make sure thousands of homeless
veterans in our country have a place to sleep. Lane Evans fought these
battles for more than 20 years, and even in the face of his own
debilitating disease, he kept fighting. Today, veterans across America
have Lane Evans to thank for reminding this country of its duty to take
care of those who have risked their lives to defend ours.
I am very proud today to introduce the Lane Evans Veterans Healthcare
and Benefits Improvement Act of 2007. This bill honors a legislator who
left behind an enduring legacy of service to our veterans. The
legislation also is an important step towards caring for our men and
women who are currently fighting for us.
I am being joined today by Senator Olympia Snowe, the lead cosponsor
of this bill. Senator Snowe has long been an advocate for veterans in
her state, and I have been honored to work with her in the past on
veterans issues. We have fought to reduce the backlog of disability
claims at the Veterans Benefits Administration and to improve the
military's ability to identify and treat Traumatic Brain Injury. Our
introduction of the Lane Evans Bill is a continuation of these efforts.
Today, more than 1.5 million American troops have been deployed
overseas as part of the Global War on Terror. These brave men and women
who protected us are beginning to return
[[Page 180]]
home. Six hundred thousand people who served in Iraq and Afghanistan
are now veterans, and more than 185,000 have already received treatment
at the VA. That number is increasing every day. Many of these fighting
men and women are coming home with major injuries. As a country, we are
only beginning to understand the true costs of the Global War on
Terror.
The Government Accountability Office reported that VA has faced $3
billion in budget shortfalls since 2005 because it underestimated the
costs of caring for Iraq and Afghanistan veterans. The VA wasn't
getting the information it needed from the Pentagon and was relying on
outdated data and incorrect forecasting models. We cannot let these
kind of bureaucratic blunders get in the way of the care and support we
owe our servicemembers.
To avoid these costly shortfalls in the future, we have to do a
better job keeping track of veterans. That's why the first thing the
Lane Evans Act does is to establish a system to track Global War on
Terror veterans. The VA established a similar data system following the
Persian Gulf War. That effort has been invaluable in budget planning as
well as in monitoring emerging health trends and diseases linked to the
Gulf War. The Gulf War Veterans Information System also has been
important to medical research and improved care for veterans. The
sooner we begin keeping accurate track of our fighting men and women in
Iraq, Afghanistan and beyond, the better and more efficiently we will
be able to care for them.
The Lane Evans Act also tackles Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.
Mental health patients account for about one-third of the new veterans
seeking care at the VA. The VA's National Center for PTSD reports that
``the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are the most sustained combat
operations since the Vietnam War, and initial signs imply that these
ongoing wars are likely to produce a new generation of veterans with
chronic mental health problems.''
This bill addresses PTSD in two ways. First, it extends the window
during which new veterans can automatically get care for mental health
from two years to five years. Right now, any servicemember discharged
from the military has up to two years to walk into a VA facility and
get care, no questions asked. After that, vets have to prove that they
are disabled because of a service-connected injury, or they have to
prove their income is below threshold levels. Unfortunately, it can
take years for symptoms of PTSD to manifest. The time it takes to prove
service-connection for mental health illness is valuable time lost
during which veterans are not receiving critically needed treatment.
The Lane Evans Act allows veterans to walk into a VA facility any time
five years after discharge and get assessed for mental health care.
This both extends the window and shortens the wait for vets to get
care.
Second, the legislation makes face-to-face physical and mental health
screening mandatory 30 to 90 days after a soldier is deployed in a war
zone. This will ensure that our fighting force is ready for battle, and
that we can identify and treat those at risk for PTSD. By making the
exams mandatory, we can help eliminate the stigma associated with
mental health screening and treatment.
Another problem veterans face is that the VA and DoD do not
effectively share medical and military records. Older veterans often
have to wait years for their benefits as the Department of Defense
recovers aging and lost paper records. Under the Lane Evans Act, the
Department of Defense would provide each separating service member at
the time of discharge with a secure full electronic copy of all
military and medical records to help them apply for healthcare and
benefits. DoD possesses the technology to do this now. The information
could be useful to VA to quickly and accurately document receipt of
vaccinations or deployment to a war zone. The electronic data will also
be helpful in future generations when family members of veterans seek
information about military service, awards, and wartime deployment that
go well beyond the existing single-sheet DD-214 discharge certificate,
which is all veterans currently receive.
Finally, the legislation improves the transition assistance that
National Guardsmen and military reservists receive when they return
from deployment. A 2005 GAO report found that because demobilization
for guardsmen and reservists is accelerated, reserve units get
abbreviated and perfunctory transition assistance including limited
employment training. VA should provide equal briefings and transition
services for all service members regarding VA healthcare, disability
compensation, and other benefits, regardless of their duty status.
Lane Evans dedicated his life to serving this country and serving
veterans. The legislation Senator Snowe and I are introducing today,
honors both the man and his mission, and will continue his legacy to
the next generation of American veterans.
Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today as a proud cosponsor of S.
3988, the Lane Evans Veterans Healthcare and Benefits Improvement Act
of 2007. After serving with Lane Evans in the House of Representatives
for over a decade, I am honored to help introduce legislation that
serves as a fitting tribute to a man whose unfaltering efforts on
behalf of our nation's veterans went unmatched.
I also applaud Senator Obama for introducing this vital legislation
at a time when over 600,000 courageous men and women have returned from
combat in both Iraq and Afghanistan. In the past, Senator Obama and I
have worked in a bipartisan manner to bolster the military's ability to
detect and treat traumatic brain injury, and most recently, we have
fought to reduce the backlog of claims at the Veterans Benefits
Administration, VBA. Once again, I thank Senator Obama for his
continuing resoluteness and advocacy for our veterans.
Since the beginning of conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, nearly 1.5
million brave Americans have deployed overseas to take part in the
global war on terror. Of those 1.5 million Americans, at least 184,400
have already received medical treatment from the Department of Veterans
Affairs, VA. It is time the VA and the Department of Defense, DOD, have
the capability to provide incoming veterans with timely and efficient
medical treatment and postdeployment services. For too long now,
provision of these critical services has been hampered by a lack of
resources and policy restructuring.
In 2005, the Government Accountability Office revealed that the VA
faced a budget shortfall of $3 billion, due to the agency's inability
to correctly gauge the benefits for Iraq and Afghanistan veterans. As a
result of spending shortfalls, the VA was forced to dip into
contingency funds that could have compromised the funding for other
vital veterans programs. In order to remedy these unacceptable
deficiencies within the veterans' benefit system, this legislation will
significantly enhance the ability of the DOD and the VA to accurately
track veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, by creating a data registry
that will hold a comprehensive list of VA health care and benefits use.
I remind my colleagues that a similar data system was established in
1998 for Gulf War I Veterans, and has been invaluable in assessing the
necessary budgetary planning for our injured veterans from that
conflict.
However, not all combat wounds are caused by bullets and shrapnel.
Several studies have indicated that due to the nature of warfare in
Iraq--with its intense urban fighting, terrorism and civilian combat--
may cause a spike in the prevalence of post traumatic stress disorder,
PTSD. According to the Veterans' Health Administration, as of October
2006, of the 184,524 Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi
Freedom veterans who have sought care from the VA, 29,041 have been
diagnosed as having probable symptoms of PTSD.
I strongly believe that we have a commitment to ensure that veterans
with PTSD receive compassionate, world-class health care and
appropriate disability compensation determinations. It is imperative
that we do all we can to detect, diagnose, and treat our
[[Page 181]]
veterans suffering from PTSD as quickly as possible, in order to help
our veterans and their families move beyond the psychological trauma of
war and lead healthy, productive lives.
This legislation's proposed data registry will further assist the VA
with ongoing medical research into mental health, traumatic brain
injury, and many other conditions. This legislation will also require
the Department of Defense to conduct in-person physical and mental
health exams with every service member 30 to 90 days after deployment
to war zone, in order to ensure that potential cases of PTSD are
identified and treated in a timely manner. By making the exams
mandatory, the stigma associated with mental health screening and
treatment can be eliminated. Additionally, multiple deployments to
combat zones may factor into a higher susceptibility to PTSD, stressing
the necessity for mental screening prior to redeployment, in order to
ensure that no servicemember experiencing symptoms of PTSD is returned
to duty without treatment. If the VA and the DOD continues its current
mental health screening policy, nondisclosures of PTSD symptoms will
continue to deter early intervention and future VA mental health
services.
This legislation addresses the difficulties associated with PTSD
symptoms that develop over prolonged periods of time. Currently, the
window for new veterans to obtain health care at the VA is 2 years.
However, in many circumstances, it takes years for PTSD symptoms and
other problems related to mental health to emerge. Therefore, this
legislation will extend the window for VA mental health care from 2
years to 5 years, ensuring the necessary mental health treatment for
all veterans who are struggling to recover from the traumas of war.
Further, this legislation will take large steps towards improving the
transfer of military and medical records in order for veterans to
receive the health care and benefits they deserve. This bill requires
DOD to provide each separating service member a full electronic copy of
all military and medical records at the time of discharge. By
facilitating the enhanced use of electronic records, veterans will be
assured the proper access and management of their required care.
Currently, a lack of swift access to military records and medical
records has hampered the VA's ability to treat veterans in need of care
in a timely and effective manner.
According to a December 2006 GAO report, while verifying veterans
claims of PTSD, regional VA offices are unable to directly access and
search an electronic library of medical and service records for all
service branches, and therefore, must rely on a DOD research
organization, whose average response time to regional office requests
is nearly 1 year. Clearly, such a processing delay is not only
inexcusable, it is potentially harmful to the veteran and his or her
family. Increased access to electronic records will allow the VA to
quickly identify the occurrence of stressful events or experiences that
may lead to the necessary treatment for PTSD.
Finally, this legislation will also require the VA to provide equal
briefings and transition services for all service members regarding VA
health care, disability compensation, and other benefits, regardless of
status. Often times, guardsmen and reservists receive limited
transition assistance and employment training, largely due to their
accelerated demobilization. Thus, this legislation will provide
equitable and fair transition services for all returning veterans,
regardless of their service branch, component or military status.
I have nothing but the utmost respect for those brave Americans who
served in uniform with honor, courage, and distinction. The obligation
our nation holds for its veterans is enormous, and it is an obligation
that must be fulfilled every day. Since the attacks of September 11,
millions of brave American men and women have answered our nation's
call to service. Congress must now do everything in its power to answer
our veterans' call, to ensure that they receive the medical care and
treatment that they rightly earned and rightly deserve.
Once again, I am pleased to join Senator Obama in introducing S. 988,
because I believe it is crucial to the welfare of our Nation's
veterans, and I urge my colleagues to voice their support.
______
By Mr. LEAHY (for himself and Mr. Pryor):
S. 118. A bill to give investigators and prosecutors the tools they
need to combat public corruption; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with Senator Pryor to
introduce the ``Effective Corruption Prosecutions Act of 2007,'' a bill
to strengthen the tools available to Federal prosecutors in combating
public corruption. This bill gives investigators and prosecutors the
statutory tools and the resources they need to ensure that serious and
insidious public corruption is detected and punished.
In November, voters sent a strong message that they were tired of the
culture of corruption. From war profiteers and corrupt officials in
Iraq to convicted Administration officials to influence-peddling
lobbyists and, regrettably, even Members of Congress, too many supposed
public servants were serving their own interests, rather than the
public interest. The American people staged an intervention and made it
clear that they would not stand for it any longer. They expect the
Congress to take action. We need to restore the people's trust by
acting to clean up the people's government.
The Senate's new leadership is introducing important lobbying reform
and ethics legislation. Similar legislation passed the Senate last
year, but stalled in the House. This is a vital first step.
But the most serious corruption cannot be prevented only by changing
our own rules. Bribery and extortion are committed by people bent on
getting around the rules and banking that they won't get caught. These
offenses are very difficult to detect and even harder to prove. Because
they attack the core of our democracy, these offenses must be found out
and punished. Congress must send a signal that it will not tolerate
this corruption by providing better tools for federal prosecutors to
combat it. This bill will do exactly that.
First, the bill extends the statute of limitations for the most
serious public corruption offenses. Specifically, it extends the
statute of limitations from five years to eight years for bribery,
deprivation of honest services, and extortion by a public official.
This is an important step because public corruption cases are among the
most difficult and time-consuming cases to investigate and prosecute.
They often require use of informants and electronic monitoring, as well
as review of extensive financial and electronic records, techniques
which take time to develop and implement.
Bank fraud, arson, and passport fraud, among other offenses, all have
10-year statutes of limitations. Since public corruption offenses are
so important to our democracy and these cases are so difficult to
investigate and prove, a more modest extended statute of limitations
for these offenses is a reasonable step to help our corruption
investigators and prosecutors do their jobs. Corrupt officials should
not be able to get away with their ill gotten gains just by waiting out
the investigators.
This bill also facilitates the investigation and prosecution of an
important offense known as Federal program bribery, Title 18, United
States Code, section 666. Federal program bribery is the key Federal
statute for prosecuting bribery involving state and local officials, as
well as officials of the many organizations that receive substantial
Federal money. This bill would allow agents and prosecutors
investigating this important offense to request authority to conduct
wiretaps and to use Federal program bribery as a basis for a
racketeering charge.
Wiretaps, when appropriately requested and authorized, are an
important method for agents and prosecutors to gain evidence of corrupt
activities, which can otherwise be next to impossible to prove without
an informant.
[[Page 182]]
The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statute is
also an important tool which helps prosecutors target organized crime
and corruption.
Agents and prosecutors may currently request authority to conduct
wiretaps to investigate many serious offenses, including bribery of
federal officials and even sports bribery, and may predicate RICO
charges on these offenses, as well. It is only reasonable that these
important tools also be available for investigating the similar and
equally important offense of federal program bribery.
Lastly, my bill authorizes $25 million in additional Federal funds
over each of the next four years to give federal investigators and
prosecutors needed resources to go after public corruption. Last month,
FBI Director Mueller in written testimony to the Judiciary Committee
called public corruption the FBI's top criminal investigative priority.
However, a September 2005 Report by Department of Justice Inspector
General Fine found that, from 2000 to 2004, there was an overall
reduction in public corruption matters handled by the FBI. The report
also found declines in resources dedicated to investigating public
corruption, in corruption cases initiated, and in cases forwarded to US
Attorney's Offices.
I am heartened by Director Mueller's assertion that there has
recently been an increase in the number of agents investigating public
corruption cases and the number of cases investigated, but I remain
concerned by the Inspector General's findings. I am concerned because
the FBI in recent years has diverted resources away from criminal law
priorities, including corruption, into counterterrorism. The FBI may
need to divert further resources to cover the growing costs of
Sentinel, their data management system. The Department of Justice has
similarly diverted resources, particularly from United States
Attorney's Offices.
Additional funding is important to compensate for this diversion of
resources and to ensure that corruption offenses are aggressively
pursued. My bill will give the FBI, the United States Attorney's
Offices, and the Public Integrity Section of the Department of Justice
new resources to hire additional public corruption investigators and
prosecutors. They can finally have the manpower they need to track down
and make these difficult cases, and to root out the corruption.
If we are serious about addressing the egregious misconduct that we
have recently witnessed, Congress must enact meaningful legislation to
give investigators and prosecutors the resources they need to enforce
our public corruption laws. I strongly urge Congress to do more to
restore the public's trust in their government.
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. 118
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 ``Effective Corruption
Prosecutions Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS FOR SERIOUS
PUBLIC CORRUPTION OFFENSES.
(a) In General.--Chapter 213 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 3299. Corruption offenses
``Unless an indictment is returned or the information is
filed against a person within 8 years after the commission of
the offense, a person may not be prosecuted, tried, or
punished for a violation of, or a conspiracy or an attempt to
violate the offense in--
``(1) section 201 or 666;
``(2) section 1341, 1343, or 1346, if the offense involves
a scheme or artifice to deprive another of the intangible
right of honest services of a public official;
``(3) section 1951, if the offense involves extortion under
color of official right;
``(4) section 1952, to the extent that the unlawful
activity involves bribery; or
``(5) section 1963, to the extent that the racketeering
activity involves bribery chargeable under State law, or
involves a violation of section 201 or 666.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 213 of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``3299. Corruption offenses.''.
(c) Application of Amendment.--The amendments made by this
section shall not apply to any offense committed more than 5
years before the date of enactment of this Act.
SEC. 3. INCLUSION OF FEDERAL PROGRAM BRIBERY AS A PREDICATE
FOR INTERCEPTION OF WIRE, ORAL OR ELECTRONIC
COMMUNICATIONS AND AS A PREDICATE FOR A
RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS
OFFENSE.
(a) In General.--Section 2516(c) of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by adding after ``section 224 (bribery in
sporting contests),'' the following: ``section 666 (theft or
bribery concerning programs receiving Federal funds),''.
(b) In General.--Section 1961 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by adding after ``section 664 (relating to
embezzlement from pension and welfare funds),'' the
following: ``section 666 (relating to theft or bribery
concerning programs receiving Federal funds),''.
SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION FOR ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL TO INVESTIGATE
AND PROSECUTE PUBLIC CORRUPTION OFFENSES.
There are authorized to be appropriated to the Department
of Justice, including the United States Attorneys' Offices,
the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Public Integrity
Section of the Criminal Division, $25,000,000 for each of the
fiscal years 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011, to increase the
number of personnel to investigate and prosecute public
corruption offenses including sections 201, 203 through 209,
641, 654, 666, 1001, 1341, 1343, 1346, and 1951 of title 18,
United States Code.
______
By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Kerry,
Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Schumer, Mr.
Wyden, Ms. Cantwell, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Menendez, and Mr. Nelson
of Florida):
S. 119. A bill to prohibit profiteering and fraud relating to
military action, relief, and reconstruction efforts, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing a bill that
creates criminal penalties for war profiteers and cheats who would
exploit taxpayer-funded efforts in Iraq and elsewhere around the world.
Last year, despite the mounting evidence of widespread contractor fraud
and abuse in Iraq, the Republican-controlled Senate would not act on
it. Instead, the Congress took a terrible misstep in seeking to end the
work of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction. I have
been proposing versions of this bill since 2003, when it did pass the
Senate. Unfortunately, this crucial provision was stripped out of the
final version of a bill by a Republican-controlled conference
committee.
There is growing evidence of widespread contractor fraud in Iraq, yet
prosecuting criminal cases against these war profiteers is difficult
under current law. We must crack down on this rampant fraud and abuse
that squanders American taxpayers' dollars and jeopardizes the safety
of our troops abroad. That is why I renew my efforts for accountability
and action with the introduction of the War Profiteering Prevention Act
of 2007. I am pleased to join with Senators Bingaman, Kerry, Harkin,
Rockefeller, Dorgan, Wyden, Schumer, Cantwell, Bill Nelson, Clinton,
Lautenberg and Menendez to introduce this legislation.
Congress has sent billions upon billions of dollars to Iraq with too
little accountability and too few financial controls. More than $50
billion of this money has gone to private contractors hired to guard
bases, drive trucks, feed and shelter the troops and rebuild the
country. This is more than the annual budget of the Department of
Homeland Security.
Instead of results from these companies, we are seeing penalties
levied for allegations of fraud and abuse. At least 10 companies with
billions of dollars in U.S. contracts for Iraq reconstruction have paid
more than $300 million in penalties since 2000, to resolve allegations
of bid rigging, fraud, delivery of faulty military parts and
environmental damage. Seven other companies with Iraq reconstruction
contracts have agreed to pay financial penalties without admitting
wrongdoing.
In 2005, Halliburton took in approximately $3.6 billion from
contracts to serve U.S. troops and rebuild the oil industry in Iraq.
Halliburton executives say that the company received about $1
[[Page 183]]
billion a month for Iraq work in 2006. In addition, last month, we
learned of new plans to spend hundreds of millions more to create jobs
in Iraq.
Last year, the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction
found that millions of U.S. taxpayer funds appropriated for Iraq
reconstruction have been lost and diverted. Yet we continue to send
more taxpayer funds to Iraq, without accountability.
Too much of this money is unaccounted for, and many of the facilities
and services that these funds were supposed to pay for are still
nonexistent. We in Congress must ask--where did all the money go? We
need to press for more accountability over the use and abuse of
billions of taxpayers' dollars sent as development aid to Iraq, not
less.
A new law to combat war profiteering in Iraq and elsewhere is sorely
needed and long overdue. Although there are anti-fraud laws to protect
against the waste of U.S. tax dollars at home, no law expressly
prohibits war profiteering or expressly confers jurisdiction on U.S.
federal courts to hear fraud cases involving war profiteering committed
overseas.
The bill I introduced today would criminalize ``war profiteering''--
overcharging taxpayers in order to defraud and to profit excessively
from a war, military action, or reconstruction efforts. It would also
prohibit any fraud against the United States involving a contract for
the provision of goods or services in connection with a war, military
action, or for relief or reconstruction activities. This new crime
would be a felony, subject to criminal penalties of up to 20 years in
prison and fines of up to $1 million, or twice the illegal gross
profits of the crime.
The bill also prohibits false statements connected with the provision
of goods or services in connection with a war or reconstruction effort.
This crime would also be a felony, subject to criminal penalties of up
to 10 years in prison and fines of up to $1 million, or twice the
illegal gross profits of the crime.
The measure also addresses weakness in the existing laws used to
combat war profiteering, by providing clear authority for the
Government to seek criminal penalties and to recover excessive profits
for war profiteering overseas. These are strong and focused sanctions
that are narrowly tailored to punish and deter fraud or excessive
profiteering in contracts, both at home and abroad.
The message sent by this bill is clear--any act to exploit the crisis
situation in Iraq or elsewhere overseas for exorbitant gain is
unacceptable, reprehensible, and criminal. Such deceit demeans and
exploits the sacrifices that our military personnel are making in Iraq
and Afghanistan, and around the world. This bill also builds on a
strong legacy of historical efforts to stem war profiteering. Congress
implemented excessive-profits taxes and contract renegotiation laws
after both World Wars, and again after the Korean War. Advocating
exactly such an approach, President Roosevelt once declared it our duty
to ensure that ``a few do not gain from the sacrifices of the many.''
Our Government cannot in good faith ask its people to sacrifice for
reconstruction efforts that allow some to profit unfairly. When U.S.
taxpayers have been called upon to bear the burden of reconstruction
contracts--where contracts are awarded in a system that offers little
competition and even less accountability--concerns about wartime
profiteering are a grave matter.
Combating war profiteering is not a Democratic issue, or a Republican
issue. Rather, it is a cause that all Americans can support. When I
first introduced this bill in 2003, it came to be cosponsored by 21
Senators. The Senate Appropriations Committee also unanimously accepted
these provisions during a Senate Appropriations Committee markup of the
$87 billion appropriations bill for Iraq and Afghanistan for Fiscal
Year 2004, and this provision passed the Senate. Passing bipartisan war
profiteering prevention legislation was the right thing to do then, and
it is the right thing to do now.
I am hopeful that in a new year, and with a new Congress, we can make
a fresh start and forge a bipartisan partnership on this important
issue that will result in passage of this bill. I ask unanimous consent
that a copy 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. 119
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 ``War Profiteering Prevention
Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. PROHIBITION OF PROFITEERING.
(a) Prohibition.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 47 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 1039. War profiteering and fraud relating to military
action, relief, and reconstruction efforts
``(a) Prohibition.--
``(1) In general.--Whoever, in any matter involving a
contract or the provision of goods or services, directly or
indirectly, in connection with a war, military action, or
relief or reconstruction activities within the jurisdiction
of the United States Government, knowingly and willfully--
``(A)(i) executes or attempts to execute a scheme or
artifice to defraud the United States; or
``(ii) materially overvalues any good or service with the
specific intent to defraud and excessively profit from the
war, military action, or relief or reconstruction activities;
shall be fined under paragraph (2), imprisoned not more than
20 years, or both; or
``(B)(i) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick,
scheme, or device a material fact;
``(ii) makes any materially false, fictitious, or
fraudulent statements or representations; or
``(iii) makes or uses any materially false writing or
document knowing the same to contain any materially false,
fictitious or fraudulent statement or entry;
shall be fined under paragraph (2) imprisoned not more than
10 years, or both.
``(2) Fine.--A person convicted of an offense under
paragraph (1) may be fined the greater of--
``(A) $1,000,000; or
``(B) if such person derives profits or other proceeds from
the offense, not more than twice the gross profits or other
proceeds.
``(b) Extraterritorial Jurisdiction.--There is
extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction over an offense under
this section.
``(c) Venue.--A prosecution for an offense under this
section may be brought--
``(1) as authorized by chapter 211 of this title;
``(2) in any district where any act in furtherance of the
offense took place; or
``(3) in any district where any party to the contract or
provider of goods or services is located.''.
(2) Table of sections.--The table of sections for chapter
47 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``1039. War profiteering and fraud relating to military action, relief,
and reconstruction efforts.''.
(b) Civil Forfeiture.--Section 981(a)(1)(C) of title 18,
United States Code, is amended by inserting ``1039,'' after
``1032,''.
(c) Criminal Forfeiture.--Section 982(a)(2)(B) of title 18,
United States Code, is amended by striking ``or 1030'' and
inserting ``1030, or 1039''.
(d) RICO.--Section 1956(c)(7)(D) of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by inserting the following: ``, section 1039
(relating to war profiteering and fraud relating to military
action, relief, and reconstruction efforts)'' after
``liquidating agent of financial institution),''.
______
By Mr. BAUCUS (for himself and Mr. Coleman):
S. 122. A bill to amend the Trade Act of 1974 to extend benefits to
service sector workers and firms, enhance certain trade adjustment
assistance authorities, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Finance.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I am pleased today to introduce the Trade
Adjustment Assistance Improvement Act of 2007 with my good friend and
colleague, Senator Norm Coleman.
In 2006, the United States passed, signed or concluded no fewer than
five new free trade agreements. This June, the President's authority to
negotiate trade agreements will expire. Congress should extend the
President's authority to negotiate these deals. But when we do, we must
raise the bar higher than before. Each deal must surpass the last, in
order to take advantage of and adjust to changes in the global
marketplace that affect American businesses and workers.
Congress will consider these agreements on their merits. In most
cases, these deals will mean more access for
[[Page 184]]
American producers and service providers. In some few cases, these
agreements could mean more and fiercer competition for producers and
providers here at home.
Competition is the engine that drives market economies like ours. It
spawns innovation and creates new jobs. But just as jobs are created in
new sectors of our economy, jobs are also lost in other sectors which
experience sudden or unfair competition from abroad.
Whether and how effectively we help those firms and workers who feel
the negative effects of our national trade policy will, in large part,
determine whether and how effectively we can move a trade agenda
forward this year.
During the last several Congresses, we have experienced unprecedented
change in the global marketplace and in our labor market at home. I
have worked to raise the bar on our efforts to help workers affected by
these changes. Today, I propose again, more urgently than ever, that
Congress and the administration work together to adapt our national
worker adjustment strategies to the challenges of globalization. The
Trade Adjustment Assistance Improvement Act is a first and necessary
step in that direction.
The Trade Adjustment Assistance Improvement Act includes many
proposals that Congress should consider before the program expires this
September. The Act extends coverage to more of the workers who are
affected by trade and globalization. And the Act will improve the
overall efficiency and effectiveness of the program.
For more than a century, the manufacturing sector drove the American
economy. So, when President Kennedy decided to open the American
economy to more trade, he established the Trade Adjustment Assistance
program to help workers in the manufacturing sector adjust to change.
Today, our economy depends upon service exports. More than 75 percent
of the American labor force work in services. While many service sector
jobs cannot be outsourced, technology change makes it possible to
provide many services remotely, in such fields as accounting,
healthcare, and computers and information technology. So when a large
call center left Kalispell, Montana, three years ago for Canada, the
Montana workers left behind did not have access to the same benefits
that workers laid off from the Columbia Falls Aluminum manufacturing
plant did. They should have.
Last year, the Department of Labor agreed, for the first time ever,
that workers who produce software, an intangible product, should be
eligible for Trade Adjustment Assistance. That was a step in the right
direction. We should take the next step this year. We should finally
extend coverage to American service workers. That is what my bill
proposes.
Trade Adjustment Assistance certification takes place on a case-by-
case, plant-by-plant basis. This means that while two factories
producing the same products may both experience foreign competition
that leads to layoffs, often only one of those factories' laid off
workers gets certified as eligible for the program.
Consider the softwood lumber industry. At least 12 out of 35 Trade
Adjustment Assistance petitions filed by workers in Montana's softwood
lumber industry over the last 7 years were denied by the Department of
Labor. Yet, all of these mills were similarly affected by the same
market conditions--dumped and subsidized Canadian imports. The
International Trade Commission found that Canadian imports injured or
threatened to injury the softwood lumber industry on a national scale.
But the Department of Labor's certification process does not take
into account the bigger--and often more meaningful--picture. It simply
relies on data provided by individual companies that lay off the
workers to make its case-by-case determination.
The legislation that I introduce today makes industry-wide
certification automatic for workers anywhere in the United States if
the President, the International Trade Commission, or another qualified
Federal agency determines that imports are harming that industry. My
bill also authorizes, but does not require, the Secretary of Labor to
make industry-wide determinations if she receives three or more
petitions in one industry within one 6-month period, or if the Senate
Finance Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee pass a
resolution requesting such an investigation.
We can anticipate and in some cases even prevent displacements by
renewing and expanding our commitment to small and medium-sized
American companies looking to recapture their competitive edge. One
key, yet small program that can help prevent displacements and shifts
in production to overseas is the TAA for Firms program in the
Department of Commerce. The Firms program reaches out to companies that
have experienced decreasing sales or production due to import
competition and have laid off or expect to lay off workers.
This program is chronically under-funded, and it should also be
available to service sector firms. This bill would authorize $50
million for this program to reach more small- and medium-sized
businesses across the nation before they are forced to lay off their
American workers and close their doors.
This bill also moves the Firms program from the Economic Development
Administration at Commerce back into the International Trade
Administration. That's where it was previously. And frankly that's
where it ought to have remained. Despite the Firms program's proven
track record, proposals related to the program under the Economic
Development Administration have sought to either defund the program
altogether, or to limit eligibility by increasing the profit-loss
margin required for participation and arbitrary termination of firms
after 2 years. The Firms program is a trade program and should be
administered by an agency whose primary mission is to help American
companies to adjust to and benefit from trade.
In 2002, with the passage of the Trade Adjustment Assistance Reform
Act, I had great expectations for our first wage insurance
demonstration project. In theory, wage insurance--or Alternative Trade
Adjustment Assistance--encourages swift re-entry into the workforce by
replacing a portion of a worker's lost wages when a worker accepts a
lower paying job within 6 months of a layoff. Workers who choose wage
insurance over traditional Trade Adjustment Assistance training and
income assistance often have less access to good training or simply
cannot afford to be out of work during their training. Wage insurance
provides an incentive for employers to hire lower-skilled and older
workers and train them on the job.
In practice, I have been disappointed with the Department of Labor's
implementation of the wage insurance proposal that we crafted in 2002.
In a 2004 review by the Government Accountability Office, the
Department of Labor's implementation of the benefit came up far short
of the mark. Last year, the Government Accountability Office once again
found that the Department needed to improve its implementation,
focusing specifically on its outreach to and direction of state
employment service offices.
I hope to work with the Department of Labor on strategies that will
improve its outreach. Wage insurance can help put people back to work,
and can even save money over traditional Trade Adjustment Assistance.
But it cannot do either of those things if no one knows about the
benefit.
This bill streamlines the process to qualify for wage insurance, and
lowers the eligible age from 50 to 40. Wage replacement should be
available to younger workers who would re-enter the workforce more
quickly if they could afford the often steep wage cut.
Another key component of the Trade Adjustment Assistance Reform Act
was the health care tax credit to help displaced workers and some
retirees maintain access to health insurance coverage. As health costs
grow, losing health insurance can be as financially devastating to
workers as losing a job. While I still believe that the TAA health care
tax credit holds promise, this is clearly an area where reforms are
needed to help the credit achieve its purpose.
[[Page 185]]
Today, the TAA health care tax credit helps only a fraction of the
hundreds of thousands eligible for assistance. In its first 2 years,
less than 6 percent of eligible workers and retirees enrolled. A GAO
report released last year studying five major plant closings in 2003
and 2004 found that only 3 to 12 percent of eligible workers enrolled.
More than half of the workers studied didn't sign up for the tax credit
because the 65 percent subsidy was too low to make health coverage
affordable.
The tax credit also suffers from complexity and administrative red
tape. More than half of eligible workers in GAO's recent study didn't
even know about the benefit. About a third of workers who knew about
the benefit decided not to enroll because it was too confusing. Even
those who understand it have to navigate complex rules and requirements
to get the benefit.
We need to make this program simpler, more affordable, and more
seamless so that more workers can take it up in the years ahead. We
need to improve the information that workers and retirees get about the
program and create systems to ensure that they get it. We need to cut
down on the red tape. And we need to look at options to make this
benefit more affordable so that we can truly reach the hundreds of
thousands eligible for this benefit that Congress intended to help when
we enacted these reforms 4 years ago. I plan to introduce a bill later
in the year that will achieve these goals for reforming the health care
tax credit and will look forward to working with Senator Coleman and
other colleagues in this effort.
The forces of globalization, like trade and technology change, have
created tremendous opportunities for American businesses and workers,
from cutting the cost of living to increasing the margin of profit.
Trade accounts for a quarter of our gross domestic product. The
adjustments we have made to maximize trade's benefits save the average
American household $9,000 annually.
But we must also make adjustments to respond to the challenges that
come with globalization. American businesses in the 21st century face
rapidly-changing consumer preferences and ever-swifter technological
advances. Global competition is fierce. Innovation is the key to these
companies' continued prosperity.
The same holds true for American workers. They know that they must
adjust to changes in the labor market if they are to maintain their
place in it. Workers must be prepared for one or more career shifts
before retirement. They must acquire more skills, and refresh their
skills more often.
We can help American companies adapt, and regain their competitive
edge in the global marketplace. We can help more trade-displaced
workers get back into the workforce. We should help these workers adapt
not only to trade displacement, but to all the other aspects of
globalization as well.
American workers and the companies that employ them must each
continually adjust to a changing world marketplace. So too should our
worker adjustment strategies.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the full 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. 122
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 ``Trade
Adjustment Assistance Improvement 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--TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE FOR SERVICES SECTOR
Sec. 101. Short title.
Sec. 102. Extension of trade adjustment assistance to services sector.
Sec. 103. Trade adjustment assistance for firms and industries.
Sec. 104. Monitoring and reporting.
Sec. 105. Effective date.
TITLE II--TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE FOR INDUSTRIES
Sec. 201. Other methods of requesting investigation.
Sec. 202. Notification.
Sec. 203. Industry-wide determination.
Sec. 204. Coordination with other trade provisions.
Sec. 205. Regulations.
TITLE III--OTHER TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE MATTERS
Subtitle A--Trade Adjustment Assistance
Sec. 301. Calculation of separation tolled during litigation.
Sec. 302. Establishment of Trade Adjustment Assistance Advisor.
Sec. 303. Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
Sec. 304. Certification of submissions.
Sec. 305. Wage insurance.
Sec. 306. Training.
Sec. 307. Funding for administrative costs.
Sec. 308. Authorization of appropriations.
Subtitle B--Data Collection
Sec. 311. Short title.
Sec. 312. Data collection; information to workers.
Sec. 313. Determinations by the Secretary of Labor.
Subtitle C--Trade Adjustment Assistance for Farmers
Sec. 321. Clarification of marketing year and other provisions.
Sec. 322. Eligibility.
TITLE I--TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE FOR SERVICES SECTOR
SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Trade Adjustment
Assistance Equity for Service Workers Act of 2007''.
SEC. 102. EXTENSION OF TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE TO
SERVICES SECTOR.
(a) Adjustment Assistance for Workers.--Section
221(a)(1)(A) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C.
2271(a)(1)(A)) is amended by striking ``firm)'' and inserting
``firm, and workers in a service sector firm or subdivision
of a service sector firm, or public agency)''.
(b) Group Eligibility Requirements; Service Workers; Shifts
in Production.--Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
U.S.C. 2272) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking
``agricultural firm)'' and inserting ``agricultural firm, and
workers in a service sector firm or subdivision of a service
sector firm, or public agency)'';
(B) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``or public agency''
after ``of the firm''; and
(C) in paragraph (2)--
(i) in subparagraph (A)(ii), by striking ``like or directly
competitive with articles produced'' and inserting ``or
services like or directly competitive with articles produced
or services provided'';
(ii) by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the
following:
``(B)(i) there has been a shift, by such workers' firm,
subdivision, or public agency to a foreign country, of
production of articles, or in provision of services, like or
directly competitive with articles which are produced, or
services which are provided by such firm, subdivision, or
public agency; or
``(ii) such workers' firm, subdivision, or public agency
has obtained or is likely to obtain such services from a
foreign country.'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking
``agricultural firm)'' and inserting ``agricultural firm, and
workers in a service sector firm or subdivision of a service
sector firm, or public agency)'';
(B) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``or service'' after
``related to the article''; and
(C) in paragraph (3)(A), by inserting ``or services'' after
``component parts'';
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (3)--
(i) by inserting ``or services'' after ``value-added
production processes'';
(ii) by striking ``or finishing'' and inserting ``,
finishing, or testing'';
(iii) by inserting ``or services'' after ``for articles'';
(iv) by inserting ``(or subdivision)'' after ``such other
firm''; and
(v) by striking ``, if the certification of eligibility''
and all that follows to the end period; and
(B) in paragraph (4)--
(i) by striking ``for articles'' and inserting ``, or
services, used in the production of articles or in the
provision of services''; and
(ii) by inserting ``(or subdivision)'' after ``such other
firm''; and
(4) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(d) Basis for Secretary's Determinations.--
``(1) Increased imports.--For purposes of subsection
(a)(2)(A)(ii), the Secretary may determine that increased
imports of like or directly competitive articles or services
exist if the workers' firm or subdivision or customers of the
workers' firm or subdivision accounting for not less than 20
percent of the sales of the workers' firm or subdivision
certify to the Secretary that they are obtaining such
articles or services from a foreign country.
``(2) Obtaining services abroad.--For purposes of
subsection (a)(2)(B)(ii), the Secretary may determine that
the workers' firm, subdivision, or public agency has obtained
or is likely to obtain like or directly
[[Page 186]]
competitive services from a foreign country based on a
certification thereof from the workers' firm, subdivision, or
public agency.
``(3) Authority of the secretary.--The Secretary may obtain
the certifications under paragraphs (1) and (2) through
questionnaires or in such other manner as the Secretary
determines is appropriate.''.
(c) Definitions.--Section 247 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
U.S.C. 2319) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by inserting ``or public agency'' after ``of a firm'';
and
(B) by inserting ``or public agency'' after ``or
subdivision'';
(2) in paragraph (2)(B), by inserting ``or public agency''
after ``the firm'';
(3) by redesignating paragraphs (8) through (17) as
paragraphs (9) through (18), respectively; and
(4) by inserting after paragraph (6) the following:
``(7) The term `public agency' means a department or agency
of a State or local government or of the Federal Government.
``(8) The term `service sector firm' means an entity
engaged in the business of providing services.''.
SEC. 103. TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE FOR FIRMS AND
INDUSTRIES.
(a) Firms.--
(1) Assistance.--Section 251 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
U.S.C. 2341) is amended--
(A) in subsection (a), by inserting ``or service sector
firm'' after ``(including any agricultural firm'';
(B) in subsection (c)(1)--
(i) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by inserting
``or service sector firm'' after ``any agricultural firm'';
(ii) in subparagraph (B)(ii), by inserting ``or service''
after ``of an article''; and
(iii) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``articles like or
directly competitive with articles which are produced'' and
inserting ``articles or services like or directly competitive
with articles or services which are produced or provided'';
and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(e) Basis for Secretary Determination.--
``(1) Increased imports.--For purposes of subsection
(c)(1)(C), the Secretary may determine that increases of
imports of like or directly competitive articles or services
exist if customers accounting for not less than 20 percent of
the sales of the workers' firm certify to the Secretary that
they are obtaining such articles or services from a foreign
country.
``(2) Authority of the secretary.--The Secretary may obtain
the certifications under paragraph (1) through questionnaires
or in such other manner as the Secretary determines is
appropriate. The Secretary may exercise the authority under
section 249 in carrying out this subsection.''.
(2) Definition.--Section 261 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
U.S.C. 2351) is amended--
(A) by striking ``For purposes of'' and inserting ``(a)
Firm.--For purposes of''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(b) Service Sector Firm.--For purposes of this chapter,
the term `service sector firm' means a firm engaged in the
business of providing services.''.
(b) Industries.--Section 265(a) of the Trade Act of 1974
(19 U.S.C. 2355(a)) is amended by inserting ``or service''
after ``new product''.
(c) Technical Amendments.--
(1) In general.--Section 249 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
U.S.C. 2321) is amended by striking ``subpena'' and inserting
``subpoena'' each place it appears in the heading and the
text.
(2) Table of contents.--The table of contents for the Trade
Act of 1974 is amended by striking ``Subpena'' in the item
relating to section 249 and inserting ``Subpoena''.
SEC. 104. MONITORING AND REPORTING.
Section 282 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2393) is
amended--
(1) in the first sentence--
(A) by striking ``The Secretary'' and inserting ``(a)
Monitoring Programs.--The Secretary'';
(B) by inserting ``and services'' after ``imports of
articles'';
(C) by inserting ``and domestic provision of services''
after ``domestic production'';
(D) by inserting ``or providing services'' after
``producing articles''; and
(E) by inserting ``, or provision of services,'' after
``changes in production''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(b) Collection of Data and Reports on Service Sector.--
``(1) Secretary of labor.--Not later than 3 months after
the date of the enactment of the Trade Adjustment Assistance
Improvement Act of 2007, the Secretary of Labor shall
implement a system to collect data on adversely affected
service workers that includes the number of workers by State,
industry, and cause of dislocation of each worker.
``(2) Secretary of commerce.--Not later than 180 days after
such date of enactment, the Secretary of Commerce shall, in
consultation with the Secretary of Labor, conduct a study and
report to the Congress on ways to improve the timeliness and
coverage of data on trade in services, including methods to
identify increased imports due to the relocation of United
States firms to foreign countries, and increased imports due
to United States firms obtaining services from firms in
foreign countries.''.
SEC. 105. EFFECTIVE DATE.
The amendments made by this title shall take effect on the
date that is 90 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act.
TITLE II--TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE FOR INDUSTRIES
SEC. 201. OTHER METHODS OF REQUESTING INVESTIGATION.
Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2271) is
amended--
(1) by adding at the end the following:
``(c) Other Methods of Initiating a Petition.--Upon the
request of the President or the United States Trade
Representative, or the resolution of either the Committee on
Finance of the Senate or the Committee on Ways and Means of
the House of Representatives, the Secretary shall promptly
initiate an investigation under this chapter to determine the
eligibility for adjustment assistance of--
``(1) a group of workers (which may include workers from
more than one facility or employer); or
``(2) all workers in an occupation as that occupation is
defined in the Bureau of Labor Statistics Standard
Occupational Classification System.'';
(2) in subsection (a)(2), by inserting ``or a request or
resolution filed under subsection (c),'' after ``paragraph
(1),''; and
(3) in subsection (a)(3), by inserting ``, request, or
resolution'' after ``petition'' each place it appears.
SEC. 202. NOTIFICATION.
Section 2243 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2274) is
amended to read as follows:
``SEC. 224. NOTIFICATIONS REGARDING AFFIRMATIVE
DETERMINATIONS AND SAFEGUARDS.
``(a) Notifications Regarding Chapter 1 Investigations and
Determinations.--Whenever the International Trade Commission
makes a report under section 202(f) containing an affirmative
finding regarding serious injury, or the threat thereof, to a
domestic industry, the Commission shall immediately--
``(1) notify the Secretary of Labor of that finding; and
``(2) in the case of a finding with respect to an
agricultural commodity, as defined in section 291, notify the
Secretary of Agriculture of that finding.
``(b) Notification Regarding Bilateral Safeguards.--The
International Trade Commission shall immediately notify the
Secretary of Labor and, in an investigation with respect to
an agricultural commodity, the Secretary of Agriculture,
whenever the Commission makes an affirmative determination
pursuant to one of the following provisions:
``(1) Section 421 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C.
2451).
``(2) Section 312 of the United States-Australia Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 3805 note).
``(3) Section 312 of the United States-Morocco Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 3805 note).
``(4) Section 312 of the United States-Singapore Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 3805 note).
``(5) Section 312 of the United States-Chile Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 3805 note).
``(6) Section 302(b) of the North American Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 3352(b)).
``(7) Section 212 of the United States-Jordan Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 2112).
``(8) Section 312 of the Dominican Republic-Central
America-United States Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act
(19 U.S.C. 4062).
``(9) Section 312 of the United States-Bahrain Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 3805 note).
``(10) Section 312 of the United States-Oman Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 3805 note).
``(c) Agricultural Safeguards.--The Commissioner of Customs
shall immediately notify the Secretary of Labor and, in the
case of an agricultural commodity, the Secretary of
Agriculture, whenever the Commissioner of Customs assesses
additional duties on a product pursuant to one of the
following provisions:
``(1) Section 202 of the United States-Australia Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 3805 note).
``(2) Section 202 of the United States-Morocco Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 3805 note).
``(3) Section 201(c) of the United States-Chile Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 3805 note).
``(4) Section 309 of the North American Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 3358).
``(5) Section 301(a) of the United States-Canada Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act of 1988 (19 U.S.C. 2112 note).
``(6) Section 404 of the United States-Israel Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 2112 note).
``(7) Section 202 of the Dominican Republic-Central
America-United States Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act
(19 U.S.C. 4032).
[[Page 187]]
``(d) Textile Safeguards.--The President shall immediately
notify the Secretary of Labor whenever the President makes a
positive determination pursuant to one of the following
provisions:
``(1) Section 322 of the United States-Australia Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 3805 note).
``(2) Section 322 of the United States-Morocco Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 3805 note).
``(3) Section 322 of the United States-Chile Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 3805 note).
``(4) Section 322 of the United States-Singapore Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 3805 note).
``(5) Section 322 of the Dominican Republic-Central
America-United States Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act
(19 U.S.C. 4082).
``(6) Section 322 of the United States-Bahrain Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 3805 note).
``(7) Section 322 of the United States-Oman Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 3805 note).
``(e) Antidumping and Countervailing Duties.--Whenever the
International Trade Commission makes a final affirmative
determination pursuant to section 705 or section 735 of the
Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671d or 1673d), the Commission
shall immediately notify the Secretary of Labor and, in the
case of an agricultural commodity, the Secretary of
Agriculture, of that determination.''.
SEC. 203. INDUSTRY-WIDE DETERMINATION.
Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(e) Investigation Regarding Industry-Wide
Certification.--If the Secretary receives a request or a
resolution under section 221(c) on behalf of workers in a
domestic industry or occupation (described in section
221(c)(2)) or receives 3 or more petitions under section
221(a) within a 180-day period on behalf of groups of workers
in a domestic industry or occupation, the Secretary shall
make an industry-wide determination under subsection (a) of
this section with respect to the domestic industry or
occupation in which the workers are or were employed. If the
Secretary does not make a determination and issue a
certification under the preceding sentence, the Secretary
shall make a determination of eligibility under subsection
(a) with respect to each group of workers in that domestic
industry or occupation from which a petition was received.''.
SEC. 204. COORDINATION WITH OTHER TRADE PROVISIONS.
(a) Industry-Wide Certification Based on Global
Safeguards.--
(1) Recommendations by itc.--
(A) Section 202(e)(2)(D) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
U.S.C. 2252(e)(2)(D)) is amended by striking ``, including
the provision of trade adjustment assistance under chapter
2''.
(B) Section 203(a)(3)(D) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
U.S.C. 2253(a)(3)(D)) is amended by striking ``, including
the provision of trade adjustment assistance under chapter
2''.
(2) Assistance for workers.--Section 203(a)(1)(A) of the
Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2253(a)(1)(A)) is amended to
read as follows:
``(A) After receiving a report under section 202(f)
containing an affirmative finding regarding serious injury,
or the threat thereof, to a domestic industry--
``(i) the President shall take all appropriate and feasible
action within his power; and
``(ii)(I) the Secretary of Labor shall certify as eligible
to apply for adjustment assistance under section 223 workers
employed in the domestic industry defined by the Commission
if such workers become totally or partially separated, or are
threatened to become totally or partially separated, not
earlier than 1 year before, or not later than 1 year after,
the date on which the Commission made its report to the
President under section 202(f); and
``(II) in the case of a finding with respect to an
agricultural commodity as defined in section 291, the
Secretary of Agriculture shall certify as eligible to apply
for adjustment assistance under section 293 agricultural
commodity producers employed in the domestic production of
the agricultural commodity that is the subject of the finding
during the most recent marketing year.''.
(b) Industry-Wide Certification Based on Bilateral
Safeguard Provisions or Antidumping or Countervailing Duty
Orders.--
(1) In general.--Subchapter A of chapter 1 of title II of
the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2271 et seq.) is amended by
inserting after section 224 the following new section:
``SEC. 224A. INDUSTRY-WIDE CERTIFICATION WHERE BILATERAL
SAFEGUARD PROVISIONS INVOKED OR ANTIDUMPING OR
COUNTERVAILING DUTIES IMPOSED.
``(a) In General.--
``(1) Mandatory certification.--Not later than 10 days
after the date on which the Secretary of Labor receives a
notification with respect to the imposition of a trade
remedy, safeguard determination, or antidumping or
countervailing duty determination under section 224 (a), (b),
(c), (d), or (e), the Secretary shall certify as eligible for
trade adjustment assistance under section 223(a) workers
employed in the domestic production of the article that is
the subject of the trade remedy, safeguard determination, or
antidumping or countervailing duty determination, as the case
may be, if such workers become totally or partially
separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially
separated not more than 1 year before or not more than 1 year
after the applicable date.
``(2) Applicable date.--In this section, the term
`applicable date' means--
``(A) the date on which the affirmative or positive
determination or finding is made in the case of a
notification under section 224 (a), (b), or (d);
``(B) the date on which a final determination is made in
the case of a notification under section 224(e); or
``(C) the date on which additional duties are assessed in
the case of a notification under section 224(c).
``(b) Qualifying Requirements for Workers.--The provisions
of subchapter B shall apply in the case of a worker covered
by a certification under this section or section 223(e),
except as follows:
``(1) Section 231(a)(5)(A)(ii) shall be applied--
``(A) by substituting `30th week' for `26th week' in
subclause (I); and
``(B) by substituting `26th week' for `20th week' in
subclause (II).
``(2) The provisions of section 236(a)(1) (A) and (B) shall
not apply.''.
(2) Agricultural commodity producers.--Chapter 6 of title
II of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2401 et seq.) is
amended by striking section 294 and inserting the following:
``SEC. 294. INDUSTRY-WIDE CERTIFICATION FOR AGRICULTURAL
COMMODITY PRODUCERS WHERE SAFEGUARD PROVISIONS
INVOKED OR ANTIDUMPING OR COUNTERVAILING DUTIES
IMPOSED.
``(a) In General.--Not later than 10 days after the date on
which the Secretary of Agriculture receives a notification
with respect to the imposition of a trade remedy, safeguard
determination, or antidumping or countervailing duty
determination under section 224 (b), (c), or (e), the
Secretary shall certify as eligible for trade adjustment
assistance under section 293(a) agricultural commodity
producers employed in the domestic production of the
agricultural commodity that is the subject of the trade
remedy, safeguard determination, or antidumping or
countervailing duty determination, as the case may be, during
the most recent marketing year.
``(b) Applicable Date.--In this section, the term
`applicable date' means--
``(1) the date on which the affirmative or positive
determination or finding is made in the case of a
notification under section 224(b);
``(2) the date on which a final determination is made in
the case of a notification under section 224(e); or
``(3) the date on which additional duties are assessed in
the case of a notification under section 224(c).''.
(c) Technical Amendments.--The table of contents for title
II of the Trade Act of 1974 is amended--
(1) by striking the item relating to section 224 and
inserting the following:
``Sec. 224. Notifications regarding affirmative determinations and
safeguards.'';
(2) by inserting after the item relating to section 224,
the following:
``Sec. 224A. Industry-wide certification based on bilateral safeguard
provisions invoked or antidumping or countervailing
duties imposed.'';
and
(3) by striking the item relating to section 294, and
inserting the following:
``Sec. 294. Industry-wide certification for agricultural commodity
producers where safeguard provisions invoked or
antidumping or countervailing duties imposed.''.
SEC. 205. REGULATIONS.
The Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretaries of
Agriculture and Labor, and the International Trade Commission
may promulgate such regulations as may be necessary to carry
out the amendments made by this title.
TITLE III--OTHER TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE MATTERS
Subtitle A--Trade Adjustment Assistance
SEC. 301. CALCULATION OF SEPARATION TOLLED DURING LITIGATION.
Section 233 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2293) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(h) Special Rule for Calculating Separation.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, any
period during which a judicial or administrative appeal is
pending with respect to the denial by the Secretary of a
petition under section 223 shall not be counted for purposes
of calculating the period of separation under subsection
(a)(2) and an adversely affected worker that would otherwise
be entitled to a trade readjustment allowance shall not be
denied such allowance because of such appeal.''.
[[Page 188]]
SEC. 302. ESTABLISHMENT OF TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE
ADVISOR.
(a) In General.--Subchapter A of chapter 2 of title II of
the Trade Act of 1974 is amended by inserting after section
221, the following new section:
``SEC. 221A. ESTABLISHMENT OF TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE
ADVISOR.
``(a) In General.--There is established in the Department
of Labor an office to be known as the `Office of Trade
Adjustment Assistance Advisor' (in this section referred to
as the `Office'). The Office shall be headed by a Director,
who shall be responsible for providing assistance and advice
to any person or entity described in section 221(a)(1)
desiring to file a petition for certification of eligibility
under section 221.
``(b) Technical Assistance.--The Director shall coordinate
with each agency responsible for providing adjustment
assistance under this chapter or chapter 6 (including the
Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance established under
section 255A) and shall provide technical and legal
assistance and advice to enable persons or entities described
in section 221(a)(1) to prepare and file petitions for
certification under section 221.''.
(b) Technical Amendment.--The table of contents for title
II of the Trade Act of 1974 is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 221, the following:
``Sec. 221A. Establishment of Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance
Advisor.''.
SEC. 303. OFFICE OF TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE.
(a) In General.--Chapter 3 of title II of the Trade Act of
1974 (19 U.S.C. 2341 et seq.) is amended by inserting after
section 255 the following:
``SEC. 255A. OFFICE OF TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE.
``(a) Establishment.--Not later than 90 days after the date
of the enactment of the Trade Adjustment Assistance
Improvement Act of 2007, there shall be established in the
International Trade Administration of the Department of
Commerce an Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance (in this
section referred to as the `Office').
``(b) Functions.--The Office shall assist the Secretary of
Commerce in carrying out the Secretary's responsibilities
under this chapter.
``(c) Personnel.--The Office shall be headed by a Director,
and shall have such staff as may be necessary to carry out
the responsibilities of the Secretary of Commerce described
in this chapter.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of contents for the
Trade Act of 1974 is amended by inserting after the item
relating to section 255, the following:
``Sec. 255A. Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.''.
SEC. 304. CERTIFICATION OF SUBMISSIONS.
Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), as
amended by section 203, is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(f) Certification of Submissions.--If an employer submits
a petition on behalf of a group of workers pursuant to
section 221(a)(1) or if the Secretary requests evidence or
information from an employer in order to make a determination
under this section, the accuracy and completeness of any
evidence or information submitted by the employer shall be
certified by the employer's legal counsel or by an officer of
the employer.''.
SEC. 305. WAGE INSURANCE.
(a) In General.--Section 246(a)(3) of the Trade Act of 1974
(19 U.S.C. 2318(a)(3)) is amended to read as follows:
``(3) Eligibility.--A worker in a group that the Secretary
has certified as eligible to apply for adjustment assistance
under section 223 may elect to receive benefits under the
alternative trade adjustment assistance program if the
worker--
``(A) obtains reemployment not more than 26 weeks after the
date of separation from the adversely affected employment;
``(B) is at least 40 years of age;
``(C) earns not more than $50,000 a year in wages from
reemployment;
``(D) is employed on a full-time basis as defined by State
law in the State in which the worker is employed; and
``(E) does not return to the employment from which the
worker was separated.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Subparagraphs (A) and (B) of section 246(a)(2) of the
Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2318(a)(2)) are amended by
striking ``paragraph (3)(B)'' and inserting ``paragraph (3)''
each place it appears.
(2) Section 246(b)(2) of such Act is amended by striking
``subsection (a)(3)(B)'' and inserting ``subsection (a)(3)''.
(c) Extension.--Section 246(b)(1) of such Act is amended by
striking ``5 years'' and inserting ``10 years''.
SEC. 306. TRAINING.
(a) Modification of Enrollment Deadlines.--Section
231(a)(5)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C.
2291(a)(5)(A)(ii)) is amended--
(1) in subclause (I), by striking ``16th week'' and
inserting ``26th week''; and
(2) in subclause (II), by striking ``8th week'' and
inserting ``20th week''.
(b) Extension of Allowance to Accommodate Training.--
Section 233 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2293), as
amended by section 301, is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(i) Extension of Allowance.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of this section, a trade readjustment allowance may
be paid to a worker for a number of additional weeks equal to
the number of weeks the worker's enrollment in training was
delayed beyond the deadline applicable under section
231(a)(5)(A)(ii) pursuant to a waiver granted under section
231(c)(1)(E).''.
(c) Funding for Training.--Section 236(a) of the Trade Act
of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2296(a)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1) by striking ``Upon such approval'' and
all that follows to the end; and
(2) by amending paragraph (2) to read as follows:
``(2)(A) Upon approval of a training program under
paragraph (l), and subject to the limitations imposed by this
section, an adversely affected worker covered by a
certification issued under section 223 shall be eligible to
have payment of the costs of that training, including any
costs of an approved training program incurred by a worker
before a certification was issued under section 223, made on
behalf of the worker by the Secretary directly or through a
voucher system.
``(B) Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment
of the Trade Adjustment Assistance Improvement Act of 2007,
the Secretary shall develop, and submit to Congress for
approval, a formula that provides workers with an individual
entitlement for training costs to be administered pursuant to
sections 239 and 240. The formula shall take into account--
``(i) the number of workers enrolled in trade adjustment
assistance;
``(ii) the duration of the assistance;
``(iii) the anticipated training costs for workers; and
``(iv) any other factors the Secretary deems appropriate.
``(C) Until such time as Congress approves the formula, the
total amount of payments that may be made under subparagraph
(A) for any fiscal year shall not exceed 50 percent of the
amount of trade readjustment allowances paid to workers
during that fiscal year.''.
(d) Approved Training Programs.--
(1) In general.--Section 236(a)(5) of the Trade Act of 1974
(19 U.S.C. 2296(a)(5)) is amended--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (E);
(B) by redesignating subparagraph (F) as subparagraph (H);
and
(C) by inserting after subparagraph (E) the following:
``(F) integrated workforce training;
``(G) entrepreneurial training; and''.
(2) Definition.--Section 247 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
U.S.C. 2319), as amended by 102(c), is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``(19) The term `integrated workforce training' means
training that integrates occupational skills training with
English language acquisition.''.
SEC. 307. FUNDING FOR ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.
Section 241 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2313) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(d) Funds provided by the Secretary to a State to cover
administrative costs associated with the performance of a
State's responsibilities under section 239 shall be
sufficient to cover all costs of the State associated with
operating the trade adjustment assistance program, including
case worker costs.''.
SEC. 308. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) In General.--Section 245(a) of the Trade Act of 1974
(19 U.S.C. 2317(a)) is amended by striking ``2007'' and
inserting ``2012''.
(b) Firms.--Section 256(b) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
U.S.C. 2346(b)) is amended by inserting ``and $50,000,000 for
each of fiscal years 2008 through 2012,'' after ``fiscal
years 2003 through 2007,''.
(c) Termination.--Section 285 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
U.S.C. 2271 note) is amended by striking ``2007'' each place
it appears and inserting ``2012''.
(d) Farmers.--Section 298(a) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
U.S.C. 2401g(a)) is amended by striking ``2007'' and
inserting ``2012''.
Subtitle B--Data Collection
SEC. 311. SHORT TITLE.
This subtitle may be cited as the ``Trade Adjustment
Assistance Accountability Act''.
SEC. 312. DATA COLLECTION; INFORMATION TO WORKERS.
(a) Data Collection.--Subchapter C of chapter 2 of title II
of the Trade Act of 1974 is amended by inserting after
section 249, the following new section:
``SEC. 250. DATA COLLECTION; REPORT.
``(a) Data Collection.--The Secretary shall, pursuant to
regulations prescribed by the Secretary, collect any data
necessary to meet the requirements of this chapter. The
Secretary shall collect and publish, on an annual basis, the
following:
``(1) The number of workers certified and the number of
workers actually participating in the trade adjustment
assistance program.
``(2) The time for processing petitions.
``(3) The number of training waivers granted.
``(4) The number of workers receiving benefits and the type
of benefits being received.
[[Page 189]]
``(5) The number of workers enrolled in, and the duration
of, training by major types of training.
``(6) Earnings history of workers that reflects wages
before separation and wages in any job obtained after
receiving benefits under this Act.
``(7) Reemployment rates and sectors in which dislocated
workers have been employed.
``(8) The cause of dislocation identified in each petition
that resulted in a certification under this chapter.
``(9) The number of petitions filed and workers certified
in each congressional district of the United States.
``(b) State Participation.--The Secretary shall ensure, to
the extent practicable, through oversight and effective
internal control measures the following:
``(1) State participation.--Participation by each State in
the collection of data required under subsection (a) and
shall provide incentives for States to supplement employment
and wage data obtained through the use of unemployment
insurance wage records.
``(2) Monitoring.--Monitoring by each State of internal
control measures with respect to program measurement data
collected by each State.
``(3) Response.--The quality and speed of the rapid
response provided by each State under section 134(a)(2)(A) of
the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C.
2864(a)(2)(A)).
``(c) Report.--
``(1) Annual report.--Not later than 1 year after the date
of enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the
Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Finance of the
Senate and the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of
Representatives and make available to each State and to the
public a report that includes the information collected under
this section.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Coordination.--Section 281 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
U.S.C. 2392) is amended by striking ``Departments of Labor
and Commerce'' and inserting ``Departments of Labor,
Commerce, and Agriculture''.
(2) Trade monitoring system.--Section 282 of the Trade Act
of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2393) is amended by striking ``The
Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of Labor'' and
inserting ``The Secretaries of Commerce, Labor, and
Agriculture''.
(3) Table of contents.--The table of contents for title II
of the Trade Act of 1974 is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 249, the following new item:
``Sec. 250. Data collection; report.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect on the date that is 60 days after the date
of enactment of this Act.
SEC. 313. DETERMINATIONS BY THE SECRETARY OF LABOR.
Section 223(c) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273(c))
is amended to read as follows:
``(c) Publication of Determinations.--Upon reaching a
determination on a petition, the Secretary shall--
``(1) promptly publish a summary of the determination in
the Federal Register together with the Secretary's reasons
for making such determination; and
``(2) make the full text of the determination available to
the public on the Internet website of the Department of Labor
with full-text searchability.''.
Subtitle C--Trade Adjustment Assistance for Farmers
SEC. 321. CLARIFICATION OF MARKETING YEAR AND OTHER
PROVISIONS.
(a) In General.--Section 291(5) of the Trade Act of 1974
(19 U.S.C. 2401(5)) is amended by inserting before the end
period the following: ``, or in the case of an agricultural
commodity that has no officially designated marketing year,
in a 12-month period for which the petitioner provides
written request''.
(b) Fishermen.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
for purposes of chapter 2 of title II of the Trade Act of
1974 (19 U.S.C. 2271 et seq.) fishermen who harvest wild
stock shall be eligible for adjustment assistance to the same
extent and in the same manner as a group of workers under
such chapter 2.
SEC. 322. ELIGIBILITY.
(a) In General.--Section 292(c)(1) of the Trade Act of 1974
(19 U.S.C. 2401a(c)(1)) is amended by striking ``80 percent''
and inserting ``90 percent''.
(b) Special Rule for Qualified Subsequent Years.--Paragraph
(2) of section 292(d) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C.
2401A(d)(2)) is amended to read as follows:
``(2) imports of articles like or directly competitive with
the agricultural commodity, or class of goods within the
agricultural commodity, produced by the group contributed
importantly to the decline in price determined under
subsection (c)(1) without regard to whether imports of such
articles increased in any year subsequent to the year the
group was first certified.''.
(c) Net Farm Income.--Section 296(a)(1)(C) of the Trade Act
of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2401e(a)(1)(C)) is amended by inserting
before the end period the following: ``or the producer had no
positive net farm income for the 2 most recent consecutive
years in which no adjustment assistance was received by the
producer under this chapter''.
______
By Ms. LANDRIEU:
S. 123. A bill to authorize the project for hurricane and storm
damage reduction, Morganza to the Gulf of Mexico, Louisiana; to the
Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita revealed the
Gulf Coast's vulnerability to storms and flooding. With the help of
generous Americans, the people of the gulf coast have been working hard
over the last year and a half to rebuild their economy, their
communities, and their lives.
Since these devastating storms struck in 2005, Congress directed the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to better protect America's gulf coast.
Yet Congress's failure to pass a Water Resources Development Act WRDA,
has delayed much of the needed protection. Of all of the many worthy
projects throughout the Nation awaiting WRDA passage, there is one
hurricane protection project that stands out and cries for immediate
congressional authorization with or without a WRDA bill. Accordingly, I
am introducing legislation to singularly authorize this long overdue
project known as ``Morganza to the Gulf of Mexico Hurricane
Protection.''
This project includes a series of levees, locks and other systems
through Terrebonne and Lafourche Parishes in Louisiana. When complete,
the Morganza to the Gulf project will protect about 120,000 people and
1,700 square miles of land against storm surges such as those caused by
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
The Morganza to the Gulf project is distinguishable from all other
projects awaiting WRDA passage because it was originally authorized in
the last enacted WRDA bill in 2000, with the requirement that the Army
Corps of Engineers deliver a favorable feasibility report by December
31 of that year. The Corps eventually submitted its report more than a
year late, causing the authorization to expire despite the Corps'
favorable recommendation.
Though repeated attempts have been made, Congress has been unable to
deliver a new WRDA bill since 2000. As a result, vital hurricane
protection for a portion of southeast Louisiana that the Corps
recommends after years of environmental and economic analysis is
awaiting congressional action, and an area of America's gulf coast
remains needlessly vulnerable. Notably, every failed WRDA bill that the
Senate, the House, and its committees have separately passed since 2000
has authorized the Morganza to the Gulf Hurricane Protection project.
Simply stated, there is no other item in WRDA that has been kicked down
the road as many times as this.
This bill that I introduce today fully authorizes the Morganza to the
Gulf project in accordance with the plans and subject to the conditions
of the Corps' report.
I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and ask unanimous
consent that a copy of my statement and the bill appear in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 123
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. MORGANZA TO THE GULF OF MEXICO PROJECT.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of the Army shall carry out
the project for hurricane and storm damage reduction,
Morganza to the Gulf of Mexico, Louisiana, substantially in
accordance with the plans, and subject to the conditions,
described in the Reports of the Chief of Engineers dated
August 23, 2002, and July 22, 2003, at a total cost of
$886,700,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $576,355,000
and an estimated non-Federal cost of $310,345,000.
(b) Credit.--The Secretary shall credit toward the non-
Federal share of the cost of the project elements the cost of
design and construction work carried out by the non-Federal
interest before the date of the partnership agreement for the
project elements if the Secretary determines that the work is
integral to the project elements.
(c) Operations and Maintenance.--The operation,
maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, and replacement of the
Houma Navigation Canal lock complex and the Gulf Intracoastal
Waterway floodgate features of the
[[Page 190]]
project described in subsection (a) that provide for inland
waterway transportation shall be a Federal responsibility, in
accordance with section 102 of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2212).
______
By Mr. ALLARD:
S. 124. A bill to provide certain counties with the ability to
receive television broadcast signals of their choice; to the Committee
on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, another piece of legislation that I am
introducing today addresses an issue important to citizens of southern
Colorado. The problem is this: cable and satellite subscribers in two
southern Colorado counties are forced by current law to receive New
Mexico television stations. Lately, I hear almost every day from my
constituents that they would prefer to receive Colorado television over
New Mexico television.
The problem stems from the fact that these two Colorado counties are
located in the Albuquerque designated market area, as determined by
Nielsen Media Research. As a matter of fairness, citizens of Colorado
should be eligible to receive Colorado TV. Consumers should choose
which television stations they receive, especially since they are the
ones paying for it.
The bill I am introducing does just that. It makes a commonsense
change to the law that allows citizens of La Plata and Montezuma
Counties to receive television stations from Denver, not Albuquerque.
I hope that my colleagues will join me in supporting this bill that
is nearly identical to laws enacted in previous Congresses that
addressed similar problems in other States.
______
By Mr. ALLARD:
S. 125. A bill to establish the Granada Relocation Center National
Historic Site as an affiliated unit of the National Park System; to the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I am introducing a bill dealing with the
Granada Relocation Camp, also known as Camp Amache. It played an
important, but sad, part in United States history. Camp Amache, one of
10 internment camps in the Nation, was established in August 1942 by
the U.S. Government during World War II as a place to house the
Japanese from the west coast and was closed on August 15, 1945. This is
a significant part of American history and it should be preserved. My
bill today will designate the Granada Relocation Camp as a national
historic site in Colorado.
______
By Mr. ALLARD (for himself and Mr. Salazar):
S. 126. A bill to modify the boundary of Mesa Verde National Park,
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, another piece of legislation I am
introducing today will authorize the expansion of the boundary of Mesa
Verde National Park. The boundary adjustment will allow for the
incorporation of 324 acres of land owned by the Henneman family, which
is being purchased by the Conservation Fund for conveyance to the park,
as well as a 38-acre parcel that will be donated to the park by the
Mesa Verde Foundation.
Mesa Verde National Park protects some of the best preserved and most
notable archeological sites in the world. There are over 4,000 known
archeological sites in the park, including 600 cliff dwellings. These
sites were constructed by ancestral Puebloans, who occupied this area
for over 700 years, from 600 A.D. to 1300 A.D.
______
By Mr. ALLARD (for himself and Mr. Salazar):
S. 127. A bill to amend the Great Sand Dunes National Park and
Preserve Act of 2000 to explain the purpose and provide for the
administration of the Baca National Wildlife Refuge; to the Committee
on Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, the Baca National Wildlife Refuge Purpose
bill will give the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service management tools that
will allow the agency to run the Baca National Wildlife Refuge in a way
that achieves the most beneficial use of this wonderful natural
resource. The Baca National Wildlife Refuge consists of 92,500 acres of
wetlands, sage brush, and riparian lands adjacent to the Great Sand
Dunes National Park in southern Colorado. I, along with my former
colleague from Colorado's 3rd Congressional District, U.S.
Representative Scott McInnis, sponsored the legislation that converted
the Sand Dunes from a monument to a park. This legislation also
authorized the Federal acquisition of the Baca Ranch lands and I remain
actively interested in the area's management.
______
By Mr. ALLARD (for himself and Mr. Salazar):
S. 128. A bill to amend the Cache La Poudre River Corridor Act to
designate a new management entity, make certain technical and
conforming amendments, enhance private property protections, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I am introducing legislation which will
extend congressional authorization for the Cache la Poudre Heritage
Area in northern Colorado and will give local citizens greater
management authority over the area. Under the original legislation,
authored by former Colorado. Senator Hank Brown, the Secretary of
Interior was to appoint a commission to work with the National Park
Service and manage the area, but because of a technicality, the
Secretary was unable to appoint the commission. In response, local
citizens stepped up and formed the Poudre Heritage Alliance to support
the Heritage Area until an official commission could be named. This
legislation would rectify this, and empower local residents to continue
the work they have been doing on behalf of the heritage area.
______
By Mr. ALLARD:
S. 129. A bill to study and promote the use of energy-efficient
computer servers in the United States; to the Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I am introducing a bill that will
authorize the EPA to conduct a study of the growth in energy
consumption by computer data centers operated by the Federal Government
and by private corporations. The study will also examine industry
movement toward energy efficient microchips and computer servers,
potential cost savings associated with the movement to more efficient
machines and what, if any, impacts to performance come with increased
efficiency. The results of the study will allow us to more fully
understand the impact that the growing number of computers in use
throughout the country has on energy consumption. This information will
better position Congress to make recommendations to Federal agencies on
their energy use and computer selection.
It will also provide private industry with information that will
allow them to choose computer models that will decrease their energy
consumption, making their companies more efficient and profitable.
______
By Mr. ALLARD (for himself and Mr. Salazar):
S. 130. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to
extend reasonable cost contracts under Medicare; to the Committee on
Finance.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, currently American seniors enjoy Medicare
health plans called cost contracts. Under legislation I am introducing
today, seniors will be able to continue utilizing these valued health
plans.
Medicare cost contract plans are vital to America. Cost contracts
provide Medicare beneficiaries in many rural areas and small cities
throughout our country with an affordable, high-quality option to the
traditional Medicare fee-for-service plan. For many of these
beneficiaries, Medicare Advantage plans do not provide access to
physicians in the community.
Medicare cost contracts are managed care plans that are reimbursed on
a cost basis for providing health services. Under current law, cost
contracts are one option for Medicare beneficiaries. Cost contract
premiums cover Medicare deductibles and additional benefits not covered
by basic Medicare. Further, for the costs of a normal Medicare fee-for-
service copayment,
[[Page 191]]
seniors with cost contracts can use any Medicare provider regardless of
whether they participate in the health plans network. This is critical
in rural areas where physicians are scarce.
Cost contracts are vital to seniors who have them. From New York to
Oregon, and even to Hawaii, America's seniors are enrolled in cost
contract plans. Cost contracts are especially important in rural
Colorado. Of the Coloradans with cost contract plans, 89 percent live
in rural Colorado, where few physicians will see patients under
straight Medicare or Medicare Advantage.
Many beneficiaries who are enrolled in Medicare cost contract plans
live on limited incomes. Under the traditional Medicare program,
beneficiaries incur considerable out-of-pocket expenses. In addition,
Medicare supplemental insurers frequently age-adjust premiums and
either refuse coverage or impose coverage restrictions for pre-existing
conditions. Medicare cost contract plans provide an affordable
alternative.
Unfortunately, under current law cost contracts soon will terminate.
I believe Congress should work to extend Medicare cost contracts
further. My bill, the Medicare Cost Contract Extension and Refinement
Act of 2007, would accomplish this by extending by five years the cost
contract sunset date of December 31, 2007, to December 31, 2012.
Cost contracts have been a bipartisan issue, with bipartisan support
in the past. Senator Wyden of Oregon worked to get an extension for
cost contracts in the 109th Congress, and I look forward to working
with him again during the 110th.
______
By Mr. ALLARD (for himself and Mr. Reed):
S. 131. A bill to extend for 5 years the Mark-to-Market program of
the Department of Housing and Urban Development; to the Committee on
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I turn now to the issue of housing.
Congress created the Mark-to-Market Program in 1997 to reduce Section 8
costs while preserving the affordability and availability of low-income
rental housing. The purpose of the program is to reduce the property
rents to market level while simultaneously restructuring property debt
to prevent FHA defaults.
Studies seem to show that the program has been an overwhelming
success. Nearly 250,000 units of affordable housing have been preserved
due to the Mark-to-Market Program. This is affordable housing that
would have been permanently lost as affordable otherwise. According to
HUD, the program has also saved taxpayers more than $2 billion.
The original legislation authorized the Mark-to-Market Program for 4
years, which was subsequently extended for 5 additional years.
Therefore, the Mark-to-Market program authority was scheduled to expire
on September 30, 2006. Fortunately, the program authority was
temporarily extended under the continuing resolutions.
When the program was extended in 2001, it appeared that 5 additional
years would be sufficient time for nearly all eligible properties to
complete the Mark-to-Market process. However, more recent projections
show that nearly 78,000 properties will face rent reductions over the
next 5 years.
It is important to note that even though the program will expire,
these Section 8 properties with above market rates will still be
required to have their rents reduced to market levels. Without the
proper tools to also restructure the debt, many owners will lack
sufficient funds for property maintenance or mortgage payments. Because
many Section 8 properties are also FHA insured, this will result in a
significant number of claims against FHA, in addition to many tenant
displacements.
Clearly, no one finds this a desirable scenario. Failure to extend
the Mark-to-Market Program would be bad for tenants and bad for
taxpayers. Thus, I am pleased to join with Senator Reed of Rhode Island
in reintroducing the Mark-to-Market Extension Act of 2007. Our bill
would extend the program for 5 additional years to allow the remaining
properties to go through the Mark-to-Market process. Frankly, I can see
no downside to extending the program; It maintains affordable housing
for less money.
I am pleased to work with industry groups and with my colleagues to
see that this very worthwhile program is extended for an additional 5
years.
______
By Mr. ALLARD:
S. 132. A bill to end the trafficking of methamphetamines and
precursor chemicals across the United States and its borders; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, the first bill I present today is to
address one of the biggest current scourges of our citizens--
methamphetamine abuse.
Just this week, a report published by Colorado's Meth Task Force
cited Denver as a major distribution center for meth in the U.S.
Our Nation has been hard hit by the illegal trafficking of meth
across U.S. borders. This is a national issue that is growing at a rate
that constantly presents a challenge to our talented law enforcement
officials. Through our work on the Combat Meth Act, we have provided
them with many tools to fight the domestic production of meth. We are
now called upon to respond to the issue of foreign produced meth as it
presents a growing threat to the U.S.
In just 10 years, meth has become America's worst drug problem--worse
than marijuana, cocaine or heroin. My home state of Colorado, like the
rest of the Nation, faces challenges associated with the growing
epidemic. Although the number of meth labs in the state is on the
decline, meth distribution remains rampant because of Denver's location
at the intersection of two major interstate highways, both of which
serve as pipelines for the distribution of meth after it enters our
country.
This evidence is echoed by the many local drug task forces, law
enforcement officials, and District Attorneys who are tasked with
tackling meth within our communities and who I have worked with on this
issue.
According to estimates from the DEA, an alarming 80 percent of the
meth used in the United States comes from larger labs, increasingly
abroad, while only 20 percent of the meth consumed in this country
comes from small laboratories.
Therefore, I propose that we improve efforts to curb the flow of meth
both within and across our borders. We must take steps to expand
enforcement to reduce the amount of meth being trafficked into the
United States by establishing stricter penalties for meth offenders,
improving coordination with foreign law enforcement officials, and
examining the serious meth problems faced by Indian reservations.
The Methamphetamine Trafficking Enforcement Act of 2007 that I am
introducing today is a first step to fighting the trafficking of this
drug. My bill addresses the distribution issue by dramatically lowering
the quantity and dollar amount thresholds for federal criminal
prosecution of leaders of methamphetamine distribution rings.
The trafficking of meth across our borders makes Federal action
necessary, but this is not our war to fight alone. This bill also
presses upon the United States Trade Representative, the Secretary of
State, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of Homeland Security to
include new ways to curb the illicit use and shipment of
pseudoephedrine, ephedrine, and similar chemicals in multilateral and
bilateral negotiations. Federal law enforcement officials will
collaborate with their foreign counterparts to fight meth
internationally. Working together, we can find a long term solution.
According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the use, production and
distribution of meth on Indian lands has increased in the past decade.
With limited numbers of tribal law enforcement officials, meth can
easily flow into and be trafficked out of many Indian reservations.
This bill urges the Attorney General to research and report to Congress
the challenges faced by all Indian reservations and make
recommendations to help them address meth trafficking and abuse.
[[Page 192]]
We must recognize the immediacy of the issue of methamphetamine
trafficking. It is important that we protect the U.S. and its borders
to ensure national security and the safety of our communities. I look
forward to working with my colleagues on this issue and invite them to
cosponsor the Methamphetamine Trafficking Enforcement Act of 2007.
______
By Mr. OBAMA (for himself, Mr. Lugar, and Mr. Harkin):
S. 133. A bill to promote the national security and stability of the
economy of the United States by reducing the dependence of the United
States on oil through the use of alternative fuels and new technology,
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, in 2005, Congress enacted the Renewable
Fuels Standard, RFS, as part of the Energy Policy Act. The RFS is a
commitment by the United States government that, henceforth, ethanol
must comprise a substantial part of the national vehicle fuel supply,
with a goal of 7.5 billion gallons of ethanol in our gasoline by 2012.
Ethanol production has responded vigorously to this national policy.
In fact, in only two years, ethanol production has boomed to where it
now far exceeds the RFS target for this year. It is widely anticipated
that ethanol production will surpass the target for the year 2012 by
the end of this year, five years early.
Clearly, it is time to increase the RFS targets. I am pleased to be
an original cosponsor of the bill introduced today by my colleagues,
Senator Harkin and Senator Lugar, that will increase those targets to
30 billion gallons by the year 2020 and 60 billion gallons by the year
2030. I hope my colleagues will support the provisions of that bill.
But for an expanded RFS to be successful, we must lay further
groundwork. We cannot meet the targets and deadlines of an expanded RFS
without a robust package of policies that set the stage for the next
decade.
So far, we've met our biofuels goals by producing ethanol made from
sugars that come from corn. This approach, by itself, has been
profoundly successful in many rural communities but will eventually
reach its maximum capacity. While that day is still several years away,
we must begin preparations now. We must build upon our current path. We
must continue our pursuit in cracking the code for corn cellulosics. We
must pour the foundation for the next generation of biofuels made from
the broadest range of agriculture feedstocks. Our vocabulary must
expand to cellulosics and biobut- anols, manure and miscanthus.
The American Fuels Act, which I introduce today, breathes life into
an expanded RFS. The American Fuels Act is the heart, the centerpiece,
the key to ensuring that an expanded RFS is successful. That's why I am
pleased to be joined today by my esteemed colleagues, Senator Lugar and
Senator Harkin, in the introduction of this bill.
The premise of the American Fuels Act is to create a ``Biofuels
Triangle'' that focuses on (1). production, (2). distribution, and (3)
consumption.
To expand production, we create an ``Alternative Diesel Standard''
for diesels that complements the RFS for gasoline. The Alternative
Diesel Standard requires 2 billion gallons of alternative diesels into
the 40 billion gallon domestic diesel supply by the year 2016,
encouraging greater use of biofuel feedstocks like vegetable oils,
animal fats, coal-to-liquids, manure, and municipal waste. We call for
the establishment of a cellulosic biomass fuels credit of an additional
76.5 cents per gallon so that first-generation cellulosic plants can be
built to meet the 250 million gallon production goals by 2012.
To expand distribution, the American Fuels Act provides a tax credit
for ethanol producers to invest in on-site blending equipment,
bypassing oil refineries so that E-85 can be transported directly to
the pump at your local gas station. Our bill also provides freedom for
fuel franchisers by making it illegal for oil companies to stop their
branded franchises from selling biofuels should these local businessmen
wish to respond to their customer's request for biofuels. This bill
also gives franchisers the power to sue oil companies for imposing any
restrictions.
And to expand consumption, the American Fuels Act encourages the
manufacture of more vehicles that can function on higher ethanol blends
like E-85 so that more passenger cars to be flexible fuel vehicles. We
provide a $100 tax credit to automakers for each ethanol-capable
vehicle produced beyond the CAFE credit or any other government
requirement. We require that 100 percent of the Federal fleet must be
ethanol-capable or hybrids in the next 7 years. And we require that any
public transit agency that uses Federal dollars to upgrade bus fleets
must purchase an alternative fuel bus, or pledge to use alternative
fuels in those buses.
To oversee these efforts, we create a Director of Energy Security in
the Office of the President to ensure that our massive investment in
domestically produced fuels get the national security leadership and
coordination it requires.
Our dependence on oil is hurting our economy and jeopardizing our
national security by keeping us tied to the world's most dangerous and
unstable regimes. It's the fossil fuels we insist on burning--
particularly oil--that are the single greatest cause of climate change
and the damaging weather patterns that have been its result. Never has
the failure to take on a single challenge so detrimentally affected
nearly every aspect of our well-being as Nation. And never have the
possible solutions had the potential to do so much good for so many
generations to come.
That's why I urge my colleagues to join us in cosponsoring the
American Fuels Act. I ask for their support, and for the swift
enactment of this bill. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the
American Fuels Act 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. 133
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 ``American
Fuels Act of 2007''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Office of Energy Security.
Sec. 3. Credit for production of qualified flexible fuel motor
vehicles.
Sec. 4. Incentives for the retail sale of alternative fuels as motor
vehicle fuel.
Sec. 5. Freedom for fuel franchisers.
Sec. 6. Alternative diesel fuel content of diesel.
Sec. 7. Excise tax credit for production of cellulosic biomass ethanol.
Sec. 8. Incentive for Federal and State fleets for medium and heavy
duty hybrids.
Sec. 9. Credit for qualifying ethanol blending and processing
equipment.
Sec. 10. Public access to Federal alternative refueling stations.
Sec. 11. Purchase of clean fuel buses.
Sec. 12. Domestic fuel production volumes to meet Department of Defense
needs.
Sec. 13. Federal fleet energy conservation improvement.
SEC. 2. OFFICE OF ENERGY SECURITY.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the Director of
Energy Security appointed under subsection (c)(1).
(2) Office.--The term ``Office'' means the Office of Energy
Security established by subsection (b).
(b) Establishment.--There is established in the Executive
Office of the President the Office of Energy Security.
(c) Director.--
(1) In general.--The Office shall be headed by a Director,
who shall be appointed by the President, by and with the
advice and consent of the Senate.
(2) Rate of pay.--The Director shall be paid at a rate of
pay equal to level I of the Executive Schedule under section
5312 of title 5, United States Code.
(d) Responsibilities.--
(1) In general.--The Office, acting through the Director,
shall be responsible for overseeing all Federal energy
security programs, including the coordination of efforts of
Federal agencies to assist the United States in achieving
full energy independence.
(2) Specific responsibilities.--In carrying out paragraph
(1), the Director shall--
(A) serve as head of the energy community;
(B) act as the principal advisor to the President, the
National Security Council,
[[Page 193]]
the National Economic Council, the Domestic Policy Council,
and the Homeland Security Council with respect to
intelligence matters relating to energy security;
(C) with request to budget requests and appropriations for
Federal programs relating to energy security--
(i) consult with the President and the Director of the
Office of Management and Budget with respect to each major
Federal budgetary decision relating to energy security of the
United States;
(ii) based on priorities established by the President,
provide to the heads of departments containing agencies or
organizations within the energy community, and to the heads
of such agencies and organizations, guidance for use in
developing the budget for Federal programs relating to energy
security;
(iii) based on budget proposals provided to the Director by
the heads of agencies and organizations described in clause
(ii), develop and determine an annual consolidated budget for
Federal programs relating to energy security; and
(iv) present the consolidated budget, together with any
recommendations of the Director and any heads of agencies and
organizations described in clause (ii), to the President for
approval;
(D) establish and meet regularly with a council of business
and labor leaders to develop and provide to the President and
Congress recommendations relating to the impact of energy
supply and prices on economic growth;
(E) submit to Congress an annual report that describes the
progress of the United States toward the goal of achieving
full energy independence; and
(F) carry out such other responsibilities as the President
may assign.
(e) Staff.--
(1) In general.--The Director may, without regard to the
civil service laws (including regulations), appoint and
terminate such personnel as are necessary to enable the
Director to carry out the responsibilities of the Director
under this section.
(2) Compensation.--
(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B),
the Director may fix the compensation of personnel without
regard to the provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of
chapter 53 of title 5, United States Code, relating to
classification of positions and General Schedule pay rates.
(B) Maximum rate of pay.--The rate of pay for the personnel
appointed by the Director shall not exceed the rate payable
for level V of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of
title 5, United States Code.
(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out
this section.
SEC. 3. CREDIT FOR PRODUCTION OF QUALIFIED FLEXIBLE FUEL
MOTOR VEHICLES.
(a) In General.--Subpart D of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by
adding at the end the following new section:
``SEC. 45O. PRODUCTION OF QUALIFIED FLEXIBLE FUEL MOTOR
VEHICLES.
``(a) Allowance of Credit.--For purposes of section 38, in
the case of a manufacturer, the qualified flexible fuel motor
vehicle production credit determined under this section for
any taxable year is an amount equal to the incremental
flexible fuel motor vehicle cost for each qualified flexible
fuel motor vehicle produced in the United States by the
manufacturer during the taxable year.
``(b) Incremental Flexible Fuel Motor Vehicle Cost.--With
respect to any qualified flexible fuel motor vehicle, the
incremental flexible fuel motor vehicle cost is an amount
equal to the lesser of--
``(1) the excess of--
``(A) the cost of producing such qualified flexible fuel
motor vehicle, over
``(B) the cost of producing such motor vehicle if such
motor vehicle was not a qualified flexible fuel motor
vehicle, or
``(2) $100.
``(c) Qualified Flexible Fuel Motor Vehicle.--For purposes
of this section, the term `qualified flexible fuel motor
vehicle' means a flexible fuel motor vehicle--
``(1) the production of which is not required for the
manufacturer to meet--
``(A) the maximum credit allowable for vehicles described
in paragraph (2) in determining the fleet average fuel
economy requirements (as determined under section 32904 of
title 49, United States Code) of the manufacturer for the
model year ending in the taxable year, or
``(B) the requirements of any other provision of Federal
law, and
``(2) which is designed so that the vehicle is propelled by
an engine which can use as a fuel a gasoline mixture of which
85 percent (or another percentage of not less than 70
percent, as the Secretary may determine, by rule, to provide
for requirements relating to cold start, safety, or vehicle
functions) of the volume of consists of ethanol.
``(d) Other Definitions and Special Rules.--For purposes of
this section--
``(1) Motor vehicle.--The term `motor vehicle' has the
meaning given such term by section 30(c)(2).
``(2) Manufacturer.--The term `manufacturer' has the
meaning given such term in regulations prescribed by the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency for
purposes of the administration of title II of the Clean Air
Act (42 U.S.C. 7521 et seq.).
``(3) Reduction in basis.--For purposes of this subtitle,
if a credit is allowed under this section for any expenditure
with respect to any property, the increase in the basis of
such property which would (but for this paragraph) result
from such expenditure shall be reduced by the amount of the
credit so allowed.
``(4) No double benefit.--The amount of any deduction or
credit allowable under this chapter (other than the credits
allowable under this section and section 30B) shall be
reduced by the amount of credit allowed under subsection (a)
for such vehicle for the taxable year.
``(5) Election not to take credit.--No credit shall be
allowed under subsection (a) for any vehicle if the taxpayer
elects to not have this section apply to such vehicle.
``(6) Termination.--This section shall not apply to any
vehicle produced after December 31, 2011.
``(7) Cross reference.--For an election to claim certain
minimum tax credits in lieu of the credit determined under
this section, see section 53(e).''.
(b) Credit Allowed Against the Alternative Minimum Tax.--
Section 38(c)(4)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
(defining specified credits) is amended by striking the
period at the end of clause (ii)(II) and inserting ``, and'',
and by adding at the end the following new clause:
``(iii) the credit determined under section 45O.''.
(c) Election to Use Additional AMT Credit.--Section 53 of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to credit for
prior year minimum tax liability) is amended by adding at the
end the following new subsection:
``(e) Additional Credit in Lieu of Flexible Fuel Motor
Vehicle Credit.--
``(1) In general.--In the case of a taxpayer making an
election under this subsection for a taxable year, the amount
otherwise determined under subsection (c) shall be increased
by any amount of the credit determined under section 45O for
such taxable year which the taxpayer elects not to claim
pursuant to such election.
``(2) Election.--A taxpayer may make an election for any
taxable year not to claim any amount of the credit allowable
under section 45O with respect to property produced by the
taxpayer during such taxable year. An election under this
subsection may only be revoked with the consent of the
Secretary.
``(3) Credit refundable.--The aggregate increase in the
credit allowed by this section for any taxable year by reason
of this subsection shall for purposes of this title (other
than subsection (b)(2) of this section) be treated as a
credit allowed to the taxpayer under subpart C.''.
(d) Conforming Amendments.--Section 38(b) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``plus'' at the
end of paragraph (30), by striking the period at the end of
paragraph (31) and inserting ``, plus'', and by adding at the
end the following new paragraph:
``(32) the qualified flexible fuel motor vehicle production
credit determined under section 45N, plus''.
(e) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for subpart
D of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the
following new item:
``Sec. 45O. Production of qualified flexible fuel motor vehicles.''.
(f) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to motor vehicles produced in model years ending
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 4. INCENTIVES FOR THE RETAIL SALE OF ALTERNATIVE FUELS
AS MOTOR VEHICLE FUEL.
(a) In General.--Subpart D of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to
business related credits) is amended by inserting after
section 40A the following new section:
``SEC. 40B. CREDIT FOR RETAIL SALE OF ALTERNATIVE FUELS AS
MOTOR VEHICLE FUEL.
``(a) General Rule.--The alternative fuel retail sales
credit for any taxable year is the applicable amount for each
gallon of alternative fuel sold at retail by the taxpayer
during such year.
``(b) Applicable Amount.--For purposes of this section, the
applicable amount shall be determined in accordance with the
following table:
``In the case of any sale: The applicable amount
for each gallon is:
Before 2010...................................................35 cents
During 2010 or 2011...........................................20 cents
During 2012...................................................10 cents.
``(c) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
``(1) Alternative fuel.--The term `alternative fuel' means
any fuel at least 85 percent (or another percentage of not
less than 70 percent, as the Secretary may determine, by
rule, to provide for requirements relating to cold start,
safety, or vehicle functions) of the volume of which consists
of ethanol.
``(2) Sold at retail.--
[[Page 194]]
``(A) In general.--The term `sold at retail' means the
sale, for a purpose other than resale, after manufacture,
production, or importation.
``(B) Use treated as sale.--If any person uses alternative
fuel (including any use after importation) as a fuel to
propel any qualified alternative fuel motor vehicle (as
defined in this section) before such fuel is sold at retail,
then such use shall be treated in the same manner as if such
fuel were sold at retail as a fuel to propel such a vehicle
by such person.
``(3) Qualified alternative fuel motor vehicle.--The term
`new qualified alternative fuel motor vehicle' means any
motor vehicle--
``(A) which is capable of operating on an alternative fuel,
``(B) the original use of which commences with the
taxpayer,
``(C) which is acquired by the taxpayer for use or lease,
but not for resale, and
``(D) which is made by a manufacturer.
``(d) Election To Pass Credit.--A person which sells
alternative fuel at retail may elect to pass the credit
allowable under this section to the purchaser of such fuel
or, in the event the purchaser is a tax-exempt entity or
otherwise declines to accept such credit, to the person which
supplied such fuel, under rules established by the Secretary.
``(e) Pass-Thru in the Case of Estates and Trusts.--Under
regulations prescribed by the Secretary, rules similar to the
rules of subsection (d) of section 52 shall apply.
``(f) Termination.--This section shall not apply to any
fuel sold at retail after December 31, 2012.''.
(b) Credit Treated as Business Credit.--Section 38(b) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to current year
business credit), as amended by section 4(d), is amended by
striking ``plus'' at the end of paragraph (31), by striking
the period at the end of paragraph (32) and inserting ``,
plus'', and by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(33) the alternative fuel retail sales credit determined
under section 40B(a).''.
(c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for subpart
D of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting after the item
relating to section 40A the following new item:
``Sec. 40B. Credit for retail sale of alternative fuels as motor
vehicle fuel.''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to fuel sold at retail after the date of
enactment of this Act, in taxable years ending after such
date.
SEC. 5. FREEDOM FOR FUEL FRANCHISERS.
(a) Prohibition on Restriction of Installation of
Alternative Fuel Pumps.--
(1) In general.--Title I of the Petroleum Marketing
Practices Act (15 U.S.C. 2801 et seq.) is amended by adding
at the end the following:
``SEC. 107. PROHIBITION ON RESTRICTION OF INSTALLATION OF
ALTERNATIVE FUEL PUMPS.
``(a) Definition.--In this section:
``(1) Alternative fuel.--The term `alternative fuel' means
any fuel--
``(A) at least 85 percent of the volume of which consists
of ethanol, natural gas, compressed natural gas, liquefied
natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, hydrogen, or any
combination of those fuels; or
``(B) any mixture of biodiesel (as defined in section
40A(d)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986) and diesel
fuel (as defined in section 4083(a)(3) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986), determined without regard to any use
of kerosene and containing at least 20 percent biodiesel.
``(2) Franchise-related document.--The term `franchise-
related document' means--
``(A) a franchise under this Act; and
``(B) any other contract or directive of a franchisor
relating to terms or conditions of the sale of fuel by a
franchisee.
``(b) Prohibitions.--
``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any provision of a
franchise-related document in effect on the date of enactment
of this section, no franchisee or affiliate of a franchisee
shall be restricted from--
``(A) installing on the marketing premises of the
franchisee an alternative fuel pump;
``(B) converting an existing tank and pump on the marketing
premises of the franchisee for alternative fuel use;
``(C) advertising (including through the use of signage or
logos) the sale of any alternative fuel; or
``(D) selling alternative fuel in any specified area on the
marketing premises of the franchisee (including any area in
which a name or logo of a franchisor or any other entity
appears).
``(2) Enforcement.--Any restriction described in paragraph
(1) that is contained in a franchise-related document and in
effect on the date of enactment of this section--
``(A) shall be considered to be null and void as of that
date; and
``(B) shall not be enforced under section 105.
``(c) Exception to 3-Grade Requirement.--No franchise-
related document that requires that 3 grades of gasoline be
sold by the applicable franchisee shall prevent the
franchisee from selling an alternative fuel in lieu of 1
grade of gasoline.''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--
(A) In general.--Section 101(13) of the Petroleum Marketing
Practices Act (15 U.S.C. 2801(13)) is amended by adjusting
the indentation of subparagraph (C) appropriately.
(B) Table of contents.--The table of contents of the
Petroleum Marketing Practices Act (15 U.S.C. 2801 note) is
amended--
(i) by inserting after the item relating to section 106 the
following:
``Sec. 107. Prohibition on restriction of installation of alternative
fuel pumps.'';
and
(ii) by striking the item relating to section 202 and
inserting the following:
``Sec. 202. Automotive fuel rating testing and disclosure
requirements.''.
(b) Application of Gasohol Competition Act of 1980.--
Section 26 of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 26a) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (d);
(2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following:
``(c) Restriction Prohibited.--For purposes of subsection
(a), restricting the right of a franchisee to install on the
premises of that franchisee qualified alternative fuel
vehicle refueling property (as defined in section 30C(c) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986) shall be considered an
unlawful restriction.''; and
(3) in subsection (d) (as redesignated by paragraph (1)),
by striking ``(d) As used in this section,'' and inserting
the following:
SEC. 6. ALTERNATIVE DIESEL FUEL CONTENT OF DIESEL.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) section 211(o) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7535(o))
(as amended by section 1501 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005
(Public Law 109-58)) established a renewable fuel program
under which entities in the petroleum sector are required to
blend renewable fuels into motor vehicle fuel based on the
gasoline motor pool;
(2) the need for energy diversification is greater as of
the date of enactment of this Act than it was only months
before the date of enactment of the Energy Policy Act (Public
Law 109-58; 119 Stat. 594); and
(3)(A) the renewable fuel program under section 211(o) of
the Clean Air Act requires a small percentage of the gasoline
motor pool, totaling nearly 140,000,000,000 gallons, to
contain a renewable fuel; and
(B) the small percentage requirement described in
subparagraph (A) does not include the 40,000,000,000-gallon
diesel motor pool.
(b) Alternative Diesel Fuel Program for Diesel Motor
Pool.--Section 211 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7545) is
amended by inserting after subsection (o) the following:
``(p) Alternative Diesel Fuel Program for Diesel Motor
Pool.--
``(1) Definition of alternative diesel fuel.--
``(A) In general.--In this subsection, the term
`alternative diesel fuel' means biodiesel (as defined in
section 312(f) of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C.
13220(f))) and any blending components derived from
alternative fuel (provided that only the alternative fuel
portion of any such blending component shall be considered to
be part of the applicable volume under the alternative diesel
fuel program established by this subsection).
``(B) Inclusions.--The term `alternative diesel fuel'
includes a diesel fuel substitute produced from--
``(i) animal fat;
``(ii) plant oil;
``(iii) recycled yellow grease;
``(iv) single-cell or microbial oil;
``(v) thermal depolymerization;
``(vi) thermochemical conversion;
``(vii) a coal-to-liquid process (including the Fischer-
Tropsch process) that provides for the sequestration of
carbon emissions;
``(viii) a diesel-ethanol blend of not less than 7 percent
ethanol; or
``(ix) sugar, starch, or cellulosic biomass.
``(2) Alternative diesel fuel program.--
``(A) Regulations.--
``(i) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this subsection, the Administrator shall
promulgate regulations to ensure that diesel sold or
introduced into commerce in the United States (except in
noncontiguous States or territories), on an annual average
basis, contains the applicable volume of alternative diesel
fuel determined in accordance with subparagraph (B).
``(ii) Provisions of regulations.--Regardless of the date
of promulgation, the regulations promulgated under clause
(i)--
``(I) shall contain compliance provisions applicable to
refineries, blenders, distributors, and importers, as
appropriate, to ensure that the requirements of this
paragraph are met; but
``(II) shall not--
``(aa) restrict geographic areas in which alternative
diesel fuel may be used; or
``(bb) impose any per-gallon obligation for the use of
alternative diesel fuel.
``(iii) Requirement in case of failure to promulgate
regulations.--If the Administrator fails to promulgate
regulations under clause (i), the percentage of alternative
diesel fuel in the diesel motor pool sold or dispensed to
consumers in the United States, on
[[Page 195]]
a volume basis, shall be 0.6 percent for calendar year 2009.
``(B) Applicable volume.--
``(i) Calendar years 2009 through 2016.--For the purpose of
subparagraph (A), the applicable volume for any of calendar
years 2009 through 2016 shall be determined in accordance
with the following table:
``Applicable volume of Alternative diesel fuel in diesel motor pool (in
millions of gallons): Calendar year:
250..............................................................2009
500..............................................................2010
750..............................................................2011
1,000............................................................2012
1,250............................................................2013
1,500............................................................2014
1,750............................................................2015
2,000............................................................2016
``(ii) Calendar year 2017 and thereafter.--The applicable
volume for calendar year 2017 and each calendar year
thereafter shall be determined by the Administrator, in
coordination with the Secretary of Agriculture and the
Secretary of Energy, based on a review of the implementation
of the program during calendar years 2009 through 2016,
including a review of--
``(I) the impact of the use of alternative diesel fuels on
the environment, air quality, energy security, job creation,
and rural economic development; and
``(II) the expected annual rate of future production of
alternative diesel fuels to be used as a blend component or
replacement to the diesel motor pool.
``(iii) Minimum applicable volume.--For the purpose of
subparagraph (A), the applicable volume for calendar year
2017 and each calendar year thereafter shall be equal to the
product obtained by multiplying--
``(I) the number of gallons of diesel that the
Administrator estimates will be sold or introduced into
commerce during the calendar year; and
``(II) the ratio that--
``(aa) 2,000,000,000 gallons of alternative diesel fuel;
bears to
``(bb) the number of gallons of diesel sold or introduced
into commerce during calendar year 2016.
``(3) Applicable percentages.--
``(A) Provision of estimate of volumes of diesel sales.--
Not later than October 31 of each of calendar years 2008
through 2016, the Administrator of the Energy Information
Administration shall provide to the Administrator an
estimate, with respect to the following calendar year, of the
volumes of diesel projected to be sold or introduced into
commerce in the United States.
``(B) Determination of applicable percentages.--
``(i) In general.--Not later than November 30 of each of
calendar years 2009 through 2016, based on the estimate
provided under subparagraph (A), the Administrator shall
determine and publish in the Federal Register, with respect
to the following calendar year, the alternative diesel fuel
obligation that ensures that the requirements of paragraph
(2) are met.
``(ii) Required elements.--The alternative diesel fuel
obligation determined for a calendar year under clause (i)
shall--
``(I) be applicable to refineries, blenders, and importers,
as appropriate;
``(II) be expressed in terms of a volume percentage of
diesel sold or introduced into commerce in the United States;
and
``(III) subject to subparagraph (C), consist of a single
applicable percentage that applies to all categories of
persons described in subclause (I).
``(C) Adjustments.--In determining the applicable
percentage for a calendar year, the Administrator shall make
adjustments to prevent the imposition of redundant
obligations on any person described in subparagraph
(B)(ii)(I).
``(4) Credit program.--
``(A) In general.--The regulations promulgated pursuant to
paragraph (2)(A) shall provide for the generation of an
appropriate amount of credits by any person that refines,
blends, or imports diesel that contains a quantity of
alternative diesel fuel that is greater than the quantity
required under paragraph (2).
``(B) Use of credits.--A person that generates a credit
under subparagraph (A) may use the credit, or transfer all or
a portion of the credit to another person, for the purpose of
complying with regulations promulgated pursuant to paragraph
(2).
``(C) Duration of credits.--A credit generated under this
paragraph shall be valid during the 1-year period beginning
on the date on which the credit is generated.
``(D) Inability to generate or purchase sufficient
credits.--The regulations promulgated pursuant to paragraph
(2)(A) shall include provisions allowing any person that is
unable to generate or purchase sufficient credits under
subparagraph (A) to meet the requirements of paragraph (2) by
carrying forward a credit generated during a previous year on
the condition that the person, during the calendar year
following the year in which the alternative diesel fuel
deficit is created--
``(i) achieves compliance with the alternative diesel fuel
requirement under paragraph (2); and
``(ii) generates or purchases additional credits under
subparagraph (A) to offset the deficit of the previous year.
``(5) Waivers.--
``(A) In general.--The Administrator, in consultation with
the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of Energy, may
waive the requirements of paragraph (2) in whole or in part
on receipt of a petition of 1 or more States by reducing the
national quantity of alternative diesel fuel for the diesel
motor pool required under paragraph (2) based on a
determination by the Administrator, after public notice and
opportunity for comment, that--
``(i) implementation of the requirement would severely harm
the economy or environment of a State, a region, or the
United States; or
``(ii) there is an inadequate domestic supply of
alternative diesel fuel.
``(B) Petitions for waivers.--Not later than 90 days after
the date on which the Administrator receives a petition under
subparagraph (A), the Administrator, in consultation with the
Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of Energy, shall
approve or disapprove the petition.
``(C) Termination of waivers.--
``(i) In general.--Except as provided in clause (ii), a
waiver under subparagraph (A) shall terminate on the date
that is 1 year after the date on which the waiver is
provided.
``(ii) Exception.--The Administrator, in consultation with
the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of Energy, may
extend a waiver under subparagraph (A), as the Administrator
determines to be appropriate.''.
(c) Penalties and Enforcement.--Section 211(d) of the Clean
Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7545(d)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``or (o)'' each place it
appears and inserting ``(o), or (p)''; and
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``and (o)'' each place it
appears and inserting ``(o), and (p)''.
(d) Technical Amendments.--Section 211 of the Clean Air Act
(42 U.S.C. 7545) is amended--
(1) in subsection (i)(4), by striking ``section 324'' each
place it appears and inserting ``section 325'';
(2) in subsection (k)(10), by indenting subparagraphs (E)
and (F) appropriately;
(3) in subsection (n), by striking ``section 219(2)'' and
inserting ``section 216(2)'';
(4) by redesignating the second subsection (r) and
subsection (s) as subsections (s) and (t), respectively; and
(5) in subsection (t)(1) (as redesignated by paragraph
(4)), by striking ``this subtitle'' and inserting ``this
part''.
SEC. 7. EXCISE TAX CREDIT FOR PRODUCTION OF CELLULOSIC
BIOMASS ETHANOL.
(a) Allowance of Excise Tax Credit.--
(1) In general.--Section 6426 of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 (relating to credit for alcohol fuel, biodiesel, and
alternative fuel mixtures) is amended by redesignating
subsections (f) and (g) as subsections (g) and (h),
respectively, and by inserting after subsection (e) the
following new subsection:
``(f) Cellulosic Biomass Ethanol Credit.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of this section, in the
case of a cellulosic biomass ethanol producer, the cellulosic
biomass ethanol credit is the product of--
``(A) the product of 51 cents times the equivalent number
of gallons of renewable fuel specified in section 211(o)(4)
of the Clean Air Act, times
``(B) the number of gallons of qualified cellulosic biomass
ethanol fuel production of such producer.
``(2) Definitions.--
``(A) Cellulosic biomass ethanol.--The term `cellulosic
biomass ethanol' has the meaning given such term under
section 211(o)(1)(A) of the Clean Air Act.
``(B) Qualified cellulosic biomass ethanol fuel
production.--The term `qualified cellulosic biomass ethanol
fuel production' means any alcohol which is cellulosic
biomass ethanol which during the taxable year--
``(i) is sold by the producer to another person --
``(I) for use by such other person in the production of an
alcohol fuel mixture in such other person's trade or business
(other than casual off-farm production),
``(II) for use by such other person as a fuel in a trade or
business, or
``(III) who sells such cellulosic biomass ethanol at retail
to another person and places such ethanol in the fuel tank of
such other person, or
``(ii) is used or sold by the producer for any purpose
described in clause (i).
``(3) Denial of double benefit.--No credit shall be allowed
under subsection (b) or (c) to any taxpayer with respect to
any fuel to the extent that a credit has been allowed with
respect to such fuel to any taxpayer under this subsection or
a payment has been made with respect to such fuel under
section 6427(e).
``(4) Termination.--This section shall not apply to any
sale or use for any period after December 31, 2008.''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--
(A) Section 6426(a) of such Code is amended--
[[Page 196]]
(i) by striking ``subsection (d)'' in paragraph (2) and
inserting ``subsections (d) and (f)'', and
(ii) by striking ``and (e)'' in the last sentence and
inserting ``, (e), and (f)''.
(B) The heading for section 6426 of such Code is amended to
read as follows:
``SEC. 6426. CREDIT FOR CERTAIN FUELS AND FUEL MIXTURES.''.
(C) The table of section for subchapter B of chapter 65 of
such Code is amended by striking the item relating to section
6426 and inserting the following new item:
``Sec. 6426. Credit for certain fuels and fuel mixtures.''.
(b) Cellulosic Biomass Ethanol Not Used for a Taxable
Purpose.--
(1) In general.--Section 6427(e) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating paragraphs (3)
through (5) as paragraphs (4) through (6), respectively, and
by inserting after paragraph (2) the following new paragraph:
``(3) Cellulosic biomass ethanol.--If any person sells or
uses cellulosic biomass ethanol (as defined in section
6426(f)(2)(A)) for a purpose described in section
6426(f)(2)(B) in such person's trade or business, the
Secretary shall pay (without interest) to such person an
amount equal to the cellulosic biomass ethanol credit with
respect to such fuel.''.
(2) Denial of double benefit.--Paragraph (4) of section
6427(e) of such Code, as redesignated by paragraph (1), is
amended to read as follows:
``(4) Coordination with other repayment provisions.--
``(A) In general.--No amount shall be payable under
paragraph (1), (2), or (3) with respect to any mixture,
alternative fuel, or cellulosic biomass ethanol with respect
to which an amount is allowed as a credit under section 6426.
``(B) Cellulosic biomass ethanol.--No amount shall be
payable under paragraph (1) or (2) with respect to any
cellulosic biomass ethanol if a payment has been made with
respect to such ethanol under paragraph (3).''.
(3) Termination.--Paragraph (6) of section 6427(e) of such
Code, as redesignated by paragraph (1), is amended by
striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (C), by striking
the period at the end of subparagraph (D) and inserting ``,
and'', and by adding at the end the following new
subparagraph:
``(E) any cellulosic biomass ethanol credit (as defined in
section 6426(f)(2)(A)) sold or used after December 31,
2008.''.
(4) Conforming amendment.--Paragraph (5) of section 6427(e)
of such Code, as redesignated by paragraph (1), is amended by
striking ``or alternative fuel mixture credit'' and inserting
``, alternative fuel mixture credit, or cellulosic biomass
ethanol credit''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to fuel sold or used after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
SEC. 8. INCENTIVE FOR FEDERAL AND STATE FLEETS FOR MEDIUM AND
HEAVY DUTY HYBRIDS.
Section 301 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C.
13211) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (3), by striking ``or a dual fueled
vehicle'' and inserting ``, a dual fueled vehicle, or a
medium or heavy duty vehicle that is a hybrid vehicle'';
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (11), (12), (13), and (14)
as paragraphs (12), (14), (15), and (16), respectively;
(3) by inserting after paragraph (10) the following:
``(11) the term `hybrid vehicle' means a vehicle powered
both by a diesel or gasoline engine and an electric motor
that is recharged as the vehicle operates;''; and
(4) by inserting after paragraph (12) (as redesignated by
paragraph (2)) the following:
``(13) the term `medium or heavy duty vehicle' means a
vehicle that--
``(A) in the case of a medium duty vehicle, has a gross
vehicle weight rating of more than 8,500 pounds but not more
than 14,000 pounds; and
``(B) in the case of a heavy duty vehicle, has a gross
vehicle weight rating of more than 14,000 pounds;''.
SEC. 9. CREDIT FOR QUALIFYING ETHANOL BLENDING AND PROCESSING
EQUIPMENT.
(a) Allowance of Qualifying Ethanol Blending and Processing
Equipment Credit.--Section 46 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 (relating to amount of credit) is amended by striking
``and'' at the end of paragraph (3), by striking the period
at the end of paragraph (4) and inserting ``, and'', and by
adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(5) the qualifying ethanol blending and processing
equipment credit.''.
(b) Amount of Qualifying Ethanol Blending and Processing
Equipment Credit.--Subpart E of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to
rules for computing investment credit) is amended by
inserting after section 48B the following new section:
``SEC. 48C. QUALIFYING ETHANOL BLENDING AND PROCESSING
EQUIPMENT.
``(a) In General.--For purposes of section 46, the
qualifying ethanol blending and processing equipment credit
for any taxable year is an amount equal to 50 percent of the
basis of the qualifying ethanol blending and processing
equipment placed in service at a qualifying facility during
such taxable year.
``(b) Limitation.--The credit allowed under subsection (a)
for qualifying ethanol blending and processing equipment
placed in service at any 1 qualifying facility during any
taxable year shall not exceed $2,000,000.
``(c) Qualifying Ethanol Blending and Processing
Equipment.--For purposes of this section, the term
`qualifying ethanol blending and processing equipment' means
any technology installed in or on a qualifying facility for
blending ethanol with petroleum fuels for the purpose of
direct retail sale, including in-line blending equipment,
storage tanks, pumps and piping for denaturants, and load-out
equipment.
``(d) Qualifying Facility.--For purposes of this section,
the term `qualifying facility' means any facility which
produces not less than 1,000,000 gallons of ethanol during
the taxable year.
``(e) Special Rule for Certain Subsidized Property.--Rules
similar to section 48(a)(4) shall apply for purposes of this
section.
``(f) Certain Qualified Progress Expenditures Rules Made
Applicable.--Rules similar to the rules of subsections (c)(4)
and (d) of section 46 (as in effect on the day before the
enactment of the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1990) shall
apply for purposes of this subsection.
``(g) Termination.--This section shall not apply to
property placed in service after December 31, 2014.''.
(c) Recapture of Credit Where Emissions Reduction Offset Is
Sold.--Paragraph (1) of section 50(a) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating subparagraph (B) as
subparagraph (C) and by inserting after subparagraph (A) the
following new subparagraph:
``(B) Special rule for qualifying ethanol blending and
processing equipment.--For purposes of subparagraph (A), any
investment property which is qualifying ethanol blending and
processing equipment (as defined in section 48C(c)) shall
cease to be investment credit property with respect to a
taxpayer if such taxpayer receives a payment in exchange for
a credit for emission reductions attributable to such
qualifying pollution control equipment for purposes of an
offset requirement under part D of title I of the Clean Air
Act.''.
(d) Special Rule for Basis Reduction; Recapture of
Credit.--Paragraph (3) of section 50(c) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to basis adjustment to
investment credit property) is amended by inserting ``or
qualifying ethanol blending and processing equipment credit''
after ``energy credit''.
(e) Certain Nonrecourse Financing Excluded From Credit
Base.--Section 49(a)(1)(C) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 (defining credit base) is amended by striking ``and'' at
the end of clause (iii), by striking the period at the end of
clause (iv) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the end
the following new clause:
``(v) the basis of any property which is part of any
qualifying ethanol blending and processing equipment under
section 48C.''.
(f) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to property placed in service after December 31,
2007, in taxable years ending after such date, under rules
similar to the rules of section 48(m) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 (as in effect on the day before the date of the
enactment of the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1990).
SEC. 10. PUBLIC ACCESS TO FEDERAL ALTERNATIVE REFUELING
STATIONS.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Alternative fuel refueling station.--The term
``alternative fuel refueling station'' has the meaning given
the term ``qualified alternative fuel vehicle refueling
property'' in section 30C(c)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986.
(2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Energy.
(b) Access to Federal Alternative Refueling Stations.--Not
later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this
Act--
(1) except as provided in subsection (d)(1), any Federal
property that includes at least 1 fuel refueling station
shall include at least 1 alternative fuel refueling station;
and
(2) except as provided in subsection (d)(2), any
alternative fuel refueling station located on property owned
by the Federal government shall permit full public access for
the purpose of refueling using alternative fuel.
(c) Duration.--The requirements described in subsection (b)
shall remain in effect until the sooner of--
(1) the date that is 7 years after the date of enactment of
this Act; or
(2) the date on which the Secretary determines that not
less than 5 percent of the commercial refueling
infrastructure in the United States offers alternative fuels
to the general public.
(d) Exceptions.--
(1) Waiver.--Subsection (b)(1) shall not apply to any
Federal property under the jurisdiction of a Federal agency
if the Secretary determines that alternative fuel is not
reasonably available to retail purchasers of the fuel, as
certified by the head of the agency to the Secretary.
(2) National security exemption.--Subsection (b)(2) does
not apply to property of the Federal government that the
Secretary,
[[Page 197]]
in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, has certified
must be exempt for national security reasons.
(e) Report.--Not later than October 31 of each year
beginning after the date of enactment of this Act, the
President shall submit to Congress a report that describes
the progress of the agencies of the Federal Government
(including the Executive Office of the President) in
complying with--
(1) the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 13201 et
seq.);
(2) Executive Order 13149 (65 Fed. Reg. 24595; relating to
greening the government through Federal fleet and
transportation efficiency); and
(3) the fueling center requirements of this section.
SEC. 11. PURCHASE OF CLEAN FUEL BUSES.
(a) In General.--Chapter 53 of title 49, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after section 5325 the
following:
``Sec. 5326. Purchase of clean fuel buses
``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Alternative diesel fuel.--
``(A) In general.--The term `alternative diesel fuel'
means--
``(i) biodiesel (as defined in section 312(f) of the Energy
Policy Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 13220(f))); and
``(ii) any blending components derived from alternative
fuel.
``(B) Inclusions.--The term `alternative diesel fuel'
includes a diesel fuel substitute produced from--
``(i) animal fat;
``(ii) plant oil;
``(iii) recycled yellow grease;
``(iv) single-cell or microbial oil;
``(v) thermal depolymerization;
``(vi) thermochemical conversion;
``(vii) a coal-to-liquid process (including the Fischer-
Tropsch process) that provides for the sequestration of
carbon emissions; or
``(viii) a diesel-ethanol blend of not less than 7 percent
ethanol.
``(2) Cellulosic biomass ethanol.--The term `cellulosic
biomass ethanol' means ethanol derived from any
lignocellulosic or hemicellulosic matter that is available on
a renewable or recurring basis, including--
``(A) dedicated energy crops and trees;
``(B) wood and wood residues;
``(C) plants;
``(D) grasses;
``(E) agricultural residues;
``(F) fibers;
``(G) animal wastes and other waste materials; and
``(H) municipal solid waste.
``(3) Clean fuel bus.--The term `clean fuel bus' means a
vehicle that--
``(A) is capable of being powered by--
``(i) compressed natural gas;
``(ii) liquefied natural gas;
``(iii) 1 or more batteries;
``(iv) a fuel that is composed of at least 85 percent
ethanol (or another percentage of not less than 70 percent,
as the Secretary may determine, by rule, to provide for
requirements relating to cold start, safety, or vehicle
functions);
``(v) electricity (including a hybrid electric or plug-in
hybrid electric vehicle);
``(vi) a fuel cell;
``(vii) a fuel that is composed of at least 22 percent
biodiesel (as defined in section 312(f) of the Energy Policy
Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 13220(f)) (or another percentage of
not less than 10 percent, as the Secretary may determine, by
rule, to provide for requirements relating to cold start,
safety, or vehicle functions);
``(viii) ultra-low sulfur diesel; or
``(ix) liquid fuel manufactured with a coal feedstock; and
``(B) has been certified by the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency to significantly reduce
harmful emissions, particularly in a nonattainment area (as
defined in section 171 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C.
7501)).
``(4) Qualified alternative fuel producer.--The term
`qualified alternative fuel producer' means a producer of
qualified fuels that, during the applicable taxable year--
``(A) are sold by the producer to another person--
``(i) for use by the person in the production of a mixture
of qualified fuels in the trade or business of the person
(other than casual off-farm production);
``(ii) for use by the other person as a fuel in a trade or
business; or
``(iii) that--
``(I) sells to another person the qualified fuel at retail;
and
``(II) places the qualified fuel in the fuel tank of the
person that purchased the qualified fuel; or
``(B) are used or sold by the producer for any purpose
described in subparagraph (A).
``(5) Qualified fuel.--The term `qualified fuel' includes--
``(A) cellulosic biomass ethanol;
``(B) ethanol produced in facilities in which animal waste
or other waste materials are digested or otherwise used to
displace at least 90 percent of the fossil fuels that would
otherwise be used in the production of ethanol;
``(C) renewable fuels;
``(D) alternative diesel fuels;
``(E) sugar, starch, or cellulosic biomass; and
``(F) any other fuel that is not substantially petroleum.
``(6) Renewable fuel.--The term `renewable fuel' means
fuel, at least 85 percent of the volume of which--
``(A)(i) is produced from grain, starch, oilseeds,
vegetable, animal, or fish materials including fats, greases,
and oils, sugarcane, sugar beets, sugar components, tobacco,
potatoes, or other biomass; or
``(ii) is natural gas produced from a biogas source,
including a landfill, sewage waste treatment plant, feedlot,
or other place in which decaying organic material is found;
and
``(B) is used to substantially replace or reduce the
quantity of fossil fuel present in a fuel mixture used to
operate a motor vehicle.
``(b) Purchase of Buses.--Subject to subsections (c) and
(d), beginning on the date that is 2 years after the date of
enactment of this section, a bus purchased using funds made
available from the Mass Transit Account of the Highway Trust
Fund shall be a clean fuel bus.
``(c) Ultra-Low Sulfur Diesel.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), not
more than 20 percent of the amount of the funds provided to a
recipient to purchase buses under this section may be used by
the recipient to purchase clean fuel buses that are capable
of being powered by a fuel described in clause (iv), (vii),
(viii), or (ix) of subsection (a)(3)(A).
``(2) Exception.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply if the
recipient enters into a 3-year purchase agreement with a
qualified alternative fuel producer to acquire qualified
fuels in a volume sufficient to power the clean fuel buses
purchased using amounts made available under this section.
``(d) Use of Certain Alternative Fuels.--
``(1) In general.--To be eligible to receive funds under
subsection (c)(2) for the purchase of a clean fuel bus that
is capable of being powered by a fuel described in clause
(iv), (vii), or (ix) of subsection (a)(3)(A), an applicant or
recipient shall submit to the Secretary--
``(A) a certification that the applicant will operate the
clean fuel bus only with the fuel at all times in accordance
with the fuel capacity and use of the fuel recommended by the
manufacturer of the clean fuel bus; and
``(B) not later than 180 days after the purchase of the
clean fuel bus and every 180 days thereafter, a report that
documents that the fuel was used in accordance with
subparagraph (A) during the 180-day period ending on the date
of the report.
``(2) Noncompliance.--Failure of an applicant or recipient
of funds to provide the certification or documentation
required under paragraph (1) shall--
``(A) be considered a violation of the agreement to receive
the funds; and
``(B) require the applicant or recipient to reimburse the
Secretary the full amount of the funds not later than 90 days
after the Secretary has determined that a violation has
occurred.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 53 is
amended by inserting after the item relating to section 5325
the following:
``5326. Clean fuel buses''.
SEC. 12. DOMESTIC FUEL PRODUCTION VOLUMES TO MEET DEPARTMENT
OF DEFENSE NEEDS.
Section 2922d of title 10, United States Code is amended--
(1) in the heading, by striking ``and tar sands'' and
inserting ``tar sands, and other sources'';
(2) in subsection (a), by striking ``fuel produced, in
whole or in part, from coal, oil shale, and tar sands
(referred to in this section as a `covered fuel') that are
extracted by either mining or in-situ methods and refined or
otherwise processed in the United States'' and inserting
``fuel produced, in whole or in part, from coal, oil shale,
and tar sands that are extracted by either mining or in-situ
methods and refined or otherwise processed in the United
States and fuel produced in the United States using starch,
sugar, cellulosic biomass, plant or animal oils, or thermal
chemical conversion, thermal depolymerization, or thermal
conversion processes (referred to in this section as a
`covered fuel')'';
(3) in subsection (d), by striking ``1 or more years'' and
inserting ``up to 5 years'';
(4) in subsection (e), by striking the period at the end
and inserting the following: ``, with consideration given to
military installations closed or realigned under a round of
defense base closure and realignment.''; and
(5) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(f) Production Facilities for Covered Fuels.--The
Secretary of Defense may enter into contracts or other
agreements with private companies or other entities to
develop and operate production facilities for covered fuels,
and may provide for the construction or capital modification
of production facilities for covered fuels.''.
SEC. 13. FEDERAL FLEET ENERGY CONSERVATION IMPROVEMENT.
(a) Definitions.--Section 301 of the Energy Policy Act of
1992 (42 U.S.C. 13211) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (3), by inserting before the semicolon at
the end the following: ``, including a vehicle that is
propelled by electric drive transportation technology, engine
dominant hybrid electric technology, or plug-in hybrid
technology'';
[[Page 198]]
(2) in paragraph (13), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon at the end;
(3) in paragraph (14), by striking the period at the end
and inserting a semicolon; and
(4) by adding at the end the following:
``(15) the term `electric drive transportation technology'
means--
``(A) technology that uses an electric motor for all or
part of the motive power of a vehicle (regardless of whether
off-board electricity is used), including--
``(i) a battery electric vehicle;
``(ii) a fuel cell vehicle;
``(iii) an engine dominant hybrid electric vehicle;
``(iv) a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle;
``(v) a plug-in hybrid fuel cell vehicle; and
``(vi) an electric rail vehicle; or
``(B) technology that uses equipment for transportation
(including transportation involving any mobile source of air
pollution) that uses an electric motor to replace an internal
combustion engine for all or part of the work of the
equipment, including corded electric equipment that is linked
to transportation or a mobile source of air pollution;
``(16) the term `engine dominant hybrid electric vehicle'
means an on-road or nonroad vehicle that--
``(A) is propelled by an internal combustion engine or heat
engine using--
``(i) any combustible fuel; and
``(ii) an on-board, rechargeable storage device; and
``(B) has no means of using an off-board source of
electricity; and
``(17) the term `plug-in hybrid electric vehicle' means an
on-road or nonroad vehicle that is propelled by an internal
combustion engine or heat engine using--
``(A) any combustible fuel;
``(B) an on-board, rechargeable storage device; and
``(C) a means of using an off-board source of
electricity.''.
(b) Minimum Federal Fleet Requirement.--Section 303(b)(1)
of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 13212(b)(1)) is
amended--
(1) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon;
(2) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``fiscal year 1999 and
thereafter,'' and inserting ``each of fiscal years 1999
through 2013; and''; and
(3) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the following:
``(E) 100 percent in fiscal year 2014 and thereafter,''.
______
By Mr. ALLARD (for himself and Mr. Salazar):
S. 134. A bill to authorize the construction of the Arkansas Valley
Conduit in the State of Colorado, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I am introducing the Arkansas Valley
Conduit bill, which will ensure the construction of a pipeline that
will provide the small, financially strapped towns and water agencies
along the lower Arkansas River with safe, clean, affordable water. This
project was originally authorized by Congress in 1962, over 40 years
ago, as a part of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project. Due to several long
years of drought and increasing Federal water quality standards,
current water delivery methods are not enough. By creating an 80-
percent Federal, 20-percent local cost share formula to help offset the
construction costs of the conduit, this legislation will protect the
future of southeastern Colorado's drinking water supplies and prevent
further economic hardship.
______
By Mr. ALLARD:
S. 135. A bill to authorize the Secretary of the Army to acquire land
for the purposes of expanding Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Armed Services.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, another bill dealing with the large
military presence in Colorado relates to the expansion of the Army's
Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site. Due to an emphasis on rapid mobility,
modularity, and maneuverability in recent years, the Army's ability to
project force across the battlefield has increased exponentially. As
such, the Army transformation is also driving higher their requirement
for training space.
With its close location to Fort Carson, Pinon Canyon was perfectly
suited for the Army's training needs 20 years ago. However, with the
arrival of 10,000 new soldiers to Fort Carson, the Army has determined
that the size of the site needs to be increased in order to meet Fort
Carson's new operational training requirements.
I have been told repeatedly by Army officials that the genesis of
Fort Carson's expansion proposal occurred when several landowners
approached Fort Carson and expressed their strong desire to sell. I
also understand that sufficient numbers of willing sellers exist to
support a significant expansion of the site. However, many in the
community surrounding Pinon Canyon have major questions that need to be
answered.
In order to get some of these major questions answered, a reporting
requirement was placed in the 2006 Defense Authorization bill, approved
by both the Senate and the House. However, the Department of Army is
restricted on communicating about any specific land acquisition
proposal until a waiver for that site has been granted by the Secretary
of Defense, which has yet to be granted. Thus, the Army's hands were
tied and they were unable to meet the full reporting requirements in
the 2006 Defense authorization. I understand the difficult position the
Army is on this issue, but I believe it is absolutely necessary that
they provide the information to the community and to Congress prior to
any acquisition of property.
The leadership at Fort Carson has done a great job of reaching out
and providing what information it could to the local communities.
However, the Pentagon has not been as forthcoming. I believe the
Congress and, more importantly, the local communities in Southeastern
Colorado need more information before we can decide whether this
proposed expansion is necessary and appropriate.
With these objectives in mind, today I am introducing a bill that
clearly defines the process under which the Army can expand the Pinon
Canyon Maneuver Site. This legislation prohibits the use of eminent
domain, requires the Army to pay fair market value. Most importantly,
the bill does not allow the Army to proceed with land acquisition until
it delivers the answers previously sought on the environmental and
economic impacts of expansion and also must offer options for
compensating the loss of property tax revenue.
It is vital that the Army take the time to answer these important
questions to help alleviate the affected communities concerns. A number
of counties and small towns in Southeastern Colorado could be adversely
affected by this expansion, and this study will help us better
understand the extent of these impacts and provide options for
mitigating them.
______
By Mr. ALLARD:
S. 136. A bill to expand the National Domestic Preparedness
Consortium to include the Transportation Technology Center; to the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, in another area, the events of the past
several years remind us of the vital role of first responders in
responding to natural disasters and terrorists attacks. It is important
that our first responders receive the training needed to make critical,
life-saving decisions under emergency circumstances. I believe that an
essential element of preparing our first responders is to provide them
with hands-on experience in real-world training environments.
The importance of real world training was called to my attention by a
visit to the Transportation Technology Training Center, TTC, in Pueblo,
CO. There, I witnessed first hand the tools at our Nation's disposal to
equip our first responders with the training they need, specifically in
the context of rail and mass transit. But our national training
consortium does not currently include a facility that is uniquely
focused on emergency preparedness within the railroad and mass transit
environment. The inclusion of TTC would fill a critical gap in its
current training agenda.
TTC is a federally owned, 52-square-mile multimodal testing and
training facility in Pueblo, CO, operated by the Association of
American Railroads, AAR. Each year, an average of 1,700 first
responders travel to Pueblo, CO, to participate in TTC's training
program. The facility has trained more than 20,000 students in its 20-
year history.
The ERTC is regarded as the ``graduate school'' of hazmat training
because of its focus on hands on, true to
[[Page 199]]
life, training exercises on actual rail vehicles, including tank cars
and passenger rail cars. The ERTC is uniquely positioned to teach
emergency response for railway-related emergencies.
It is for these reasons that today I introduce a bill authorizing the
National Domestic Preparedness Consortium, as expanded to include the
Transportation Technology Center in Pueblo, CO, and providing for its
coordination and use by the Department of Homeland Security in training
the Nation's first responders.
______
By Mr. CARDIN:
S. 137. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to
provide additional beneficiary protections; to the Committee on
Finance.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of
the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 137
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 ``Preserving
Medicare for All Act of 2007''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Negotiation of prices for medicare prescription drugs.
Sec. 3. Guaranteed prescription drug benefits.
Sec. 4. Full reimbursement for qualified retiree prescription drug
plans.
Sec. 5. Repeal of comparative cost adjustment (cca) program.
Sec. 6. Repeal of MA Regional Plan Stabilization Fund.
Sec. 7. Repeal of cost containment provisions.
Sec. 8. Removal of exclusion of benzodiazepines from required coverage
under the Medicare prescription drug program.
SEC. 2. NEGOTIATION OF PRICES FOR MEDICARE PRESCRIPTION
DRUGS.
Section 1860D-11 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1395w-111) is amended by striking subsection (i) (relating to
noninterference) and inserting the following:
``(i) Negotiation; No National Formulary or Price
Structure.--
``(1) Negotiation of 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 and exercise 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) No national formulary or price structure.--In order
to promote competition under this part and in carrying out
this part, the Secretary may not require a particular
formulary or institute a price structure for the
reimbursement of covered part D drugs.''.
SEC. 3. GUARANTEED PRESCRIPTION DRUG BENEFITS.
(a) In General.--Section 1860D-3 of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 1395w-103) is amended to read as follows:
``ASSURING ACCESS TO A CHOICE OF COVERAGE
``Sec. 1860D-3. (a) Access to a Choice of Qualified
Prescription Drug Coverage.--
``(1) Choice of at least three plans in each area.--
Beginning on January 1, 2008, the Secretary shall ensure that
each part D eligible individual has available, consistent
with paragraph (2), a choice of enrollment in--
``(A) a nationwide prescription drug plan offered by the
Secretary in accordance with subsection (b); and
``(B) at least 2 qualifying plans (as defined in paragraph
(3)) in the area in which the individual resides, at least
one of which is a prescription drug plan.
``(2) Requirement for different plan sponsors.--The
requirement in paragraph (1)(B) is not satisfied with respect
to an area if only one entity offers all the qualifying plans
in the area.
``(3) Qualifying plan defined.--For purposes of this
section, the term `qualifying plan' means--
``(A) a prescription drug plan;
``(B) an MA-PD plan described in section 1851(a)(2)(A)(i)
that provides--
``(i) basic prescription drug coverage; or
``(ii) qualified prescription drug coverage that provides
supplemental prescription drug coverage so long as there is
no MA monthly supplemental beneficiary premium applied under
the plan, due to the application of a credit against such
premium of a rebate under section 1854(b)(1)(C); or
``(C) a nationwide prescription drug plan offered by the
Secretary in accordance with subsection (b).
``(b) HHS as PDP Sponsor for a Nationwide Prescription Drug
Plan.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary, acting through the
Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services, shall take such steps as may be necessary to
qualify and serve as a PDP sponsor and to offer a
prescription drug plan that offers basic prescription drug
coverage throughout the United States. Such a plan shall be
in addition to, and not in lieu of, other prescription drug
plans offered under this part.
``(2) Premium; solvency; authorities.--In carrying out
paragraph (1), the Secretary--
``(A) shall establish a premium in the amount of $35 for
months in 2008 and, for months in subsequent years, in the
amount specified in this paragraph for months in the previous
year increased by the annual percentage increase described in
section 1860D-2(b)(6) (relating to growth in medicare
prescription drug costs per beneficiary) for the year
involved;
``(B) is deemed to have met any applicable solvency and
capital adequacy standards; and
``(C) shall exercise such authorities (including the use of
regional or other pharmaceutical benefit managers) as the
Secretary determines necessary to offer the prescription drug
plan in the same or a comparable manner as is the case for
prescription drug plans offered by private PDP sponsors.
``(c) Flexibility in Risk Assumed.--In order to ensure
access pursuant to subsection (a) in an area the Secretary
may approve limited risk plans under section 1860D-11(f) for
the area.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 1860D-11(g) of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-111(g)) is amended by
adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(8) Application.--This subsection shall not apply on or
after January 1, 2008.''.
SEC. 4. FULL REIMBURSEMENT FOR QUALIFIED RETIREE PRESCRIPTION
DRUG PLANS.
(a) Elimination of True Out-of-Pocket Limitation.--Section
1860D-2(b)(4)(C)(ii) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1395w-102(b)(4)(C)(ii) is amended--
(1) by inserting ``under a qualified retiree prescription
drug plan (as defined in section 1860D-22(a)(2)),'' after
``under section 1860D-14,''; and
(2) by inserting ``, under such a qualified retiree
prescription drug plan,'' after ``(other than under such
section''.
(b) Equalization of Subsidies.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, the Secretary of Health and Human Services
shall provide for such increase in the special subsidy
payment amounts under section 1860D-22(a)(3) of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-132(a)(3)) as may be
appropriate to provide for payments in the aggregate
equivalent to the payments that would have been made under
section 1860D-15 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-115) if the
individuals were not enrolled in a qualified retiree
prescription drug plan. In making such computation, the
Secretary shall not take into account the application of the
amendments made by section 1202 of the Medicare Prescription
Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (Public Law
108-173; 117 Stat. 2480).
(c) Effective Date.--This section, and the amendments made
by this section, shall take effect on January 1, 2008.
SEC. 5. REPEAL OF COMPARATIVE COST ADJUSTMENT (CCA) PROGRAM.
Subtitle E of title II of the Medicare Prescription Drug,
Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (Public Law 108-
173; 117 Stat. 2214), and the amendments made by such
subtitle, are repealed.
SEC. 6. REPEAL OF MA REGIONAL PLAN STABILIZATION FUND.
(a) In General.--Subsection (e) of section 1858 of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-27a) is repealed.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 1858(f)(1) of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-27a(f)(1)) is amended by
striking ``subject to subsection (e),''.
SEC. 7. REPEAL OF COST CONTAINMENT PROVISIONS.
Subtitle A of title VIII of the Medicare Prescription Drug,
Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (Public Law 108-
173; 117 Stat. 2357) is repealed and any provisions of law
amended by such subtitle are restored as if such subtitle had
not been enacted.
SEC. 8. REMOVAL OF EXCLUSION OF BENZODIAZEPINES FROM REQUIRED
COVERAGE UNDER THE MEDICARE PRESCRIPTION DRUG
PROGRAM.
(a) Removal of Exclusion.--
(1) In general.--Section 1860D-2(e)(2) of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-102(e)(2)) is amended--
(A) by striking ``subparagraph (E)'' and inserting
``subparagraphs (E) and (J)''; and
(B) by inserting ``and benzodiazepines'' after ``smoking
cessation agents''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendments made by paragraph (1)
shall apply to prescriptions dispensed on or after January 1,
2008.
(b) Review of Benzodiazepine Prescription Policies to
Assure Appropriateness and to Avoid Abuse.--The Secretary of
Health and Human Services shall review the policies of
Medicare prescription drug plans (and MA-PD plans) under
parts C and D of title XVIII of the Social Security Act
regarding the filling of prescriptions for
[[Page 200]]
benzodiazepine to ensure that these policies are consistent
with accepted clinical guidelines, are appropriate to
individual health histories, and are designed to minimize
long term use, guard against over-prescribing, and prevent
patient abuse.
(c) Development by Medicare Quality Improvement
Organizations of Educational Guidelines for Physicians
Regarding Prescribing of Benzodiazepines.--The Secretary of
Health and Human Services shall provide, in contracts entered
into with Medicare quality improvement organizations under
part B of title XI of the Social Security Act, for the
development by such organizations of appropriate educational
guidelines for physicians regarding the prescribing of
benzodiazepines.
______
By Mrs. BOXER:
S. 146. A bill to require the Federal Government to purchase fuel
efficient automobiles, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, last year many Americans paid over $3--and
in some places in California, $4--for a gallon of gasoline.
At the same time, oil companies made record profits. Enough is
enough!
We need to help the American public and reduce our dependence on oil.
The Federal Government should be taking the lead on this issue. Sadly,
it is not.
In 2005, the Federal Government purchased 64,000 passenger vehicles.
According to the U.S. Department of Energy, the average fuel economy of
the new vehicles purchased for the fleet in 2005 was an abysmal 21.4
miles per gallon.
Today, hybrid cars on the market can achieve over 50 miles per gallon
and SUVs can obtain 36 miles per gallon. The Government's average of
21.4 miles to the gallon is too low.
Instead, our government needs to purchase fuel-efficient cars, SUVs,
and light trucks. This can be done today. I drive a Toyota Prius that
gets over 50 mpg. The Ford Escape SUV can get 36 mpg.
The Federal Government should be a leader in protecting our
environment and national security.
That is why I am reintroducing the Government Fleet Fuel Economy Act.
The bill requires the federal government to purchase vehicles that are
fuel-efficient to the greatest extent possible.
______
By Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself and Mr. Menendez):
S. 148. A bill to establish the Paterson Great Falls National Park in
the State of New Jersey, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I rise today with great pride to
reintroduce legislation which would create a national park in my
hometown of Paterson, NJ, The Paterson Great Falls National Park Act of
2007, which I first introduced last year, would bring long-deserved
recognition and accessibility to one of our Nation's most beautiful and
historic landmarks. I am pleased that my colleague from New Jersey,
Senator Menendez, is cosponsoring this legislation.
The Great Falls are located where the Passaic River drops nearly 80
feet straight down, on its course towards New York Harbor. It is one of
the tallest and most spectacular waterfalls on the east coast, but the
incredible natural beauty of the falls should not overshadow its
tremendous importance as the powerhouse of industry in New Jersey and
the infant United States. Indeed, in 1778, Alexander Hamilton visited
the Great Falls and immediately realized the potential of the falls for
industrial applications and development. Hamilton was instrumental in
creating the planned community in Paterson--the first of its kind
nationwide--centered on the Great Falls, and industry thrived on the
power generated by the falls. Rogers Locomotive Works, the premier
steam locomotive manufacturer of the 19th century, was located in the
shadow of the falls, as were many other vitally important manufacturing
enterprises.
President Ford recognized the importance of the area by declaring the
falls and its surroundings a ``National Historic Landmark'' in 1976; he
called the falls ``a symbol of the industrial might which helps to make
the United States the most powerful nation in the world.'' Now, it is
time that we recognize the importance of this historic area by making
it New Jersey's first national park. This would be of special
importance because so few of our national parks are in urban areas. I
believe that it is time we acknowledge that many of our most
significant national treasures are located in densely populated areas,
and creating a national park in Paterson is an ideal opportunity to do
just that.
I grew up in Paterson, and I have appreciated the majesty and beauty
of the Great Falls for many years. By creating a national park in
Paterson, more Americans can be exposed to the exceptional cultural,
natural, and historic significance of the Great Falls, and that is why
I will passionately advocate for the passage of this bill. I have been
delighted to again work with my good friend, Congressman Bill
Pascrell--another longtime resident of Paterson--on this issue, as well
as with a bipartisan group of lawmakers from my home State, all of whom
believe strongly in this cause. I urge my colleagues to support the
passage of this legislation, which is so important to New Jersey and
all of America.
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. 148
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 ``Paterson Great Falls
National Park Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) The Great Falls Historic District in Paterson, New
Jersey is the site Alexander Hamilton selected to implement
his vision of American economic independence and transform a
rural agrarian society based on slavery into a global economy
based on freedom.
(2) President Ford announced the designation of the
Historic District as a National Historic Landmark in 1976 and
declared it ``a symbol of the industrial might which helps to
make America the most powerful nation in the world''.
(3) The Historic District was established as a National
Historic District in 1996.
(4) Exceptional natural and cultural resources make the
Historic District America's only National Historic District
that contains both a National Historic Landmark and a
National Natural Resource.
(5) The Historic District embodies Hamilton's vision of an
American economy based on--
(A) diverse industries to avoid excessive reliance on any
single manufactured product;
(B) innovative engineering and technology, including the
successful use of water, a renewable energy source, to power
industry and manufacturing;
(C) industrial production of goods not only for domestic
consumption but also for international trade; and
(D) meritocracy and opportunities for all.
(6) Pierre L'Enfant's water power system at Great Falls and
the buildings erected around it over two centuries constitute
the finest and most extensive remaining example of
engineering, planning, and architectural works that span the
entire period of America's growth into an industrial power.
(7) A National Park Service unit in Paterson is necessary
to give the American people an opportunity to appreciate the
physical beauty and historical importance of the Historic
District.
(8) Congress and the National Park Service recognized the
national significance of the Historic District through
listing on the National Register of Historic Places and
designation as a National Historic Landmark and a National
Historic District.
(9) The Historic District is suitable for addition to the
National Park System because--
(A) the national park will promote themes not adequately
represented in National Park System, including aspects of
African-American history and the inspiration Great Falls has
been for renowned American writers and artists;
(B) the national park will promote civic engagement by
attracting and engaging people who currently feel little or
no connection to National Parks or the founding fathers;
(C) the national park will interpret America's developing
history in the historical and global context; and
(D) the national park will foster partnerships among
federal, state and local governments and private donors and
non-profit organizations.
(10) The Historic District is a physically and fiscally
feasible site for a national park because--
[[Page 201]]
(A) all of the required natural and cultural resources are
on property largely owned by local government entities;
(B) it is of a manageable size; and
(C) much of the funding will come from private donors and
the State of New Jersey, which has committed substantial sums
of money to fund a state park that will assist in the funding
of the national park.
(11) The national park provides enormous potential for
public use because its location and urban setting make it
easily accessible for millions of Americans.
(12) The historic Hinchliffe stadium, adjacent to the
Historic District, was home to the New York Black Yankees for
many years, including 1933 when it hosted the Colored
Championship of the Nation, and it was added to the National
Register of Historic Places by the National Park Service in
2004.
(13) Larry Doby played in Hinchliffe Stadium both as a star
high school athlete and again as Negro League player, shortly
before becoming the first African-American to play in the
American League.
(14) A National Park Service unit, in partnership with
private donors and state and local governments, represents
the most effective and efficient method of preserving the
Historic District for the public.
(15) A National Park Service unit in Paterson is necessary
to give the Historic District the continuity and
professionalism required to attract private donors from
across the country.
(16) Though the State of New Jersey will be a strong
partner with a significant financial commitment, the State
alone cannot preserve the Historic District and present it to
the public without a National Park System unit in Paterson.
(b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are--
(1) to establish a unit of the National Park System in
Paterson, New Jersey, consisting of the Historic District and
historic Hinchliffe Stadium; and
(2) to create partnerships among Federal, State, and local
governments, non-profit organizations, and private donors to
preserve, enhance, interpret, and promote the cultural sites,
historic structures, and natural beauty of the Historic
District and the historic Hinchliffe Stadium for the benefit
of present and future generations.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Historic district.--The term ``Historic District''
means the Great Falls National Historic District in Paterson,
New Jersey, consisting of approximately 118 acres, as
specified in the National Register of Historic Places.
(2) National park.--The term ``national park'' means the
Paterson Great Falls National Park established by section 4.
(3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior.
(4) Management plan.--The term ``management plan'' means
the integrated resource management plan prepared pursuant to
section 6.
(5) Partnership.--The term ``Partnership'' means the
Paterson Great Falls National Park Partnership established in
section 7.
(6) Advisory council.--The term ``Advisory Council'' means
the Paterson Great Falls National Park Advisory Council
established pursuant to section 8.
SEC. 4. PATERSON GREAT FALLS NATIONAL PARK.
(a) Establishment.--There is established in Paterson, New
Jersey, the Paterson Great Falls National Park as a unit of
the National Park System.
(b) Boundaries.--The boundaries of the national park shall
be--
(1) the Historic District as listed on the National
Register of Historic Places; and
(2) the historic Hinchliffe Stadium as listed on the
National Register of Historic Places.
SEC. 5. ADMINISTRATION.
(a) In General.--The national park shall be administered in
partnership by the Secretary, the State of New Jersey, City
of Paterson and its applicable subdivisions, and others in
accordance with the provisions of law generally applicable to
units of the National Park System (including the Act of
August 25, 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.) and the Act of August
21, 1935 (16 U.S.C. 461 et seq.)), and in accordance with the
management plan.
(b) State and Local Jurisdiction.--Nothing in this section
shall be construed to diminish, enlarge, or modify any right
of the State of New Jersey or any political subdivision
thereof to exercise civil and criminal jurisdiction or to
carry out State laws, rules, and regulations within the
national park.
(c) Cooperative Agreements.--
(1) The Secretary may consult and enter into cooperative
agreements with the State of New Jersey or its political
subdivisions to acquire from and provide to the State or its
political subdivisions goods and services to be used in the
cooperative management of lands within the national park, if
the Secretary determines that appropriations for that purpose
are available and the agreement is in the best interest of
the United States.
(2) The Secretary, after consultation with the Partnership,
may enter into cooperative agreements with owners of property
of nationally significant historic or other cultural
resources within the national park in order to provide for
interpretive exhibits or programs. Such agreements shall
provide, whenever appropriate, that--
(A) the public may have access to such property at
specified, reasonable times for purposes of viewing property
or exhibits or attending programs established by the
Secretary under this subsection; and
(B) no changes or alterations shall be made in the
properties, except by mutual agreements between the Secretary
and the other parties to the agreements.
(d) Construction of Facilities on Non-Federal Lands.--In
order to facilitate the administration of the national park,
the Secretary is authorized, subject to the availability of
appropriated funds, to construct essential administrative or
visitor use facilities on non-Federal public lands within the
national park. Such facilities and the use thereof shall be
in conformance with applicable plans
(e) Other Property, Funds, and Services.--The Secretary may
accept and use donated funds, property, and services to carry
out this section.
(f) Management in Accordance With Integrated Management
Plan.--The Secretary shall preserve, interpret, manage, and
provide educational and recreational uses for the national
park, in consultation with the owners and managers of lands
in the national park, in accordance with the management plan.
SEC. 6. INTEGRATED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN.
(a) In General.--Not later than 3 years after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Partnership shall submit to
the Secretary a management plan for the national park to be
developed and implemented by the Partnership.
(b) Contents.--The management plan shall include, at a
minimum, each of the following:
(1) A program providing for coordinated administration of
the national park with proposed assignment of
responsibilities to the appropriate governmental unit at the
Federal, State, and local levels, and nonprofit
organizations, including each of the following:
(A) A plan to finance and support the public improvements
and services recommended in the management plan, including
allocation of non-Federal matching requirements and a
delineation of profit sector roles and responsibilities.
(B) A program for the coordination and consolidation, to
the extent feasible, of activities that may be carried out by
Federal, State, and local agencies having jurisdiction over
land within the national park, including planning and
regulatory responsibilities.
(2) Policies and programs for the following purposes:
(A) Enhancing public recreational and cultural
opportunities in the national park.
(B) Conserving, protecting, and maintaining the scenic,
historical, cultural, and natural values of the national
park.
(C) Developing educational opportunities in the national
park.
(D) Enhancing public access to the national park, including
development of transportation networks.
(E) Identifying potential sources of revenue from programs
or activities carried out within the national park.
(F) Protecting and preserving sites with historical,
cultural, natural, Native American and African American
significance.
(3) A policy statement that recognizes existing economic
activities within the national park.
(c) Consultation and Public Hearings.--In developing the
management plan, the Partnership shall:
(1) Consult on a regular basis with appropriate officials
of any local government or Federal or State agency which has
jurisdiction over lands within the national park.
(2) Consult with interested conservation, business,
professional, and citizen organizations.
(3) Conduct public hearings or meetings for the purposes of
providing interested persons with the opportunity to testify
with respect to matters to be addressed by the management
plan.
(d) Approval of the Management Plan.--
(1) In general.--The Partnership shall submit the
management plan to the Governor of New Jersey for review. The
Governor shall have 90 days to review and make any
recommendations regarding the management plan. After
considering the Governor's recommendations, if any, the
Partnership shall submit the plan to the Secretary, who shall
approve or disapprove the plan not later than 90 days after
receiving the management plan from the Partnership. In
reviewing the management plan, the Secretary shall consider
each of the following:
(A) The adequacy of public participation.
(B) Assurances from State and local officials regarding
implementation of the management plan.
(C) The adequacy of regulatory and financial tools that are
in place to implement the management plan.
(2) Disapproval.--If the Secretary disapproves the
management plan, the Secretary shall, not later than 60 days
after the date of such disapproval, submit to the Partnership
in writing the reasons for the disapproval and
recommendations for revision.
[[Page 202]]
Not later than 90 days after receipt of such notice of
disapproval and recommendations, the Partnership shall revise
and resubmit the management plan to the Secretary who shall
approve or disapprove the revision not later than 60 days
after receiving the revised management plan.
(3) Result of failure to approve or disapprove.--If the
Secretary does not take action within the deadlines set forth
in paragraphs (1) or (2), the plan shall be deemed to have
been approved.
(e) Prior to adoption of the Partnership's plan, the
Secretary and the Partnership shall assist the owners and
managers of lands within the national park to ensure that
existing programs, services, and activities that promote the
purposes of this section are supported.
SEC. 7. PATERSON GREAT FALLS NATIONAL PARK PARTNERSHIP.
(a) Establishment.--There is hereby established the
Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park Partnership
whose purpose shall be to coordinate the activities of
Federal, State, and local authorities and the private sector
in the development and implementation of the management plan.
(b) Membership.--
(1) In general.--The Commission shall be composed of 13
members appointed by the Secretary, of whom--
(A) 4 members shall be appointed by the Secretary from
nominees submitted by the Governor of the State of New
Jersey;
(B) 2 members shall be appointed by the Secretary from
nominees submitted by the City Council of Paterson;
(C) 2 members shall be appointed by the Secretary from the
Paterson Great Falls National Park Advisory Board; and
(D) 1 member shall be appointed by the Secretary from
nominees submitted by the Board of Chosen Freeholders of
Passaic County, New Jersey.
(2) Chairperson; vice chairperson.--The Partnership shall
elect one of its members as Chairperson and one as Vice
Chairperson. The term of office of the Chairperson and Vice
Chairperson shall be one year. The Vice Chairperson shall
serve as chairperson in the absence of the Chairperson.
(3) Vacancies.--A vacancy in the Partnership shall be
filled in the same manner in which the original appointment
was made.
(4) Terms.--Terms of service--
(A) members of the Partnership shall serve for terms of 3
years and may be reappointed not more than once; and
(B) a member may serve after the expiration of his or her
term until a successor has been appointed.
(5) Deadline.--The Secretary shall appoint the first
members of the Partnership within 30 days after the date on
which the Secretary has received all of the recommendations
for appointment pursuant to subsection (b)(1).
(c) Compensation.--Members of the Partnership shall serve
without pay, but while away from their homes or regular
places of business in the performance of services for the
Partnership, members shall be allowed travel expenses,
including per diem in lieu of subsistence, in the same manner
as persons employed intermittently in Federal Government
service are allowed expenses under section 5703 of title 5,
United States Code.
(d) Meetings.--The Partnership shall meet at the call of
the Chairperson or a majority of its members.
(e) Quorum.--A majority of the Partnership shall constitute
a quorum.
(f) Staff.--The Secretary shall provide the Partnership
with such staff and technical assistance as the Secretary,
after consultation with the Partnership, considers
appropriate to enable the Partnership to carry out its
duties. The Secretary may accept the services of personnel
detailed from the State of New Jersey, any political
subdivision of the State, or any entity represented on the
Partnership.
(g) Hearings.--The Partnership may hold such hearings, sit
and act at such times and places, take such testimony, and
receive such evidence as the Partnership may deem
appropriate.
(h) Donations.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
the Partnership may seek and accept donations of funds,
property, or services from individuals, foundations,
corporations, and other private and public entities for the
purpose of carrying out this section.
(i) Use of Funds to Obtain Money.--The Partnership may use
its funds to obtain money from any source under any program
or law requiring the recipient of such money to make a
contribution in order to receive such money.
(j) Mails.--The Partnership may use the United States mails
in the same manner and upon the same conditions as other
departments and agencies of the United States.
(k) Obtaining Property.--The Partnership may obtain by
purchase, rental, donation, or otherwise, such property,
facilities, and services as may be needed to carry out its
duties, except that the Partnership may not acquire any real
property or interest in real property.
(l) Cooperative Agreements.--For purposes of carrying out
the management plan, the Partnership may enter into
cooperative agreements with the State of New Jersey, any
political subdivision thereof, or with any organization or
person.
SEC. 8. PATERSON GREAT FALLS NATIONAL PARK ADVISORY COUNCIL.
(a) Establishment.--The Secretary, acting through the
Director of the National Park Service, shall establish an
advisory committee to be known as the Paterson Great Falls
National Park Advisory Council. The purpose of the Advisory
Council shall be to represent various groups with interests
in the National Park and make recommendations to the
Partnership on issues related to the development and
implementation of the management plan. The Advisory Council
is encouraged to establish committees relating to specific
National Park management issues, such as education, tourism,
transportation, natural resources, cultural and historic
resources, and revenue raising activities. Participation on
any such committee shall not be limited to members of the
Advisory Council.
(b) Membership.--The Advisory Council shall consist of not
fewer than 15 individuals, to be appointed by the Secretary,
acting through the Director of the National Park Service. The
Secretary shall appoint no fewer than 3 individuals to
represent each of the following categories of entities:
(1) Municipalities.
(2) Educational and cultural institutions.
(3) Environmental organizations.
(4) Business and commercial entities, including those
related to transportation and tourism.
(5) Organizations representing African American and Native
American interests in the Historic District.
(c) Procedures.--Each meeting of the Advisory Council and
its committees shall be open to the public.
(d) FACA.--The provisions of section 14 of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) are hereby waived with
respect to the Advisory Council.
SEC. 9. FINANCIAL AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.
The Secretary may provide to any owner of property within
the National Park containing nationally significant historic
or cultural resources, in accordance with cooperative
agreements or grant agreements, as appropriate, such
financial and technical assistance to mark, interpret, and
restore non-Federal properties within the National Park as
the Secretary determines appropriate to carry out the
purposes of this Act, provided that--
(1) the Secretary, acting through the National Park
Service, shall have right of access at reasonable times to
public portions of the property covered by such agreements
for the purpose of conducting visitors through such
properties and interpreting them to the public; and
(2) no changes or alterations shall be made in such
properties except by mutual agreement between the Secretary
and the other parties to the agreements.
SEC. 10. ACQUISITION OF LAND.
(a) General Authority.--The Secretary may acquire land or
interests in land within the boundaries of the National Park
by donation, purchase with donated or appropriated funds, or
exchange.
(b) State Property.--Property owned by the State of New
Jersey or any political subdivision of the State may be
acquired only by donation.
(c) Consent.--No lands or interests therein within the
boundaries of the park may be acquired without the consent of
the owner, unless the Secretary determines that the land is
being developed, or is proposed to be developed, in a manner
which is detrimental to the natural, scenic, historic, and
other values for which the park is established.
SEC. 11. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated
such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section,
provided that no funds may be appropriated for land
acquisition.
(b) Matching Requirement.--Amounts appropriated in any
fiscal year to carry out this section may only be expended on
a matching basis in a ration of at least 3 non-Federal
dollars to every Federal dollar. The non-Federal share of the
match may be in the form of cash, services, or in-kind
contributions, fairly valued.
______
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. Sessions):
S. 149. A bill to address the effect of the death of a defendant in
Federal criminal proceedings; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to join Senator
Sessions in re-introducing the ``Preserving Crime Victims' Restitution
Act.'' The Act would clarify the rule of law and procedures that should
be applied when a criminal defendant, such as former Enron CEO Kenneth
Lay, dies after he has been duly convicted, but before his appeals are
final.
This bill passed the Senate unanimously at the end of the 109th
Congress, but unfortunately it was not taken up by the House. Except
for minor, technical corrections, this new bill is the same as what the
Senate passed in the last Congress, and I urge
[[Page 203]]
my colleagues to speedily pass this bill, as you did before, so that it
can be enacted into law.
As I mentioned when I introduced this bill last fall, we have worked
closely with the Department of Justice in crafting this legislation,
and have used much of DOJ's suggested language. DOJ fully supports the
principles contained in this bill, and has indicated that it supports
fixing this problem now to ensure that, despite a defendant's death,
hard-won convictions are preserved so that restitution remains
available for the victims of crime.
This bill would establish that, if a defendant dies after being
convicted of a federal offense, his conviction will not be vacated.
Instead, the court will be directed to issue a statement that the
defendant was convicted--either by a guilty plea or a verdict finding
him guilty--but then died before his case or appeal was final.
It would codify the current rule that no further punishments can be
imposed on a person who is convicted if they die before a sentence is
imposed or they have an opportunity to appeal their conviction. It
would clarify that, unlike punishment, other relief (such as
restitution to the victims) that could have been sought against a
convicted defendant can continue to be pursued and collected after the
defendant's death. It would establish a process to ensure that after a
person dies, a representative of his estate can challenge or appeal his
conviction if they want, and can also secure a lawyer--either on their
own or by having one appointed and, if the Government had filed a
criminal forfeiture action--in which it had sought to reach the
defendant's assets that were linked to his crimes--the Government would
get an extra 2 years after the defendant's death to file a civil
forfeiture lawsuit so that it could try to recover those same assets in
a different, and traditionally-accepted manner.
The need for this legislation was vividly demonstrated on October 17,
2006, when U.S. District Judge Sim Lake, of the Southern District of
Texas, wiped clean the criminal record of Enron founder Kenneth Lay,
even after a jury and judge had unanimously found him guilty of 10
criminal charges, including securities fraud, wire fraud involving
false and misleading statements, bank fraud and conspiracy.
The decision to dismiss Mr. Lay's conviction was not based on any
error in the trial, suggestion of unfairness in the proceedings, or
allegation of his innocence. Instead, it was simply based on the fact
that Mr. Lay died before his conviction had been affirmed on appeal,
under a common law rule known as ``abatement.''
In other words, the order essentially meant that Mr. Lay was
``convicted but not guilty''--``innocent by reason of his death.''
Judge Lake granted this dismissal even in the face of DOJ Enron Task
Force filings, which noted how Mr. Lay's conviction ``provided the
basis for the likely disgorgement of fraud proceeds totaling tens of
millions of dollars.'' In other words, the dismissal meant that
millions of dollars that the jury found was obtained by Mr. Lay
illegally at the expense of former Enron employees and shareholders,
would remain untouched in the Lay estate. These employees and
shareholders will now find it much harder to lay claim to these ill-
gotten gains held by Mr. Lay's estate, because they will be unable to
point to his criminal conviction as proof of his wrongdoing.
I do not fault Judge Lake for issuing this order. He made it clear
that he was simply following the binding precedent issued in 2004 by
the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, in a case called
United States v. Estate of Parsons.
But as I noted in a letter I wrote to Attorney General Gonzales on
October 20, 2006, the Fifth Circuit's Parsons decision goes far beyond
the traditional rule of law in this area. While the common-law doctrine
of abatement has historically wiped out ``punishments'' following a
criminal defendant's death, the Supreme Court has never held that it
must also wipe out a victim's right to other forms of relief such as
restitution, which simply compensate third parties who were injured by
criminal misconduct.
As the six dissenters in Parsons noted, the majority's ```finality
rationale' is a completely novel judicial creation which has not been
embraced or even suggested by . . . other courts.'' The Third and
Fourth Circuits, for example, have expressly refused to take this
position, and upheld a restitution order after a criminal defendant's
death.
The Parsons decision was remarkable in several other respects,
including the fact that (as the dissenters noted), its new rule of law
was apparently inspired by a single law review article. That academic
piece boldly claimed that a criminal defendant's right of appeal is
``evolving into a constitutional right,'' and suggested that a
conviction untested by appellate review is unreliable and illegitimate.
This notion runs contrary to the traditional rule applied in virtually
every other context--where a jury's findings are typically respected
under the law.
Of course a defendant is presumed innocent at the outset of his case.
After a jury has deliberated and unanimously issued a formal finding of
guilt, however, that presumption of innocence no longer stands.
The Parsons ``finality'' rationale even raises the possibility that a
defendant who fully admitted his wrongdoing and pleaded guilty, but who
then died while an appeal of his sentence was pending, could have his
entire criminal conviction erased.
In fact, that has already occurred, in the 1994 case of United States
v. Pogue, where the D.C. Circuit ordered the dismissal of a conviction
of a defendant whose appeal was pending--even though the docketing
statement had said that the defendant intended to challenge only his
sentence, and not his underlying conviction.
Following Judge Lake's decision, I sent a letter to the Attorney
General, asking him to appeal the order and continue the fight for
Enron victims. Unfortunately, the Justice Department decided in
November to withdraw its appeal, leaving it up to the victims
themselves to pursue any further relief.
I am very disappointed in this decision. These victims have had their
livelihoods and retirement stripped from them, and they deserved a
Justice Department that was willing to fight vigorously to protect
their interests.
Enron's collapse in 2001 wiped out thousands of jobs, more than $60
billion in market value, and more than $2 billion in pension plans.
When America's seventh largest company crumbled into bankruptcy after
its accounting tricks could no longer hide its billions in debt,
countless former Enron employees and shareholders lost their entire
life savings after investing in Enron's 401(k) plan.
Many of these Enron victims have been following closely the years of
preparation by the Enron Task Force, and the four-month jury trial and
separate one-week bench trial, hoping to finally recover some
restitution in this criminal case. And despite Mr. Lay's vigorous
efforts to avoid being held accountable for his actions, a conviction
was finally secured.
Yet now these people have essentially been victimized again. They
will be forced to start all over in their efforts to get back some
portion of the pension funds on which they expected to subsist, and the
other hard-earned assets that will remain beyond their reach, despite
the unanimous, hard-fought verdicts finding Mr. Lay guilty of all ten
counts with which he had been charged.
I believe in situations like this, leaving the victims without this
recourse is an unacceptable outcome. That is why I am introducing this
bill to prevent further injustices like this from ever happening again.
While I have no desire for our Government to punish a criminal
defendant who dies, the calculation should be different when we are
determining how to make up for harm suffered by other innocent victims.
This legislation offers a fair solution and orderly process in the
event that a criminal defendant dies prior to his final appeal.
The time has come for Congress to end this injustice--hopefully, by
acting
[[Page 204]]
quickly enough to assist these Enron victims, but in any event in a way
that will solve the problems that the Lay dismissal so starkly
illustrated.
I urge my colleagues in the Senate to quickly pass this bill, as you
did in the 109th Congress, so that we can enact it into law in the
110th Congress.
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. 149
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 ``Preserving Crime Victims'
Restitution Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. EFFECT OF DEATH OF A DEFENDANT IN FEDERAL CRIMINAL
PROCEEDINGS.
(a) In General.--Subchapter A of chapter 227 of title 18,
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``Sec. 3560. Effect of death of a defendant in Federal
criminal proceedings
``(a) General Rule.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the death of a defendant who has been convicted of a
Federal criminal offense shall not be the basis for abating
or otherwise invalidating a plea of guilty or nolo contendere
accepted, a verdict returned, a sentence announced, or a
judgment entered prior to the death of that defendant, or for
dismissing or otherwise invalidating the indictment,
information, or complaint on which such a plea, verdict,
sentence, or judgment is based, except as provided in this
section.
``(b) Death After Plea or Verdict.--
``(1) Entry of judgment.--If a defendant dies after a plea
of guilty or nolo contendere has been accepted or a verdict
has been returned, but before judgment is entered, the court
shall enter a judgment incorporating the plea of guilty or
nolo contendere or the verdict, with the notation that the
defendant died before the judgment was entered.
``(2) Punitive sanctions.--
``(A) Death before sentence announced.--If a defendant dies
after a plea of guilty or nolo contendere has been accepted
or a verdict has been returned and before a sentence has been
announced, no sentence of probation, supervision, or
imprisonment may be imposed, no criminal forfeiture may be
ordered, and no liability for a fine or special assessment
may be imposed on the defendant or the defendant's estate.
``(B) Death after sentencing or judgment.--The death of a
defendant after a sentence has been announced or a judgment
has been entered, and before that defendant has exhausted or
waived the right to a direct appeal--
``(i) shall terminate any term of probation, supervision,
or imprisonment, and shall terminate the liability of that
defendant to pay any amount remaining due of a criminal
forfeiture, of a fine under section 3613(b), or of a special
assessment under section 3013; and
``(ii) shall not require return of any portion of any
criminal forfeiture, fine, or special assessment already
paid.
``(3) Restitution.--
``(A) Death before sentence announced.--If a defendant dies
after a plea of guilty or nolo contendere has been accepted
or a verdict has been returned and before a sentence has been
announced, the court shall, upon a motion under subsection
(c)(2) by the Government or any victim of that defendant's
crime, commence a special restitution proceeding at which the
court shall adjudicate and enter a final order of restitution
against the estate of that defendant in an amount equal to
the amount that would have been imposed if that defendant
were alive.
``(B) Death after sentencing or judgment.--The death of a
defendant after a sentence has been announced shall not be a
basis for abating or otherwise invalidating restitution
announced at sentencing or ordered after sentencing under
section 3664(d)(5) of this title or any other provision of
law.
``(4) Civil proceedings.--The death of a defendant after a
plea of guilty or nolo contendere has been accepted, a
verdict returned, a sentence announced, or a judgment
entered, shall not prevent the use of that plea, verdict,
sentence, or judgment in civil proceedings, to the extent
otherwise permitted by law.
``(c) Appeals, Motions, and Petitions.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2),
after the death of a defendant convicted in a criminal case--
``(A) no appeal, motion, or petition by or on behalf of
that defendant or the personal representative or estate of
that defendant, the Government, or a victim of that
defendant's crime seeking to challenge or reinstate a plea of
guilty or nolo contendere accepted, a verdict returned, a
sentence announced, or a judgment entered prior to the death
of that defendant shall be filed in that case after the death
of that defendant; and
``(B) any pending motion, petition, or appeal in that case
shall be dismissed with the notation that the dismissal is
due to the death of the defendant.
``(2) Exceptions.--
``(A) Restitution.--If a defendant dies after being
convicted in a criminal case but prior to sentencing or the
exhaustion or waiver of direct appeal, the personal
representative of that defendant, the Government, or any
victim of that defendant's crime may file or pursue an
otherwise permissible direct appeal, petition for mandamus or
a writ of certiorari, or an otherwise permissible motion
described in section 3663, 3663A, 3664, or 3771, to the
extent that the appeal, petition, or motion raises an
otherwise permissible claim to--
``(i) obtain, in a special restitution proceeding, a final
order of restitution under subsection (b)(3);
``(ii) enforce, correct, amend, adjust, reinstate, or
challenge any order of restitution; or
``(iii) challenge or reinstate a verdict, plea of guilty or
nolo contendere, sentence, or judgment on which--
``(I) a restitution order is based; or
``(II) restitution is being or will be sought by an appeal,
petition, or motion under this paragraph.
``(B) Other civil actions affected.--If a defendant dies
after being convicted in a criminal case but prior to
sentencing or the exhaustion or waiver of direct appeal, the
personal representative of that defendant, the Government, or
any victim of that defendant's crime may file or pursue an
otherwise permissible direct appeal, petition for mandamus or
a writ of certiorari, or an otherwise permissible motion
under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, to the extent
that the appeal, petition, or motion raises an otherwise
permissible claim to challenge or reinstate a verdict, plea
of guilty or nolo contendere, sentence, or judgment that the
appellant, petitioner, or movant shows by a preponderance of
the evidence is, or will be, material in a pending or
reasonably anticipated civil proceeding, including civil
forfeiture proceedings.
``(C) Collateral consequences.--
``(i) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraphs (A)
and (B), the Government may not restrict any Federal benefits
or impose collateral consequences on the estate or a family
member of a deceased defendant based solely on the conviction
of a defendant who died before that defendant exhausted or
waived the right to direct appeal unless, not later than 90
days after the death of that defendant, the Government gives
notice to that estate or family member of the intent of the
Government to take such action.
``(ii) Personal representative.--If the Government gives
notice under clause (i), the court shall appoint a personal
representative for the deceased defendant that is the subject
of that notice, if not otherwise appointed, under section
(d)(2)(A).
``(iii) Tolling.--If the Government gives notice under
clause (i), any filing deadline that might otherwise apply
against the defendant, the estate of the defendant, or a
family member of the defendant shall be tolled until the date
of the appointment of that defendant's personal
representative under clause (ii).
``(3) Basis.--In any appeal, petition, or motion under
paragraph (2), the death of the defendant shall not be a
basis for relief.
``(d) Procedures Regarding Continuing Litigation.--
``(1) In general.--The standards and procedures for a
permitted appeal, petition, motion, or other proceeding under
subsection (c)(2) shall be the standards and procedures
otherwise provided by law, except that the personal
representative of the defendant shall be substituted for the
defendant.
``(2) Special procedures.--If continuing litigation is
initiated or could be initiated under subsection (c)(2), the
following procedures shall apply:
``(A) Notice and appointment of personal representative.--
The district court before which the criminal case was filed
(or the appellate court if the matter is pending on direct
appeal) shall--
``(i) give notice to any victim of the convicted defendant
under section 3771(a)(2), and to the personal representative
of that defendant or, if there is none, the next of kin of
that defendant; and
``(ii) appoint a personal representative for that
defendant, if not otherwise appointed.
``(B) Counsel.--Counsel shall be appointed for the personal
representative of a defendant convicted in a criminal case
who dies if counsel would have been available to that
defendant, or if the personal representative of that
defendant requests counsel and otherwise qualifies for the
appointment of counsel, under section 3006A.
``(C) Tolling.--The court shall toll any applicable
deadline for the filing of any motion, petition, or appeal
during the period beginning on the date of the death of a
defendant convicted in a criminal case and ending on the
later of--
``(i) the date of the appointment of that defendant's
personal representative; or
``(ii) where applicable, the date of the appointment of
counsel for that personal representative.
``(D) Restitution.--If restitution has not been fully
collected on the date on which a defendant convicted in a
criminal case dies--
``(i) any amount owed under a restitution order (whether
issued before or after the
[[Page 205]]
death of that defendant) shall be collectible from any
property from which the restitution could have been collected
if that defendant had survived, regardless of whether that
property is included in the estate of that defendant;
``(ii) any restitution protective order in effect on the
date of the death of that defendant shall continue in effect
unless modified by the court after hearing or pursuant to a
motion by the personal representative of that defendant, the
Government, or any victim of that defendant's crime; and
``(iii) upon motion by the Government or any victim of that
defendant's crime, the court shall take any action necessary
to preserve the availability of property for restitution
under this section.
``(e) Forfeiture.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the
death of an individual does not affect the Government's
ability to seek, or to continue to pursue, civil forfeiture
of property as authorized by law.
``(2) Tolling of limitations for civil forfeiture.--
Notwithstanding the expiration of any civil forfeiture
statute of limitations or any time limitation set forth in
section 983(a) of this title, not later than the later of the
time period otherwise authorized by law and 2 years after the
date of the death of an individual against whom a criminal
indictment alleging forfeiture is pending, the Government may
commence civil forfeiture proceedings against any interest in
any property alleged to be forfeitable in the indictment of
that individual.
``(f) Definitions.--In this section--
``(1) the term `accepted', relating to a plea of guilty or
nolo contendere, means that a court has determined, under
rule 11(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, that
the plea is voluntary and supported by a factual basis,
regardless of whether final acceptance of that plea may have
been deferred pending review of a presentence report or
otherwise;
``(2) the term `announced', relating to a sentence, means
that the sentence has been orally stated in open court;
``(3) the term `convicted' refers to a defendant--
``(A) whose plea of guilty or nolo contendere has been
accepted; or
``(B) against whom a verdict of guilty has been returned;
``(4) the term `direct appeal' means an appeal filed,
within the period provided by rule 4(b) of the Federal Rules
of Appellate Procedure, from the entry of the judgment or
order of restitution, including review by the Supreme Court
of the United States; and
``(5) the term `returned', relating to a verdict, means
that the verdict has been orally stated in open court.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of sections for
chapter 227 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``3560. Effect of death of a defendant in Federal criminal
proceedings.''.
SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.
The amendments made by this Act shall apply to any criminal
case or appeal pending on or after July 1, 2007.
SEC. 4. SEVERABILITY.
If any provision of this Act, any amendment made by this
Act, or the application of such provision or amendment to any
person or circumstance is held to be unconstitutional, the
remainder of the provisions of this Act, the amendments made
by this Act, and the application of such provisions or
amendments to any person or circumstance shall not be
affected.
______
By Mrs. BOXER (for herself, Mrs. Feinstein, and Mr. Lautenberg):
S. 150. A bill to amend the safe Drinking Water Act to protect the
health of pregnant women, fetuses, infants, and children by requiring a
health advisory and drinking water standard for perchlorate; to the
Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation that
would order EPA to promptly establish a health advisory and then a
drinking water standard for perchlorate. I am pleased that the Senior
Senator from California, Mrs. Feinstein, and the Senior Senator from
New Jersey, Mr. Lautenberg, have joined as original cosponsors of this
measure.
This legislation will require the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) to establish a standard for perchlorate contamination in
drinking water supplies by December 31, 2007. EPA still has not
committed to establishing a tap water standard for this widespread
contaminant, decades after learning that perchlorate is a problem in
our drinking water.
Perchlorate is a clear and present danger to California's and much of
America's health. We cannot wait any longer to address this threat. EPA
needs to get moving and protect our drinking water now.
Drinking water sources for more than 20 million Americans are
contaminated with perchlorate. Perchlorate is the main ingredient in
rocket fuel, which accounts for 90 percent of its use. Perchlorate is
also used for ammunition, fireworks, highway safety flares, air bags,
and fertilizers. It dissolves readily in many liquids, including water,
and moves easily and quickly through the ground.
Perchlorate was first discovered in drinking water in 1957, and at
the latest in the mid-1980s, EPA was aware that perchlorate
contaminates drinking water. Since 1997, when California developed a
new, more sensitive testing method that can detect perchlorate down to
4 parts per billion, perchlorate has been found in soil, groundwater,
and surface water throughout the U.S.
According to a May 2005 report from the Government Accountability
Office, perchlorate contamination has been detected in water and soil
at almost 400 sites in the U.S., with levels ranging from 4 parts per
billion to millions of parts per billion.
GAO also said that limited EPA data show that perchlorate has
polluted 35 States and the District of Columbia, and is known to have
contaminated 153 public water systems in 26 States. Those data likely
underestimate total exposure, as illustrated by the finding of the
California Department of Health Services that perchlorate contamination
has affected at least 276 drinking water wells sources and 77 drinking
water systems in California alone.
The Food and Drug Administration and other scientific researchers
have detected perchlorate in the United States food supply, including
in lettuce, milk, cucumbers, tomatoes, carrots, cantaloupe, wheat, and
spinach, and in human breast milk.
Perchlorate can harm human health, especially in pregnant women and
children, by interfering with thyroid gland, which is needed to produce
important hormones that help control human health and development. The
thyroid helps to ensure children's proper mental and physical
development, in addition to helping to control metabolism. Thyroid
problems in expectant mothers or infants can affect babies, and result
in delayed development and decreased learning capability.
The largest and most comprehensive study to date on the effects of
low levels of perchlorate exposure in women was recently published by
researchers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
CDC found that there were significant changes in thyroid hormones in
women with low iodine levels who were exposed to perchlorate. The CDC
researchers also found that even small increases in low-level
perchlorate exposure may affect the thyroid's production of hormones in
iodine deficient women. About 36 percent of women in the U.S. have
iodine levels equal to or below those of the women in the study.
EPA has not established a health advisory or national primary
drinking water regulation for perchlorate. Instead, the agency has
established a ``Drinking Water Equivalent Level'' (DWEL) of 24.5 parts
per billion for this toxin. The agency's DWEL does not take into
consideration all routes of exposure to perchlorate, and has been
criticized by experts for failing to sufficiently consider the body
weight, unique exposure, and vulnerabilities of certain pregnant women
and fetuses, infants, and children. It is based primarily upon a small
human study by Greer et al., which tested a small number of adults. The
DWEL also does not take into account the new much larger studies from
CDC, and other data indicating potential effects at lower perchlorate
levels than previously found.
Alarming levels of perchlorate have been discovered in Lake Mead and
the Colorado River, the drinking water source for millions of Southern
Californians. Communities in the Inland Empire, San Gabriel Valley,
Santa Clara Valley, and the Sacramento area are also grappling with
perchlorate contamination.
My bill will ensure that EPA acts swiftly to address this threat to
our health and welfare. I look forward to working with my colleagues to
pass this important piece of legislation.
[[Page 206]]
I ask unanimous consent that the text of my bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 150
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 ``Protecting Pregnant Women
and Children From Perchlorate Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) perchlorate--
(A) is a chemical used as the primary ingredient of solid
rocket propellant;
(B) is also used in fireworks, road flares, and other
applications.
(2) waste from the manufacture and improper disposal of
chemicals containing perchlorate is increasingly being
discovered in soil and water;
(3) according to the Government Accountability Office,
perchlorate contamination has been detected in water and soil
at almost 400 sites in the United States, with concentration
levels ranging from 4 parts per billion to millions of parts
per billion;
(4) the Government Accountability Office has determined
that the Environmental Protection Agency does not centrally
track or monitor perchlorate detections or the status of
perchlorate cleanup, so a greater number of contaminated
sites may already exist;
(5) according to the Government Accountability Office,
limited Environmental Protection Agency data show that
perchlorate has been found in 35 States and the District of
Columbia and is known to have contaminated 153 public water
systems in 26 States;
(6) those data are likely underestimates of total drinking
water exposure, as illustrated by the finding of the
California Department of Health Services that perchlorate
contamination sites have affected approximately 276 drinking
water sources and 77 drinking water systems in the State of
California alone;
(7) Food and Drug Administration scientists and other
scientific researchers have detected perchlorate in the
United States food supply, including in lettuce, milk,
cucumbers, tomatoes, carrots, cantaloupe, wheat, and spinach,
and in human breast milk;
(8)(A) perchlorate can harm human health, especially in
pregnant women and children, by interfering with uptake of
iodide by the thyroid gland, which is necessary to produce
important hormones that help control human health and
development;
(B) in adults, the thyroid helps to regulate metabolism;
(C) in children, the thyroid helps to ensure proper mental
and physical development; and
(D) impairment of thyroid function in expectant mothers or
infants may result in effects including delayed development
and decreased learning capability;
(9)(A) in October 2006, researchers from the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention published the largest, most
comprehensive study to date on the effects of low levels of
perchlorate exposure in women, finding that--
(i) significant changes existed in thyroid hormones in
women with low iodine levels who were exposed to perchlorate;
and
(ii) even low-level perchlorate exposure may affect the
production of hormones by the thyroid in iodine-deficient
women; and
(B) in the United States, about 36 percent of women have
iodine levels equivalent to or below the levels of the women
in the study described in subparagraph (A); and
(10) the Environmental Protection Agency has not
established a health advisory or national primary drinking
water regulation for perchlorate, but instead established a
``Drinking Water Equivalent Level'' of 24.5 parts per billion
for perchlorate, which--
(A) does not take into consideration all routes of exposure
to perchlorate;
(B) has been criticized by experts as failing to
sufficiently consider the body weight, unique exposure, and
vulnerabilities of certain pregnant women and fetuses,
infants, and children; and
(C) is based primarily on a small study and does not take
into account new, larger studies of the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention or other data indicating potential
effects at lower perchlorate levels than previously found.
(b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are--
(1) to require the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency to establish, by not later than 90 days
after the date of enactment of this Act, a health advisory
for perchlorate in drinking water that fully protects
pregnant women, fetuses, infants, and children, taking into
consideration body weight and exposure patterns and all
routes of exposure to perchlorate; and
(2) to require the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency to establish promptly a national primary
drinking water regulation for perchlorate that fully protects
pregnant women, fetuses, infants, and children, taking into
consideration body weight and exposure patterns and all
routes of exposure to perchlorate.
SEC. 3. HEALTH ADVISORY AND NATIONAL PRIMARY DRINKING WATER
REGULATION FOR PERCHLORATE.
Section 1412(b)(12) of the Safe Drinking Water Act (42
U.S.C. 300g-1(b)(12)) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(C) Perchlorate.--
``(i) Schedule, health advisory, and standard.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, the
Administrator shall publish a health advisory and promulgate
a national primary drinking water regulation for perchlorate,
in accordance with the schedule and provisions established by
this subparagraph, that fully protect, with an adequate
margin of safety, the health of vulnerable persons (including
pregnant women, fetuses, infants, and children), taking into
consideration body weight, exposure patterns, and all routes
of exposure.
``(ii) Health advisory.--Not later than 90 days after the
date of enactment of this subparagraph, the Administrator
shall publish a health advisory for perchlorate in accordance
with clause (i).
``(iii) Proposed regulations.--Not later than August 1,
2007, the Administrator shall propose a national primary
drinking water regulation for perchlorate in accordance with
clause (i).
``(iv) Final regulations.--Not later than December 31,
2007, after providing notice and an opportunity for public
comment, the Administrator shall promulgate a national
primary drinking water regulation for perchlorate in
accordance with clause (i).''.
______
By Mrs. BOXER:
S. 152. A bill to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965 to establish a program to help States expand the educational
system to include at least 1 year of early education preceding the year
a child enters kindergarten; to the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions.
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today I rise to reintroduce the Early
Education Act. This bill will enable children across our nation to be
prepared with the initial skills and abilities to successfully begin
their education.
I strongly believe that there should be a national commitment to
establish that all children have access to high quality prekindergarten
programs. This bill is a step forward in making that possible.
Of the nearly 8 million and 3- and 4-year-olds that could be in early
education, fewer than half are enrolled in an early education program.
In my State of California alone, just 65 percent of 4-year-olds are in
preschool.
The result is that too many children come to school ill-prepared to
learn. They lack language and social skills. Almost all experts now
agree that an early education experience is one of the most effective
strategies for improving later school performance.
Researchers have discovered that children have a learning capacity
that can and should be developed at a much earlier age than was
previously thought. The National Research Council reported that
prekindergarten educational opportunities are critical in developing
early language and literacy skills and preventing reading difficulties
in young children.
Furthermore, studies have shown that children who participate in
prekindergarten programs are less likely to be held back a grade, show
greater learning retention and initiative, have better social skills,
are more enthusiastic about school, and are more likely to have good
attendance records.
In fact, prekindergarten programs pay for themselves in long-term
benefits. It is estimated that for every dollar invested in early
education, about $7 are saved in later costs.
My bill, the Early Education Act, would create a program in at least
10 States to provide one year of prekindergarten early education in the
public schools. There is a 50 percent matching requilement, and the
$300 million authorized annually under this bill would be used by
States to supplement--not supplant--other Federal, State or local
funds. This bill would serve approximately 136,000 children.
Our children need a solid foundation that builds on current education
system by providing them with early learning skills. I urge my
colleagues to support this legislation.
______
By Mrs. BOXER:
S. 153. A bill to provide for the monitoring of the long-term medical
health of firefighters who responded to emergencies in certain disaster
areas and
[[Page 207]]
for the treatment of such firefighters; to the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation.
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I introduce the Healthy Firefighters Act,
an important bill that would protect the firefighters who respond to
emergencies. The bill is inspired by the brave firefighters from the
San Jacinto Ranger District, who responded to the Esperanza Incident
wildfire in southern California in October of 2006.
We rely on firefighters to protect us when disaster strikes, and they
selflessly place themselves in danger to provide that protection. One
danger they face in the course of performing their duties is exposure
to toxins--including fine particulates, carbon monoxide, sulfur,
formaldehyde, mercury, heavy metals, and benzene--that can have a
significant negative effect on their health.
We owe it to this country's brave firefighters to minimize their
sacrifice for our safety, to the greatest extent possible. My bill
would require the U.S. Fire Administrator to contract with a medical
research university to conduct long-term medical health monitoring of
firefighters who responded to emergencies in any areas declared a
disaster by the Federal Government, and provide healthcare for those
firefighters who suffer health problems as a consequence of their work
in those disaster areas. Pulmonary illness, neurological damage, and
cardiovascular damage are examples of illnesses for which firefighters
would be monitored and treated under this bill.
I urge my colleagues to consider and pass this bill to benefit
firefighters, who are among this country's most heroic citizens.
______
By Mr. BUNNING (for himself, Mr. Obama, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Pryor, Ms.
Murkowski, Mr. Bond, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Martinez, Mr. Enzi, Ms.
Landrieu, and Mr. Craig):
S. 154. A bill to promote coal-to-liquid fuel activities; to the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Coal-to-
Liquid Fuel Promotion Act of 2007.
For too long, America has ignored its energy security. Many of us can
remember the energy crises of the 1970s. We were held ransom by a
monopolistic oil cartel and forced to endure shortages, gas lines, and
high prices. In the early 1980s, just as America began to invest in
alternative fuels, the oil-producing states of the world crashed prices
to make new technology uncompetitive.
During most of the last 25 years, we have enjoyed low prices and
plentiful supply, but we have paid a price. Today, we find America is
addicted to oil.
Since September 11, we have seen the fragile state of our energy
markets. Domestic disasters and terrorism can send energy prices
spiraling out of control. Our energy resources are stretched to the
limits, and small supply disruptions ripple through the entire economy.
America needs a secure domestic source to ease our dependency on
imported oil.
That is why today I am reintroducing my bill, the Coal-to-Liquid Fuel
Promotion Act with the current Presiding Officer, Senator Obama of
Illinois. I have worked with the coal and fuel industries, the
Department of Defense, and environmental groups to identify the needs
of the coal-to-liquid industry and the best way for the Government to
support the coal-to-liquid development.
Coal has long been America's most abundant fuel resource and has
driven our economic growth since the industrial revolution. In the
coal-to-liquid process, coal is gasified, the gas is run through the
FischerTropsch process, and the resulting fuel is refined into jet fuel
and diesel fuel. The final product is cleaner than conventional fuels
because nearly all of the sulfur and nitrogen is removed.
While this technology is just taking root in America, South Africa
meets 30 percent of its fuel needs with coal. CTL technology lets
America capitalize on a domestic resource that will fuel economic
growth and produce the energy security required in today's world. Many
of my colleagues may ask one question right now: If this technology is
so great and could replace expensive imports from the Middle East, why
hasn't it been done already? The answer is simple: costs and market
uncertainty.
A typical size CTL plant costs more than $2 billion to construct.
With complicated plans and environmental permits, a new plant could
take 5 to 8 years to build. This is a challenge for even the biggest
risk-takers on Wall Street. Raising the capital needed to develop a new
technology is always difficult, but the multibillion dollar investment
scale of a CTL plant has made it nearly impossible.
On top of this is the uncertainty of the price of oil. America has
seen oil prices rise dramatically in the last few years. But investors
are concerned that oil prices could drop to the low levels of the 1980s
and make CTL plants uncompetitive again. I believe oil prices will stay
above the price range that keeps CTL profitable, which is estimated to
be between $40 and $50 per barrel. But even if oil prices were to drop
that low in the next few decades, I believe CTL would more than pay for
itself by insulating us from supply shocks and providing a secure
domestic fuel supply for the military, businesses such as airlines and
trucking, and the average American's car.
The Federal Government must act to help industry overcome these
hurdles. This legislation will provide a combination of incentives to
create a network of coal-to-liquid production in the United States.
The Coal-to-Liquid Fuel Promotion Act of 2007 has three parts. First,
this bill addresses the need to pull together the investors and the
billions of dollars required to build a CTL plant. It expands and
enhances the Department of Energy's loan guarantee program included in
the Energy Policy Act we passed in 2005. It expressly authorizes DOE to
administer loan guarantees for the Nation's first CTL plants. These
plants must be large scale, which is a minimum production of 10,000
barrels a day of liquid fuel. This program is only for the first 10
commercial plants. By then, we should have proven the economics of this
technology and no further incentives will be needed.
It also provides a new program of matching loans. The loans are
capped at $20 million and must be matched dollar-for-dollar by non-
Federal money. They must be repaid as soon as the plants are financed.
Second, this legislation would fundamentally alter the economics of
CTL plants during and after construction. It expands the investment tax
credits and expensing provisions enacted in the Energy Policy Act of
2005. It increases the 20-percent tax credit for CTL plants to a
maximum of $200 million for each of the first 10 CTL plants. It also
extends the expiring exploration of the fuel excise tax credits for CTL
from 2009 to 2020. The current provisions will expire long before the
first CTL plant is even operational. This extension will provide a
meaningful timeframe for CTL plants to benefit from the same tax
incentives we offer renewable and hydrogen fuels.
This bill also provides an incentive for CTL plants to capture carbon
emissions. We can use CO2 to produce oil in depleted wells
or extract coalbed methane.
Third, this bill provides the Department of Defense the funding to
purchase, test, and integrate CTL fuels into the military. In the last
few months, the Air Force has successfully tested CTL fuels in B-52
bombers. These tests are proving to the DOD and to industry that CTL
fuels are as safe and reliable as the fuels produced today.
This legislation also instructs the DOD to conduct a study on CTL
fuel storage and its inclusion in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
It authorizes the construction of storage facilities for CTL fuel and
allows the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to hold up to 20 percent of its
stock in the form of CTL-finished fuels.
By combining the abilities of the Department of Energy and the
Department of Defense with incentives in the Tax Code, I am confident
this legislation will help Kentucky, and America,
[[Page 208]]
become the world leaders in coal-to-liquid fuel promotion. This coal-
to-liquid fuel legislation made headlines during the summer of 2006
when gas prices were at a near record high. Yet when prices fell, the
pressure to pass this legislation also decreased. We have been very
lucky that a mild winter has held down demand. We will not always be
this lucky.
No matter what energy prices are, America needs a domestic source of
fuel. This year alone we will send $250 billion to foreign countries,
mostly in the Middle East, just to buy oil. Imagine what we could have
done here at home with trillions of dollars we have spent on oil in the
last few decades.
There is no room for politics in energy security. In the 110th
Congress, Senator Obama and I will work hard with all of our colleagues
to pass this important legislation. I especially look forward to
working with my new chairman in the Energy Committee, Senator Bingaman,
and my ranking member, Senator Domenici, on this important bill.
I now send to the desk the Coal-to-Liquid Fuel Promotion Act of 2007
and the related Coal-to-Liquid Fuel Energy Act of 2007. I ask unanimous
consent these two bills be printed with my remarks in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. without objection, the bills will be received
and appropriately referred.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, first I commend my colleague from Kentucky
for his legislation. This is an area in which I have had a continuing
interest as well. I salute him because one of the great challenges
facing our Nation is to dramatically reduce our dependence on foreign
energy. That is in our energy interest, it is in our economic interest,
it is in our vital security interest. I commend my colleague from
Kentucky for coming to the floor and offering his proposal on what we
could do to make progress. I thank the Senator.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 154
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 ``Coal-to-Liquid Fuel Energy
Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Coal-to-liquid.--The term ``coal-to-liquid'' means--
(A) with respect to a process or technology, the use of a
feedstock, the majority of which is the coal resources of the
United States, using the class of reactions known as Fischer-
Tropsch, to produce synthetic fuel suitable for
transportation; and
(B) with respect to a facility, the portion of a facility
related to producing the inputs to the Fischer-Tropsch
process, the Fischer-Tropsch process, finished fuel
production, or the capture, transportation, or sequestration
of byproducts of the use of a feedstock that is primarily
domestic coal at the Fischer-Tropsch facility, including
carbon emissions.
(2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Energy.
SEC. 3. COAL-TO-LIQUID FUEL LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM.
(a) Eligible Projects.--Section 1703(b) of the Energy
Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16513(b)) is amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(11) Large-scale coal-to-liquid facilities (as defined in
section 2 of the Coal-to-Liquid Fuel Energy Act of 2007) that
use a feedstock, the majority of which is the coal resources
of the United States, to produce not less than 10,000 barrels
a day of liquid transportation fuel.''.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 1704 of the
Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16514) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(c) Coal-to-Liquid Projects.--
``(1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated
such sums as are necessary to provide the cost of guarantees
for projects involving large-scale coal-to-liquid facilities
under section 1703(b)(11).
``(2) Alternative funding.--If no appropriations are made
available under paragraph (1), an eligible applicant may
elect to provide payment to the Secretary, to be delivered if
and at the time the application is approved, in the amount of
the estimated cost of the loan guarantee to the Federal
Government, as determined by the Secretary.
``(3) Limitations.--
``(A) In general.--No loan guarantees shall be provided
under this title for projects described in paragraph (1)
after (as determined by the Secretary)--
``(i) the tenth such loan guarantee is issued under this
title; or
``(ii) production capacity covered by such loan guarantees
reaches 100,000 barrels per day of coal-to-liquid fuel.
``(B) Individual projects.--
``(i) In general.--A loan guarantee may be provided under
this title for any large-scale coal-to-liquid facility
described in paragraph (1) that produces no more than 20,000
barrels of coal-to-liquid fuel per day.
``(ii) Non-federal funding requirement.--To be eligible for
a loan guarantee under this title, a large-scale coal-to-
liquid facility described in paragraph (1) that produces more
than 20,000 barrels per day of coal-to-liquid fuel shall be
eligible to receive a loan guarantee for the proportion of
the cost of the facility that represents 20,000 barrels of
coal-to-liquid fuel per day of production.
``(4) Requirements.--
``(A) Guidelines.--Not later than 180 days after the date
of enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall publish
guidelines for the coal-to-liquids loan guarantee application
process.
``(B) Applications.--Not later than 1 year after the date
of enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall begin to
accept applications for coal-to-liquid loan guarantees under
this subsection.
``(C) Deadline.--Not later than 1 year from the date of
acceptance of an application under subparagraph (B), the
Secretary shall evaluate the application and make final
determinations under this subsection.
``(5) Reports to congress.--The Secretary shall submit to
the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate
and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives a report describing the status of the program
under this subsection not later than each of--
``(A) 180 days after the date of enactment of this
subsection;
``(B) 1 year after the date of enactment of this
subsection; and
``(C) the dates on which the Secretary approves the first
and fifth applications for coal-to-liquid loan guarantees
under this subsection.''.
SEC. 4. COAL-TO-LIQUID FACILITIES LOAN PROGRAM.
(a) Definition of Eligible Recipient.--In this section, the
term ``eligible recipient'' means an individual,
organization, or other entity that owns, operates, or plans
to construct a coal-to-liquid facility that will produce at
least 10,000 barrels per day of coal-to-liquid fuel.
(b) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish a program
under which the Secretary shall provide loans, in a total
amount not to exceed $20,000,000, for use by eligible
recipients to pay the Federal share of the cost of obtaining
any services necessary for the planning, permitting, and
construction of a coal-to-liquid facility.
(c) Application.--To be eligible to receive a loan under
subsection (b), the eligible recipient shall submit to the
Secretary an application at such time, in such manner, and
containing such information as the Secretary may require.
(d) Non-Federal Match.--To be eligible to receive a loan
under this section, an eligible recipient shall use non-
Federal funds to provide a dollar-for-dollar match of the
amount of the loan.
(e) Repayment of Loan.--
(1) In general.--To be eligible to receive a loan under
this section, an eligible recipient shall agree to repay the
original amount of the loan to the Secretary not later than 5
years after the date of the receipt of the loan.
(2) Source of funds.--Repayment of a loan under paragraph
(1) may be made from any financing or assistance received for
the construction of a coal-to-liquid facility described in
subsection (a), including a loan guarantee provided under
section 1703(b)(11) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42
U.S.C. 16513(b)(11)).
(f) Requirements.--
(1) Guidelines.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall publish guidelines
for the coal-to-liquids loan application process.
(2) Applications.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall begin to accept
applications for coal-to-liquid loans under this section.
(g) Reports to Congress.--Not later than each of 180 days
and 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources of the Senate and the Committee on Energy and
Commerce of the House of Representatives a report describing
the status of the program under this section.
(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $200,000,000, to
remain available until expended.
SEC. 5. LOCATION OF COAL-TO-LIQUID MANUFACTURING FACILITIES.
The Secretary, in coordination with the head of any
affected agency, shall promulgate such regulations as the
Secretary determines to be necessary to support the
development on Federal land (including land of the Department
of Energy, military bases,
[[Page 209]]
and military installations closed or realigned under the
defense base closure and realignment) of coal-to-liquid
manufacturing facilities and associated infrastructure,
including the capture, transportation, or sequestration of
carbon dioxide.
SEC. 6. STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE.
(a) Development, Operation, and Maintenance of Reserve.--
Section 159 of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42
U.S.C. 6239) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (f), (g), (j), (k), and
(l) as subsections (a), (b), (e), (f), and (g), respectively;
and
(2) by inserting after subsection (b) (as redesignated by
paragraph (1)) the following:
``(c) Study of Maintaining Coal-to-Liquid Products in
Reserve.--Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment
of the Coal-to-Liquid Fuel Energy Act of 2007, the Secretary
and the Secretary of Defense shall--
``(1) conduct a study of the feasibility and suitability of
maintaining coal-to-liquid products in the Reserve; and
``(2) submit to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources and the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate
and the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on
Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report
describing the results of the study.
``(d) Construction of Storage Facilities.--As soon as
practicable after the date of enactment of the Coal-to-Liquid
Fuel Energy Act of 2007, the Secretary may construct 1 or
more storage facilities--
``(1) in the vicinity of pipeline infrastructure and at
least 1 military base; but
(b) Petroleum Products for Storage in Reserve.--Section 160
of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6240) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by inserting a semicolon at the end;
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(C) in paragraph (3), by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; and''; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
``(4) coal-to-liquid products (as defined in section 2 of
the Coal-to-Liquid Fuel Energy Act of 2007), as the Secretary
determines to be appropriate, in a quantity not to exceed 20
percent of the total quantity of petroleum and petroleum
products in the Reserve.'';
(2) in subsection (b), by redesignating paragraphs (3)
through (5) as paragraphs (2) through (4), respectively; and
(3) by redesignating subsections (f) and (h) as subsections
(d) and (e), respectively.
(c) Conforming Amendments.--Section 167 of the Energy
Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6247) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs
(1) and (2), respectively; and
(B) in paragraph (2) (as redesignated by subparagraph (A)),
by striking ``section 160(f)'' and inserting ``section
160(e)''; and
(2) in subsection (d), in the matter preceding paragraph
(1), by striking ``section 160(f)'' and inserting ``section
160(e)''.
SEC. 7. AUTHORIZATION TO CONDUCT RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
TESTING, AND EVALUATION OF ASSURED DOMESTIC
FUELS.
Of the amount authorized to be appropriated for the Air
Force for research, development, testing, and evaluation,
$10,000,000 may be made available for the Air Force Research
Laboratory to continue support efforts to test, qualify, and
procure synthetic fuels developed from coal for aviation jet
use.
SEC. 8. COAL-TO-LIQUID LONG-TERM FUEL PROCUREMENT AND
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEVELOPMENT.
Section 2398a of title 10, United States Code is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking ``The Secretary'' and inserting the
following:
``(1) In general.--The Secretary''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Coal-to-liquid production facilities.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary of Defense may enter into
contracts or other agreements with private companies or other
entities to develop and operate coal-to-liquid facilities (as
defined in section 2 of the Coal-to-Liquid Fuel Energy Act of
2007) on or near military installations.
``(B) Considerations.--In entering into contracts and other
agreements under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall
consider land availability, testing opportunities, and
proximity to raw materials.'';
(2) in subsection (d)--
(A) by striking ``Subject to applicable provisions of law,
any'' and inserting ``Any''; and
(B) by striking ``1 or more years'' and inserting ``up to
25 years''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to
carry out this section.''.
SEC. 9. REPORT ON EMISSIONS OF FISCHER-TROPSCH PRODUCTS USED
AS TRANSPORTATION FUELS.
(a) In General.--In cooperation with the Administrator of
the Environmental Protection Agency, the Secretary of
Defense, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration, and the Secretary of Health and Human
Services, the Secretary shall--
(1) carry out a research and demonstration program to
evaluate the emissions of the use of Fischer-Tropsch fuel for
transportation, including diesel and jet fuel;
(2) evaluate the effect of using Fischer-Tropsch
transportation fuel on land and air engine exhaust emissions;
and
(3) in accordance with subsection (e), submit to Congress a
report on the effect on air quality and public health of
using Fischer-Tropsch fuel in the transportation sector.
(b) Guidance and Technical Support.--The Secretary shall
issue any guidance or technical support documents necessary
to facilitate the effective use of Fischer-Tropsch fuel and
blends under this section.
(c) Facilities.--For the purpose of evaluating the
emissions of Fischer-Tropsch transportation fuels, the
Secretary shall--
(1) support the use and capital modification of existing
facilities and the construction of new facilities at the
research centers designated in section 417 of the Energy
Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 15977); and
(2) engage those research centers in the evaluation and
preparation of the report required under subsection (a)(3).
(d) Requirements.--The program described in subsection
(a)(1) shall consider--
(1) the use of neat (100 percent) Fischer-Tropsch fuel and
blends of Fischer-Tropsch fuels with conventional crude oil-
derived fuel for heavy-duty and light-duty diesel engines and
the aviation sector; and
(2) the production costs associated with domestic
production of those fuels and prices for consumers.
(e) Reports.--The Secretary shall submit to the Committee
on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and the
Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives--
(1) not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of
this Act, an interim report on actions taken to carry out
this section; and
(2) not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of
this Act, a final report on actions taken to carry out this
section.
(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out
this section.
______
By Mr. BUNNING (for himself, Mr. Obama, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Pryor, Ms.
Murkowski, Mr. Bond, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Martinez, Mr. Enzi, Ms.
Landrieu, and Mr. Craig):
S. 155. A bill to promote coal-to-liquid fuel activities; to the
Committee on Finance.
Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of
the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 155
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 ``Coal-to-Liquid Fuel
Promotion Act of 2007''.
TITLE I--COAL-TO-LIQUID FUEL ACTIVITIES
SEC. 101. DEFINITIONS.
In this title:
(1) Coal-to-liquid.--The term ``coal-to-liquid'' means--
(A) with respect to a process or technology, the use of a
feedstock, the majority of which is the coal resources of the
United States, using the class of reactions known as Fischer-
Tropsch, to produce synthetic fuel suitable for
transportation; and
(B) with respect to a facility, the portion of a facility
related to producing the inputs to the Fischer-Tropsch
process, the Fischer-Tropsch process, finished fuel
production, or the capture, transportation, or sequestration
of byproducts of the use of a feedstock that is primarily
domestic coal at the Fischer-Tropsch facility, including
carbon emissions.
(2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Energy.
SEC. 102. COAL-TO-LIQUID FUEL LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM.
(a) Eligible Projects.--Section 1703(b) of the Energy
Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16513(b)) is amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(11) Large-scale coal-to-liquid facilities (as defined in
section 101 of the Coal-to-Liquid Fuel Promotion Act of 2007)
that use a feedstock, the majority of which is the coal
resources of the United States, to produce not less than
10,000 barrels a day of liquid transportation fuel.''.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 1704 of the
Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16514) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(c) Coal-to-Liquid Projects.--
``(1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated
such sums as are necessary to provide the cost of guarantees
for projects involving large-scale coal-to-liquid facilities
under section 1703(b)(11).
``(2) Alternative funding.--If no appropriations are made
available under paragraph (1), an eligible applicant may
elect to
[[Page 210]]
provide payment to the Secretary, to be delivered if and at
the time the application is approved, in the amount of the
estimated cost of the loan guarantee to the Federal
Government, as determined by the Secretary.
``(3) Limitations.--
``(A) In general.--No loan guarantees shall be provided
under this title for projects described in paragraph (1)
after (as determined by the Secretary)--
``(i) the tenth such loan guarantee is issued under this
title; or
``(ii) production capacity covered by such loan guarantees
reaches 100,000 barrels per day of coal-to-liquid fuel.
``(B) Individual projects.--
``(i) In general.--A loan guarantee may be provided under
this title for any large-scale coal-to-liquid facility
described in paragraph (1) that produces no more than 20,000
barrels of coal-to-liquid fuel per day.
``(ii) Non-federal funding requirement.--To be eligible for
a loan guarantee under this title, a large-scale coal-to-
liquid facility described in paragraph (1) that produces more
than 20,000 barrels per day of coal-to-liquid fuel shall be
eligible to receive a loan guarantee for the proportion of
the cost of the facility that represents 20,000 barrels of
coal-to-liquid fuel per day of production.
``(4) Requirements.--
``(A) Guidelines.--Not later than 180 days after the date
of enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall publish
guidelines for the coal-to-liquids loan guarantee application
process.
``(B) Applications.--Not later than 1 year after the date
of enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall begin to
accept applications for coal-to-liquid loan guarantees under
this subsection.
``(C) Deadline.--Not later than 1 year from the date of
acceptance of an application under subparagraph (B), the
Secretary shall evaluate the application and make final
determinations under this subsection.
``(5) Reports to congress.--The Secretary shall submit to
the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate
and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives a report describing the status of the program
under this subsection not later than each of--
``(A) 180 days after the date of enactment of this
subsection;
``(B) 1 year after the date of enactment of this
subsection; and
``(C) the dates on which the Secretary approves the first
and fifth applications for coal-to-liquid loan guarantees
under this subsection.''.
SEC. 103. COAL-TO-LIQUID FACILITIES LOAN PROGRAM.
(a) Definition of Eligible Recipient.--In this section, the
term ``eligible recipient'' means an individual,
organization, or other entity that owns, operates, or plans
to construct a coal-to-liquid facility that will produce at
least 10,000 barrels per day of coal-to-liquid fuel.
(b) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish a program
under which the Secretary shall provide loans, in a total
amount not to exceed $20,000,000, for use by eligible
recipients to pay the Federal share of the cost of obtaining
any services necessary for the planning, permitting, and
construction of a coal-to-liquid facility.
(c) Application.--To be eligible to receive a loan under
subsection (b), the eligible recipient shall submit to the
Secretary an application at such time, in such manner, and
containing such information as the Secretary may require.
(d) Non-Federal Match.--To be eligible to receive a loan
under this section, an eligible recipient shall use non-
Federal funds to provide a dollar-for-dollar match of the
amount of the loan.
(e) Repayment of Loan.--
(1) In general.--To be eligible to receive a loan under
this section, an eligible recipient shall agree to repay the
original amount of the loan to the Secretary not later than 5
years after the date of the receipt of the loan.
(2) Source of funds.--Repayment of a loan under paragraph
(1) may be made from any financing or assistance received for
the construction of a coal-to-liquid facility described in
subsection (a), including a loan guarantee provided under
section 1703(b)(11) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42
U.S.C. 16513(b)(11)).
(f) Requirements.--
(1) Guidelines.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall publish guidelines
for the coal-to-liquids loan application process.
(2) Applications.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall begin to accept
applications for coal-to-liquid loans under this section.
(g) Reports to Congress.--Not later than each of 180 days
and 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources of the Senate and the Committee on Energy and
Commerce of the House of Representatives a report describing
the status of the program under this section.
(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $200,000,000, to
remain available until expended.
SEC. 104. LOCATION OF COAL-TO-LIQUID MANUFACTURING
FACILITIES.
The Secretary, in coordination with the head of any
affected agency, shall promulgate such regulations as the
Secretary determines to be necessary to support the
development on Federal land (including land of the Department
of Energy, military bases, and military installations closed
or realigned under the defense base closure and realignment)
of coal-to-liquid manufacturing facilities and associated
infrastructure, including the capture, transportation, or
sequestration of carbon dioxide.
SEC. 105. STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE.
(a) Development, Operation, and Maintenance of Reserve.--
Section 159 of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42
U.S.C. 6239) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (f), (g), (j), (k), and
(l) as subsections (a), (b), (e), (f), and (g), respectively;
and
(2) by inserting after subsection (b) (as redesignated by
paragraph (1)) the following:
``(c) Study of Maintaining Coal-to-Liquid Products in
Reserve.--Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment
of the Coal-to-Liquid Fuel Promotion Act of 2007, the
Secretary and the Secretary of Defense shall--
``(1) conduct a study of the feasibility and suitability of
maintaining coal-to-liquid products in the Reserve; and
``(2) submit to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources and the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate
and the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on
Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report
describing the results of the study.
``(d) Construction of Storage Facilities.--As soon as
practicable after the date of enactment of the Coal-to-Liquid
Fuel Promotion Act of 2007, the Secretary may construct 1 or
more storage facilities in the vicinity of pipeline
infrastructure and at least 1 military base.''.
(b) Petroleum Products for Storage in Reserve.--Section 160
of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6240) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by inserting a semicolon at the end;
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(C) in paragraph (3), by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; and''; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
``(4) coal-to-liquid products (as defined in section 101 of
the Coal-to-Liquid Fuel Promotion Act of 2007), as the
Secretary determines to be appropriate, in a quantity not to
exceed 20 percent of the total quantity of petroleum and
petroleum products in the Reserve.'';
(2) in subsection (b), by redesignating paragraphs (3)
through (5) as paragraphs (2) through (4), respectively; and
(3) by redesignating subsections (f) and (h) as subsections
(d) and (e), respectively.
(c) Conforming Amendments.--Section 167 of the Energy
Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6247) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs
(1) and (2), respectively; and
(B) in paragraph (2) (as redesignated by subparagraph (A)),
by striking ``section 160(f)'' and inserting ``section
160(e)''; and
(2) in subsection (d), in the matter preceding paragraph
(1), by striking ``section 160(f)'' and inserting ``section
160(e)''.
SEC. 106. AUTHORIZATION TO CONDUCT RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
TESTING, AND EVALUATION OF ASSURED DOMESTIC
FUELS.
Of the amount authorized to be appropriated for the Air
Force for research, development, testing, and evaluation,
$10,000,000 may be made available for the Air Force Research
Laboratory to continue support efforts to test, qualify, and
procure synthetic fuels developed from coal for aviation jet
use.
SEC. 107. COAL-TO-LIQUID LONG-TERM FUEL PROCUREMENT AND
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEVELOPMENT.
Section 2398a of title 10, United States Code is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking ``The Secretary'' and inserting the
following:
``(1) In general.--The Secretary''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Coal-to-liquid production facilities.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary of Defense may enter into
contracts or other agreements with private companies or other
entities to develop and operate coal-to-liquid facilities (as
defined in section 101 of the Coal-to-Liquid Fuel Promotion
Act of 2007) on or near military installations.
``(B) Considerations.--In entering into contracts and other
agreements under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall
consider land availability, testing opportunities, and
proximity to raw materials.'';
(2) in subsection (d)--
(A) by striking ``Subject to applicable provisions of law,
any'' and inserting ``Any''; and
(B) by striking ``1 or more years'' and inserting ``up to
25 years''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to
carry out this section.''.
[[Page 211]]
SEC. 108. REPORT ON EMISSIONS OF FISCHER-TROPSCH PRODUCTS
USED AS TRANSPORTATION FUELS.
(a) In General.--In cooperation with the Administrator of
the Environmental Protection Agency, the Secretary of
Defense, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration, and the Secretary of Health and Human
Services, the Secretary shall--
(1) carry out a research and demonstration program to
evaluate the emissions of the use of Fischer-Tropsch fuel for
transportation, including diesel and jet fuel;
(2) evaluate the effect of using Fischer-Tropsch
transportation fuel on land and air engine exhaust emissions;
and
(3) in accordance with subsection (e), submit to Congress a
report on the effect on air quality and public health of
using Fischer-Tropsch fuel in the transportation sector.
(b) Guidance and Technical Support.--The Secretary shall
issue any guidance or technical support documents necessary
to facilitate the effective use of Fischer-Tropsch fuel and
blends under this section.
(c) Facilities.--For the purpose of evaluating the
emissions of Fischer-Tropsch transportation fuels, the
Secretary shall--
(1) support the use and capital modification of existing
facilities and the construction of new facilities at the
research centers designated in section 417 of the Energy
Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 15977); and
(2) engage those research centers in the evaluation and
preparation of the report required under subsection (a)(3).
(d) Requirements.--The program described in subsection
(a)(1) shall consider--
(1) the use of neat (100 percent) Fischer-Tropsch fuel and
blends of Fischer-Tropsch fuels with conventional crude oil-
derived fuel for heavy-duty and light-duty diesel engines and
the aviation sector; and
(2) the production costs associated with domestic
production of those fuels and prices for consumers.
(e) Reports.--The Secretary shall submit to the Committee
on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and the
Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives--
(1) not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of
this Act, an interim report on actions taken to carry out
this section; and
(2) not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of
this Act, a final report on actions taken to carry out this
section.
(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out
this section.
TITLE II--AMENDMENTS TO THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986
SEC. 201. CREDIT FOR INVESTMENT IN COAL-TO-LIQUID FUELS
PROJECTS.
(a) In General.--Section 46 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 (relating to amount of credit) is amended by striking
``and'' at the end of paragraph (3), by striking the period
at the end of paragraph (4) and inserting ``, and'', and by
adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(5) the qualifying coal-to-liquid fuels project
credit.''.
(b) Amount of Credit.--Subpart E of part IV of subchapter A
of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating
to rules for computing investment credit) is amended by
inserting after section 48B the following new section:
``SEC. 48C. QUALIFYING COAL-TO-LIQUID FUELS PROJECT CREDIT.
``(a) In General.--For purposes of section 46, the
qualifying coal-to-liquid fuels project credit for any
taxable year is an amount equal to 20 percent of the
qualified investment for such taxable year.
``(b) Qualified Investment.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of subsection (a), the
qualified investment for any taxable year is the basis of
property placed in service by the taxpayer during such
taxable year which is part of a qualifying coal-to-liquid
fuels project--
``(A)(i) the construction, reconstruction, or erection of
which is completed by the taxpayer, or
``(ii) which is acquired by the taxpayer if the original
use of such property commences with the taxpayer, and
``(B) with respect to which depreciation (or amortization
in lieu of depreciation) is allowable.
``(2) Applicable rules.--For purposes of this section,
rules similar to the rules of subsection (a)(4) and (b) of
section 48 shall apply.
``(c) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
``(1) Qualifying coal-to-liquid fuels project.--The term
`qualifying coal-to-liquid fuels project' means any domestic
project which--
``(A) employs the class of reactions known as Fischer-
Tropsch to produce at least 10,000 barrels per day of
transportation grade liquid fuels from a feedstock that is
primarily domestic coal (including any property which allows
for the capture, transportation, or sequestration of by-
products resulting from such process, including carbon
emissions), and
``(B) any portion of the qualified investment in which is
certified under the qualifying coal-to-liquid program as
eligible for credit under this section in an amount (not to
exceed $200,000,000) determined by the Secretary.
``(2) Coal.--The term `coal' means any carbonized or
semicarbonized matter, including peat.
``(d) Qualifying Coal-to-Liquid Fuels Project Program.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary, in consultation with the
Secretary of Energy, shall establish a qualifying coal-to-
liquid fuels project program to consider and award
certifications for qualified investment eligible for credits
under this section to 10 qualifying coal-to-liquid fuels
project sponsors under this section. The total qualified
investment which may be awarded eligibility for credit under
the program shall not exceed $2,000,000,000.
``(2) Period of issuance.--A certificate of eligibility
under paragraph (1) may be issued only during the 10-fiscal
year period beginning on October 1, 2007.
``(3) Selection criteria.--The Secretary shall not make a
competitive certification award for qualified investment for
credit eligibility under this section unless the recipient
has documented to the satisfaction of the Secretary that--
``(A) the proposal of the award recipient is financially
viable,
``(B) the recipient will provide sufficient information to
the Secretary for the Secretary to ensure that the qualified
investment is spent efficiently and effectively,
``(C) the fuels identified with respect to the gasification
technology for such project will comprise at least 90 percent
of the fuels required by the project for the production of
transportation grade liquid fuels,
``(D) the award recipient's project team is competent in
the planning and construction of coal gasification facilities
and familiar with operation of the Fischer-Tropsch process,
with preference given to those recipients with experience
which demonstrates successful and reliable operations of such
process, and
``(E) the award recipient has met other criteria
established and published by the Secretary.
``(e) Denial of Double Benefit.--No deduction or other
credit shall be allowed with respect to the basis of any
property taken into account in determining the credit allowed
under this section.''.
(c) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 49(a)(1)(C) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of clause
(iii), by striking the period at the end of clause (iv) and
inserting ``, and'', and by adding after clause (iv) the
following new clause:
``(v) the basis of any property which is part of a
qualifying coal-to-liquid fuels project under section 48C.''.
(2) The table of sections for subpart E of part IV of
subchapter A of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by
inserting after the item relating to section 48B the
following new item:
``48C. Qualifying coal-to-liquid fuels project credit.''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to periods after the date of the enactment of
this Act, under rules similar to the rules of section 48(m)
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (as in effect on the day
before the date of the enactment of the Revenue
Reconciliation Act of 1990).
SEC. 202. TEMPORARY EXPENSING FOR EQUIPMENT USED IN COAL-TO-
LIQUID FUELS PROCESS.
(a) In General.--Part VI of subchapter B of chapter 1 of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting
after section 179D the following new section:
``SEC. 179E. ELECTION TO EXPENSE CERTAIN COAL-TO-LIQUID FUELS
FACILITIES.
``(a) Treatment as Expenses.--A taxpayer may elect to treat
the cost of any qualified coal-to-liquid fuels process
property as an expense which is not chargeable to capital
account. Any cost so treated shall be allowed as a deduction
for the taxable year in which the expense is incurred.
``(b) Election.--
``(1) In general.--An election under this section for any
taxable year shall be made on the taxpayer's return of the
tax imposed by this chapter for the taxable year. Such
election shall be made in such manner as the Secretary may by
regulations prescribe.
``(2) Election irrevocable.--Any election made under this
section may not be revoked except with the consent of the
Secretary.
``(c) Qualified Coal-to-Liquid Fuels Process Property.--The
term `qualified coal-to-liquid fuels process property' means
any property located in the United States--
``(1) which employs the Fischer-Tropsch process to produce
transportation grade liquid fuels from a feedstock that is
primarily domestic coal (including any property which allows
for the capture, transportation, or sequestration of by-
products resulting from such process, including carbon
emissions),
``(2) the original use of which commences with the
taxpayer,
``(3) the construction of which--
``(A) except as provided in subparagraph (B), is subject to
a binding construction contract entered into after the date
of the enactment of this section and before January 1, 2011,
but only if there was no written binding construction
contract entered into on or before such date of enactment, or
[[Page 212]]
``(B) in the case of self-constructed property, began after
the date of the enactment of this section and before January
1, 2011, and
``(4) which is placed in service by the taxpayer after the
date of the enactment of this section and before January 1,
2016.
``(d) Election to Allocate Deduction to Cooperative
Owner.--If--
``(1) a taxpayer to which subsection (a) applies is an
organization to which part I of subchapter T applies, and
``(2) one or more persons directly holding an ownership
interest in the taxpayer are organizations to which part I of
subchapter T apply,
the taxpayer may elect to allocate all or a portion of the
deduction allowable under subsection (a) to such persons.
Such allocation shall be equal to the person's ratable share
of the total amount allocated, determined on the basis of the
person's ownership interest in the taxpayer. The taxable
income of the taxpayer shall not be reduced under section
1382 by reason of any amount to which the preceding sentence
applies.
``(e) Basis Reduction.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of this title, if a
deduction is allowed under this section with respect to any
qualified coal-to-liquid fuels process property, the basis of
such property shall be reduced by the amount of the deduction
so allowed.
``(2) Ordinary income recapture.--For purposes of section
1245, the amount of the deduction allowable under subsection
(a) with respect to any property which is of a character
subject to the allowance for depreciation shall be treated as
a deduction allowed for depreciation under section 167.
``(f) Application With Other Deductions and Credits.--
``(1) Other deductions.--No deduction shall be allowed
under any other provision of this chapter with respect to any
expenditure with respect to which a deduction is allowed
under subsection (a) to the taxpayer.
``(2) Credits.--No credit shall be allowed under section 38
with respect to any amount for which a deduction is allowed
under subsection (a).
``(g) Reporting.--No deduction shall be allowed under
subsection (a) to any taxpayer for any taxable year unless
such taxpayer files with the Secretary a report containing
such information with respect to the operation of the
property of the taxpayer as the Secretary shall require.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 1016(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is
amended by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (36), by
striking the period at the end of paragraph (37) and
inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(38) to the extent provided in section 179E(e)(1).''.
(2) Section 1245(a) of such Code is amended by inserting
``179E,'' after ``179D,'' both places it appears in
paragraphs (2)(C) and (3)(C).
(3) Section 263(a)(1) of such Code is amended by striking
``or'' at the end of subparagraph (J), by striking the period
at the end of subparagraph (K) and inserting ``, or'', and by
inserting after subparagraph (K) the following new
subparagraph:
``(L) expenditures for which a deduction is allowed under
section 179E.''.
(4) Section 312(k)(3)(B) of such Code is amended by
striking ``or 179D'' each place it appears in the heading and
text and inserting ``179D, or 179E''.
(5) The table of sections for part VI of subchapter B of
chapter 1 of such Code is amended by inserting after the item
relating to section 179D the following new item:
``Sec. 179E. Election to expense certain coal-to-liquid fuels
facilities.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to properties placed in service after the date of
the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 203. EXTENSION OF ALTERNATIVE FUEL CREDIT FOR FUEL
DERIVED FROM COAL THROUGH THE FISCHER-TROPSCH
PROCESS.
(a) Alternative Fuel Credit.--Paragraph (4) of section
6426(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to
read as follows:
``(4) Termination.--This subsection shall not apply to--
``(A) any sale or use involving liquid fuel derived from a
feedstock that is primarily domestic coal (including peat)
through the Fischer-Tropsch process for any period after
September 30, 2020,
``(B) any sale or use involving liquified hydrogen for any
period after September 30, 2014, and
``(C) any other sale or use for any period after September
30, 2009.''.
(b) Payments.--
(1) In general.--Paragraph (5) of section 6427(e) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``and''
and the end of subparagraph (C), by striking the period at
the end of subparagraph (D) and inserting ``, and'', and by
adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(E) any alternative fuel or alternative fuel mixture (as
so defined) involving liquid fuel derived from coal
(including peat) through the Fischer-Tropsch process sold or
used after September 30, 2020.''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 6427(e)(5)(C) of such
Code is amended by striking ``subparagraph (D)'' and
inserting ``subparagraphs (D) and (E)''.
SEC. 204. MODIFICATIONS TO ENHANCED OIL RECOVERY CREDIT.
(a) Enhanced Credit for Carbon Dioxide Injections.--Section
43 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding
at the end the following new subsection:
``(f) Enhanced Credit for Projects Using Qualified Carbon
Dioxide.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of this section--
``(A) the term `qualified project' includes a project
described in paragraph (2), and
``(B) in the case of a project described in paragraph (2),
subsection (a) shall be applied by substituting `50 percent'
for `15 percent'.
``(2) Projects described.--A project is described in this
paragraph if it begins or is substantially expanded after
December 31, 2007, and
``(A) uses qualified carbon dioxide in an enhanced oil,
natural gas, or coalbed methane recovery method, which
involves flooding or injection, or
``(B) enables the capture or sequestration of qualified
carbon dioxide.
``(3) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection--
``(A) Enhanced oil recovery.--The term `enhanced oil
recovery' means recovery of oil by injecting or flooding with
qualified carbon dioxide.
``(B) Enhanced natural gas recovery.--The term `enhanced
natural gas recovery' means recovery of natural gas by
injecting or flooding with qualified carbon dioxide.
``(C) Enhanced coalbed methane recovery.--The term
`enhanced coalbed methane recovery' means recovery of coalbed
methane by injecting or flooding with qualified carbon
dioxide.
``(D) Qualified carbon dioxide.--The term `qualified carbon
dioxide' means carbon dioxide which is produced from the
gasification and subsequent refinement of a feedstock which
is primarily domestic coal, at a facility which produces
coal-to-liquid fuel.
``(E) Capture or sequestration.--The term `capture or
sequestration' means any equipment or facility necessary to--
``(i) capture or separate qualified carbon dioxide from
other emissions,
``(ii) transport qualified carbon dioxide, or
``(iii) process and use qualified carbon dioxide in a
qualified project.
``(4) Termination.--This subsection shall not apply to
costs paid or incurred for any qualified project after
December 31, 2020.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 43 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is
amended--
(A) by striking ``enhanced oil recovery credit'' in
subsection (a) and inserting ``enhanced oil, natural gas, and
coalbed methane recovery, and capture and sequestration
credit'',
(B) by striking ``qualified enhanced oil recovery costs''
each place it appears and inserting ``qualified costs'',
(C) by striking ``qualified enhanced oil recovery project''
each place it appears and inserting ``qualified project'',
and
(D) by striking the heading and inserting:
``SEC. 43. ENHANCED OIL, NATURAL GAS, AND COALBED METHANE
RECOVERY, AND CAPTURE AND SEQUESTRATION
CREDIT.''.
(2) The item in the table of sections for subpart D of part
IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of such Code relating to
section 43 is amended to read as follows:
``Sec. 43. Enhanced oil, natural gas, and coalbed methane recovery, and
capture and sequestration credit.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to costs paid or incurred in taxable years ending
after December 31, 2007.
SEC. 205. ALLOWANCE OF ENHANCED OIL, NATURAL GAS, AND COALBED
METHANE RECOVERY, AND CAPTURE AND SEQUESTRATION
CREDIT AGAINST THE ALTERNATIVE MINIMUM TAX.
(a) In General.--Subsection (c) of section 38 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to limitation based
on amount of tax) is amended by redesignating paragraphs (4)
and (5) as paragraphs (5) and (6), respectively, and by
inserting after paragraph (3) the following new paragraph:
``(4) Special rules for enhanced oil, natural gas, and
coalbed methane recovery, and capture and sequestration
credit.--In the case of the enhanced oil, natural gas, and
coalbed methane recovery, and capture and sequestration
credit determined under section 43--
``(A) this section and section 39 shall be applied
separately with respect to such credit, and
``(B) in applying paragraph (1) to such credit--
``(i) the tentative minimum tax shall be treated as being
zero, and
``(ii) the limitation under paragraph (1) (as modified by
clause (i)) shall be reduced by the credit allowed under
subsection (a) for the taxable year (other than the enhanced
oil, natural gas, and coalbed methane recovery, and capture
and sequestration credit and the specified credits).''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 38(c)(2)(A)(ii)(II) of such Code is amended by
inserting ``the enhanced oil, natural gas, and coalbed
methane recovery, and
[[Page 213]]
capture and sequestration credit,'' after ``employee
credit,''.
(2) Section 38(c)(3)(A)(ii)(II) of such Code is amended by
inserting ``, the enhanced oil, natural gas, coalbed methane
recovery, capture and sequestration credit,'' after
``employee credit''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years ending after December 31, 2007.
______
By Mr. REID (for Mr. Wyden (for himself, Mr. McCain, and Mr.
Sununu)):
S. 156. A bill to make the moratorium on Internet access taxes and
multiple and discriminatory taxes on electronic commerce permanent; to
the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing in this new
Congress a bill to advance a cause for which I have been fighting for
over 10 years now. The Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act would extend
the current Internet tax moratorium, so that the Internet can remain
free from burdensome and discriminatory taxes.
Legislation to keep the Internet free from these taxes has passed the
Senate 3 times since 1998 with sunsets that required consecutive
extensions. A permanent moratorium on Internet taxation passed through
both the Commerce and Finance Committees in the 109th Congress yet
failed to get action on the Senate floor.
I come to the Floor again, bringing up Internet Taxation, because the
moratorium on Internet Taxation is set to expire on November 1st of
this year. In only 11 months, if Congress does not act, the moratorium
on Internet Taxation that has allowed the Internet and e-commerce to
flourish will cease to protect American consumers and American
businesses.
I don't want those who use the Internet to end up like our ancestors:
they were told the Spanish-American War telephone tax was
``temporary,'' and that the tax was just needed to pay for the war.
That war ended two centuries ago, and Congress is just now getting
around to getting rid of the tax!
The last time I checked, the Internet shows no sign of riding off
into the sunset, or becoming obsolete. You can bet that once
discriminatory taxes are slapped on Internet users, those
discriminatory taxes won't be going away any time soon either.
If you want to figure out how much discriminatory taxes could be,
just look at your phone bill. Taxes and government fees already add as
much as 20 percent in surcharges to consumer's telephone bills.
If you take a gallon of milk to the checkout counter and pay tax on
the purchase, the clerk can't turn around and charge you another tax if
you're going to use the milk in your cereal and another tax if you're
going to put milk in your coffee. But that's what will happen to the
Internet if the ban is not made permanent. You'd still pay all the
telephone taxes and all the franchise fees on cable, but on top of
those you'd pay even more taxes for the same service when you sign on
to the Internet!
Discriminatory and double taxation of the Internet has been banned
for 8 years now. In all that time no one has ever come forward with
evidence to show that the failure to impose discriminatory taxes has
hurt them. No one has demonstrated why taxes that cannot be imposed in
the offline world should be imposed on identical online transactions.
Western Civilization may not end if the Permanent Internet Freedom
Act is not passed, but you have to ask how many times Congress has to
revisit, re-litigate and re-approve a law that has been this effective.
It is time to make the Internet Tax moratorium permanent.
I want to thank my colleagues, Mr. McCain from Arizona and Mr. Sununu
from New Hampshire for introducing this legislation with me today. They
both fought tirelessly alongside me and our former colleague, Mr. Allen
from Virginia, to get the moratorium extended in 2004. I am pleased
that they are now replacing Mr. Allen as my bi-partisan partners on
this important piece of legislation. It is my hope that the three of
us, working with the rest of our colleagues, can get this all-important
piece of legislation passed early this year so we do not have to worry
about it as the November 1st deadline fast approaches.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 156
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 ``Permanent Internet Tax
Freedom Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. PERMANENT MORATORIUM ON INTERNET ACCESS TAXES AND
MULTIPLE AND DISCRIMINATORY TAXES ON ELECTRONIC
COMMERCE.
Section 1101(a) of the Internet Tax Freedom Act (47 U.S.C.
151 note) is amended by striking ``taxes during the period
beginning November 1, 2003, and ending November 1, 2007:''
and inserting ``taxes:''
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with Senators Wyden
and Sununu in introducing the Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act of
2007. This bill would ensure that consumers never have to pay a toll
when they access the Information Highway. Whether consumers log onto
the Internet using cable modem, DSL, dial-up or wireless services,
under this bill, they will not be taxed by any State or local
governments for their Internet usage.
Keeping Internet access affordable to all Americans is a worthy
policy goal. The Internet has become a fixture and core component of
modem American life that has created and continues to generate social
and economic opportunities throughout the United States.
In 1998, Congress put in place a temporary ban on any State or local
taxes on Internet access. Additionally, Congress placed a moratorium on
multiple or discriminatory State and local taxes on e-commerce
transactions to ensure the growth of online commerce. This moratorium
was extended in 2004, but is set to expire November 1, 2007. Our
legislation, the Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act of 2007, would make
the moratorium permanent.
Today, the U.S. ranks 12th in the world in per capita Internet
access, lagging behind competitors South Korea, the United Kingdom and
Canada. This is absolutely unacceptable for a country that leads the
world in technical innovation, economic development, and international
competitiveness. We certainly cannot afford to make Internet access
more difficult to obtain if we want to become more internationally
competitive.
There is little doubt that the development and growth of the Internet
was aided by the tax moratorium. In 1998, the year the moratorium was
first enacted, 36 percent of U.S. adults reported using the Internet.
In 2006, that number grew to 73 percent, an all time high according to
an April 2006 Pew Internet & American Life Project Report. However, the
report also found that Americans in the lowest income households are
considerably less likely to be online. Just 55 percent of adults living
in households with less than $30,000 annual income go online, versus 73
percent of those whose income is between $30,000-$50,000. This
``digital divide'' needs to be closed immediately. Continuing
Congress's policy of reducing the cost of Internet access, by
preventing the service from being taxed, is one step we can take now to
close the ``digital divide.''
As use of the Internet has grown, so has e-commerce. According to the
most recent comScore Networks report, Americans spent over $100 billion
on Internet purchases during 2006, a major milestone for retailers and
the World Wide Web. This legislation would ensure that online
transactions are not taxed by cities or States at a rate higher than
other sales transactions. Again, the goal of this legislation is to
make the Internet affordable to all Americans and foster the growth of
the Internet.
With respect to the question of whether it is wise to make Internet
access tax free, Congress has a long history of giving tax incentives
to commercial activities that we believe help our society. The Internet
is a technology that is a source of and vehicle
[[Page 214]]
for significant economic benefits. The proponents of this legislation
strongly believe the Internet clearly merits the tax incentives
provided by this bill.
I recognize that there are some who wish to continue to make the
Internet tax moratorium temporary. Their premise is that the Internet
will continue to evolve and thus Internet access may develop into a
service the States and localities would wish to tax. I believe that
this moratorium should be permanent to continue encouraging those very
Internet-related innovations. By making the moratorium permanent,
businesses that invest in and provide Internet access will be able to
operate in a predictable tax environment. This will result in continued
investment in this very important social, political and economic
medium.
Congress now has the opportunity to extend permanently the Internet
tax moratorium and assure consumers that taxes will not inhibit the
offering of affordable Internet access. By supporting this legislation,
we can continue to promote Internet usage by Americans as well as
encourage innovation relating to this technology. For these reasons, I
ask my colleagues to support this pro-consumer, pro-innovation, and
pro-technology bill.
______
By Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Ms. Landrieu):
S. 158. A bill to expand access to affordable health care and to
strengthen the health care safety net and make health care services
more available in rural and underserved areas; to the Committee on
Finance.
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my colleague
from Louisiana, Senator Landrieu, in introducing the Access to
Affordable Health Care Act, a comprehensive plan that builds on the
strengths of our current public programs and private health care system
to make affordable health care available to millions more Americans.
One of my priorities in the Senate has been to expand access to
affordable health care. There are still far too many Americans without
health insurance or with woefully inadequate coverage. As many as 46
million Americans are uninsured, and millions more are underinsured.
Maine is in the midst of a growing health insurance crisis, with
insurance premiums rising at alarming rates. Whether I am talking to a
self-employed fisherman, a displaced worker, the owner of a struggling
small business, or the human resource manager of a large company, the
soaring costs of health insurance is a common concern.
These cost increases have been particularly burdensome for small
businesses, the backbone of the Maine economy. Maine small business
owners want to provide coverage for their employees, but they are
caught in a cost squeeze. They know that if they pass on premium
increases to their employees, more of them will decline coverage. Yet
these small businesses simply cannot afford to absorb double-digit
increases in their health insurance premiums year after year.
The problem of rising costs is even more acute for individuals and
families who must purchase health insurance on their own. Monthly
health insurance premiums in Maine often exceed a family's mortgage
payment. Clearly, we must do more to make health insurance more
available and affordable.
The Access to Affordable Health Care Act, which we are introducing
today, is a seven-point plan that combines a variety of public and
private approaches. The legislation's seven goals are: one, to expand
access to affordable health care for small businesses; two, to make
health insurance more affordable for individuals and families
purchasing coverage on their own; three, to strengthen the health care
safety net for those without coverage; four, to expand access to care
in rural and underserved areas; five, to increase access to affordable
long-term care; six to promote healthier lifestyles; and seven, to
provide more equitable Medicare payments to Maine providers to reduce
the Medicare shortfall, which has forced hospitals, physicians and
other providers to shift costs onto other payers in the form of higher
charges, which in turn drives up health care premiums.
Let me discuss each of these seven points in greater detail.
First, our legislation will help small employers cope with rising
health care costs.
Since most Americans get their health insurance through the
workplace, it is a common assumption that people without health
insurance are unemployed. The fact is, however, that as many as 83
percent of Americans who do not have health insurance are in a family
with a worker.
Uninsured working Americans are most often employees of small
businesses. In fact, some 63 per cent of uninsured workers are employed
by small firms. Smaller firms generally face higher costs for health
insurance than larger firms, which makes them less likely to offer
coverage. The Access to Affordable Health Care Act will help these
employers cope with rising costs by creating new tax credits for small
businesses to make health insurance more affordable. It will encourage
those small businesses that do not offer health insurance to do so and
will help employers that do offer insurance to continue coverage for
their employees even in the face of rising costs.
Our legislation will also provide grants to provide start-up funding
to States to help businesses to form group purchasing cooperatives.
These cooperatives will enable small businesses to band together to
purchase health insurance jointly. This will help to reduce their costs
and improve the quality of their employee's health care.
The legislation would also authorize a Small Business Administration
grant program for States, local governments and non-profit
organizations to provide information about the benefits of health
insurance to small employers, including tax benefits, increased
productivity of employees, and decreased turnover. These grants would
also be used to make employers aware of their current incentives under
State and Federal laws. While costs are clearly a problem, many small
employers are simply not aware of laws that have already been enacted
by both States and the Federal government to make health insurance more
affordable. For example, in one survey, 57 percent of small employers
did not know that they could deduct 100 percent of their health
insurance premiums as a business expense.
The legislation would also create a new program to encourage
innovation by awarding demonstration grants in up to 10 States
conducting innovative coverage expansions, such as alternative group
purchasing or pooling arrangements, individual or small group market
reforms, or subsidies to employers or individuals purchasing coverage.
The States have long been laboratories for reform, and they should be
encouraged in the development of innovative programs that can serve as
models for the Nation.
The Access to Affordable Health Care Act will also expand access to
affordable health care for individuals and families. One of the first
bills that I sponsored when I came to the Senate was legislation to
establish the State Child Health Insurance Program, which provides
insurance for the children of low-income parents who cannot afford
health insurance, yet make too much money to qualify for Medicaid.
Since 1997, this program, which is known as SCHIP, has contributed to a
one-third decline in the uninsured rate of low-income children. Today,
over six million children--including approximately 14,500 in Maine--
receive health care coverage through this remarkably effective health
care program.
First, our legislation will shore up the looming shortfalls in SCHIP
funding that 17 states--including Maine--will face in Fiscal Year 2007
to ensure that children currently enrolled in the program do not lose
their coverage. Just prior to adjournment in December, the Congress
approved legislation to partially address these shortfalls. That
legislation, however, provides only about one-fifth of the funds
needed. Our legislation will close that gap.
Our legislation also builds on the success of the SCHIP program and
gives States a number of new tools to increase participation. The bill
authorizes new grants for States and non-
[[Page 215]]
profit organizations to conduct innovative outreach and enrollment
efforts to ensure that all eligible children are covered. States would
also have the option of covering the parents of the children who are
enrolled in programs like MaineCare. States could also use funds
provided through this program to help eligible working families pay
their share of an employer-based health insurance plan. In short, the
legislation will help ensure that the entire family receives the health
care they need.
And finally, to help make health coverage more affordable for low and
middle-income individuals and families who do not have employer-
provided coverage and who are not eligible for the expanded programs,
our legislation would provide an advanceable, refundable tax credit of
up to $1,000 for individuals earning up to $30,000 and up to $3,000 for
families earning up to $60,000. This could provide coverage for up to
six million Americans who would otherwise be uninsured for one or more
months, and will help many more working lower-income families who
currently purchase private health insurance with little or no
government help.
To strengthen our nation's health care safety net, the Access to
Affordable Health Care Act calls for a doubling of funding over five
years for the Consolidated Health Centers program, which includes
community, migrant, public housing and homeless health centers.
These centers, which operate in underserved urban and rural
communities, provide critical primary care services to millions of
Americans, regardless of their ability to pay. About 20 percent of the
patients treated in Maine's community health centers have no insurance
coverage and many more have inadequate coverage, so these centers are a
critical part of our nation's health care safety net.
The problem of access to affordable health care services is not
limited to the uninsured, but is also shared by many Americans living
in rural and underserved areas where there is a shortage of health care
providers. The Access to Affordable Health Care Act therefore calls for
increased funding for the National Health Service Corps, which supports
doctors, dentists, and other clinicians who serve in rural and inner
city areas.
The legislation will also give the program greater flexibility by
allowing National Health Service Corps participants to fulfill their
commitment on a part-time basis. Current law requires all National
Health Service Corps participants to serve full-time. Many rural
communities, however, simply do not have enough volume to support a
full-time health care practitioner. Moreover, some sites may not need a
particular type of provider on a full-time basis. Our bill therefore
gives the program additional flexibility to meet community needs.
As the Senate co-chair of the bipartisan Congressional Task Force on
Alzheimer's Disease, I am particularly sensitive to the long-term care
needs of patients with chronic diseases like Alzheimer's and their
families.
Long-term care is the major catastrophic health care expense faced by
older Americans today, and these costs will only increase with the
aging of the baby boomers. Most Americans mistakenly believe that
Medicare or their private health insurance policies will cover the
costs of long-term care should they develop a chronic illness or
cognitive impairment like Alzheimer's Disease. Unfortunately, far too
many do not discover that they do not have coverage until they are
confronted with the difficult decision of placing a much-loved parent
or spouse in long-term care and facing the shocking realization that
they will have to cover the costs themselves.
The Access to Affordable Health Care Act will provide a tax credit
for long-term care expenses of up to $3,000 to provide some help to
those families struggling to provide long-term care to a loved one. It
will also encourage more Americans to plan for their future long-term
care needs by providing a tax deduction to help them purchase long-term
care insurance.
Health insurance alone is not going to ensure good health. As noted
author and physician Dr. Michael Crichton has observed, ``the future of
medicine lies not in treating illness, but preventing it.'' Many of our
most serious health problems are directly related to unhealthy
behaviors--smoking, lack of regular exercise, and poor diet. These
three major risk factors alone have made Maine the state with the
fourth highest death rate due to four largely preventable diseases:
cardiovascular disease, cancer, chronic lung disease and diabetes.
These four chronic diseases are responsible for 70 percent of the
health care problems in Maine.
Our bill therefore contains a number of provisions designed to
promote healthy lifestyles. An ever-expanding body of evidence shows
that investments in health promotion and prevention offer returns not
only in reduced health care bills, but in longer life and increased
productivity. The legislation will provide grants to States to assist
small businesses wishing to establish ``worksite wellness'' programs
for their employees. It would also authorize a grant program to support
new and existing ``community partnerships,'' such as the Healthy
Community Coalition in Maine's Franklin County, to promote healthy
lifestyles among hospitals, employers, schools and community
organizations. And, it would provide funds for States to establish or
expand comprehensive school health education, including, for example,
physical education programs that promote lifelong physical activity,
healthy food service selections, and programs that promote a healthy
and safe school environment.
And finally, the Access to Affordable Health Care Act would promote
greater equity in Medicare payments and help to ensure that the
Medicare system rewards rather than punishes states like Maine that
deliver high-quality, cost-effective Medicare services to our elderly
and disabled citizens.
The Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 and subsequent legislation did
take some significant steps toward promoting greater fairness by
increasing Medicare payments to rural hospitals and by modifying
geographic adjustment factors that discriminated against physicians and
other providers in rural areas. The legislation we are introducing
today will build on those improvements by establishing State pilot
programs that reward providers of high- quality, cost-efficient
Medicare services.
The Access to Affordable Health Care Act outlines a blueprint for
reform based on principles upon which I believe a bipartisan majority
in Congress could agree. The plan takes significant strides toward the
goal of universal health care coverage by bringing millions more
Americans into the insurance system and by strengthening the health
care safety net.
Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my colleague
from Main, Senator Collins, in introducing the Access to Affordable
Health Care Act. The latest available Census figures show that 46.6
million people in our country--including almost 19 percent of the
people in my home State of Louisiana--are without health insurance.
This statistic has been referred to so often in the media and in this
body that it is almost possible to hear it without realizing the full
impact of such uncertainty on one's day-to-day life. 46.6 million
people without health insurance means 36.3 million families struggling
with the knowledge that they may be just one hospitalization away from
bankruptcy. It means 8.3 million children who may not be able to access
the care they need to prevent increasingly common and often
debilitating chronic illnesses such as diabetes and asthma, adversely
affecting them for the rest of their lives. It means 27.3 million
Americans with jobs, who work everyday knowing that they still may not
be able to provide for their families in their time of need.
Across the country, small business owners and families are struggling
with the high cost of health care. This is particularly true in
Louisiana and across the gulf coast, where recovery from the 2005
hurricanes has already placed heavy burdens on thousands of families
trying to rebuild and businesses working to reopen. Since 2000,
[[Page 216]]
the number of employees nationwide receiving health insurance through
their employers has actually decreased, reversing the progress we saw
in the 1990s. Small businesses create two out of every three new jobs
in America and account for nearly half of America's overall employment.
Yet only 26 percent of businesses with fewer than 50 employees can
offer health insurance to their employees. The Access to Affordable
Health Care Act gives the small businesses that are the backbone of
this country the opportunity to help make their employees' lives just a
little easier.
This legislation further provides for the expansion of the enormously
successful SCHIP program, allowing States to cover increased numbers of
pregnant women and poor, working adults. It allows for more community
health centers and encourages health care providers to practice in the
increasingly underserved rural areas of all States. It gives businesses
the tools to not only insure their employees against illness but to
encourage wellness, decreasing health care costs for everybody. It
allows our government to reward States that find ways to improve health
outcomes among Medicare patients, actively supporting the types of
cost-efficient successes that improve the quality of life.
A country identified by its ingenuity and creativity has a moral
responsibility to do more than we have to provide its citizens with the
ability to keep their families safe and healthy. These comprehensive,
real steps forward will open new doors of opportunity and access to
affordable health care for millions of American families and business
owners, and I am proud to have partnered with Senator Collins in this
important pursuit. I encourage my colleagues to consider this
legislation and to help provide our all our constituents with the peace
of mind.
______
By Mr. KERRY (for himself, Ms. Snowe, Ms. Landrieu, and Mr.
Vitter):
S. 163. A bill to improve the disaster loan program at the Small
Business Administration, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Small Business and Entrepreneurship.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, 16 months after Hurricane Katrina struck
the Gulf Coast, small business owners in New Orleans and across
Louisiana are still struggling to keep their doors open and their
employees working. In those 16 months, I have worked with Senators
Snowe, Landrieu, and Vitter to produce a comprehensive package to
reform the SBA's Disaster Assistance program. The SBA's failed response
in a time of unmatched need demonstrated to everyone that this program
is broken and needs fixing.
Immediately after Hurricane Katrina hit, I introduced an amendment
with Senator Landrieu to the fiscal year 2006 Commerce, Justice and
Science appropriations bill to address the needs of Gulf Region small
business and homeowners. The amendment was adapted with input from
Chair Snowe, and a subsequent bipartisan amendment passed the Senate
with a vote of 96-0. Although the entire Senate supported the
amendment, it was stripped out of the bill in conference.
On September 30, 2005, I again worked with Chair Snowe and Senators
Landrieu and Vitter to introduce a bipartisan proposal, the Small
Business Hurricane Relief and Reconstruction Act of 2006 S. 1807. This
proposal was opposed by the administration. In June, I introduced the
Small Business Disaster Loan Reauthorization and Improvements Act of
2006, S. 3487 which once again attempted to comprehensively address the
shortcomings of the SBA's Disaster Assistance program. Again, the
administration opposed this effort. In August, the Small Business
Committee unanimously reported S. 3778, the Small Business
Reauthorization and Improvements Act of 2006, which again put forward a
bipartisan, comprehensive fix for this program. Finally, in December,
just prior to the adjournment of the 109th Congress, yet another
attempt was made at reaching a bipartisan consensus with the
introduction of S. 4097, the Small Business Disaster Response and Loan
Improvements Act of 2006. The administration maintained its opposition
to the fixes proposed in this bill.
Now, on the first day of this new Congress, I am introducing the
Small Business Disaster Response and Loan Improvements Act of 2007.
Once again, this bill enjoys bipartisan support by the chair and the
ranking minority member of the Small Business Committee, as well as by
the Democratic and Republican Senators of Louisiana, whose constituents
continue to wait for their Government to respond appropriately. I am
introducing this bill on the first day of the 110th Congress because as
the incoming chair of the Small Business Committee, improving the
Disaster Assistance program at the SBA is among my top priorities.
This bill includes directives for the SBA to create a private
disaster loan program, to allow for lenders to issue disaster loans. To
ensure that these loans are borrower-friendly, we provide authorization
for appropriations so that the agency can subsidize the interest rates.
In addition, the administrator is authorized to enter into agreements
with private contractors in order to expedite loan application
processing for direct disaster loans.
The bill also includes language directing SBA to create an expedited
disaster assistance loan program to provide businesses with short-term
loans so that they may keep their doors open until they receive
alternative forms of assistance. The days immediately following a
disaster are crucial for business owners--statistics show that once
they close their doors, they likely will not open them again. These
short-term loans should help prevent those doors from closing.
A presidential declaration of Catastrophic National Disaster will
allow the administrator to offer economic injury disaster loans to
adversely affected business owners beyond the geographic reach of the
disaster area. In the event of a large-scale disaster, businesses
located far from the physical reach of the disaster can be affected by
the magnitude of a localized destruction. We saw this when the
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 affected businesses from coast
to coast, and we saw it again with the 2005 Gulf Coast hurricanes.
Should another catastrophic disaster strike, the President should have
the authority to provide businesses across the country with access to
the same low-interest economic injury loans available to businesses
within the declared disaster area.
Non-profit entities working to provide services to victims should be
rewarded and given access to the capital they require to continue their
services. To this end, the administrator is authorized to make disaster
loans to non-profit entities, including religious organizations.
Construction and rebuilding contracts being awarded are likely to be
larger than the current $2 million threshold currently applied to the
SBA Surety Bond Program, which helps small construction firms gain
access to contracts. This bill increases the guarantee against loss for
small business contracts up to $5 million and allows the administrator
to increase that level to $10 million, if deemed necessary.
The bill also provides for Small Business Development Centers to
offer business counseling in disaster areas, and to travel beyond
traditional geographic boundaries to provide services during declared
disasters. To encourage Small Business Development Centers located in
disaster areas to keep their doors open, the maximum grant amount of
$100,000 is waived.
So that Congress may remain better aware of the status of the
administration's disaster loan program, this bill directs the
administration to report to the Committee on Small Business and
Entrepreneurship of the Senate and to the Committee on Small Business
of the House of Representatives regularly on the fiscal status of the
disaster loan program as well as the need for supplemental funding. The
adiministration is also directed to report on the number of Federal
contracts awarded to small businesses, minority-owned small businesses,
women-owned businesses, and local businesses during a disaster
declaration.
[[Page 217]]
Finally, gas prices continue to fluctuate, and fuel-dependent small
businesses are struggling with the cost of energy. This bill provides
relief to small business owners during times of above average energy
price increases, authorizing energy disaster loans through the Small
Business Administration and the United States Department of Agriculture
to companies that are dependent on fuel.
In the 16 months since Katrina struck, I have visited New Orleans
three times. I have met with the lifeblood of that city--its small
business owners--the shopowners on Bourbon Street and on Magazine
Street who make that city unique. The people of New Orleans are
resilient, and they remain hopeful; they are keeping their businesses
open despite tourism that has been slow to return and despite a
government response that was painfully slow to arrive. Sixteen months
is too long a time to wait to reform and improve a program that could
have breathed relief into this city's economy during a time of
desperation. As this new Congress begins, I call on my colleagues to
support this legislation, a bipartisan labor of more than a year's
worth of negotiations. The tools offered within this bill will go a
long way toward heading off another Katrina-like response to any future
catastrophic disaster.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 163
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 ``Small
Business Disaster Response and Loan Improvements Act of
2007''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Definitions.
TITLE I--PRIVATE DISASTER LOANS
Sec. 101. Private disaster loans.
Sec. 102. Technical and conforming amendments.
TITLE II--DISASTER RELIEF AND RECONSTRUCTION
Sec. 201. Definition of disaster area.
Sec. 202. Disaster loans to nonprofits.
Sec. 203. Disaster loan amounts.
Sec. 204. Small business development center portability grants.
Sec. 205. Assistance to out-of-State businesses.
Sec. 206. Outreach programs.
Sec. 207. Small business bonding threshold.
Sec. 208. Contracting priority for local small businesses.
Sec. 209. Termination of program.
Sec. 210. Increasing collateral requirements.
TITLE III--DISASTER RESPONSE
Sec. 301. Definitions.
Sec. 302. Business expedited disaster assistance loan program.
Sec. 303. Catastrophic national disasters.
Sec. 304. Public awareness of disaster declaration and application
periods.
Sec. 305. Consistency between Administration regulations and standard
operating procedures.
Sec. 306. Processing disaster loans.
Sec. 307. Development and implementation of major disaster response
plan.
Sec. 308. Congressional oversight.
TITLE IV--ENERGY EMERGENCIES
Sec. 401. Findings.
Sec. 402. Small business energy emergency disaster loan program.
Sec. 403. Agricultural producer emergency loans.
Sec. 404. Guidelines and rulemaking.
Sec. 405. Reports.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act--
(1) the terms ``Administration'' and ``Administrator'' mean
the Small Business Administration and the Administrator
thereof, respectively;
(2) the term ``small business concern'' has the same
meaning as in section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C.
632); and
(3) the term ``small business concern owned and controlled
by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals'' has
the same meaning as in section 8 of the Small Business Act
(15 U.S.C. 637).
TITLE I--PRIVATE DISASTER LOANS
SEC. 101. PRIVATE DISASTER LOANS.
(a) In General.--Section 7 of the Small Business Act (15
U.S.C. 636) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (c) and (d) as subsections
(d) and (e), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following:
``(c) Private Disaster Loans.--
``(1) Definitions.--In this subsection--
``(A) the term `disaster area' means a county, parish, or
similar unit of general local government in which a disaster
was declared under subsection (b);
``(B) the term `eligible small business concern' means a
business concern that is--
``(i) a small business concern, as defined in this Act; or
``(ii) a small business concern, as defined in section 103
of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958; and
``(C) the term `qualified private lender' means any
privately-owned bank or other lending institution that the
Administrator determines meets the criteria established under
paragraph (9).
``(2) Authorization.--The Administrator may guarantee
timely payment of principal and interest, as scheduled on any
loan issued by a qualified private lender to an eligible
small business concern located in a disaster area.
``(3) Use of loans.--A loan guaranteed by the Administrator
under this subsection may be used for any purpose authorized
under subsection (a) or (b).
``(4) Online applications.--
``(A) Establishment.--The Administrator may establish,
directly or through an agreement with another entity, an
online application process for loans guaranteed under this
subsection.
``(B) Other federal assistance.--The Administrator may
coordinate with the head of any other appropriate Federal
agency so that any application submitted through an online
application process established under this paragraph may be
considered for any other Federal assistance program for
disaster relief.
``(C) Consultation.--In establishing an online application
process under this paragraph, the Administrator shall consult
with appropriate persons from the public and private sectors,
including private lenders.
``(5) Maximum amounts.--
``(A) Guarantee percentage.--The Administrator may
guarantee not more than 85 percent of a loan under this
subsection.
``(B) Loan amounts.--The maximum amount of a loan
guaranteed under this subsection shall be $3,000,000.
``(6) Loan term.--The longest term of a loan for a loan
guaranteed under this subsection shall be--
``(A) 15 years for any loan that is issued without
collateral; and
``(B) 25 years for any loan that is issued with collateral.
``(7) Fees.--
``(A) In general.--The Administrator may not collect a
guarantee fee under this subsection.
``(B) Origination fee.--The Administrator may pay a
qualified private lender an origination fee for a loan
guaranteed under this subsection in an amount agreed upon in
advance between the qualified private lender and the
Administrator.
``(8) Documentation.--A qualified private lender may use
its own loan documentation for a loan guaranteed by the
Administrator, to the extent authorized by the Administrator.
The ability of a lender to use its own loan documentation for
a loan offered under this subsection shall not be considered
part of the criteria for becoming a qualified private lender
under the regulations promulgated under paragraph (9).
``(9) Implementation regulations.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of the Small Business Disaster Response and Loan
Improvements Act of 2007, the Administrator shall issue final
regulations establishing permanent criteria for qualified
private lenders.
``(B) Report to congress.--Not later than 6 months after
the date of enactment of the Small Business Disaster Response
and Loan Improvements Act of 2007, the Administrator shall
submit a report on the progress of the regulations required
by subparagraph (A) to the Committee on Small Business and
Entrepreneurship of the Senate and the Committee on Small
Business of the House of Representatives.
``(10) Authorization of appropriations.--
``(A) In general.--Amounts necessary to carry out this
subsection shall be made available from amounts appropriated
to the Administration under subsection (b).
``(B) Authority to reduce interest rates.--Funds
appropriated to the Administration to carry out this
subsection, may be used by the Administrator, to the extent
available, to reduce the applicable rate of interest for a
loan guaranteed under this subsection by not more than 3
percentage points.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to disasters declared under section 7(b)(2) of
the Small Business Act (631 U.S.C. 636(b)(2)) before, on, or
after the date of enactment of this Act.
SEC. 102. TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.
The Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 631 et seq.) is amended--
(1) in section 4(c)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``7(c)(2)'' and inserting
``7(d)(2)''; and
(B) in paragraph (2)--
(i) by striking ``7(c)(2)'' and inserting ``7(d)(2)''; and
[[Page 218]]
(ii) by striking ``7(e),''; and
(2) in section 7(b), in the undesignated matter following
paragraph (3)--
(A) by striking ``That the provisions of paragraph (1) of
subsection (c)'' and inserting ``That the provisions of
paragraph (1) of subsection (d)''; and
(B) by striking ``Notwithstanding the provisions of any
other law the interest rate on the Administration's share of
any loan made under subsection (b) except as provided in
subsection (c),'' and inserting ``Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, and except as provided in subsection (d),
the interest rate on the Administration's share of any loan
made under subsection (b)''.
TITLE II--DISASTER RELIEF AND RECONSTRUCTION
SEC. 201. DEFINITION OF DISASTER AREA.
In this title, the term ``disaster area'' means an area
affected by a natural or other disaster, as determined for
purposes of paragraph (1) or (2) of section 7(b) of the Small
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(b)), during the period of such
declaration.
SEC. 202. DISASTER LOANS TO NONPROFITS.
Section 7(b) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(b))
is amended by inserting immediately after paragraph (3) the
following:
``(4) Loans to nonprofits.--In addition to any other loan
authorized by this subsection, the Administrator may make
such loans (either directly or in cooperation with banks or
other lending institutions through agreements to participate
on an immediate or deferred basis) as the Administrator
determines appropriate to a nonprofit organization located or
operating in an area affected by a natural or other disaster,
as determined under paragraph (1) or (2), or providing
services to persons who have evacuated from any such area.''.
SEC. 203. DISASTER LOAN AMOUNTS.
(a) Increased Loan Caps.--Section 7(b) of the Small
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(b)) is amended by inserting
immediately after paragraph (4), as added by this title, the
following:
``(5) Increased loan caps.--
``(A) Aggregate loan amounts.--Except as provided in clause
(ii), and notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
aggregate loan amount outstanding and committed to a borrower
under this subsection may not exceed $5,000,000.
``(B) Waiver authority.--The Administrator may, at the
discretion of the Administrator, waive the aggregate loan
amount established under clause (i).''.
(b) Disaster Mitigation.--
(1) In general.--Section 7(b)(1)(A) of the Small Business
Act (15 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A)) is amended by inserting ``of the
aggregate costs of such damage or destruction (whether or not
compensated for by insurance or otherwise)'' after ``20 per
centum''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1)
shall apply with respect to a loan or guarantee made after
the date of enactment of this Act.
(c) Technical Amendments.--Section 7(b) of the Small
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(b)) is amended--
(1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking
``the, Administration'' and inserting ``the Administration'';
(2) in paragraph (2)(A), by striking ``Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act'' and inserting ``Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121
et seq.)''; and
(3) in the undesignated matter at the end--
(A) by striking ``, (2), and (4)'' and inserting ``and
(2)''; and
(B) by striking ``, (2), or (4)'' and inserting ``(2)''.
SEC. 204. SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER PORTABILITY
GRANTS.
Section 21(a)(4)(C)(viii) of the Small Business Act (15
U.S.C. 648(a)(4)(C)(viii)) is amended--
(1) in the first sentence, by striking ``as a result of a
business or government facility down sizing or closing, which
has resulted in the loss of jobs or small business
instability'' and inserting ``due to events that have
resulted or will result in, business or government facility
downsizing or closing''; and
(2) by adding at the end ``At the discretion of the
Administrator, the Administrator may make an award greater
than $100,000 to a recipient to accommodate extraordinary
occurrences having a catastrophic impact on the small
business concerns in a community.''.
SEC. 205. ASSISTANCE TO OUT-OF-STATE BUSINESSES.
Section 21(b)(3) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C.
648(b)(3)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``At the discretion'' and inserting the
following: ``Small business development centers.--
``(A) In general.--At the discretion''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(B) During disasters.--
``(i) In general.--At the discretion of the Administrator,
the Administrator may authorize a small business development
center to provide such assistance to small business concerns
located outside of the State, without regard to geographic
proximity, if the small business concerns are located in a
disaster area declared under section 7(b)(2)(A).
``(ii) Continuity of services.--A small business
development center that provides counselors to an area
described in clause (i) shall, to the maximum extent
practicable, ensure continuity of services in any State in
which such small business development center otherwise
provides services.
``(iii) Access to disaster recovery facilities.--For
purposes of providing disaster recovery assistance under this
subparagraph, the Administrator shall, to the maximum extent
practicable, permit small business development center
personnel to use any site or facility designated by the
Administrator for use to provide disaster recovery
assistance.''.
SEC. 206. OUTREACH PROGRAMS.
(a) In General.--Not later than 30 days after the date of
the declaration of a disaster area, the Administrator may
establish a contracting outreach and technical assistance
program for small business concerns which have had a primary
place of business in, or other significant presence in, such
disaster area.
(b) Administrator Action.--The Administrator may fulfill
the requirement of subsection (a) by acting through--
(1) the Administration;
(2) the Federal agency small business officials designated
under section 15(k)(1) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C.
644(k)(1)); or
(3) any Federal, State, or local government entity, higher
education institution, procurement technical assistance
center, or private nonprofit organization that the
Administrator may determine appropriate, upon conclusion of a
memorandum of understanding or assistance agreement, as
appropriate, with the Administrator.
SEC. 207. SMALL BUSINESS BONDING THRESHOLD.
(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), and
notwithstanding any other provision of law, for any
procurement related to a major disaster (as that term is
defined in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122)), the
Administrator may, upon such terms and conditions as the
Administrator may prescribe, guarantee and enter into
commitments to guarantee any surety against loss resulting
from a breach of the terms of a bid bond, payment bond,
performance bond, or bonds ancillary thereto, by a principal
on any total work order or contract amount at the time of
bond execution that does not exceed $5,000,000.
(b) Increase of Amount.--Upon request of the head of any
Federal agency other than the Administration involved in
reconstruction efforts in response to a major disaster, the
Administrator may guarantee and enter into a commitment to
guarantee any security against loss under subsection (a) on
any total work order or contract amount at the time of bond
execution that does not exceed $10,000,000.
SEC. 208. CONTRACTING PRIORITY FOR LOCAL SMALL BUSINESSES.
Section 15(d) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644(d))
is amended--
(1) by striking ``(d) For purposes'' and inserting the
following:
``(d) Contracting Priorities.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Disaster contracting priority in general.--The
Administrator shall designate any disaster area as an area of
concentrated unemployment or underemployment, or a labor
surplus area for purposes of paragraph (1).
``(3) Local small businesses.--
``(A) In general.--The head of each executive agency shall
give priority in the awarding of contracts and the placement
of subcontracts for disaster relief to local small business
concerns by using, as appropriate--
``(i) preferential factors in evaluations of contract bids
and proposals;
``(ii) competitions restricted to local small business
concerns, where there is a reasonable expectation of
receiving competitive, reasonably priced bids or proposals
from not fewer than 2 local small business concerns;
``(iii) requirements of preference for local small business
concerns in subcontracting plans; and
``(iv) assessments of liquidated damages and other
contractual penalties, including contract termination.
``(B) Other disaster assistance.--Priority shall be given
to local small business concerns in the awarding of contracts
and the placement of subcontracts for disaster relief in any
Federal procurement and any procurement by a State or local
government made with Federal disaster assistance funds.
``(4) Definitions.--In this subsection--
``(A) the term `declared disaster' means a disaster, as
designated by the Administrator;
``(B) the term `disaster area' means any State or area
affected by a declared disaster, as determined by the
Administrator;
``(C) the term `executive agency' has the same meaning as
in section 105 of title 5, United States Code; and
``(D) the term `local small business concern' means a small
business concern that--
``(i) on the date immediately preceding the date on which a
declared disaster occurred--
``(I) had a principal office in the disaster area for such
declared disaster; and
``(II) employed a majority of the workforce of such small
business concern in the disaster area for such declared
disaster; and
``(ii) is capable of performing a substantial proportion of
any contract or subcontract
[[Page 219]]
for disaster relief within the disaster area for such
declared disaster, as determined by the Administrator.''.
SEC. 209. TERMINATION OF PROGRAM.
Section 711(c) of the Small Business Competitive
Demonstration Program Act of 1988 (15 U.S.C. 644 note) is
amended by inserting after ``January 1, 1989'' the following:
``, and shall terminate on the date of enactment of the Small
Business Disaster Response and Loan Improvements Act of
2007''.
SEC. 210. INCREASING COLLATERAL REQUIREMENTS.
Section 7(d)(6) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636),
as so designated by section 101, is amended by striking
``$10,000 or less'' and inserting ``$14,000 or less (or such
higher amount as the Administrator determines appropriate in
the event of a catastrophic national disaster declared under
subsection (b)(6))''.
TITLE III--DISASTER RESPONSE
SEC. 301. DEFINITIONS.
In this title--
(1) the term ``catastrophic national disaster'' has the
meaning given the term in section 7(b)(6) of the Small
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(b)), as added by this Act;
(2) the term ``declared disaster'' means a major disaster
or a catastrophic national disaster;
(3) the term ``disaster loan program of the
Administration'' means assistance under section 7(b) of the
Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(b));
(4) the term ``disaster update period'' means the period
beginning on the date on which the President declares a major
disaster or a catastrophic national disaster and ending on
the date on which such declaration terminates;
(5) the term ``major disaster'' has the meaning given the
term in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief
and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122); and
(6) the term ``State'' means any State of the United
States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands, the Virgin Islands, Guam,
American Samoa, and any territory or possession of the United
States.
SEC. 302. BUSINESS EXPEDITED DISASTER ASSISTANCE LOAN
PROGRAM.
(a) Definitions.--In this section--
(1) the term ``immediate disaster assistance'' means
assistance provided during the period beginning on the date
on which a disaster declaration is made and ending on the
date that an impacted small business concern is able to
secure funding through insurance claims, Federal assistance
programs, or other sources; and
(2) the term ``program'' means the expedited disaster
assistance business loan program established under subsection
(b); and
(b) Creation of Program.--The Administrator shall take such
administrative action as is necessary to establish and
implement an expedited disaster assistance business loan
program to provide small business concerns with immediate
disaster assistance under section 7(b) of the Small Business
Act (15 U.S.C. 636(b)).
(c) Consultation Required.--In establishing the program,
the Administrator shall consult with--
(1) appropriate personnel of the Administration (including
District Office personnel of the Administration);
(2) appropriate technical assistance providers (including
small business development centers);
(3) appropriate lenders and credit unions;
(4) the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship of
the Senate; and
(5) the Committee on Small Business of the House of
Representatives.
(d) Rules.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall promulgate
rules establishing and implementing the program in accordance
with this section. Such rules shall apply as provided for in
this section, beginning 90 days after their issuance in final
form.
(2) Contents.--The rules promulgated under paragraph (1)
shall--
(A) identify whether appropriate uses of funds under the
program may include--
(i) paying employees;
(ii) paying bills and other financial obligations;
(iii) making repairs;
(iv) purchasing inventory;
(v) restarting or operating a small business concern in the
community in which it was conducting operations prior to the
declared disaster, or to a neighboring area, county, or
parish in the disaster area; or
(vi) covering additional costs until the small business
concern is able to obtain funding through insurance claims,
Federal assistance programs, or other sources; and
(B) set the terms and conditions of any loan made under the
program, subject to paragraph (3).
(3) Terms and conditions.--A loan made by the
Administration under this section--
(A) shall be a short-term loan, not to exceed 180 days,
except that the Administrator may extend such term as the
Administrator determines necessary or appropriate on a case-
by-case basis;
(B) shall have an interest rate not to exceed 1 percentage
point above the prime rate of interest that a private lender
may charge;
(C) shall have no prepayment penalty;
(D) may be refinanced as part of any subsequent disaster
assistance provided under section 7(b) of the Small Business
Act; and
(E) shall be subject to such additional terms as the
Administrator determines necessary or appropriate.
(e) Report to Congress.--Not later than 5 months after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall report
to the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship of
the Senate and the Committee on Small Business of the House
of Representatives on the progress of the Administrator in
establishing the program.
(f) Authorization.--There are authorized to be appropriated
to the Administrator such sums as are necessary to carry out
this section.
SEC. 303. CATASTROPHIC NATIONAL DISASTERS.
Section 7(b) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(b))
is amended by inserting immediately after paragraph (5), as
added by this Act, the following:
``(6) Catastrophic national disasters.--
``(A) Definition.--In this paragraph the term `catastrophic
national disaster' means a disaster, natural or other, that
the President determines has caused significant adverse
economic conditions outside of the geographic reach of the
disaster.
``(B) Authorization.--The Administrator may make such loans
under this paragraph (either directly or in cooperation with
banks or other lending institutions through agreements to
participate on an immediate or deferred basis) as the
Administrator determines appropriate to small business
concerns located anywhere in the United States that are
economically adversely impacted as a result of a catastrophic
national disaster.
``(C) Loan terms.--A loan under this paragraph shall be
made on the same terms as a loan under paragraph (2).''.
SEC. 304. PUBLIC AWARENESS OF DISASTER DECLARATION AND
APPLICATION PERIODS.
(a) In General.--Section 7(b) of the Small Business Act (15
U.S.C. 636(b)) is amended by inserting immediately after
paragraph (6), as added by this Act, the following:
``(7) Coordination with fema.--
``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, for any disaster (including a catastrophic national
disaster) declared under this subsection or major disaster
(as that term is defined in section 102 of the Robert T.
Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42
U.S.C. 5122)), the Administrator, in consultation with the
Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, shall
ensure, to the maximum extent practicable, that all
application periods for disaster relief under this Act and
the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) begin on the same
date and end on the same date.
``(B) Deadline extensions.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law--
``(i) not later than 10 days before the closing date of an
application period for disaster relief under this Act for any
disaster (including a catastrophic national disaster)
declared under this subsection, the Administrator, in
consultation with the Director of the Federal Emergency
Management Agency, shall notify the Committee on Small
Business and Entrepreneurship of the Senate and the Committee
on Small Business of the House of Representatives as to
whether the Administrator intends to extend such application
period; and
``(ii) not later than 10 days before the closing date of an
application period for disaster relief under the Robert T.
Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act for any
major disaster (as that term is defined in section 102 of the
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance
Act (42 U.S.C. 5122)) for which the President has declared a
catastrophic national disaster under paragraph (6), the
Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, in
consultation with the Administrator, shall notify the
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship of the
Senate and the Committee on Small Business of the House of
Representatives as to whether the Director intends to extend
such application period.
``(8) Public awareness of disasters.--If a disaster
(including a catastrophic national disaster) is declared
under this subsection, the Administrator shall make every
effort to communicate through radio, television, print, and
web-based outlets, all relevant information needed by
disaster loan applicants, including--
``(A) the date of such declaration;
``(B) cities and towns within the area of such declaration;
``(C) loan application deadlines related to such disaster;
``(D) all relevant contact information for victim services
available through the Administration (including links to
small business development center websites);
``(E) links to relevant Federal and State disaster
assistance websites;
``(F) information on eligibility criteria for Federal
Emergency Management Agency disaster assistance applications,
as well as for Administration loan programs, including where
such applications can be found; and
``(G) application materials that clearly state the function
of the Administration as
[[Page 220]]
the Federal source of disaster loans for homeowners and
renters.''.
(b) Coordination of Agencies and Outreach.--Not later than
90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Administrator and the Director of the Federal Emergency
Management Agency shall enter into a memorandum of
understanding that ensures, to the maximum extent
practicable, adequate lodging and transportation for
employees of the Administration, contract employees, and
volunteers during a major disaster, if such staff are needed
to assist businesses, homeowners, or renters in recovery.
(c) Marketing and Outreach.--Not later than 90 days after
the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall
create a marketing and outreach plan that--
(1) encourages a proactive approach to the disaster relief
efforts of the Administration;
(2) distinguishes between disaster services provided by the
Administration and disaster services provided by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency, including contact information,
application information, and timelines for submitting
applications, the review of applications, and the
disbursement of funds;
(3) describes the different disaster loan programs of the
Administration, including how they are made available and
what eligibility requirements exist for each loan program;
(4) provides for regional marketing, focusing on disasters
occurring in each region before the date of enactment of this
Act, and likely scenarios for disasters in each such region;
and
(5) ensures that the marketing plan is made available at
small business development centers and on the website of the
Administration.
SEC. 305. CONSISTENCY BETWEEN ADMINISTRATION REGULATIONS AND
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES.
(a) In General.--The Administrator shall, promptly
following the date of enactment of this Act, conduct a study
of whether the standard operating procedures of the
Administration for loans offered under section 7(b) of the
Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(b)) are consistent with the
regulations of the Administration for administering the
disaster loan program.
(b) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administration shall submit to
Congress a report containing all findings and recommendations
of the study conducted under subsection (a).
SEC. 306. PROCESSING DISASTER LOANS.
(a) Authority for Qualified Private Contractors to Process
Disaster Loans.--Section 7(b) of the Small Business Act (15
U.S.C. 636(b)) is amended by inserting immediately after
paragraph (8), as added by this Act, the following:
``(9) Authority for qualified private contractors.--
``(A) Disaster loan processing.--The Administrator may
enter into an agreement with a qualified private contractor,
as determined by the Administrator, to process loans under
this subsection in the event of a major disaster (as defined
in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122)) or a catastrophic
national disaster declared under paragraph (6), under which
the Administrator shall pay the contractor a fee for each
loan processed.
``(B) Loan loss verification services.--The Administrator
may enter into an agreement with a qualified lender or loss
verification professional, as determined by the
Administrator, to verify losses for loans under this
subsection in the event of a major disaster (as defined in
section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122)) or a catastrophic
national disaster declared under paragraph (6), under which
the Administrator shall pay the lender or verification
professional a fee for each loan for which such lender or
verification professional verifies losses.''.
(b) Coordination of Efforts Between the Administrator and
the Internal Revenue Service To Expedite Loan Processing.--
The Administrator and the Commissioner of Internal Revenue
shall, to the maximum extent practicable, ensure that all
relevant and allowable tax records for loan approval are
shared with loan processors in an expedited manner, upon
request by the Administrator.
(c) Report on Loan Approval Rate.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 6 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit a
report to the Committee on Small Business and
Entrepreneurship of the Senate and the Committee on Small
Business of the House of Representatives detailing how the
Administration can improve the processing of applications
under the disaster loan program of the Administration.
(2) Contents.--The report submitted under paragraph (1)
shall include--
(A) recommendations, if any, regarding--
(i) staffing levels during a major disaster;
(ii) how to improve the process for processing, approving,
and disbursing loans under the disaster loan program of the
Administration, to ensure that the maximum assistance is
provided to victims in a timely manner;
(iii) the viability of using alternative methods for
assessing the ability of an applicant to repay a loan,
including the credit score of the applicant on the day before
the date on which the disaster for which the applicant is
seeking assistance was declared;
(iv) methods, if any, for the Administration to expedite
loss verification and loan processing of disaster loans
during a major disaster for businesses affected by, and
located in the area for which the President declared, the
major disaster that are a major source of employment in the
area or are vital to recovery efforts in the region
(including providing debris removal services, manufactured
housing, or building materials);
(v) legislative changes, if any, needed to implement
findings from the Administration's Accelerated Disaster
Response Initiative; and
(vi) a description of how the Administration plans to
integrate and coordinate the response to a major disaster
with the technical assistance programs of the Administration;
and
(B) the plans of the Administrator for implementing any
recommendation made under subparagraph (A).
SEC. 307. DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF MAJOR DISASTER
RESPONSE PLAN.
(a) In General.--Not later than March 15, 2007, the
Administrator shall--
(1) by rule, amend the 2006 Atlantic hurricane season
disaster response plan of the Administration (in this section
referred to as the ``disaster response plan'') to apply to
major disasters and catastrophic national disasters,
consistent with this Act and the amendments made by this Act;
and
(2) submit a report to the Committee on Small Business and
Entrepreneurship of the Senate and the Committee on Small
Business of the House of Representatives detailing the
amendments to the disaster response plan.
(b) Contents.--The amended report required under subsection
(a)(2) shall include--
(1) any updates or modifications made to the disaster
response plan since the report regarding the disaster
response plan submitted on July 14, 2006;
(2) a description of how the Administrator plans to utilize
and integrate District Office personnel of the Administration
in the response to a major disaster, including information on
the utilization of personnel for loan processing and loan
disbursement;
(3) a description of the disaster scalability model of the
Administration and on what basis or function the plan is
scaled;
(4) a description of how the agency-wide Disaster Oversight
Council is structured, which offices comprise its membership,
and whether the Associate Deputy Administrator for
Entrepreneurial Development of the Administration is a
member;
(5) a description of how the Administrator plans to
coordinate the disaster efforts of the Administration with
State and local government officials, including
recommendations on how to better incorporate State
initiatives or programs, such as State-administered bridge
loan programs, into the disaster response of the
Administration;
(6) recommendations, if any, on how the Administrator can
better coordinate its disaster response operations with the
operations of other Federal, State, and local entities;
(7) any surge plan for the system in effect on or after
August 29, 2005 (including surge plans for loss verification,
loan processing, mailroom, customer service or call center
operations, and a continuity of operations plan);
(8) the number of full-time equivalent employees and job
descriptions for the planning and disaster response staff of
the Administration;
(9) the in-service and preservice training procedures for
disaster response staff of the Administration;
(10) information on the logistical support plans of the
Administration (including equipment and staffing needs, and
detailed information on how such plans will be scalable
depending on the size and scope of the major disaster;
(11) a description of the findings and recommendations of
the Administrator, if any, based on a review of the response
of the Administration to Hurricane Katrina of 2005, Hurricane
Rita of 2005, and Hurricane Wilma of 2005; and
(12) a plan for how the Administrator, in cooperation with
the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, will
coordinate the provision of accommodations and necessary
resources for disaster assistance personnel to effectively
perform their responsibilities in the aftermath of a major
disaster.
(c) Exercises.--Not later than May 31, 2007, the
Administrator shall develop and execute simulation exercises
to demonstrate the effectiveness of the amended disaster
response plan required under this section.
SEC. 308. CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT.
(a) Monthly Accounting Report to Congress.--
(1) Definition.--In this subsection the term ``applicable
period'' means the period beginning on the date on which the
President declares a major disaster and ending on the date
that is 30 days after the later of the
[[Page 221]]
closing date for applications for physical disaster loans for
such disaster and the closing date for applications for
economic injury disaster loans for such disaster.
(2) Reporting requirements.--Not later than the fifth
business day of each month during the applicable period for a
major disaster, the Administrator shall provide to the
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship and the
Committee on Appropriations of the Senate and to the
Committee on Small Business and the Committee on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives a report on
the operation of the disaster loan program authorized under
section 7 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636) for such
disaster during the preceding month.
(3) Contents.--Each report under paragraph (2) shall
include--
(A) the daily average lending volume, in number of loans
and dollars, and the percent by which each category has
increased or decreased since the previous report under
paragraph (2);
(B) the weekly average lending volume, in number of loans
and dollars, and the percent by which each category has
increased or decreased since the previous report under
paragraph (2);
(C) the amount of funding spent over the month for loans,
both in appropriations and program level, and the percent by
which each category has increased or decreased since the
previous report under paragraph (2);
(D) the amount of funding available for loans, both in
appropriations and program level, and the percent by which
each category has increased or decreased, noting the source
of any additional funding;
(E) an estimate of how long the available funding for such
loans will last, based on the spending rate;
(F) the amount of funding spent over the month for staff,
along with the number of staff, and the percent by which each
category has increased or decreased since the previous report
under paragraph (2);
(G) the amount of funding spent over the month for
administrative costs, and the percent by which such spending
has increased or decreased since the previous report under
paragraph (2);
(H) the amount of funding available for salaries and
expenses combined, and the percent by which such funding has
increased or decreased, noting the source of any additional
funding; and
(I) an estimate of how long the available funding for
salaries and expenses will last, based on the spending rate.
(b) Daily Disaster Updates to Congress for Presidentially
Declared Disasters.--
(1) In general.--Each day during a disaster update period,
excluding Federal holidays and weekends, the Administration
shall provide to the Committee on Small Business and
Entrepreneurship of the Senate and to the Committee on Small
Business of the House of Representatives a report on the
operation of the disaster loan program of the Administration
for the area in which the President declared a major disaster
or a catastrophic national disaster, as the case may be.
(2) Contents.--Each report under paragraph (1) shall
include--
(A) the number of Administration staff performing loan
processing, field inspection, and other duties for the
declared disaster, and the allocations of such staff in the
disaster field offices, disaster recovery centers, workshops,
and other Administration offices nationwide;
(B) the daily number of applications received from
applicants in the relevant area, as well as a breakdown of
such figures by State;
(C) the daily number of applications pending application
entry from applicants in the relevant area, as well as a
breakdown of such figures by State;
(D) the daily number of applications withdrawn by
applicants in the relevant area, as well as a breakdown of
such figures by State;
(E) the daily number of applications summarily declined by
the Administration from applicants in the relevant area, as
well as a breakdown of such figures by State;
(F) the daily number of applications declined by the
Administration from applicants in the relevant area, as well
as a breakdown of such figures by State;
(G) the daily number of applications in process from
applicants in the relevant area, as well as a breakdown of
such figures by State;
(H) the daily number of applications approved by the
Administration from applicants in the relevant area, as well
as a breakdown of such figures by State;
(I) the daily dollar amount of applications approved by the
Administration from applicants in the relevant area, as well
as a breakdown of such figures by State;
(J) the daily amount of loans dispersed, both partially and
fully, by the Administration to applicants in the relevant
area, as well as a breakdown of such figures by State;
(K) the daily dollar amount of loans dispersed, both
partially and fully, from the relevant area, as well as a
breakdown of such figures by State;
(L) the number of applications approved, including dollar
amount approved, as well as applications partially and fully
dispersed, including dollar amounts, since the last report
under paragraph (1); and
(M) the declaration date, physical damage closing date,
economic injury closing date, and number of counties included
in the declaration of a major disaster.
(c) Notice of the Need for Supplemental Funds.--On the same
date that the Administrator notifies any committee of the
Senate or the House of Representatives that supplemental
funding is necessary for the disaster loan program of the
Administration in any fiscal year, the Administrator shall
notify in writing the Committee on Small Business and
Entrepreneurship of the Senate and to the Committee on Small
Business of the House of Representatives regarding the need
for supplemental funds for such loan program.
(d) Report on Contracting.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 6 months after the date on
which the President declares a declared disaster, and every 6
months thereafter until the date that is 18 months after the
date on which the declared disaster was declared, the
Administrator shall submit a report to the Committee on Small
Business and Entrepreneurship of the Senate and to the
Committee on Small Business of the House of Representatives
regarding Federal contracts awarded as a result of the
declared disaster.
(2) Contents.--Each report submitted under paragraph (1)
shall include--
(A) the total number of contracts awarded as a result of
the declared disaster;
(B) the total number of contracts awarded to small business
concerns as a result of the declared disaster;
(C) the total number of contracts awarded to women and
minority-owned businesses as a result of the declared
disaster; and
(D) the total number of contracts awarded to local
businesses as a result of the declared disaster.
TITLE IV--ENERGY EMERGENCIES
SEC. 401. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that--
(1) a significant number of small business concerns in the
United States, nonfarm as well as agricultural producers, use
heating oil, natural gas, propane, or kerosene to heat their
facilities and for other purposes;
(2) a significant number of small business concerns in the
United States sell, distribute, market, or otherwise engage
in commerce directly related to heating oil, natural gas,
propane, and kerosene; and
(3) significant increases in the price of heating oil,
natural gas, propane, or kerosene--
(A) disproportionately harm small business concerns
dependent on those fuels or that use, sell, or distribute
those fuels in the ordinary course of their business, and can
cause them substantial economic injury;
(B) can negatively affect the national economy and regional
economies;
(C) have occurred in the winters of 1983 to 1984, 1988 to
1989, 1996 to 1997, 1999 to 2000, 2000 to 2001, and 2004 to
2005; and
(D) can be caused by a host of factors, including
international conflicts, global or regional supply
difficulties, weather conditions, insufficient inventories,
refinery capacity, transportation, and competitive structures
in the markets, causes that are often unforeseeable to, and
beyond the control of, those who own and operate small
business concerns.
SEC. 402. SMALL BUSINESS ENERGY EMERGENCY DISASTER LOAN
PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--Section 7(b) of the Small Business Act (15
U.S.C. 636(b)) is amended by inserting after paragraph (9),
as added by this Act, the following:
``(10) Energy emergencies.--
``(A) Definitions.--In this paragraph--
``(i) the term `base price index' means the moving average
of the closing unit price on the New York Mercantile Exchange
for heating oil, natural gas, or propane for the 10 days, in
each of the most recent 2 preceding years, which correspond
to the trading days described in clause (ii);
``(ii) the term `current price index' means the moving
average of the closing unit price on the New York Mercantile
Exchange, for the 10 most recent trading days, for contracts
to purchase heating oil, natural gas, or propane during the
subsequent calendar month, commonly known as the `front
month';
``(iii) the term `heating fuel' means heating oil, natural
gas, propane, or kerosene; and
``(iv) the term `significant increase' means--
``(I) with respect to the price of heating oil, natural
gas, or propane, any time the current price index exceeds the
base price index by not less than 40 percent; and
``(II) with respect to the price of kerosene, any increase
which the Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary
of Energy, determines to be significant.
``(B) Authorization.--The Administration may make such
loans, either directly or in cooperation with banks or other
lending institutions through agreements to participate on an
immediate or deferred basis, to assist a small business
concern that has suffered or that is likely to suffer
substantial economic injury as the result of a significant
increase in the price of heating fuel occurring on or after
October 1, 2004.
[[Page 222]]
``(C) Interest rate.--Any loan or guarantee extended under
this paragraph shall be made at the same interest rate as
economic injury loans under paragraph (2).
``(D) Maximum amount.--No loan may be made under this
paragraph, either directly or in cooperation with banks or
other lending institutions through agreements to participate
on an immediate or deferred basis, if the total amount
outstanding and committed to the borrower under this
subsection would exceed $1,500,000, unless such borrower
constitutes a major source of employment in its surrounding
area, as determined by the Administrator, in which case the
Administrator, in the discretion of the Administrator, may
waive the $1,500,000 limitation.
``(E) Declarations.--For purposes of assistance under this
paragraph--
``(i) a declaration of a disaster area based on conditions
specified in this paragraph shall be required, and shall be
made by the President or the Administrator; or
``(ii) if no declaration has been made under clause (i),
the Governor of a State in which a significant increase in
the price of heating fuel has occurred may certify to the
Administration that small business concerns have suffered
economic injury as a result of such increase and are in need
of financial assistance which is not otherwise available on
reasonable terms in that State, and upon receipt of such
certification, the Administration may make such loans as
would have been available under this paragraph if a disaster
declaration had been issued.
``(F) Use of funds.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, loans made under this paragraph may be used by a small
business concern described in subparagraph (B) to convert
from the use of heating fuel to a renewable or alternative
energy source, including agriculture and urban waste,
geothermal energy, cogeneration, solar energy, wind energy,
or fuel cells.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments Relating to Heating Fuel.--
Section 3(k) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632(k)) is
amended--
(1) by inserting ``, significant increase in the price of
heating fuel'' after ``civil disorders''; and
(2) by inserting ``other'' before ``economic''.
(c) Effective Period.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply during the 4-year period beginning on the date on
which guidelines are published by the Administrator under
section 404.
SEC. 403. AGRICULTURAL PRODUCER EMERGENCY LOANS.
(a) In General.--Section 321(a) of the Consolidated Farm
and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1961(a)) is amended--
(1) in the first sentence--
(A) by striking ``operations have'' and inserting
``operations (i) have''; and
(B) by inserting before ``: Provided,'' the following: ``,
or (ii)(I) are owned or operated by such an applicant that is
also a small business concern (as defined in section 3 of the
Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632)), and (II) have suffered
or are likely to suffer substantial economic injury on or
after October 1, 2004, as the result of a significant
increase in energy costs or input costs from energy sources
occurring on or after October 1, 2004, in connection with an
energy emergency declared by the President or the
Secretary'';
(2) in the third sentence, by inserting before the period
at the end the following: ``or by an energy emergency
declared by the President or the Secretary''; and
(3) in the fourth sentence--
(A) by inserting ``or energy emergency'' after ``natural
disaster'' each place that term appears; and
(B) by inserting ``or declaration'' after ``emergency
designation''.
(b) Funding.--Funds available on the date of enactment of
this Act for emergency loans under subtitle C of the
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1961 et
seq.) shall be available to carry out the amendments made by
subsection (a) to meet the needs resulting from energy
emergencies.
(c) Effective Period.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply during the 4-year period beginning on the date on
which guidelines are published by the Secretary of
Agriculture under section 404.
SEC. 404. GUIDELINES AND RULEMAKING.
(a) Guidelines.--Not later than 30 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator and the Secretary of
Agriculture shall each issue such guidelines as the
Administrator or the Secretary, as applicable, determines to
be necessary to carry out this title and the amendments made
by this title.
(b) Rulemaking.--Not later than 30 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator, after consultation
with the Secretary of Energy, shall promulgate regulations
specifying the method for determining a significant increase
in the price of kerosene under section 7(b)(10)(A)(iv)(II) of
the Small Business Act, as added by this Act.
SEC. 405. REPORTS.
(a) Small Business Administration.--Not later than 12
months after the date on which the Administrator issues
guidelines under section 404, and annually thereafter until
the date that is 12 months after the end of the effective
period of section 7(b)(10) of the Small Business Act, as
added by this Act, the Administrator shall submit to the
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship of the
Senate and the Committee on Small Business of the House of
Representatives, a report on the effectiveness of the
assistance made available under section 7(b)(10) of the Small
Business Act, as added by this Act, including--
(1) the number of small business concerns that applied for
a loan under such section and the number of those that
received such loans;
(2) the dollar value of those loans;
(3) the States in which the small business concerns that
received such loans are located;
(4) the type of heating fuel or energy that caused the
significant increase in the cost for the participating small
business concerns; and
(5) recommendations for ways to improve the assistance
provided under such section 7(b)(10), if any.
(b) Department of Agriculture.--Not later than 12 months
after the date on which the Secretary of Agriculture issues
guidelines under section 404, and annually thereafter until
the date that is 12 months after the end of the effective
period of the amendments made to section 321(a) of the
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C.
1961(a)) by this title, the Secretary shall submit to the
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship and the
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the
Senate and the Committee on Small Business and the Committee
on Agriculture of the House of Representatives, a report
that--
(1) describes the effectiveness of the assistance made
available under section 321(a) of the Consolidated Farm and
Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1961(a)); and
(2) contains recommendations for ways to improve the
assistance provided under such section 321(a), if any.
Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, as we all know, there was a tremendous
amount of criticism of the Federal Government's response to Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita last year. Things are better now and the region is
slowly recovering. But, having just finished the 2006 hurricane season,
and with the 2007 season a few months away, we must be sure that if we
have another disaster, the Federal Government's response will be better
this time around. Disaster response agencies have to be better
organized, more efficient, and more responsive in order to avoid the
problems, the delays, mismanagement, and the seeming incompetence that
occurred in 2005.
Today, I am proud to be an original cosponsor of legislation to
improve the disaster response of one agency that had a great deal of
problems last year, the Small Business Administration, SBA. This bill,
the ``Small Business Disaster Response and Loan Improvements Act''
makes major improvements to the SBA's disaster response and provides
them with essential tools to ensure that they are more efficient and
better prepared for future disasters--big and small. I should also note
that this bill is a result of intensive bipartisan work over the past
couple of months and was introduced shortly before the 109th Congress
adjourned as S. 4097. Unfortunately, there was no action on that bill
so it must be reintroduced in the new Congress. I strongly believe
though we can secure passage during this Congress as the bill is
reflective of the priorities from Senators Kerry and Snowe,
respectively, Chair and Ranking Member of the Senate Small Business
Committee, as well as Senators Landrieu and Vitter. For my part, I have
heard loud and clear from our impacted businesses that SBA reforms
should be implemented as soon as possible. That is why in September, I
sent a letter to the new SBA Administrator Steve Preston, expressing
concerns on the lack of progress on SBA disaster reforms, which were
included in S. 3778, the FY07 SBA Reauthorization bill reported out of
the Senate Small Business Committee. In this letter, I requested his
cooperation, along with our committee to pass this important
legislation before Congress adjourns at the end of the year. The
introduction of this bill today, shows the progress that the committee
made since September on this issue. I hope that this spirit of
bipartisanship continues into the 110th Congress and that I can
continue to work with my colleagues on the Senate Small Business
Committee to reform SBA.
This legislation offers new tools to enhance SBA's disaster
assistance programs. In every disaster, the SBA Disaster Loan program
is a lifeline for
[[Page 223]]
businesses and homeowners who want to rebuild their lives after a
catastrophe. When Hurricane Katrina hit, our businesses and homeowners
had to wait months for loan approvals. I do not know how many
businesses we lost because help did not come in time. Because of the
scale of this disaster, what these businesses needed was immediate,
short-term assistance to hold them over until SBA was ready to process
the tens of thousands of loan applications it received.
That is why this legislation provides the SBA Administrator with the
ability to set up an expedited disaster assistance business loan
program to make short-term, low-interest loans to keep them afloat.
These loans will allow businesses to make payroll, begin making
repairs, and address other immediate needs while they are awaiting
insurance payouts or regular SBA disaster loans. However, I realize
that every disaster is different and could range from a disaster on the
scale of Hurricane Katrina or 9-11, to an ice storm or drought. This
legislation gives the SBA additional options and flexibility in the
kinds of relief they can offer a community. When a tornado destroys 20
businesses in a small town in the Midwest, SBA can get the regular
disaster program up and running fairly quickly. You may not need short-
term loans in this instance. But if you know that SBA's resources would
be overwhelmed by a storm--just as they were initially with Hurricane
Katrina--these expedited business loans would be very helpful.
This legislation also would direct SBA to study ways to expedite
disaster loans for those businesses in a disaster area that have a
good, solid track record with the SBA or can provide vital recovery
efforts. We had many businesses in the Gulf Coast that had paid off
previous SBA loans, were major sources of employment in their
communities, but had to wait months for decisions on their SBA disaster
loan applications. I do not want to get rid of the SBA's current
practice of reviewing applications on a first-come first-served basis,
but there should be some mechanism in place for major disasters to get
expedited loans out the door to specific businesses that has a positive
record with SBA or those that could serve a vital role in the recovery
efforts. Expedited loans would jump-start impacted economies, get vital
capital out to businesses, and retain essential jobs following future
disasters.
This bill also makes an important modification to the collateral
requirements for disaster loans. The SBA cannot disburse more than
$10,000 for an approved loan without showing collateral. This is to
limit the loss to the SBA in the event that a loan defaults. However,
this disbursement amount has not been increased since 1998 and these
days, $10,000 is not enough to get a business up and running. That is
why this bill increases this collateral requirement to $14,000 and
gives the Administrator the ability to increase that amount, in the
event of another large-scale disaster. I believe this is a reasonable
and fiscally responsible increase, and at the same time gives the
Administrator flexibility for future disasters which will inevitably
occur.
As you may know, I pushed to get language in the last Hurricane
Supplemental Appropriations bill in June 2006 to require SBA to develop
a disaster plan and report to Congress on its contents by July 15,
2006. SBA provided this status report in July and I am pleased that,
since then, SBA has been working on a comprehensive disaster response
plan. That said, I believe that with the 2007 Atlantic hurricane season
fast approaching, and other disasters possible before then, the SBA
should be looking at additional ways to improve upon this plan. This
legislation requires SBA to report to Congress, by March 15, 2007 on
the current status of its response plan and to provide us with a
snapshot of where they were with Hurricane Katrina and where they are
now. The report also requests SBA feedback on suggested improvements.
These improvements include better incorporating State disaster
assistance efforts into SBA's response, as well as better coordination
with Federal response agencies like FEMA.
The Small Business Disaster Response and Loan Improvements Act will
provide essential tools to make the SBA more proactive, flexible, and
most important, more efficient during future disasters. Again, I look
forward to working with both Senator Snowe and Senator Kerry during
this new session of Congress to ensure that the SBA has everything it
needs to meet these goals.
I ask unanimous consent that a copy of my September 27, 2006 letter
to SBA be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC, September 27, 2006.
Hon. Steven C. Preston,
Administrator, U.S. Small Business Administration,
Washington, D.C.
Dear Administrator Preston: Let me take this opportunity to
again congratulate you on your confirmation as Administrator
of the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA). Your
management experience and passion to serve will prove
extremely helpful to you in this challenging position.
I write you today because as a member of the Senate
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, as well as
senator from a state hit hard by both Hurricanes Katrina, and
Rita. I believe it is my duty to ensure that we implement
substantive changes to SBA's Disaster Assistance Program
during this session of Congress.
The SBA's response to Katrina and Rita was too slow and
lacking in urgency--threatening the very survival of our
affected businesses. A year has passed since Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita, yet while Congress is currently acting on
extensive reforms for the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA), there has been only incremental changes to SBA's
Disaster Assistance Program. That is why I am pleased to
learn that you have recently created the Accelerated Disaster
Response Initiative to identify and help implement process
improvements to enable the SBA to respond more quickly in
assisting small businesses and homeowners in need of
assistance after a disaster. I applaud these efforts and your
leadership on this issue. But much more must be done to
address the systemic problems that led to delays and inaction
post-Katrina and Rita.
For our part, the Senate is also attempting to address the
multiple problems that hampered SBA's ability to assist
impacted Gulf Coast small businesses and homeowners. Under
the leadership of the Chair and Ranking Member of the Senate
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, Senators
Snowe and Kerry, the committee voted unanimously to approve
S. 3778, the ``Small Business Reauthorization and
Improvements Act of 2006'' and sent it to the full Senate for
consideration. A copy of the bill is attached for your
convenience. This bipartisan legislation reauthorizes SBA
programs, and also of great importance to me and my
constituents, makes essential reforms to SBA's Disaster
Assistance Program. However, since S. 3778 was introduced on
August 2, 2006, almost nine weeks ago, it has been blocked
from consideration and the Committee is still waiting for
budget information so that it may file its report on the
bill. It is my understanding that the administration and SBA
has several concerns about this bill in its current form.
I am very concerned at this apparent deadlock, a deadlock
which threatens our bipartisan efforts to implement
comprehensive SBA Disaster Assistance reforms before the end
of the year. In particular, I believe that there must be SBA
reforms in the following areas:
Short-Term Assistance: Following Katrina and Rita small
businesses waited, on average, four to six months for
approvals and disbursements on SBA Disaster Loans, In order
to ensure the long-term survival of small businesses impacted
by a catastrophic disaster, SBA needs to be in the business
of short-term recovery--by providing either emergency bridge
loans or grants.
Disaster Loan Process for Homeowners: While SBA's mission
is to ``aid, counsel, assist and protect, insofar as is
possible, the interests of small business concerns'' it also
has the added responsibility of helping affected homeowners
rebuild their housing post-disaster. Katrina and Rita
resulted in record numbers of SBA Disaster Loan applications
from homeowners, which strained SBA's existing resources and
personnel. If the SBA must bear this responsibility, the
agency should improve the process as well as possibly seek
greater coordination and cooperation with the U.S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development on disaster housing
assistance.
Expedited Disaster Loans to Businesses: The SBA currently
has no mechanism in place to expedite Disaster Loans to
impacted businesses that are either a major source of
employment or that can demonstrate a vital contribution to
recovery efforts in the area, such as businesses who
construct housing, provide building materials, or conduct
debris removal. The SBA needs the ability to fast-track loans
to these businesses, in order to
[[Page 224]]
jumpstart local economies and recovery efforts.
Economic Injury Disaster Loans: Although Katrina and Rita
directly affected businesses along the Gulf Coast, additional
businesses in the region, as well as the rest of the country,
were economically impacted by the storms. The SBA must have
the ability to provide nationwide, or perhaps regional,
economic injury disaster loans to businesses which can
demonstrate economic distress or disruption from a future
major disaster.
Loss Verification and Loan Processing: Following the Gulf
Coast hurricanes, the SBA struggled for months to hire enough
staff to inspect losses and process loan applications.
Although SBA now has trained reserves to handle such surges
in demand, the SBA also needs the permanent authority to
enter into agreements with qualified private lenders and
credit unions to process Disaster Loans and provide loss
verification services.
Administrator Preston, I was impressed by your expressed
willingness to be a bridge between Congress and the White
House. For the SBA to truly bring its disaster capabilities
to the next level, I believe that it must work in concert
with the Congress. Together, we must remove layers of
bureaucracy and red tape, which, following Katrina and Rita,
both overwhelmed and frustrated dedicated SBA employees and
those affected by the hurricanes. We must also give the SBA
new tools to ensure that problems that occurred post-Katrina
and Rita never happen again.
Last month we marked the one-year anniversary of Hurricane
Katrina, and now mark the one-year anniversary of Hurricane
Rita. It is essential that we take action now to make
substantive reforms to the SBA Disaster Assistance Program.
We owe nothing less to our small businesses. I ask that you
continue working with my office on this important issue and
respond to our approach in writing no later than October 31,
2006. This will help us develop a proposal which can address
the concerns of the SBA as well as provide a better and more
responsive SBA Disaster Assistance Program for our Small
businesses.
Thank you in advance for your assistance with this request.
Sincerely,
Mary L. Landrieu,
United States Senator.
______
By Mr. KENNEDY:
S. 164. A bill to modernize the education system of the United
States; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, few things are more indispensable to the
United States than good schools. Today more than ever, a quality
education is the gateway to achieving the American dream and the best
guarantee of equal opportunity for all our people, good citizenship,
and an economy capable of mastering modern global challenges.
In 1965, as part of the War on Poverty, President Johnson signed into
law the landmark Elementary and Secondary Education to strengthen
America by allocating substantial Federal resources to public schools
for the first time. In the bipartisan No Child Left Behind Act of 2002,
we reauthorized this landmark legislation, and for the first time made
a commitment that every child--black or white, Latino or Asian, native-
born or an English language learner, disabled or non-disabled--would be
part of an accountability plan that holds schools responsible for the
progress of all students. It required every State to implement content
and performance standards specifying what children should know and be
able to do, and urged States to create high-quality assessments so that
students' progress toward meeting those standards could be accurately
measured. It expanded support for early reading and literacy skills and
offered extra tutoring to students in struggling schools. It sought to
improve the quality of instruction by requiring all schools to provide
a highly-qualified teacher for every child.
We know these reforms can work. But good results are not possible
without adequate investments. The No Child Left Behind Act recognized
that to move forward with these dramatic changes, schools would need a
continued infusion of Federal resources, because the cost was obviously
too great for States and local governments to bear alone.
Today, because of budget cuts and poor implementation, we still have
much to do to ensure that no child is left behind. President Bush has
short-changed the promise made in the law by nearly $56 billion,
leaving millions of children without the resources needed to reduce
class sizes, improve teaching, and set higher standards for our
schools. Now, more than ever, it's important to deliver the resources
our schools deserve. Thousands of schools are on watchlists in their
States and need Federal support and extra assistance to bridge the
learning gaps of their students.
The No Child Left Behind Act is again scheduled for reauthorization
this year, and we must work to ensure that its promise is fulfilled.
Aside from additional funding, one of our priorities must be to ensure
that the standards and assessments used to measure progress are fair
and reliable. Accountability is only as good as the tests to measure
progress, and many States use tests that need substantial improvement.
Some use exams that are not aligned to the standards that students must
meet. Others have manufactured artificially high test score gains by
lowering standards and adjusting test scores in order to avoid
unfavorable consequences under the law's accountability framework.
We need to shift our understanding of the Act away from the idea that
it labels and penalizes schools, and toward a more productive framework
that helps schools and States reach higher, not lower. We should use
the well-regarded National Assessment of Educational Progress the
``Nation's report card'' as a benchmark for the rigor of State exams.
States should also align their elementary and secondary school
standards with their standards for college entrance and success,
creating seamless systems that guide students from the beginning of
their education to the achievement of a college degree.
The SUCCESS Act I am introducing today would assist States in these
efforts. As the name suggests, it would provide Federal support for
States Using Collaboration and Cooperation to Enhance Standards for
Students. It would help ensure that public schools challenge all
students to learn to high standards and provide needed help to schools
with the greatest needs.
The legislation updates the Nation's report card the National
Assessment of Educational Progress to ensure that it sets a national
benchmark which is internationally competitive and is aligned with the
demands of the 21st century global economy. It expands our ability to
monitor science achievement. It requires the NAEP to measure student
preparedness to enter college, the 21st century workforce, or the Armed
Services. It also requires the Secretary of Education to examine the
gaps in student performance on state-level assessments and NAEP
assessments, and to assist States that wish to analyze how their
standards and assessments compare to the benchmark.
The SUCCESS Act provides critical resources to States to create ``P-
16'' Preparedness Councils that will engage members of the early
childhood, K-12 and higher education communities, along with the
business and military communities, and other stakeholders to align the
standards with what is needed for success in college and the workforce.
The councils would be charged with ensuring that State standards and
assessments meet international benchmarks to improve instruction and
student achievement and prepare students to contribute in the global
economy. It also provides funds to encourage collaboration among States
in raising the bar for student achievement by providing grants to
States working together to establish common standards and assessments
that are rigorous, internationally competitive, and aligned with
postsecondary demands.
I look forward to working with my colleagues on this and other
important proposals as we move toward the reauthorization of the No
Child Left Behind Act. In the coming weeks, our Committee on Health,
Education, Labor and Pensions will hold a series of hearings and
roundtable discussions to hear from experts and those dealing with the
challenges of the current law on a daily basis. Our goal is to work on
a bipartisan basis with all our colleagues in the Senate and in the
House and with the Administration to develop a strong bipartisan bill
that builds on the positive aspects of the law, addresses the concerns
about its implementation, and encourages reforms that we
[[Page 225]]
know will work to help students succeed.
Teachers deserve the resources they need to help students achieve at
higher levels. In many schools, the most valuable resource that
teachers require is time. Yet the U.S. ranks 11th among industrialized
nations in the number of days children attend school. Innovative
approaches are needed to extend the school day and year in high-need
schools. We should recruit Americorps volunteers to coordinate
academically oriented extended-day programs for students and assist
teachers during the school day.
We must also ensure that students in high poverty schools have access
to good teachers. We should create incentives to attract the best
teachers to the neediest schools, including increased salaries for
teachers and principals with strong track records of success who work
in hard-to-staff schools, and by creating ``career advancement
systems'' in which highly effective teachers serve as instructional
leaders for new or less successful teachers. To help teachers improve
their teaching, we should invest more in training them to use the best
data to improve instruction.
We should also help parents by replicating Boston's successful
initiative to place parent-family outreach coordinators in every high-
poverty school, and offer grants to school districts to support
community programs that address children's social, emotional and other
non-academic needs.
We must invest in these and other reforms to give schools the
resources they need to close the achievement gap and ensure that all
students can stay on track to graduate and succeed.
Experience shows that each year yields greater success when
policymakers and educators commit in the long term to higher standards,
better teacher training, stronger accountability, and extra help for
students in need. The initial implementation of the No Child Left
Behind Act has been flawed, but we can't abandon its vision of an
America in which every child is important and deserves to be educated
and enjoy the full benefits of our society.
That vision is as enduring as America itself. As John Adams wrote in
the Massachusetts Constitution of 1780, the education of the people is
``necessary for the preservation of their rights and liberty.'' More
than two hundred years later, we need to recapture that spirit, and
make ``No Child Left Behind'' a reality, not merely a slogan.
I ask unanimous consent that 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. 164
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 ``States Using Collaboration
and Coordination to Enhance Standards for Students Act of
2007'' or the ``SUCCESS Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) Throughout our Nation's history, the skills and
education of our workforce have been a major determinant of
the standard of living of the people of the United States.
(2) According to the most recent National Assessment of
Educational Progress, only 36 percent of the students in
grade 4 and 30 percent of the students in grade 8 reach the
proficient level in mathematics. In reading, only 31 percent
of the students in grades 4 and 8 reach the proficient level.
In science, only 29 percent of the students in grades 4 and 8
reach the proficient level.
(3) A State-by-State comparison of the 2005 National
Assessment of Educational Progress average scale scores for
8th grade mathematics reveals that 31 States--more than \1/2\
of the States in the Nation--scored more than 10 points
(about 1 grade level) below the highest scoring State,
Massachusetts.
(4) Student achievement in mathematics and science in
elementary school and secondary school in the United States
lags behind other nations, according to the Trends in
International Mathematics and Science study and other
studies, including the Programme for International Student
Assessment, that recently ranked United States secondary
school students 28th out of 40 first- and second-world
nations, and tied with Latvia, in mathematics performance and
problem solving.
(5) According to a report released in August, 2006, the
Nation loses more than $3,700,000,000 a year in the costs of
remedial education and in individuals' reduced earning
potential because students are not learning the basic skills
they need to succeed after high school.
SEC. 3. PURPOSES.
The purposes of this Act are the following:
(1) To ensure students receive an education competitive
with other industrialized countries.
(2) To assist States in improving the rigor of standards
and assessments.
(3) To provide for the establishment of prekindergarten
through grade 16 student preparedness councils to better link
early childhood education and school readiness with
elementary school success, elementary student skills with
success in secondary school, and secondary student skills and
curricula, especially with respect to reading, mathematics,
and science, with the demands of higher education, the 21st
century workforce, and the Armed Forces, in order to ensure
that greater number of students, especially low-income and
minority students, complete secondary school with the
coursework and skills necessary to enter--
(A) credit-bearing coursework in higher education without
the need for remediation;
(B) high-paying employment in the 21st century workforce;
or
(C) the Armed Forces.
(4) To establish a system that encourages local educational
agencies to adopt a curriculum that meets State academic
content standards and student academic achievement standards
and prepares all students for success in elementary school,
secondary school, and post-secondary endeavors in the 21st
century.
SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) In general.--The terms ``elementary school'', ``limited
English proficient'', ``local educational agency'',
``scientifically based research'', ``secondary school'',
``Secretary'', and ``State educational agency'' have the
meanings given such terms in section 9101 of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
(2) 21st century curriculum.--The term ``21st century
curriculum'' means a course of study identified by a State as
preparing secondary school students for entrance into credit-
bearing coursework in higher education without the need for
remediation, employment in the 21st century workforce, or
entrance into the Armed Forces. A State shall define the 21st
century curriculum in terms of content as well as course
names.
(3) Academic content standards; student academic
achievement standards.--The terms ``academic content
standards'' and ``student academic achievement standards'',
when used with respect to a particular State, mean the
academic content standards and student academic achievement
standards adopted by a State under section 1111(b)(1) of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
6311(b)(1)).
(4) Critical-need foreign language.--The term ``critical-
need foreign language'' means a language included on the list
of critical-need foreign languages that the Secretary shall
develop and update in consultation with the head official, or
a designee of such head official, of the National Security
Council, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department
of Defense, the Department of State, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, the Department of Labor, and the Department of
Commerce, and the Director of National Intelligence.
(5) End of course examination.--The term ``end of course
examination'' means an assessment of student learning given
at the end of a particular course that is used to measure
student learning of State academic content standards in the
subject matter of the course.
(6) Engineering and technology education.--The term
``engineering and technology education'' means a curriculum
and instruction that--
(A) uses technology as a knowledge base or as a way of
teaching innovation using an engineering design process and
context;
(B) develops an appreciation and fundamental understanding
of technology through design skills and the use of materials,
tools, processes, and limited resources;
(C) is taught in conjunction with applied mathematics,
science, language arts, fine arts, and social studies as a
part of a comprehensive education;
(D) applies the use of tools and skills employed by a
globalized skilled 21st century workforce that are necessary
for communication, manufacturing, construction, energy
systems, biomedical systems, transportation systems, and
other related fields; and
(E) through the application of engineering principles and
concepts, develops proficiency in abstract ideas and in
problem-solving techniques that build a comprehensive
education.
(7) Institution of higher education.--The term
``institution of higher education'' has the meaning given the
term in section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965
(20 U.S.C. 1001(a)).
(8) Professional development.--The term ``professional
development'' includes activities that--
(A) improve and increase teachers' knowledge of the
academic subjects the teachers
[[Page 226]]
teach, and enable teachers to become highly qualified;
(B) are an integral part of broad educational improvement
plans across the school and across the local educational
agency;
(C) give teachers, principals, and administrators the
knowledge and skills to provide students with the opportunity
to meet the State academic content standards and student
academic achievement standards and the 21st century
curriculum demands;
(D) are high-quality, sustained, intensive, and classroom-
focused, in order to have a positive and lasting effect on
classroom instruction and the teacher's performance in the
classroom;
(E) advance teacher understanding of effective
instructional strategies that are based on scientifically
based research and are directly aligned with the State
academic content standards and State assessments;
(F) are designed to give teachers the knowledge and skills
to provide instruction and appropriate language and academic
support services to limited English proficient students and
students with special needs, including the appropriate use of
curricula and assessments;
(G) are, as a whole, regularly evaluated for their impact
on increased teacher effectiveness and improved student
academic achievement, with the findings of the evaluations
used to improve the quality of professional development; and
(H) include instruction in the use of data and assessments
to inform and instruct classroom practice.
(9) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the several
States of the United States, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin
Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands, the Republic of the Marshall
Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic
of Palau.
(10) State assessment.--The term ``State assessment'', when
used with respect to a particular State, means the student
academic assessments implemented by the State pursuant to
section 1111(b)(3) of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(3)).
(11) Student preparedness.--The term ``student
preparedness'' means preparedness based on the knowledge and
skills that--
(A) are prerequisites for entrance into--
(i) credit-bearing coursework in higher education without
the need for remediation;
(ii) the 21st century workforce; and
(iii) the Armed Forces;
(B) can be measured and verified objectively using widely
accepted professional assessment standards; and
(C) are consistent with widely accepted professional
assessment standards and competitive with international
levels of preparedness of students for postsecondary success.
SEC. 5. ALIGNING STATE STANDARDS WITH NATIONAL BENCHMARKS.
(a) Report on Results of State Assessments and National
Assessment.--Not later than 90 days after each release of the
results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress
(as carried out under section 303(b)(2) of the National
Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act (20
U.S.C. 9622(b)(2)) and section 1111(c)(2) of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311(c)(2)))
in reading or mathematics (or, beginning in 2009, science) in
grades 4 and 8, the Secretary shall--
(1) prepare and submit to Congress the report described in
subsection (b) on the results of the State assessments and
the assessments of reading and mathematics, and, beginning in
2009, science, in grades 4 and 8, required under section
1111(c)(2) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965; and
(2) identify States with significant discrepancies in
performance between the 2 assessments, as described in
subsection (b)(3).
(b) Contents of Report.--
(1) In general.--The report described in this subsection
shall include the following information for each subject area
and grade described in subsection (a)(1) in each State:
(A) The percentage of students who performed at or above
the basic level on the State assessment--
(i) for the most recent applicable year;
(ii) for the preceding year; and
(iii) for the previous year in which the assessment
required under section 1111(c)(2) of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 was given in such subject,
and the change in such percentages between those assessments.
(B) The percentage of students who performed at or above
the proficient level on the State assessment--
(i) for the most recent applicable year;
(ii) for the preceding year; and
(iii) for the previous year in which the assessment
required under section 1111(c)(2) of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 was given in such subject,
and the change in such percentages between those assessments.
(C) The percentage of students who performed at or above
the basic level on the assessment required under section
1111(c)(2) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965--
(i) for the most recent applicable year; and
(ii) for the previous such assessment,
and the change in such percentages between those assessments.
(D) The percentage of students who performed at or above
the proficient level on the assessment required under section
1111(c)(2) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965--
(i) for the most recent applicable year; and
(ii) for the previous such assessment,
and the change in such percentages between those assessments.
(E) The difference between--
(i) the percentage of students who performed at or above
the basic level for the most recent applicable year on the
assessment required under section 1111(c)(2) of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965; and
(ii) the percentage of students who performed at or above
the basic level on the State assessment for such year.
(F) The difference between--
(i) the percentage of students who performed at or above
the proficient level for the most recent applicable year on
the assessment required under section 1111(c)(2) of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965; and
(ii) the percentage of students who performed at or above
the proficient level on the State assessment for such year.
(2) Analysis.--In addition to the information described in
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall include in the report--
(A) an analysis of how the achievement of students in
grades 4, 8, and 12, and the preparedness of students in
grade 12 (when such data on preparedness exists from
assessments described in section 303 of the National
Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act (as
amended by this Act)), in the United States compares to the
achievement and preparedness of students in other
industrialized countries; and
(B) possible reasons for any deficiencies identified in the
achievement or preparedness of United States students
compared to students in other industrialized countries.
(3) Ranking.--The Secretary shall--
(A) using the information described in paragraph (1), rank
the States according to the degree to which student
performance on State assessments differs from performance on
the assessments required under section 1111(c)(2) of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965; and
(B) identify those States with the most significant
discrepancies in performance between the State assessments
and the assessments required under section 1111(c)(2) of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.
(c) Report on State Progress.--Beginning 5 years after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall include in
the report described in subsection (a)(1) the following:
(1) Information about the progress made by States to
decrease discrepancies in student performance on the State
assessments and the assessments required under section
1111(c)(2) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965.
(2) The differences that exist in States across subject
areas and grades.
SEC. 6. NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRESS CHANGES.
(a) National Assessment Governing Board.--Section 302 of
the National Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization
Act (20 U.S.C. 9621) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``shall formulate'' and
all that follows through the period at the end and inserting
``shall--
``(1) formulate policy guidelines for the National
Assessment of Educational Progress (carried out under section
303); and
``(2) carry out, upon the request of a State, an alignment
analysis (under section 304) comparing a State's academic
content standards and student academic achievement standards
adopted under section 1111(b)(1) of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965, assessment specifications,
assessment questions, and performance standards with national
benchmarks reflected in the assessments authorized under this
Act.'';
(2) in subsection (b)(1), by adding at the end the
following:
``(O) One representative of the Armed Forces with expertise
in military personnel requirements and military preparedness,
who shall serve as an ex-officio, nonvoting member.'';
(3) in subsection (c), by striking paragraph (4);
(4) in subsection (e)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) in subparagraph (B), by inserting ``and grade 12
student preparedness levels'' after ``achievement levels'';
(ii) in subparagraph (D), by inserting ``members of the
business and military communities,'' after ``parents,'';
(iii) in subparagraph (E), by inserting ``and'' after
``subject matter,'';
(iv) by redesignating subparagraphs (G), (H), (I), and (J)
as subparagraphs (H), (I), (K), and (L), respectively;
(v) by inserting after subparagraph (F) the following:
``(G) consistent with section 303, measure grade 12 student
preparedness;'';
[[Page 227]]
(vi) by inserting after subparagraph (I) (as redesignated
by clause (iv)) the following:
``(J) ensure the rigor of the National Assessment of
Educational Progress framework and assessments, taking into
consideration--
``(i) the knowledge and skills that are prerequisite to
credit-bearing coursework in higher education without the
need for remediation, the 21st century workforce, and the
Armed Forces; and
``(ii) rigorous international content and performance
standards, and how the achievement of students in grades 4,
8, and 12, and the preparedness of students in grade 12, in
the United States compare to the achievement and the
preparedness of students in other industrialized
countries;'';
(vii) in subparagraph (K) (as redesignated by clause (iv)),
by striking ``and'' after the semicolon;
(viii) in subparagraph (L) (as redesignated by clause
(iv)), by striking the period at the end and inserting ``;
and'';
(ix) by inserting after subparagraph (L) the following:
``(M) conduct an alignment analysis as described in section
304 for each State that requests such analysis.''; and
(x) in the flush matter at the end--
(I) by inserting ``for an assessment'' after ``data'';
(II) by inserting ``Assessment Board's'' after ``prior to
the''; and
(III) by striking ``(J)'' and inserting ``(L)'';
(B) in paragraph (4), by inserting ``of Educational
Progress'' after ``National Assessment'';
(C) in paragraph (5), in the paragraph heading, by
inserting ``advice'' after ``Technical''; and
(D) in paragraph (6), by inserting ``or grade 12 student
preparedness levels'' after ``student achievement levels'';
and
(5) in subsection (g)(1), by inserting ``of Educational
Progress'' after ``National Assessment''.
(b) National Assessment of Educational Progress.--Section
303 of the National Assessment of Educational Progress
Authorization Act (20 U.S.C. 9622) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) in the subsection heading, by striking ``Purpose'' and
inserting ``Purposes'';
(B) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
``(1) Purposes.--The purposes of this section are--
``(A) to provide, in a timely manner, a fair and accurate
measurement of student achievement and grade 12 student
preparedness in reading, mathematics, science, and other
subject matter as specified in this section; and
``(B) to report trends in student achievement and grade 12
student preparedness in reading, mathematics, science, and
other subject matter as specified in this section.'';
(C) in paragraph (2)--
(i) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``reading and
mathematics'' and inserting ``reading, mathematics, and
science'';
(ii) by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting the
following:
``(C) conduct a national assessment and collect and report
assessment data, including achievement and student
preparedness data trends, in a valid and reliable manner on
student academic achievement and student preparedness in
public and private schools in reading, mathematics, and
science at least once every 2 years in grade 12;'';
(iii) in subparagraph (D)--
(I) by striking ``subparagraph (B) are implemented and the
requirements described in subparagraph (C) are met,'' and
inserting ``subparagraphs (B) and (C) are implemented,''; and
(II) by striking ``science,'';
(iv) in subparagraph (E)--
(I) by striking ``reading and mathematics'' and inserting
``reading, mathematics, and science''; and
(II) by striking ``subparagraph (B)'' and inserting
``subparagraphs (B) and (C)''; and
(v) in subparagraph (H), by striking ``achievement data''
and inserting ``student achievement data and grade 12 student
preparedness data'';
(D) in paragraph (3)--
(i) in subparagraph (A)--
(I) in clause (i), by striking ``reading and mathematics''
and inserting ``reading, mathematics, and science'';
(II) in clause (ii)--
(aa) by inserting ``and grade 12 student preparedness''
after ``achievement''; and
(bb) by striking ``reading and mathematics'' and inserting
``reading, mathematics, and science''; and
(III) in clause (iv), by striking ``an evaluation'' and
inserting ``a review''; and
(ii) in subparagraph (C)(ii), by striking ``reading and
mathematics'' and inserting ``reading, mathematics, and
science'';
(E) in paragraph (4)(B), by striking ``, require, or
influence'' and inserting ``or require''; and
(F) in paragraph (5)(B), by striking ``academic
achievement'' and inserting ``academic achievement or grade
12 student preparedness'';
(2) in subsection (c)(3)(A), by striking ``academic
achievement'' and inserting ``academic achievement or grade
12 preparedness'';
(3) in subsection (d)(3)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``reading and
mathematics in grades 4 and 8'' and inserting ``reading,
mathematics, and science in grades 4 and 8''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``reading and
mathematics assessments in grades 4 and 8'' and inserting
``reading, mathematics, and science assessments in grades 4
and 8'';
(4) in subsection (e)--
(A) in the subsection heading, by inserting ``and Grade 12
Student Preparedness Levels'' after ``Levels'';
(B) in paragraph (1)--
(i) by striking the paragraph heading and inserting
``Development.--''; and
(ii) by inserting ``, and develop grade 12 student
preparedness levels'' after ``subsection (b)(2)(F)'';
(C) in paragraph (2)--
(i) by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the
following:
``(A) Student achievement and grade 12 preparedness
levels.--
``(i) Student achievement levels.--The student achievement
levels described in paragraph (1) shall be determined by--
``(I) identifying the knowledge and skills that--
``(aa) are prerequisite to credit-bearing coursework in
higher education without the need for remediation in English,
mathematics, or science, participation in the 21st century
workforce, and the Armed Forces or, in the case of grade 4
and grade 8 students, are prerequisite to grade 12
preparedness;
``(bb) are competitive with rigorous international content
and performance standards; and
``(cc) can be measured and verified objectively using
widely accepted professional assessment standards; and
``(II) developing student achievement levels that are--
``(aa) based on the knowledge and skills identified in
subclause (I);
``(bb) based on the appropriate level of subject matter
knowledge for the grade levels to be assessed, or the age of
the students, as the case may be; and
``(cc) consistent with relevant widely accepted
professional assessment standards.
``(ii) Grade 12 student preparedness levels.--The grade 12
student preparedness levels described in paragraph (1) shall
be determined by--
``(I) identifying the knowledge and skills that--
``(aa) are prerequisite to credit-bearing coursework in
higher education without the need for remediation in English,
mathematics, or science, participation in the 21st century
workforce, and the Armed Forces;
``(bb) are competitive with rigorous international content
and performance standards; and
``(cc) can be measured and verified objectively using
widely accepted professional assessment standards; and
``(II) developing grade 12 student preparedness levels that
are--
``(aa) based on the knowledge and skills identified in
subclause (I); and
``(bb) consistent with widely accepted professional
assessment standards.''; and
(ii) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``achievement
levels'' and inserting ``student achievement levels and grade
12 student preparedness levels'';
(D) in paragraph (3)--
(i) by striking ``After determining that such levels'' and
inserting ``After determining that the student achievement
levels and grade 12 student preparedness levels''; and
(ii) by striking ``an evaluation'' and inserting ``a
review''; and
(E) in paragraph (4), by inserting ``or grade 12 student
preparedness levels'' after ``achievement levels''; and
(5) in subsection (f)(1)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ``and grade 12
student preparedness levels'' after ``student achievement
levels''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B)--
(i) in clause (i), by inserting ``or grade 12 student
preparedness'' after ``achievement'';
(ii) in clause (ii), by inserting ``and grade 12 student
preparedness levels'' after ``achievement levels'';
(iii) by striking clause (iii) and inserting the following:
``(iii) whether any authorized assessment is being
administered as a random sample and is reporting the trends
in student achievement or grade 12 student preparedness in a
valid and reliable manner in the subject areas being
assessed;'';
(iv) in clause (iv), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon;
(v) in clause (v), by striking ``and mathematical
knowledge.'' and inserting ``and mathematical knowledge and
scientific knowledge; and''; and
(vi) by adding at the end the following:
``(vi) whether the appropriate authorized assessments are
measuring, consistent with this section, the preparedness of
students in grade 12 in the United States for entry into--
``(I) credit-bearing coursework in higher education without
the need for remediation in English, mathematics, or science;
``(II) the 21st century workforce; and
``(III) the Armed Forces.''.
(c) National Benchmarks.--The National Assessment of
Educational Progress Authorization Act (20 U.S.C. 9621 et
seq.) is amended--
[[Page 228]]
(1) by redesignating sections 304 and 305 as sections 305
and 306, respectively; and
(2) by inserting after section 303 the following:
``SEC. 304. NATIONAL BENCHMARKS.
``(a) Purposes.--The purposes of this section are--
``(1) to encourage the coordination of, and consistency
between--
``(A) a State's academic content standards and student
academic achievement standards adopted under section
1111(b)(1) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965, assessment specifications, and assessment questions;
and
``(B) national benchmarks, as reflected in the National
Assessment of Educational Progress;
``(2) to assist States in increasing the rigor of their
State academic content standards, student academic
achievement standards, assessment specifications, and
assessment questions, to ensure that such standards,
specifications, and questions are competitive with rigorous
national and international benchmarks; and
``(3) to improve the instruction and academic achievement
of students, beginning in the early grades, to ensure that
secondary school graduates are well-prepared to enter--
``(A) credit-bearing coursework in higher education without
the need for remediation;
``(B) the 21st century workforce; or
``(C) the Armed Forces.
``(b) Alignment Analysis.--
``(1) In general.--When the chief State school officer of a
State identifies a need for, and requests the Assessment
Board to conduct, an alignment analysis for the State in
reading, mathematics, or science in grades 4 and 8, the
Assessment Board shall perform an alignment analysis of the
State's academic content standards and student academic
achievement standards adopted under section 1111(b)(1) of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
6311(b)(1)), assessment specifications, and assessment
questions, for the identified subject in grades 4 and 8. Such
analysis shall begin not later than 180 days after the
alignment analysis is requested.
``(2) Assessment board responsibilities.--As part of the
alignment analysis, the Assessment Board shall--
``(A) identify the differences between the State's academic
content standards and student academic achievement standards,
assessment specifications, and assessment questions for the
subject identified by the State, and national benchmarks
reflected in the National Assessment of Educational Progress
in such subject in grades 4 and 8;
``(B) at the State's request, recommend steps for, and
policy questions such State should consider regarding, the
alignment of the State's academic content standards and
student academic achievement standards in the identified
subject, with national benchmarks reflected in the National
Assessment of Educational Progress in such subject in grades
4 and 8; and
``(C) at the State's request, and in conjunction with a
State prekindergarten through grade 16 student preparedness
council established under section 7 of the States Using
Collaboration and Coordination to Enhance Standards for
Students Act of 2007, assist in the development of a plan
described in section 7(e)(1)(C) of such Act.
``(3) Contract.--At the discretion of the Assessment Board,
the Assessment Board may enter into a contract with an entity
that possesses the technical expertise to conduct the
analysis described in this subsection.
``(4) State panel.--The chief State school officer of a
State participating in an alignment analysis described in
this subsection shall appoint a panel of not less than 6
individuals to partner with the Assessment Board in
conducting the alignment analysis. Such panel--
``(A) shall include--
``(i) local and State curriculum experts;
``(ii) relevant content and pedagogy experts, including
representatives of entities with widely accepted national
educational standards and assessments; and
``(iii) not less than 1 entity that possesses the technical
expertise to assist the State in implementing standards-based
reform, which may be the same entity with which the
Assessment Board contracts to conduct the analysis under
paragraph (3); and
``(B) may include other State and local representatives and
representatives of organizations with relevant expertise.''.
(d) Definition of Secretary.--Section 305 of the National
Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act (as
redesignated by subsection (c)(1)) is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3); and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
``(2) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the Secretary
of Education.''.
(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 306(a) of the
National Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act
(as redesignated by subsection (c)(1)) is amended--
(1) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
``(1) for fiscal year 2008--
``(A) $7,500,000 to carry out section 302;
``(B) $200,000,000 to carry out section 303; and
``(C) $10,000,000 to carry out section 304; and''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) by striking ``5 succeeding'' and inserting ``4
succeeding''; and
(B) by striking ``and 303, as amended by section 401 of
this Act'' and inserting ``, 303, and 304''.
(f) Conforming Changes and Amendments.--
(1) Conforming changes to the elementary and secondary
education act of 1965.--
(A) State plans.--Section 1111(c)(2) of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311(c)(2)) is
amended by striking ``and mathematics'' and inserting ``,
mathematics, and science''.
(B) Local educational agency plans.--Section 1112(b)(1)(F)
of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 6312(b)(1)(F)) is amended by striking ``reading and
mathematics'' and inserting ``reading, mathematics, and
science''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 113(a)(1) of the
Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002 (20 U.S.C. 9513(a)(1))
is amended by striking ``section 302(e)(1)(J)'' and inserting
``section 302(e)(1)(L)''.
SEC. 7. PREKINDERGARTEN THROUGH GRADE 16 STUDENT PREPAREDNESS
COUNCIL GRANTS.
(a) Program Authorized.--
(1) In general.--From amounts appropriated under subsection
(g) for a fiscal year, the Secretary is authorized to award,
on a competitive basis, grants to States for the purpose of
allowing the States to establish State prekindergarten
through grade 16 student preparedness councils (referred to
in this section as ``councils'') that--
(A) convene stakeholders within the State and create a
forum for identifying and deliberating on educational issues
that cut across prekindergarten through grade 12 education
and higher education, and transcend any single system of
education's ability to address;
(B) develop and implement a plan for improving the rigor of
a State's academic content standards, student academic
achievement standards, assessment specifications, and
assessment questions as necessary, to ensure such standards
and assessments meet national and international benchmarks as
reflected in the assessments required under section 303(b)(2)
of the National Assessment of Educational Progress
Authorization Act (20 U.S.C. 9622(b)(2)) or as defined by the
council as necessary for success in credit-bearing coursework
in higher education without the need for remediation, the
21st century workforce, or the Armed Forces;
(C) inform the design and implementation of integrated
prekindergarten through grade 16 data systems, which--
(i) will allow the State to track the progress of
individual students from prekindergarten through grade 12 and
into higher education; and
(ii) shall be capable of being linked with appropriate
databases on service in the Armed Forces and participation in
the 21st century workforce; and
(D) develop challenging--
(i) school readiness standards;
(ii) curricula for elementary schools and middle schools;
and
(iii) 21st century curricula for secondary schools.
(2) Duration.--The Secretary shall award grants under this
section for a period of not more than 5 years.
(3) Existing state council.--A State with an existing State
council may qualify for the purposes of a grant under this
section if--
(A) such council--
(i) has the authority to carry out this section; and
(ii) includes the members required under subsection (b); or
(B) the State amends the membership or responsibilities of
the existing council to meet the requirements of subparagraph
(A).
(b) Composition.--
(1) Required members.--The members of a council described
in subsection (a) shall include--
(A) the Governor of the State or the designee of the
Governor;
(B) the chief executive officer of the State public
institution of higher education system, if such a position
exists;
(C) the chief executive officer of the State higher
education coordinating board;
(D) the chief State school officer;
(E) not less than 1 representative each from--
(i) the business community; and
(ii) the Armed Forces;
(F) a public elementary school teacher employed in the
State; and
(G) a public secondary school teacher employed in the
State.
(2) Optional members.--The council described in subsection
(a) may also include--
(A) a representative from--
(i) a private institution of higher education;
(ii) the Chamber of Commerce for the State;
(iii) a civic organization;
(iv) a civil rights organization;
(v) a community organization; or
(vi) an organization with expertise in world cultures;
(B) the State official responsible for economic
development, if such a position exists; or
[[Page 229]]
(C) a dean or similar representative for a school of
education at an institution of higher education or a similar
teacher certification or licensure program.
(c) Timeline.--A State receiving a grant under this section
shall establish a council (or use or amend an existing
council in accordance with subsection (a)(3)) not later than
60 days after the receipt of the grant.
(d) Application.--
(1) In general.--Each State desiring a grant under this
section shall submit an application to the Secretary at such
time, in such manner, and accompanied by such information as
the Secretary may reasonably require.
(2) Contents.--Each application submitted under paragraph
(1) shall--
(A) demonstrate that the opinions of the larger education,
business, and military community, including parents,
students, teachers, teacher educators, principals, school
administrators, and business leaders, will be represented
during the determination of the State academic content
standards and student academic achievement standards,
assessment specifications, assessment questions, and the
development of curricula, if applicable;
(B) include a comprehensive plan to provide high-quality
professional development for teachers, paraprofessionals,
principals, and school administrators;
(C) explain how the State will provide assistance to local
educational agencies in implementing rigorous State standards
through substantive curricula, including scientifically based
remediation and acceleration opportunities for students; and
(D) explain how the State and the council will leverage
additional State, local, and other funds to pursue curricular
alignment and student success.
(e) Use of Funds.--
(1) Required activities.--A State receiving a grant under
this section shall use the grant funds to establish a council
that shall carry out the following:
(A) Design and implement an integrated prekindergarten
through grade 16 longitudinal data system for the State, if
such system does not exist, that will allow the State to
track the progress of students from prekindergarten, through
grade 12, and into higher education, the 21st century
workforce, and the Armed Forces. The data system shall--
(i) include--
(I) a unique statewide student identifier for each student;
(II) student-level enrollment, demographic, and program
participation information, including race or ethnicity,
gender, and income status;
(III) the ability to match individual students' test
records from year to year to measure academic growth;
(IV) information on untested students;
(V) a teacher identifier system with the ability to match
teachers to students;
(VI) student-level transcript information, including
information on courses completed and grades earned;
(VII) student-level college preparedness examination
scores;
(VIII) student-level graduation and dropout data;
(IX) the ability to match student records between the
prekindergarten through grade 12 and the postsecondary
systems;
(X) a State data audit system assessing data quality,
validity, and reliability;
(XI) rates of student attendance at institutions of higher
education;
(XII) rates of student enrollment and retention in the
Armed Forces; and
(XIII) student nonmilitary postsecondary employment
information;
(ii) to the extent possible, coordinate with other relevant
State databases, such as criminal justice or social services
data systems;
(iii) allow the State to analyze correlations between
course-taking patterns in prekindergarten through grade 12
and outcomes after secondary school graduation, including--
(I) entry into higher education;
(II) the need for, and cost of, remediation in higher
education;
(III) graduation from higher education;
(IV) entry into the 21st century workforce;
(V) entry into the Armed Forces; and
(VI) to the extent possible through linkages with
appropriate databases on service in the Armed Forces and
participation in the 21st century workforce, persistence in
the Armed Forces and continued participation in the 21st
century workforce; and
(iv) ensure that the use of any available data does not
allow for the public identification of the individual
student's personally identifiable information, and that all
data shall be collected and maintained in accordance with
section 444 of the General Education Provisions Act (20
U.S.C. 1232g; commonly referred to as the Family Educational
Rights and Privacy Act of 1974).
(B) If an integrated prekindergarten through grade 16
longitudinal data system exists or is currently being built,
ensure that it complies with the requirements described in
subparagraph (A).
(C) Develop and implement a plan to increase the rigor of
standards or assessments in reading, mathematics, or science
in order to better align such standards or assessments with
national benchmarks reflected in the National Assessment of
Educational Progress in grades 4 and 8 (in accordance with
the results of the alignment analysis conducted under section
304 of the National Assessment of Educational Progress
Authorization Act), and in other grades to ensure the
alignment of kindergarten through grade 12 standards or
assessments with the revisions made in grades 4 and 8, or to
align such standards or assessments with the demands of
higher education, the 21st century workforce, or the Armed
Forces or other national and international benchmarks
identified by the council. Such plan may include--
(i) an articulation of the steps necessary--
(I) for revising the State academic content standards and
student academic achievement standards, assessment
specifications, and assessment questions for the identified
subject; and
(II) to better align the standards and the assessment
specifications and questions described in subclause (I)
with--
(aa) national benchmarks as reflected in the National
Assessment of Educational Progress required under section 303
of the National Assessment of Educational Progress
Authorization Act (20 U.S.C. 9622) for the identified
subject; or
(bb) the demands of higher education, the 21st century
workforce, or the Armed Forces or other national or
international benchmarks identified by the council;
(ii) an articulation of the steps necessary and the process
the State will undertake to revise standards or assessments,
or both, in the identified subject;
(iii) a description of the partners the State will work
with to revise standards or assessments, or both; and
(iv) a description of the activities the State will
undertake to implement the revised standards or assessments,
or both, at the State educational agency level and the local
educational agency level, which activities may include--
(I) preservice and in-service teacher, paraprofessional,
principal, and school administrator training;
(II) statewide meetings to provide professional development
opportunities for teachers and administrators;
(III) development of curricula and instructional methods
and materials;
(IV) the redesign of existing assessments, or the
development or purchase of new high-quality assessments, with
a focus on ensuring that such assessments are rigorous,
measure significant depth of knowledge, use multiple measures
and formats (such as student portfolios), and are sensitive
to inquiry-based, project-based, or differentiated
instruction; and
(V) other activities necessary for the effective
implementation of the new State standards or assessments, or
both.
(D) Analyze the State's level of prekindergarten through
grade 16 curricular alignment and the success of the State's
education system in preparing students for higher education,
the 21st century workforce, and the Armed Forces by--
(i) using the data produced by a data system described in
subparagraph (A) or (B), or other information as appropriate;
and
(ii) exploring a possible agreement between the State
educational agency and the higher education system in the
State on a common assessment or assessments that--
(I) shall follow established guidelines to guarantee
reliability and validity;
(II) shall provide adequate accommodations for students who
are limited English proficient and students with
disabilities; and
(III) may be a placement examination, end of course
examination, college, workforce, or Armed Forces preparedness
examination, or admissions examination, that measures
secondary students' preparedness to succeed in postsecondary,
credit-bearing courses.
(E) If the State has an officially designated college
preparatory curriculum at the time the State applies for a
grant under this section--
(i) describe the extent to which students who completed the
college preparatory curriculum are more or less successful
than other students, including students who did not complete
a college preparatory curriculum, in entering and graduating
from a program of study at an institution of higher education
or entering the 21st century workforce or the Armed Forces;
(ii) examine the extent to which the expectations of the
college preparatory curriculum are aligned with the entry
standards of the State's institutions of higher education,
including whether such curriculum enables secondary school
students to enter credit-bearing coursework in higher
education without the need for remediation; and
(iii) examine the extent to which the curriculum allows
graduates to attain the skills necessary to enter the 21st
century workforce or the Armed Forces.
(F) If the State has not designated a college preparatory
curriculum at the time the State applied for a grant under
this section, or if the curriculum described in subparagraph
(E) does not result in a higher number of students enrolling
in and graduating from institutions of higher education or
entering the 21st century workforce or the Armed Forces, or
is not aligned with the entry
[[Page 230]]
standards described in subparagraph (E)(ii), develop a 21st
century curriculum that--
(i) may be adopted by the local educational agencies in the
State for use in secondary schools;
(ii) enables secondary school students to enter credit-
bearing coursework in higher education without the need for
remediation;
(iii) allows graduates to attain the skills necessary to
enter the 21st century workforce or the Armed Forces;
(iv) reflects the input of teachers, principals, school
administrators, and college faculty; and
(v) focuses on providing rigorous core courses that reflect
the State academic content standards and student academic
achievement standards.
(G) Develop and make available specific opportunities for
extensive professional development for teachers,
paraprofessionals, principals, and school administrators, to
improve instruction and support mechanisms for students using
a curriculum described in subparagraph (E) or (F).
(H) Develop a plan to provide remediation and additional
learning opportunities for students below grade level to
ensure that all students will have the opportunity to meet
the curricular standards of a curriculum described in
subparagraph (E) or (F).
(I) Use data gathered by the council to improve
instructional methods, better tailor student support
services, and serve as the basis for all school reform
initiatives.
(J) Implement activities designed to ensure the enrollment
of all students in rigorous coursework, which may include--
(i) specifying the courses and performance levels required
for acceptance into public institutions of higher education;
(ii) collaborating with institutions of higher education or
other State educational agencies to develop assessments
aligned to State academic content standards and a curriculum
described in subparagraph (E) or (F), which assessments may
be used as measures of student achievement in secondary
school as well as for entrance or placement at institutions
of higher education;
(iii) creating ties between elementary schools and
secondary schools, and institutions of higher education, to
offer--
(I) accelerated learning opportunities, particularly with
respect to mathematics, science, engineering, technology, and
critical-need foreign languages to secondary school students,
which may include--
(aa) granting postsecondary credit for secondary school
courses;
(bb) providing early enrollment opportunities in
postsecondary education for secondary students enrolled in
postsecondary-level coursework;
(cc) creating dual enrollment programs;
(dd) creating satellite secondary school campuses on the
campuses of institutions of higher education; and
(ee) providing opportunities for higher education faculty
who are highly qualified, as such term is defined in section
9101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965
(20 U.S.C. 7801), to teach credit-bearing postsecondary
courses in secondary schools; and
(II) professional development activities for teachers,
which may include--
(aa) mentoring opportunities; and
(bb) summer institutes;
(iv) expanding or creating higher education awareness
programs for middle school and secondary school students;
(v) expanding opportunities for students to enroll in
highly rigorous postsecondary preparatory courses, such as
Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate courses;
and
(vi) developing a high-quality professional development
curriculum to provide professional development opportunities
for paraprofessionals, teachers, principals, and
administrators.
(2) Planning and implementation.--A State receiving a grant
under this section may use grant funds received for the first
fiscal year to form the council and plan the activities
described in paragraph (1). Grant funds received for
subsequent fiscal years shall be used for the implementation
of the activities described in such paragraph.
(f) Reports and Publication.--
(1) Reports.--
(A) Initial report.--Not later than 9 months after a State
receives a grant under this section, the State shall submit a
report to the Secretary that includes--
(i) an analysis of alignment and articulation across the
State's systems of public education for prekindergarten
through grade 16, including data that indicates the percent
of students who--
(I) graduate from secondary school with a regular diploma
in the standard number of years;
(II) complete a curriculum described in subparagraph (E) or
(F) of subsection (e)(1);
(III) matriculate into an institution of higher education
(disaggregated by 2-year and 4-year degree-granting
programs);
(IV) are secondary school graduates who need remediation in
reading, writing, mathematics, or science before pursuing
credit-bearing post-secondary courses in English,
mathematics, or science;
(V) persist in an institution of higher education into the
second year; and
(VI) graduate from an institution of higher education
within 150 percent of the expected time for degree completion
(within 3 years for a 2-year degree program and within 6
years for a baccalaureate degree);
(ii) an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the
State--
(I) in transitioning students from the prekindergarten
through grade 12 education system into higher education, the
21st century workforce, and the Armed Forces; and
(II) in transitioning students from the prekindergarten
through grade 12 education system into mathematics, science,
engineering, technology, and critical-need foreign language
degree programs at institutions of higher education;
(iii) an analysis of the quality and rigor of the State's
curriculum described in subparagraph (E) or (F) of subsection
(e)(1), and the accessibility of the curriculum to all
students in prekindergarten through grade 12;
(iv) an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the
State in recruiting, retaining, and supporting qualified
teachers, including--
(I) whether the State needs to recruit additional teachers
at the secondary level for specific subjects (such as
mathematics, science, engineering and technology education,
and critical-need foreign languages), particular schools, or
local educational agencies; and
(II) recommendations on how to set and achieve goals in
this pursuit; and
(v) a detailed action plan that describes how the council
will accomplish the goals and tasks required by the grant
under this section, including a timeline for accomplishing
all activities under the grant.
(B) Annual reports.--Not later than 1 year following the
submission of the initial report described in subparagraph
(A), and annually thereafter for the duration of the grant, a
State receiving a grant under this section shall prepare and
submit to the Secretary a report that describes the State's
progress in accomplishing the goals and tasks required by the
grant, including progress on each item described in
subparagraph (A). The final annual report under this
subparagraph shall be submitted 1 year after the expiration
of the grant.
(2) Publication.--A State submitting a report in accordance
with this subsection shall publish and widely disseminate the
report to the public, including posting the report on the
Internet.
(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $200,000,000 for
fiscal year 2008, and such sums as may be necessary for each
of the 4 succeeding fiscal years.
SEC. 8. COLLABORATIVE STANDARDS AND ASSESSMENTS GRANTS.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Eligible state.--The term ``eligible State'' means a
State that demonstrates that it has analyzed and, where
applicable, revised the State standards and assessments,
through participation in a prekindergarten through grade 16
student preparedness council described in section 7 or
through other State action, to ensure the standards and
assessments--
(A) are aligned with the demands of the 21st century; and
(B) prepare students for entry into--
(i) credit-bearing coursework in higher education without
the need for remediation;
(ii) the 21st century workforce; and
(iii) the Armed Forces
(2) Eligible consortium.--
(A) In general.--The term ``eligible consortium'' means a
consortium of 2 or more eligible States that agrees to allow
the Secretary, under subsection (e), to make available any
assessment developed by the consortium under this section to
a State that so requests, including a State that is not a
member of the consortium.
(B) Additional members.--An eligible consortium may
include, in addition to 2 or more eligible States, an entity
with the technical expertise to carry out a grant under this
section.
(b) Program Authorized.--From amounts authorized under
subsection (f), the Secretary shall award grants, on a
competitive basis, to eligible consortia to enable the
eligible consortia to develop common standards and
assessments that--
(1) are highly rigorous, internationally competitive, and
aligned with the demands of higher education, the 21st
century workforce, and the Armed Forces; and
(2) in the case of assessments, set rigorous performance
standards comparable to rigorous national and international
benchmarks.
(c) Application.--An eligible consortium desiring a grant
under this section shall submit an application to the
Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing such
information as the Secretary may require.
(d) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the end of the
grant period, an eligible consortium receiving a grant under
this section shall prepare and submit a report to the
Secretary describing the grant activities.
(e) Availability of Assessments.--The Secretary shall--
(1) make available, to a State that so requests and at no
charge to the State, any rigorous, high-quality assessment
developed by an eligible consortium under this section; and
[[Page 231]]
(2) notify potential eligible States, at reasonable
intervals, of all assessments currently under development by
eligible consortia under this section.
(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $75,000,000 for
fiscal year 2008 and such sums as are necessary for each of
the 4 succeeding fiscal years.
______
By Mr. McCAIN (for himself, Mr. DeMint, Mr. Smith, and Mr.
Sununu):
S. 166. A bill to restrict any State from imposing a new
discriminatory tax on cell phone services; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to be joined by Senator
DeMint in introducing the Cell Phone Tax Moratorium Act of 2007. This
bill would put a stop to new discriminatory taxes on cell phone
services for a period of 3 years.
The average general sales tax in the U.S. today is around six
percent, but the average State and local taxes and fees on cell phone
service comes in at about 17 percent. Consumers are left paying a hefty
portion of their monthly cell phone bill to the Government for what
many believe is their most important communications device.
The National Conference of State Legislatures and the National
Governors' Association have issued policy positions calling for states
to eliminate excessive and discriminatory taxes on communications
services. State and local governments have been working with the
telecommunications industry to find a solution to these excessive
taxes, but no agreement has been reached. During the three year
moratorium, it is my hope that State and local governments--in
cooperation with industry--will work to eliminate discriminatory taxes
and fees on wireless services.
Excessive taxes dampen innovation, and are regressive, hitting the
most vulnerable customers the hardest. Although more then 72 percent of
all Americans own a cell phone, 26 percent said they could not live
without it because it is their only communications source, according to
a recent Pew Internet and Life Project report. Cell phone only owners
are often those who find it difficult to afford a wired and a wireless
phone. Additionally, according to the same report, 74 percent of the
Americans say they have used their cell phone in an emergency and
gained valuable assistance.
Some State and local governments cannot move beyond the idea that
wireless services are some kind of luxury item that can be taxed at a
higher rate. These services may have been a luxury item many years ago,
but due to deregulation wireless services are more affordable than ever
and even necessary for personal or business reasons. This is why it is
perplexing that some states burden cell phone subscribers with taxes
and fees that can be as high as 24 percent of a consumer's total bill.
Tax rates as high as this are generally associated with cigarettes
and alcohol and known as ``sin taxes'' designed to reduce consumption.
I cannot imagine it is the intention of states and localities to reduce
consumption of wireless services.
Mindful of the revenue requirements of States and localities, this
bill does not eliminate existing discriminatory taxes. Nor does the
bill prohibit states and localities from imposing new taxes on wireless
services that are not discriminatory. The bill simply puts a stop to
the creation of new discriminatory taxes on cell phone services.
Last year I introduced similar legislative language during a mark-up
in the Senate Commerce Committee. The amendment passed with a vote 21-
1. I am hopeful that this bill will once again be supported by the
Commerce Committee and that it will be approved by the full Senate. I
ask my colleagues to join me in ending the discriminatory sales taxes
on this very popular communications service.
______
By Mrs. BOXER:
S. 167. A bill to amend the Clean Air Act to require the Secretary of
Energy to provide grants to eligible entities to carry out research,
development, and demonstration projects of cellulosic ethanol and
construct infrastructure that enables retail gas stations to dispense
cellulosic ethanol for vehicle fuel to reduce the consumption of
petroleum-based fuel; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Cellulosic
Ethanol Development and Implementation Act of 2007.
As a Nation, we should be striving for greater energy independence
and for more environmentally friendly sources of fuel for our
automobiles. Cellulosic ethanol is fuel ethanol made from glucose, a
sugar derived from the cellolose in biomass. It is chemically identical
to ethanol made from food crops like corn and sugar cane. Cellulosic
ethanol is more difficult to make, because cellulose is a tough
structural material that gives plants their strength.
However, making ethanol from cellulose lets us tap into a much larger
source of sugars, and, therefore, potentially make much larger amounts
of fuel ethanol, tens of billions of gallons or more. An additional
benefit is that cellulosic ethanol made from biomass is likely to
produce smaller amounts of greenhouse gases than corn ethanol, and far
less greenhouse gases than gasoline it will replace. With continued
technology improvements, it should be cheaper than gasoline. Because it
is locally made, it reduces the need for oil imports.
An April 2005 study by the Department of Energy and Agriculture
indicates that the country currently has a supply of biomass sufficient
to displace 30 percent of the country's present petroleum use.
I am introducing this bill because I believe we should be doing more
to harness our Nation's cellulosic ethanol potential. I have been a
strong proponent of using alternative transportation fuels and
efficiency measures to reduce oil dependence. Last Congress, we took a
good first step in the development of cellulosic ethanol. The Energy
Policy Act of 2005, known as EPAct 05, requires that at least one-third
of the Nation's ethanol be produced from cellulose by 2013.
In addition, EPAct 05 also created a new ethanol section of the Clean
Air Act (Section 212). In that section, one subsection, section 212(e),
includes language I authored to establish a new cellulosic production
conversion assistance grant program. That program, housed at the
Department of Energy, provides financial assistance to encourage the
building of new cellulosic facilities in the U.S. The program was
authorized to receive $250 million in fiscal year 2006 and $400 million
in fiscal year 2007.
Though Congress has taken the steps I've just described, I believe we
can and should do more, and the bill I introduce today does just that.
It would add two new cellulosic ethanol programs to the Clean Air
Act. The first is a new competitive grant program for cellulosic motor
vehicle fuel research and demonstration projects. Funded at $1 billion
over 6 years, universities, Federal and State research labs, private
industry, nonprofit groups, or partnerships between any of these
groups, would be able to compete for funds.
My bill would also create a new pilot program for the installation of
ethanol fuel pumps at gas stations or any other needed infrastructure
required to dispense ethanol fuel, such as a storage tank, for example.
Funded at $1 billion over 6 years, the same entities that would
participate in the research section of the bill would also be able to
compete for funds under this program. Successful applicants would have
to provide 20 percent of the grant in matching funds.
Finally, my bill also extends the authorization for the original
cellulosic grant program that is currently authorized in EPAct 05. The
authorization expires at the end of this year, and the bill I introduce
today would extend it at $400 million per year thru 2010. This
extension will ensure the program continues.
As Chair of the Environment and Public Works Committee, I believe
that our Nation's energy policy must focus on conservation,
improvements in energy efficiency, and the development of clean,
renewable energy technology. I continue to support measures
[[Page 232]]
to accomplish these goals, including the promotion of cellulosic
ethanol. I believe this bill is an important next step in achieving
these objectives. I ask content that a copy 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. 167
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 ``Cellulosic Ethanol
Development and Implementation Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. CELLULOSIC ETHANOL FUEL DEVELOPMENT AND
IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM.
Section 212 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7546) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(f) Cellulosic Ethanol Fuel Grant Program.--
``(1) Definition of eligible entity.--In this subsection,
the term `eligible entity' means--
``(A) an institution of higher education;
``(B) a National Laboratory;
``(C) a Federal research agency;
``(D) a State research agency;
``(E) a private sector entity;
``(F) a nonprofit organization; or
``(G) a consortium of 2 or more entities described in
subparagraphs (A) through (F).
``(2) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish a
program to provide grants to eligible entities for use in
carrying out research, development, and demonstration
projects relating to the use of cellulosic ethanol fuel for
motor vehicles.
``(3) Application.--An eligible entity that seeks to
receive a grant under this subsection shall submit to the
grant review committee described in paragraph (4) an
application for the grant at such time, in such form, and
containing such information as the grant review committee may
require.
``(4) Grant review committee.--Applications for grants
under this subsection shall be reviewed, and approved or
disapproved, by a grant review committee composed of an equal
number of representatives of--
``(A) the Department of Energy, to be appointed by the
Secretary;
``(B) the Department of Agriculture, to be appointed by the
Secretary of Agriculture;
``(C) the Environmental Protection Agency, to be appointed
by the Administrator; and
``(D) experts that are not full-time employees of the
Federal Government, to be appointed by the President.
``(5) Priority.--In awarding grants under this subsection,
the grant review committee shall give priority to eligible
entitles that propose to carry out--
``(A) projects that use alternative or renewable energy
sources in the production of cellulosic ethanol fuel; and
``(B) demonstration projects.
``(6) Matching funds.--As a condition of receiving a grant
under this subsection, an eligible entity shall provide
matching funds in the amount of 20 percent of the total
amount of the grant.
``(7) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this subsection
$1,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2007 through
2013.
``(g) Infrastructure Pilot Program for Cellulosic Ethanol
Fuel.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish a pilot
program to provide grants to eligible entities (as described
in subsection (d)(2) or defined in subsection (f)) for use in
installing infrastructure (such as pumps) that would enable
retail gas stations to sell and dispense ethanol fuel.
``(2) Application.--An eligible entity that seeks to
receive a grant under this subsection shall submit to the
Secretary an application for the grant at such time, in such
form, and containing such information as the Secretary may
require.
``(3) Matching funds.--As a condition of receiving a grant
under this subsection, an eligible entity shall provide
matching funds in the amount of 20 percent of the total
amount of the grant.
``(4) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this subsection
$1,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2007 through
2013.''.
SEC. 3. CELLULOSIC BIOMASS ETHANOL CONVERSION ASSISTANCE.
Section 212(e) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7546(e)) is
amended by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the
following:
``(3) Authorization of appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subsection
$400,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2010.''.
______
By Mr. ALLARD (for himself and Mr. Salazar):
S. 168. A bill to direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to
establish a national cemetery for veterans in the Pikes Peak Region of
Colorado; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I am reintroducing legislation to
establish a National Veteran's Cemetery in the Pikes Peak Region of
Colorado in order to meet the needs of veterans in southern Colorado.
This legislation is similar to what I have introduced and supported in
the past, and seeks to fill a void for many veterans and their
families. Colorado's fifth Congressional District contains the third
highest concentration of military retirees in the nation. Recent
estimates show that there are as many as 175,000 veterans in the area,
when including all of southern Colorado. This legislation will allow
thousands of eligible southern Colorado military personnel, both active
duty and retired as well as the many veterans living in the area, to
have a chance to find their final resting place in the region so many
of them have come to love and appreciate.
This legislation has been influenced by the growing military retiree
and veterans populations in the Pikes Peak region as well as community
leaders and local Veterans Service Organizations who have repeatedly
brought this issue to my attention over the last several years. It is
important to note the passion and perseverance of those that have
supported a National Veterans Cemetery and have worked tirelessly on
the issue. This legislation is truly citizen-generated and is a
testament to the dedication of veterans in the community.
______
By Mr. ALLARD (for himself and Mr. Levin):
S. 169. A bill to amend the National Trails System Act to clarify
Federal authority relating to land acquisition from willing sellers for
the majority of the trails in the System, and for other purposes; to
the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, the National Trails System Willing Seller
Act will pave the way for the completion of our Nation's most
outstanding national trails. The legislation will amend the National
Trails System Act of 1968 to make clear that the Federal Government may
purchase land to complete several national trails from willing sellers.
The legislation specifically names nine trails that are spread across
the nation. The Continental Divide trail, stretching from Mexico
through Colorado to the Canadian border, is among the trails that await
completion.
I was successful in gaining Senate passage of this legislation in the
108th Congress and am hopeful that both the House and Senate will act
on the bill this year.
______
By Mr. INHOFE (for himself and Mr. Coburn):
S. 171. A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal
Service located at 301 Commerce Street in Commerce, Oklahoma, as the
``Mickey Mantle Post Office Building''; to the Committee on Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I rise today along with my colleague, Tom
Coburn, to proudly introduce legislation to designate the facility of
the United States Postal Service located at 301 Commerce Street in
Commerce, OK as the ``Mickey Mantle Post Office.''
Mickey Mantle emulates the Oklahoma spirit of hard work, charity, and
sportsmanship. He is a shining example of how commitment and dedication
can lead to great success. I seek to name the post office in Commerce,
Oklahoma, in Mickey Mantle's honor. He is still known to Commerce by
the nicknames ``Commerce Comet'' or ``Commerce Kid''.
At age 4, Mickey Mantle moved with his family to Commerce where he
grew up, having been born in Spavinaw, OK. By his father who was an
amateur player and fervent fan, Mickey Mantle was named in honor of
Mickey Cochrane, the Hall of Fame catcher from the Detroit Tigers.
Signing with the New York Yankees in 1949, Mantle made his Major
League Debut in 1951. He played his entire Major League career with the
Yankees. He was a twenty-time All Star and named American League MVP
three times. Mantle was a part of 12 pennant winners and 7 World
Championship clubs. Some of Mantle's records still hold today. He holds
the record for
[[Page 233]]
most World Series home runs 18, runs batted in 40, runs 42, walks 43,
extra-base hits 26, and total bases 123.
Mantle announced his retirement on March 1, 1969. He actually retired
on Mickey Mantle Day, June 8, 1969. In addition to the retirement of
his uniform number 7, Mantle was given a plaque that would hang on the
center field wall at Yankee Stadium, near the monuments to Babe Ruth,
Lou Gehrig and Miller Huggins. In 1974, as soon as he was eligible, he
was inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame demonstrating his
importance to baseball and community.
Sadly, Mickey Mantle's father died of cancer at the age of 39, just
as his son was starting his career. Mantle said one of the great
heartaches of his life was that he never told his father he loved him.
After a bout with liver cancer himself, Mickey Mantle was given a few
precious extra weeks of life due to a liver transplant. The baseball
great was overwhelmed by the selfless gift of a liver from a stranger;
therefore, Mickey became determined to give something back at the end
of his life. Thus, in 1995, the year he died, the Mickey Mantle
Foundation was established to promote organ and tissue donation, and
Mickey Mantle will be remembered for something more than his heroic
baseball career.
I encourage my colleagues to join me in support of this legislation
as we commemorate an outstanding athlete so that future generations
will be as inspired by his example of sportsmanship and charity as we
have been.
______
Mr. INHOFE (for himself and Mr. DeMint):
S. 173. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to
establish Medicare Health Savings Accounts; to the Committee on
Finance.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I introduce a bill to establish Medicare
Health Savings Account, HSAs. This bill will make HSAs available under
Medicare in lieu of Medicare Medical Savings Account, MSAs. I have long
been dedicated to quality health care and believe that seniors should
have the ability to make their own decisions regarding their health
care, so they can receive the health care they need and deserve. As a
senior myself, I appreciate how imperative it is that we seniors be
provided with a wide array of choices.
My desire to see my fellow Oklahomans and all Americans receive the
best possible health care is evidenced by my involvement in various
health-related issues. I have always been a champion of rural health
care providers. In 1997, I was one of the few Republicans to vote
against the Balanced Budget Act because of its lack of support for
rural hospitals. At that time, I made a commitment to not allow our
rural hospitals to be closed and am pleased we finally addressed that
important issue in the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 by providing
great benefits for rural health care providers as well as a voluntary
prescription drug benefit to seniors. In 2003, I also co-sponsored the
Health Care Access and Rural Equity Act, to protect and preserve access
of Medicare beneficiaries to health care in rural regions.
In order to assist my State and other States suffering from large
reduction in their Federal Medical Assistance Percentage, FMAP for
Medicaid, I introduced a bill in the 109th Congress to apply a State's
FMAP from fiscal year 2005 to fiscal years 2006 through 2014. The
purpose of this legislation is to prevent drastic reductions in FMAP
while revision of the formula itself is considered.
I am a strong advocate of medical liability reform and have
consistently been an original cosponsor of the Medical Care Access
Protection Act and the Healthy Mothers and Healthy Babies Access to
Care Act. These bills protect patients' access to quality and
affordable health care by reducing the effects of excessive liability
costs. I am committed to this vital reform that would alleviate the
burden placed on physicians and patients by excessive medical
malpractice lawsuits.
I have also worked with officials from the Centers for Medicare and
Medicaid Services, CMS to expand access to life-saving Implantable
Cardiac Defibrillators and many other numerous regulations that would
affect my rural State such as the 250 yard-rule for Critical Access
Hospitals.
As a supporter of safety and medical research, I have co-sponsored
legislation to increase the supply of pancreatic islet cells for
research and a bill to take the abortion pill RU-486 off the market in
the United States.
In response to the shortages of flu vaccines experienced in years
past, I introduced the Flu Vaccine Incentive Act to help prevent any
future shortages in flu vaccines in both the 108th and 109th
Congresses. My bill removed suffocating price controls from government
purchasing of the flu vaccine while encouraging more companies to enter
the market. Also, my bill freed American companies to enter the flu
vaccine industry by giving them an investment tax credit towards the
construction of flu vaccine production facilities.
As a result of my sister's death from cancer and a treatment we
learned about not accessible in the United States that might have saved
her life, Senator Sam Brownback and I introduced the Access,
Compassion, Care and Ethics for Seriously-ill Patients Act, ACCESS, in
the 109th Congress. This bill offered a three-tiered approval system
for treatments showing efficacy during clinical trials, for use by the
seriously ill patient population. Seriously ill patients, who have
exhausted all alternatives and are seeking new treatment options, would
be offered access to these treatments with the consent of their
physician. I was pleased to learn that the Food and Drug Administration
has announced a proposal to offer expanded access to drugs to
terminally ill patients.
My resolution to designate April 8, 2006, as ``National Cushing's
Syndrome Awareness Day'' was passed by unanimous consent in the 109th
Congress. The intent of this resolution is to raise awareness of
Cushing's Syndrome, a debilitating disorder that affects an estimated
10 to 15 people per million. It is an endocrine or hormonal disorder
caused by prolonged exposure of the body's tissue to high levels of the
hormone cortisol.
It was brought to my attention thanks to a staffer with Celiac
Disease and an Oklahoma Celiac Support Group that there is a great need
to raise awareness of celiac disease; therefore, I worked to get my
resolution passed by unanimous consent to designate September 13, 2006
as National Celiac Disease Awareness Day. Celiac disease is an
autoimmune disorder and a malabsorption disease that affects an
estimated 2.2 million Americans. Celiac disease is, essentially,
intolerance to gluten, a protein found in wheat, rye, oats and barley,
as well as some medicines and vitamins.
Additionally, I have consistently co-sponsored yearly resolutions
designating a day in October as ``National Mammography Day'' and a week
in August as ``National Health Center Week'' to raise awareness
regarding both these issues and have supported passage and enactment of
numerous health-care-related bills, such as the Rural Health Care
Capital Access Act of 2006, which extends the exemption respecting
required patient days for critical access hospitals under the federal
hospital mortgage insurance program.
As the Federal Government invests in improving hospitals and
healthcare initiatives, I have fought hard to ensure that Oklahoma gets
its fair share. Specifically, over the past 3 years, I have helped to
secure $5.2 million in funding for the Oklahoma Medical Research
Foundation, the Oklahoma State Department of Health planning initiative
for a rural telemedicine system, the INTEGRIS Healthcare System, the
University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, the Oklahoma Center for
the Advancement of Science and Technology, St. Anthony's Heart
Hospital, the Hillcrest Healthcare System, and the Morton Health
Center.
As a long supporter of HSAs, I believe all people should have access
to them since they provide great flexibility in the health market and
allow individuals to have control over their own health care. Medicare
MSAs have
[[Page 234]]
existed since January 1, 1997, revised in December of 2003, but they
have not worked. No insurer whatsoever has yet offered any Medicare MSA
under the current law. To fix this problem, my legislation creates a
new HSA program under Medicare that incorporates a high deductible
health plan and an HSA account while dissolving the existing Medicare
MSA.
In tandem with my efforts, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Service, CMS, are launching an HSA demonstration project that would
test allowing health insurance companies to offer Medicare
beneficiaries products similar to HSA. This activity points to the
Administration's support of HSAs and desire to see all seniors receive
the best possible coverage.
As the July 13, 2006 edition of The Hill, explains, ``no legislation
is pending that would integrate HSAs into the Medicare program . .
.'' Thus, my legislation is necessary because real Medicare HSA reform
is needed in order for seniors to have true flexibility and freedom of
choice in their health care.
Under my bill, beneficiaries who choose the HSA option will receive
an annual amount that is equal to 95 percent of the annual Medicare
Advantage, MA, capitation rate with respect to the individual's MA
payment area. These funds provided through the Medicare HSA program can
only be used by the beneficiary for the following purposes: as a
contribution into an HSA or for payment of high deductible health plan
premiums. However, the individual also has the opportunity to deposit
personal funds in to the Medicare HSA.
My bill also guarantees that seniors be notified of the amount they
will receive 90 days before receipt to ensure they have time to
determine the best and most appropriate HSA to accommodate needs. The
bill also allows the Secretary of Health and Human Services to deal
with fraud appropriately and requires providers to accept payment by
individuals enrolled in a Medicare HSA just as they would with an
individual enrolled in traditional Medicare.
Please join me in supporting this important legislation to give our
seniors more choices regarding their health care.
______
By Mr. INHOFE:
S. 174. A bill to amend the Head Start Act to require parental
consent for nonemergency intrusive physical examinations; to the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I introduce legislation requiring parental
consent for intrusive physical exams administered under the Head Start
program.
Young children attending Head Start programs should not be subjected
to these intrusive physical exams without the prior knowledge or
consent of their parents. While the Department of Health and Human
Services has administered general exam guidelines to agencies, the U.S.
Code is not clear about prohibiting them without parental consent. To
clarify the Code, my bill will not allow any non-emergency intrusive
exam by a Head Start agency without parental consent. This would not
include exams such as hearing, vision or scoliosis screenings.
This issue was brought to my attention by some of my constituents
from Tulsa, OK, who felt their rights were violated when their children
were subjected to genital exams and blood tests without their consent.
I am pleased to see that the Rutherford Institute has taken an interest
in this crucial issue and are representing my constituents.
As a father and grandfather, I believe it is vital for parents to be
informed about what is happening to their children in the classroom. I
hope that my colleagues will join me in support of this important bill.
______
By Mrs. HUTCHISON (for herself, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Alexander, Mr.
Ensign, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Martinez, Mr. Thune, and Mr. Stevens):
S. 180. A bill to provide a permanent deduction for State and local
general sales taxes; to the Committee on Finance.
Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce a bill to
permanently correct an injustice in the tax code that has harmed
citizens in many States of this great Nation.
State and local governments have various alternatives for raising
revenue.
Some levy income taxes, some use sales taxes, and others use a
combination of the two. The citizens who pay State and local income
taxes have been able to offset some of their federal income taxes by
receiving a deduction for those State and local income taxes. Before
1986, taxpayers also had the ability to deduct their sales taxes.
The philosophy behind these deductions is simple: people should not
have to pay taxes on their taxes. The money that people must give to
one level of Government should not also be taxed by another level of
Government.
Unfortunately, citizens of some States were treated differently after
1986 when the deduction for State and local sales taxes was eliminated.
This discriminated against those living in States, such as my home
State of Texas, with no income taxes. It is important to remember the
lack of an income tax does not mean citizens in these States do not pay
State taxes; revenues are simply collected differently.
It is unfair to give citizens from some States a deduction for the
revenue they provide their State and local governments, while not doing
the same for citizens from other States. Federal tax law should not
treat people differently on the basis of State residence and differing
tax collection methods, and it should not provide an incentive for
States to establish income taxes over sales taxes.
This discrepancy had a significant impact on Texas. According to the
Texas Comptroller, the sales tax deduction saves a family of four $310
a year, or a total of about $1 billion each year for the State's
residents who itemize deductions. The ability of taxpayers to deduct
their sales taxes will lead to the creation of more than 16,500 new
jobs and the addition of $920 million in State economic activity.
Recognizing the inequity in the tax code, Congress reinstated the
sales tax deduction in 2004 and authorized it for two years. Last year,
we extended the sales tax deduction for an additional two years. As a
result of our efforts, the 55 million of us in the eight States with a
sales tax but no income tax are no longer discriminated against in the
tax code. Unfortunately, the deduction is only in effect through 2007,
and we must act to prevent the inequity from returning.
The legislation I am offering today will fix this problem for good by
making the State and local sales tax deduction permanent. This will
permanently end the discrimination suffered by my fellow Texans and
citizens of other States who do not have the option of an income tax
deduction.
This legislation is about reestablishing equity to the tax code and
defending the important principle of eliminating taxes on taxes. Last
year, the Senate voted 75-25 to instruct conferees to make this
deduction permanent. I hope my fellow Senators will once again support
this effort and pass this legislation.
______
By Mrs. HUTCHISON (for herself, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Bunning, Mr.
Ensign, Mr. Hagel, Mr. Martinez, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Chambliss, Mr.
Stevens, and Mr. Brownback):
S. 181. A bill to provide permanent tax relief from the marriage
penalty; to the Committee on Finance.
Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce a bill to
provide permanent tax relief from the marriage penalty--the most
egregious, anti-family provision that has been in the tax code. One of
my highest priorities in the United States Senate has been to relieve
American taxpayers of this punitive burden.
We have made important strides to eliminate this unfair tax and
provide marriage penalty relief by raising the standard deduction and
enlarging the 15 percent tax bracket for married joint filers to twice
that of single filers. Before these provisions were
[[Page 235]]
changed, 44 million married couples, including 2.4 million Texas
families, paid an average penalty of $1,480.
Enacting marriage penalty relief was a giant step for tax fairness,
but it may be fleeting. Even as married couples use the money they now
save to put food on the table and clothes on their children, a tax
increase looms in the future. Since the 2001 tax relief bill was
restricted, the marriage penalty provisions will only be in effect
through 2010. In 2011, marriage will again be a taxable event and 43
percent of married couples will again pay more in taxes unless we act
decisively. Given the challenges many families face in making ends
meet, we must make sure we do not backtrack on this important reform.
The benefits of marriage are well established, yet, without marriage
penalty relief, the tax code provides a significant disincentive for
people to walk down the aisle. Marriage is a fundamental institution in
our society and should not be discouraged by the IRS. Children living
in a married household are far less likely to live in poverty or to
suffer from child abuse. Research indicates these children are also
less likely to be depressed or have developmental problems. Scourges
such as adolescent drug use are less common in married families, and
married mothers are less likely to be victims of domestic violence.
We should celebrate marriage, not penalize it. The bill I am offering
would make marriage penalty relief permanent, because marriage should
not be a taxable event. I call on the Senate to finish the job we
started and make marriage penalty relief permanent today.
______
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. Feingold, Mr.
Leahy, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Kennedy, and Mr. Durbin):
S. 182. A bill to authorize the Attorney General to make grants to
improve the ability of State and local governments to prevent the
abduction of children by family members, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senators
Hutchison, Feingold, Leahy, Snowe, Kennedy and Durbin in reintroducing
the ``Family Abduction Prevention Act,'' a bill to help the thousands
of children who are abducted by a family member each year.
We introduced this legislation last Congress, and it passed the
Senate by unanimous consent, but unfortunately, the bill was never
taken up by the House. This is important and needed legislation.
Family abductions are the most common form of abduction, yet they
receive little attention, and law enforcement agencies too often don't
treat them as the serious crimes that they are--too often dismissing
the seriousness of these cases as family disputes.
The Family Abduction Prevention Act of 2007 would provide grants to
States for the costs associated with family abduction prevention.
Specifically, it would assist States with costs associated with the
extradition of individuals suspected of committing the crime of family
abduction, costs borne by State and local law enforcement agencies to
investigate cases of missing children, training for local and State law
enforcement agencies in responding to family abductions, outreach and
media campaigns to educate parents on the dangers of family abductions,
and assistance to public schools to help with costs associated with
``flagging'' school records.
Each year, over 200,000 children--78 percent of all abductions in the
United States--are kidnapped by a family member, usually a non-
custodial parent.
More than half of the abducting parents have a history of domestic
violence, substance abuse, or a criminal record.
Unfortunately, many State and local law enforcement agencies
frequently treat these abductions as personal, family disputes.
Approximately 70 percent of law enforcement agencies lack written
guidelines on responding to family abduction and many are not informed
about the Federal laws available to help in the search and recovery of
an abducted child.
Too often law enforcement assumes that a child is not in grave danger
if the abductor is a family member. Unfortunately, this is not always
true, and this assumption can endanger a child's life. Research has
shown that the most common motive in family abduction cases is revenge
against the other parent--not love for the child.
The effects of family abduction on children are often traumatic.
Abducted children suffer from severe separation anxiety. To break
emotional ties with the left-behind parent, some abductors will coach a
child into falsely disclosing abuse by the other parent to perpetuate
their control during or after the abduction. And in many cases, the
child is told that the other parent is dead or did not really love
them.
For example, on Takeroot.org, a website devoted to the victims of
family abductions, a young lady named Kelly told the story of how her
parents were going through a bitter divorce and custody battle when she
was nine, and her brother was six. Her dad picked them up for a regular
visit, but then just kept on driving.
Kelly says, ``If I close my eyes, I can still see my mother waving
goodbye as we watched her from the rear window of our father's truck. .
. . Little did we know that it would be close to a year before we would
see her again.''
Days later, Kelly started asking her father why they were continuing
to drive--and why they were sleeping in the truck. After a while, her
father finally broke his silence and screamed at her that her mother
had given him the children because she didn't love them and that they
would just have to learn to deal with it.
For the next eleven months, they lived like fugitives on the run,
often dirty and hungry, ``with very little money and even less love,''
according to Kelly. ``We left in the middle of the night, never saying
goodbye to friends we may have made or people we met. I still see those
people in my mind's eye. I miss them. . . . Mostly, I miss the child I
was, the child I lost.''
The harm caused by these abductions cannot easily be put into words.
In many family abduction cases, children are given new identities at an
age when they are still developing a sense of who they are. In extreme
cases, the child's gender is masked to further avoid detection.
Abducting parents also often deprive their children of education and
much-needed medical attention to avoid the risk of being tracked via
school or medical records.
As the child adapts to a fugitive's lifestyle, deception becomes an
integral part of their life. The child is taught to fear those that one
would normally trust, such as police, doctors, teachers and counselors.
Even after recovery, the child often has a difficult time growing into
adulthood.
In some cases, the abducting parent leaves the child with strangers,
or locations where their health, safety, and other basic needs may be
extremely compromised.
For example, in Lafayette, CA, two girls abducted by their mother
ended up under the control of a convicted child molester. When Kelli
Nunez absconded with her daughters, 6-year-old Anna and 4-year-old
Emily, in violation of court custody orders, she drove her daughters
cross-country, and then returned by plane to San Francisco, where she
handed the children to someone holding a coded sign at the airport.
The person holding the sign belonged to a helpful-sounding
organization called the California Family Law Center--but the
organization was actually led by Florencio Maning, a convicted child
molester. For six months, Maning orchestrated the concealment of the
Nunez girls with help from other people.
Luckily, police were able to track down the girls, and they were
successfully reunited with their father. That success may have been due
to the fact that California has been the Nation's leader in fighting
family abduction.
In my State, we have a system that places the responsibility for the
investigation and resolution of family abduction cases with the County
District
[[Page 236]]
Attorney's Office. Each California County District Attorney's Office
has an investigative unit that is focused on family abduction cases.
These investigators only handle family abduction cases and become
experts in the process.
However, most States lack the training and resources to effectively
recover children who are kidnapped by a family member. According to a
study conducted by Plass, Finkelhor and Hotaling, 62 percent of parents
surveyed said they were ``somewhat'' or ``very'' dissatisfied with
police handling of their family abduction cases.
The ``Family Abduction Prevention Act of 2007'' would be an important
first step in addressing this serious issue.
I urge my colleagues to pass this important legislation, just as you
did in the 109th Congress.
______
By Mr. STEVENS:
S. 183. A bill to require the establishment of a corporate average
fuel economy standard for passenger automobiles of 40 miles per gallon
2017, and for other purpose; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, the bill that I introduce today features
language that would remove the legal ambiguity that for years has
inhibited the Secretary of Transportation from raising fuel economy
standards for passenger cars, and the measure would mandate that a fuel
economy standard for passenger cars be set at 40 miles per gallon by
model year 2017. By providing authority to increase standards for
passenger cars, and requiring a specific fuel economy standard target,
this bill would provide consumers with fuel savings at the pump, limit
the Nation's dependence on foreign oil, and significantly reduce
greenhouse gas emissions.
The bill would remove from the current Corporate Average Fuel Economy
(CAFE) statute the requirement that the Secretary of Transportation
submit to Congress any proposal to increase or decrease fuel economy
standards. This requirement has been deemed unconstitutional by the
U.S. Supreme Court. This legal hurdle, coupled with years of Federal
funding legislation precluding the Secretary from reviewing CAFE, has
prevented increases in fuel economy in the domestic passenger vehicle
fleet.
The Secretary recently completed a dramatic reform of the fuel
economy standards for the light-truck fleet, and he might have made
similar reforms to the passenger fleet but for the statutory ambiguity
of the current CAFE statute. I applaud the Secretary for his recent
CAFE increases for light trucks, and I commend the administration for
its seven light truck CAFE increases in the last six years. But the
time has come for the Secretary to increase fuel economy standards for
passenger cars as well.
In 2000, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) issued a report that
concluded that the benefits resulting from CAFE since its
implementation in 1978 clearly warrant Government intervention to
ensure fuel economy levels beyond what may result from market forces
alone. The NAS panel found that CAFE has led to marked improvements in
reducing greenhouse gas emissions, fuel consumption, and dependence on
foreign oil.
Mr. President, the United States imports almost 11 million barrels of
crude oil every day, compared with only five million produced here at
home. And over two million imported barrels hail from the Persian Gulf
region. The terrorist attacks waged on this country on September 11,
2001, and the ongoing turmoil in the Middle East has brought into focus
the need to reduce our dependence on all foreign oil. The savings
achieved by increasing fuel economy standards for the entire U.S.
passenger vehicle fleet is essential if we are to increase our energy
independence and national security.
This bill also would require the Secretary of Commerce to create a
national registry system that, for the first time, would enable the
automobile industry to trade fuel economy credits with other industries
that generate greenhouse gas emissions. Participation in the registry
would be voluntary, and any entity conducting business in the United
States would be eligible to utilize the services of the registry.
Therefore, automobile manufacturers would be able to contribute or
purchase emissions credits with other industries that generate
greenhouse gases in order to achieve compliance with CAFE and emissions
standards.
Mr. President, any change to fuel economy standards requires the
careful balance of many factors, including national security, consumer
preference, domestic employment, as well as the need for powerful and
durable vehicles in rural America, including my home State of Alaska.
The amendment would provide the Secretary the authority to balance
these considerations, and to make the appropriate and necessary fuel
economy increases. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 183
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 ``Improved
Passenger Automobile Fuel Economy 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--40 MPG STANDARD BY 2017
Sec. 101. Cafe standards for passenger automobiles.
Sec. 102. Fuel economy standard credits.
Sec. 103. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 104. Effective date.
TITLE II--MARKET--BASED INITIATIVES FOR GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION
Sec. 201. Market-based initiatives.
Sec. 202. Implementing panel.
Sec. 203. Definitions.
TITLE I--40 MPG STANDARD BY 2017
SEC. 101. CAFE STANDARDS FOR PASSENGER AUTOMOBILES.
(a) Average Fuel Economy Standards for Automobiles.--
Section 32902 of title 49, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking subsections (b) and (c) and inserting the
following:
``(b) Passenger Automobiles.--
``(1) In general.--At least 18 months before the beginning
of each model year, the Secretary of Transportation shall
prescribe by regulation average fuel economy standards for
passenger automobiles manufactured by a manufacturer in that
model year. Each standard shall be the maximum feasible
average fuel economy level that the Secretary decides the
manufacturers can achieve in that model year. The Secretary
may prescribe separate standards for different classes of
passenger automobiles.
``(2) Minimum standard.--Except as provided in paragraph
(3), in prescribing a standard under paragraph (1), the
Secretary shall ensure that no manufacturer's standard for a
particular model year is less than the greater of--
``(A) the standard in effect on the date of enactment of
the Improved Passenger Automobile Fuel Economy Act of 2007;
or
``(B) a standard established in accordance with the
requirement of section 104(c)(2) of that Act.
``(3) 40 miles per gallon standard for model year 2017.--
The Secretary shall prescribe an average fuel economy
standard for passenger automobiles manufactured by a
manufacturer in model year 2017 of 40 miles per gallon. If
the Secretary determines that more than 1 manufacturer is not
reasonably expected to achieve that standard, the Secretary
shall notify the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee on
Energy and Commerce of that determination.
``(c) Flexibility of Authority.--
``(1) In general.--The authority of the Secretary to
prescribe by regulation average fuel economy standards for
automobiles under this section includes the authority to
prescribe standards based on one or more vehicle attributes
that relate to fuel economy, and to express the standards in
the form of a mathematical function. The Secretary may issue
a regulation prescribing standards for one or more model
years.
``(2) Required lead-time.--When the Secretary prescribes an
amendment to a standard under this section that makes an
average fuel economy standard more stringent, the Secretary
shall prescribe the amendment at least 18 months before the
beginning of the model year to which the amendment applies.
``(3) No across-the-board increases.--When the Secretary
prescribes a standard, or prescribes an amendment under this
section that changes a standard, the standard may not be
expressed as a uniform percentage increase from the fuel-
economy performance of
[[Page 237]]
automobile classes or categories already achieved in a model
year by a manufacturer.'';
(2) by inserting ``motor vehicle safety, emissions,'' in
subsection (f) after ``economy,'';
(3) by striking ``energy.'' in subsection (f) and inserting
``energy and reduce its dependence on oil for
transportation.'';
(4) by striking subsection (j) and inserting the following:
``(j) Notice of Final Rule.--Before taking final action on
a standard or an exemption from a standard under this
section, the Secretary of Transportation shall notify the
Secretary of Energy and the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency and provide them a reasonable
time to comment on the standard or exemption.''; and
(5) by adding at the end thereof the following:
``(k) Costs-Benefits.--The Secretary of Transportation may
not prescribe an average fuel economy standard under this
section that imposes marginal costs that exceed marginal
benefits, as determined at the time any change in the
standard is promulgated.''.
(b) Exemption Criteria.--The first sentence of section
32904(b)(6)(B) of title 49, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``exemption would result in reduced'' and
inserting ``manufacturer requesting the exemption will
transfer'';
(2) by striking ``in the United States'' and inserting
``from the United States''; and
(3) by inserting ``because of the grant of the exemption''
after ``manufacturing''.
(c) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 32902 of title 49, United States Code, is
amended--
(A) by striking ``or (c)'' in subsection (d)(1);
(B) by striking ``(c),'' in subsection (e)(2);
(C) by striking ``subsection (a) or (d)'' each place it
appears in subsection (g)(1) and inserting ``subsection (a),
(b), or (d)'';
(D) by striking ``(1) The'' in subsection (g)(1) and
inserting ``The'';
(E) by striking subsection (g)(2); and
(F) by striking ``(c),'' in subsection (h) and inserting
``(b),''.
(2) Section 32903 of such title is amended by striking
``section 32902(b)-(d)'' each place it appears and inserting
``subsection (b) or (d) of section 32902''.
(3) Section 32904(a)(1)(B) of such title is amended by
striking ``section 32902(b)-(d)'' and inserting ``subsection
(b) or (d) of section 32902''.
(4) The first sentence of section 32909(b) of such title is
amended to read ``The petition must be filed not later than
59 days after the regulation is prescribed.''.
(5) Section 32917(b)(1)(B) of such title is amended by
striking ``or (c)''.
SEC. 102. FUEL ECONOMY STANDARD CREDITS.
(a) In General.--Section 32903 of title 49, United States
Code, is amended by striking the second sentence of
subsection (a) and inserting ``The credits--
``(1) may be applied to any of the 3 model years
immediately following the model year for which the credits
are earned; or
``(2) transferred to the registry established under section
201 of the Improved Passenger Automobile Fuel Economy Act of
2007.''.
(b) Greenhouse Gas Credits Applied to CAFE Standards.--
Section 32903 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(g) Greenhouse Gas Credits.--
``(1) In general.--A manufacturer may apply credits
purchased through the registry established by section 201 of
the Improved Passenger Automobile Fuel Economy Act of 2007
toward any model year after model year 2010 under subsection
(d), subsection (e), or both.
``(2) Limitation.--A manufacturer may not use credits
purchased through the registry to offset more than 10 percent
of the fuel economy standard applicable to any model year.''.
SEC. 103. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of
Transportation such sums as may be necessary to carry out
this title and chapter 329 of title 49, United States Code,
as amended by this title.
SEC. 104. EFFECTIVE DATE.
(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), this
title, and the amendments made by this title, take effect on
the date of enactment of this Act.
(b) Transition for Passenger Automobile Standard.--
Notwithstanding subsection (a), and except as provided in
subsection (c)(2), until the effective date of a standard for
passenger automobiles that is issued under the authority of
section 32902(b) of title 49, United States Code, as amended
by this Act, the standard or standards in place for passenger
automobiles under the authority of section 32902 of that
title, as that section was in effect on the day before the
date of enactment of this Act, shall remain in effect.
(c) Rulemaking.--
(1) Initiation of rulemaking under amended law.--Within 60
days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary
of Transportation shall initiate a rulemaking for passenger
automobiles under section 32902(b) of title 49, United States
Code, as amended by this Act.
(2) Amendment of existing standard.--Until the Secretary
issues a final rule pursuant to the rulemaking initiated in
accordance with paragraph (1), the Secretary shall amend the
average fuel economy standard prescribed pursuant to section
32092(b) of title 49, United States Code, with respect to
passenger automobiles in model years to which the standard
adopted by such final rule does not apply.
TITLE II--MARKET-BASED INITIATIVES FOR GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION
SEC. 201. MARKET-BASED INITIATIVES.
(a) Establishment of Registry for Voluntary Trading
Systems.--The Secretary of Commerce shall establish a
national registry system for greenhouse gas trading among
industry under which emission reductions from the applicable
baseline are assigned unique identifying numerical codes by
the registry. Participation in the registry is voluntary. Any
entity conducting business in the United States may register
its emission results, including emissions generated outside
of the United States, on an entity-wide basis with the
registry, and may utilize the services of the registry.
(b) Purposes.--The purposes of the national registry are--
(1) to encourage voluntary actions to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions and increase energy efficiency, including
increasing the fuel economy of passenger automobiles and
light trucks and reducing the reliance by United States
markets on petroleum produced outside the United States used
to provide vehicular fuel;
(2) to enable participating entities to record voluntary
greenhouse gas emissions reductions; in a consistent format
that is supported by third party verification;
(3) to encourage participants involved in existing
partnerships to be able to trade emissions reductions among
partnerships;
(4) to further recognize, publicize, and promote
registrants making voluntary and mandatory reductions;
(5) to recruit more participants in the program; and
(6) to help various entities in the nation establish
emissions baselines.
(c) Functions.--The national registry shall carry out the
following functions:
(1) Referrals.--Provide referrals to approved providers for
advice on--
(A) designing programs to establish emissions baselines and
to monitor and track greenhouse gas emissions; and
(B) establishing emissions reduction goals based on
international best practices for specific industries and
economic sectors.
(2) Uniform reporting format.--Adopt a uniform format for
reporting emissions baselines and reductions established
through--
(A) the Director of the National Institute of Standards and
Technology for greenhouse gas baselines and reductions
generally; and
(B) the Secretary of Transportation for credits under
section 32903 of title 49, United States Code.
(3) Record maintenance.--Maintain a record of all emission
baselines and reductions verified by qualified independent
auditors.
(4) Encourage participation.--Encourage organizations from
various sectors to monitor emissions, establish baselines and
reduction targets, and implement efficiency improvement and
renewable energy programs to achieve those targets.
(5) Public awareness.--Recognize, publicize, and promote
participants that--
(A) commit to monitor their emissions and set reduction
targets;
(B) establish emission baselines; and
(C) report on the amount of progress made on their annual
emissions.
(d) Transfer of Reductions.--The registry shall--
(1) allow for the transfer of ownership of any reductions
realized in accordance with the program; and
(2) require that the registry be notified of any such
transfer within 30 days after the transfer is effected.
(e) Future Considerations.--Any reductions achieved under
this program shall be credited against any future mandatory
greenhouse gas reductions required by the government. Final
approval of the amount and value of credits shall be
determined by the agency responsible for the implementation
of the mandatory greenhouse gas emission reduction program,
except that credits under section 32903 of title 49, United
States Code, shall be determined by the Secretary of
Transportation. The Secretary of Commerce shall by rule
establish an appeals process, that may incorporate an
arbitration option, for resolving any dispute arising out of
such a determination made by that agency.
(f) CAFE Standards Credits.--The Secretary of
Transportation shall work with the Secretary of Commerce and
the implementing panel established by section 202 to
determine the equivalency of credits earned under section
32903 of title 49, United States Code, for inclusion in the
registry. The Secretary shall by rule establish an appeals
process, that may incorporate an arbitration option, for
resolving any dispute arising out of such a determination.
SEC. 202. IMPLEMENTING PANEL.
(a) Establishment.--There is established within the
Department of Commerce an implementing panel.
(b) Composition.--The panel shall consist of--
[[Page 238]]
(1) the Secretary of Commerce or the Secretary's designee,
who shall serve as Chairperson;
(2) the Secretary of Transportation or the Secretary's
designee; and
(3) 1 expert in the field of greenhouse gas emissions
reduction, certification, or trading from each of the
following agencies--
(A) the Department of Energy;
(B) the Environmental Protection Agency;
(C) the Department of Agriculture;
(D) the National Aeronautics and Space Administration;
(E) the Department of Commerce; and
(F) the Department of Transportation.
(c) Experts and Consultants.--Any member of the panel may
secure the services of experts and consultants in accordance
with the provisions of section 3109 of title 5, United States
Code, for greenhouse gas reduction, certification, and
trading experts in the private and non-profit sectors and may
also utilize any grant, contract, cooperative agreement, or
other arrangement authorized by law to carry out its
activities under this subsection.
(d) Duties.--The panel shall--
(1) implement and oversee the implementation of this
section;
(2) promulgate--
(A) standards for certification of registries and operation
of certified registries; and
(B) standards for measurement, verification, and recording
of greenhouse gas emissions and greenhouse gas emission
reductions by certified registries;
(3) maintain, and make available to the public, a list of
certified registries; and
(4) issue rulemakings on standards for measuring,
verifying, and recording greenhouse gas emissions and
greenhouse gas emission reductions proposed to the panel by
certified registries, through a standard process of issuing a
proposed rule, taking public comment for no less than 30
days, then finalizing regulations to implement this act,
which will provide for recognizing new forms of acceptable
greenhouse gas reduction certification procedures.
(e) Certification and Operation Standards.--The standards
promulgated by the panel shall include--
(1) standards for ensuring that certified registries do not
have any conflicts of interest, including standards that
prohibit a certified registry from--
(A) owning greenhouse gas emission reductions recorded in
any certified registry; or
(B) receiving compensation in the form of a commission
where sources receive money for the total number of tons
certified;
(2) standards for authorizing certified registries to enter
into agreements with for-profit persons engaged in trading of
greenhouse gas emission reductions, subject to paragraph (1);
and
(3) such other standards for certification of registries
and operation of certified registries as the panel determines
to be appropriate.
(f) Measurement, Verification, and Recording Standards.--
The standards promulgated by the panel shall provide for, in
the case of certified registries--
(1) ensuring that certified registries accurately measure,
verify, and record greenhouse gas emissions and greenhouse
gas emission reductions, taking into account--
(A) boundary issues such as leakage and shifted
utilization; and
(B) such other factors as the panel determines to be
appropriate;
(2) ensuring that--
(A) certified registries do not double-count greenhouse gas
emission reductions; and
(B) if greenhouse gas emission reductions are recorded in
more than 1 certified registry, such double-recording is
clearly indicated;
(3) determining the ownership of greenhouse gas emission
reductions and recording and tracking the transfer of
greenhouse gas emission reductions among entities (such as
through assignment of serial numbers to greenhouse gas
emission reductions);
(4) measuring the results of the use of carbon
sequestration and carbon recapture technologies;
(5) measuring greenhouse gas emission reductions resulting
from improvements in--
(A) power plants;
(B) automobiles (including types of passenger automobiles
and light trucks, as defined in section 32901(a)(16) and (17)
respectively, produced in the same model year);
(C) carbon re-capture, storage and sequestration, including
organic sequestration and manufactured emissions injection,
and or storage.
(D) other sources;
(6) measuring prevented greenhouse gas emissions through
the rulemaking process and based on the latest scientific
data, sampling, expert analysis related to measurement and
projections for prevented greenhouse gas emissions in tons
including--
(A) organic soil carbon sequestration practices;
(B) forest preservation and re-forestation activities which
adequately address the issues of permanence, leakage and
verification; and
(7) such other measurement, verification, and recording
standards as the panel determines to be appropriate.
(g) Certification of Registries.--Except as provided in
subsection (h), a registrant that desires to be a certified
registry shall submit to the panel an application that--
(1) demonstrates that the registrant meets each of the
certification standards established by the panel under
subsections (d) and (e); and
(2) meets such other requirements as the panel may
establish.
(h) Automobile Industry.--The Secretary of Transportation
is deemed to be the certified registrant for credits earned
under section 32903 of title 49, United States Code.
(i) Annual Report.--Within 1 year after the date after the
date of enactment of this Act and biennially thereafter, the
panel shall report to the Congress on the status of the
program established under this section. The report shall
include an assessment of the level of participation in the
program and amount of progress being made on emission
reduction targets.
SEC. 203. DEFINITIONS.
In this title:
(1) Greenhouse Gas.--The term ``greenhouse gas'' includes--
(A) carbon dioxide;
(B) methane;
(C) hydro fluorocarbons;
(D) perfluorocarbons;
(E) nitrous oxide; and
(F) sulfur hexafluoride.
(2) Baseline.--The term ``baseline'' means--
(A) the greenhouse gas emissions, determined on an entity-
wide basis for the participant's most recent previous 3-year
annual average of greenhouse gas emissions prior to the date
of enactment of this Act; or
(B) if data is unavailable for that 3-year period, the
greenhouse gas emissions as of September 30, 2004, (or as
close to that date as such emission levels can reasonably be
determined). In promulgating regulations under this title,
the panel shall take into account greenhouse gas emission
reductions or off-setting actions taken by any entity before
the date on which the registry is established.
(3) Certified registry.--The term ``certified registry''
means a registry that has been certified by the panel as
meeting the standards promulgated under section 202(e) and
(f) and, for the automobile industry, the Secretary of
Transportation.
(4) Greenhouse gas emissions.--The term ``greenhouse gas
emissions'' means the quantity of greenhouse gases emitted by
a source during a period, measured in tons of greenhouse
gases.
(5) Greenhouse gas emission reduction.--The term
``greenhouse gas emission reduction'' means a quantity equal
to the difference between--
(A) the greenhouse gas emissions of a source during a
period; and
(B) the greenhouse gas emissions of the source during a
baseline period of the same duration as determined by
registries and entities defined as owners of emission
sources.
(6) Kyoto protocol.--The term ``Kyoto protocol'' means the
Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change (including the Montreal Protocol to the
Convention on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer).
(7) Panel.--The term ``panel'' means the implementing panel
established by section 202(a).
(8) Registrant.--The term ``registrant'' means a private
person that operates a database recording quantified and
verified greenhouse gas emissions and emissions reductions of
sources owned by other entities.
(9) Source.--The term ``source'' means a source of
greenhouse gas emissions.
______
By Mr. INOUYE (for himself, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Lautenberg, Ms.
Snowe, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Lieberman. Mrs. Boxer,
Mr. Pryor, Mr. Carper, Mr. Biden, Mr. Baucus, Mrs. Clinton, and
Mr. Schumer):
S. 184. A bill to provide improved rail and surface transportation
security; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, last year we made significant improvements
to the Nation's transportation security system by enacting the SAFE
Port Act, which strengthened the security of our Nation's ports and
maritime vessels. Yet, during the conference on this important bill,
the Congress failed to seize the opportunity to enact comprehensive
transportation security legislation that would have provided real
homeland security for our entire transportation system. The Senate-
passed version of the SAFE Port Act contained essential provisions that
would have strengthened security in all of the surface modes of
transportation, including passenger and freight rail, public transit,
trucking, intercity bus and pipelines. But jurisdictional infighting
and a lack of political will kept the leadership of the House of
Representatives from agreeing to, or even attempting to consider, these
provisions in conference.
Given the urgent need for surface transportation security
improvements,
[[Page 239]]
Cochairman Stevens and I are introducing the Surface Transportation and
Rail Security Act of 2007, or STARS Act, to once again offer the
Congress an opportunity to enact a comprehensive transportation
security bill. We have all seen the possible consequences of an attack
on critical surface transportation systems in Madrid and London. We
have all heard about possible threats and foiled plots aimed at our
rail tunnels and stations here at home. The time has come for us to
address these vulnerabilities and risks in a comprehensive and
coordinated way that ensures that in the rush to protect one mode of
transportation we don't shift vulnerability towards other, less secure,
transportation modes.
The STARS Act combines the rail, truck, bus, pipeline and hazardous
materials security provisions that were included in the Senate-passed
SAFE Port Act into a stand-alone bill, which the Commerce Committee
will soon consider. These provisions were endorsed unanimously by the
Senate during consideration of the SAFE Port Act, and the House of
Representatives overwhelmingly voted to instruct its conferees to
include these provisions in the Conference Report--advice the House
leadership declined to accept. Additionally, the rail security portion
of this package has already passed the Senate twice in prior Congresses
and has been endorsed by railroads and rail labor alike. This kind of
support demonstrates both the necessity of these improvements and the
distinct possibility that we can finally enact these provisions into
law this Congress.
The legislation that we introduce today reflects the Commerce
Committee's substantial expertise over the issues of transportation
security. The time has come to advance these improvements, and protect
the vital surface transportation assets that grant us the quality of
life and economic health that we all cherish. Our legislation presents
an opportunity to make immediate progress on transportation security,
and it is my sincere hope that my colleagues will join me in supporting
consideration and passage of this measure as soon as possible.
I ask unanimous consent that 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. 184
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 ``Surface Transportation and
Rail Security Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS.
The table of contents for this Act is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title.
Sec. 2. Table of contents.
Title I--Improved Rail Security
Sec. 101. Rail transportation security risk assessment.
Sec. 102. Systemwide amtrak security upgrades.
Sec. 103. Fire and life-safety improvements.
Sec. 104. Freight and passenger rail security upgrades.
Sec. 105. Rail security research and development.
Sec. 106. Oversight and grant procedures.
Sec. 107. Amtrak plan to assist families of passengers involved in rail
passenger accidents.
Sec. 108. Northern border rail passenger report.
Sec. 109. Rail worker security training program.
Sec. 110. Whistleblower protection program.
Sec. 111. High hazard material security threat mitigation plans.
Sec. 112. Memorandum of agreement.
Sec. 113. Rail security enhancements.
Sec. 114. Public awareness.
Sec. 115. Railroad high hazard material tracking.
Sec. 116. Authorization of appropriations.
Title II--Improved Motor Carrier, Bus, and Hazardous Material Security
Sec. 201. Hazardous materials highway routing.
Sec. 202. Motor carrier high hazard material tracking.
Sec. 203. Hazardous materials security inspections and enforcement.
Sec. 204. Truck security assessment.
Sec. 205. National public sector response system.
Sec. 206. Over-the-road bus security assistance.
Sec. 207. Pipeline security and incident recovery plan.
Sec. 208. Pipeline security inspections and enforcement.
Sec. 209. Technical corrections.
Sec. 210. Certain personnel limitations not to apply.
TITLE I--IMPROVED RAIL SECURITY
SEC. 101. RAIL TRANSPORTATION SECURITY RISK ASSESSMENT.
(a) In General.--
(1) Vulnerability and risk assessment.--The Secretary of
Homeland Security shall establish a task force, including the
Transportation Security Administration, the Department of
Transportation, and other appropriate agencies, to complete a
vulnerability and risk assessment of freight and passenger
rail transportation (encompassing railroads, as that term is
defined in section 20102(1) of title 49, United States Code).
The assessment shall include--
(A) a methodology for conducting the risk assessment,
including timelines, that addresses how the Department of
Homeland Security will work with the entities describe in
subsection (b) and make use of existing Federal expertise
within the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of
Transportation, and other appropriate agencies;
(B) identification and evaluation of critical assets and
infrastructures;
(C) identification of vulnerabilities and risks to those
assets and infrastructures;
(D) identification of vulnerabilities and risks that are
specific to the transportation of hazardous materials via
railroad;
(E) identification of security weaknesses in passenger and
cargo security, transportation infrastructure, protection
systems, procedural policies, communications systems,
employee training, emergency response planning, and any other
area identified by the assessment; and
(F) an account of actions taken or planned by both public
and private entities to address identified rail security
issues and assess the effective integration of such actions.
(2) Recommendations.--Based on the assessment conducted
under paragraph (1), the Secretary, in consultation with the
Secretary of Transportation, shall develop prioritized
recommendations for improving rail security, including any
recommendations the Secretary has for--
(A) improving the security of rail tunnels, rail bridges,
rail switching and car storage areas, other rail
infrastructure and facilities, information systems, and other
areas identified by the Secretary as posing significant rail-
related risks to public safety and the movement of interstate
commerce, taking into account the impact that any proposed
security measure might have on the provision of rail service;
(B) deploying equipment to detect explosives and hazardous
chemical, biological, and radioactive substances, and any
appropriate countermeasures;
(C) training appropriate railroad or railroad shipper
employees in terrorism prevention, passenger evacuation, and
response activities;
(D) conducting public outreach campaigns on passenger
railroads;
(E) deploying surveillance equipment; and
(F) identifying the immediate and long-term costs of
measures that may be required to address those risks.
(3) Plans.--The report required by subsection (c) shall
include--
(A) a plan, developed in consultation with the freight and
intercity passenger railroads, and State and local
governments, for the Federal government to provide increased
security support at high or severe threat levels of alert;
(B) a plan for coordinating existing and planned rail
security initiatives undertaken by the public and private
sectors; and
(C) a contingency plan, developed in conjunction with
freight and intercity and commuter passenger railroads, to
ensure the continued movement of freight and passengers in
the event of an attack affecting the railroad system, which
shall contemplate--
(i) the possibility of rerouting traffic due to the loss of
critical infrastructure, such as a bridge, tunnel, yard, or
station; and
(ii) methods of continuing railroad service in the
Northeast Corridor in the event of a commercial power loss,
or catastrophe affecting a critical bridge, tunnel, yard, or
station.
(b) Consultation; Use of Existing Resources.--In carrying
out the assessment and developing the recommendations and
plans required by subsection (a), the Secretary of Homeland
Security shall consult with rail management, rail labor,
owners or lessors of rail cars used to transport hazardous
materials, first responders, shippers of hazardous materials,
public safety officials, and other relevant parties.
(c) Report.--
(1) Contents.--Within 180 days after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to the Senate
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, the House
of Representatives Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, and the House of Representatives Committee on
Homeland Security a report containing the assessment,
prioritized recommendations, and plans required by subsection
(a) and an estimate of the cost to implement such
recommendations.
[[Page 240]]
(2) Format.--The Secretary may submit the report in both
classified and redacted formats if the Secretary determines
that such action is appropriate or necessary.
(d) Annual Updates.--The Secretary, in consultation with
the Secretary of Transportation, shall update the assessment
and recommendations each year and transmit a report, which
may be submitted in both classified and redacted formats, to
the Committees named in subsection (c)(1), containing the
updated assessment and recommendations.
(e) Funding.--Out of funds appropriated pursuant to section
114(u) of title 49, United States Code, as amended by section
116 of this Act, there shall be made available to the
Secretary of Homeland Security to carry out this section
$5,000,000 for fiscal year 2008.
SEC. 102. SYSTEMWIDE AMTRAK SECURITY UPGRADES.
(a) In General.--Subject to subsection (c) the Secretary of
Homeland Security, in consultation with the Assistant
Secretary of Homeland Security (Transportation Security
Administration), is authorized to make grants to Amtrak--
(1) to secure major tunnel access points and ensure tunnel
integrity in New York, Baltimore, and Washington, DC;
(2) to secure Amtrak trains;
(3) to secure Amtrak stations;
(4) to obtain a watch list identification system approved
by the Secretary;
(5) to obtain train tracking and interoperable
communications systems that are coordinated to the maximum
extent possible;
(6) to hire additional police and security officers,
including canine units;
(7) to expand emergency preparedness efforts; and
(8) for employee security training.
(b) Conditions.--The Secretary of Transportation shall
disburse funds to Amtrak provided under subsection (a) for
projects contained in a systemwide security plan approved by
the Secretary of Homeland Security. The plan shall include
appropriate measures to address security awareness, emergency
response, and passenger evacuation training.
(c) Equitable Geographic Allocation.--The Secretary shall
ensure that, subject to meeting the highest security needs on
Amtrak's entire system and consistent with the risk
assessment required under section 101, stations and
facilities located outside of the Northeast Corridor receive
an equitable share of the security funds authorized by this
section.
(d) Availability of Funds.--Out of funds appropriated
pursuant to section 114(u) of title 49, United States Code,
as amended by section 116 of this Act,, there shall be made
available to the Secretary of Homeland Security and the
Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security (Transportation
Security Administration) to carry out this section--
(1) $63,500,000 for fiscal year 2008;
(2) $30,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
(3) $30,000,000 for fiscal year 2010.
Amounts appropriated pursuant to this subsection shall remain
available until expended.
SEC. 103. FIRE AND LIFE-SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS.
(a) Life-Safety Needs.--The Secretary of Transportation, in
consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, is
authorized to make grants to Amtrak for the purpose of making
fire and life-safety improvements to Amtrak tunnels on the
Northeast Corridor in New York, NY, Baltimore, MD, and
Washington, DC.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Out of funds
appropriated pursuant to section 116(b) of this Act, there
shall be made available to the Secretary of Transportation
for the purposes of carrying out subsection (a) the following
amounts:
(1) For the 6 New York tunnels to provide ventilation,
electrical, and fire safety technology upgrades, emergency
communication and lighting systems, and emergency access and
egress for passengers--
(A) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
(B) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2009;
(C) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2010; and
(D) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2011.
(2) For the Baltimore & Potomac tunnel and the Union
tunnel, together, to provide adequate drainage, ventilation,
communication, lighting, and passenger egress upgrades--
(A) $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
(B) $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2009;
(C) $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2010; and
(D) $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2011.
(3) For the Washington, DC, Union Station tunnels to
improve ventilation, communication, lighting, and passenger
egress upgrades--
(A) $8,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
(B) $8,000,000 for fiscal year 2009;
(C) $8,000,000 for fiscal year 2010; and
(D) $8,000,000 for fiscal year 2011.
(c) Infrastructure Upgrades.--Out of funds appropriated
pursuant to section 116(b) of this Act, there shall be made
available to the Secretary of Transportation for fiscal year
2008 $3,000,000 for the preliminary design of options for a
new tunnel on a different alignment to augment the capacity
of the existing Baltimore tunnels.
(d) Availability of Appropriated Funds.--Amounts made
available pursuant to this section shall remain available
until expended.
(e) Plans Required.--The Secretary of Transportation may
not make amounts available to Amtrak for obligation or
expenditure under subsection (a)--
(1) until Amtrak has submitted to the Secretary, and the
Secretary has approved, an engineering and financial plan for
such projects; and
(2) unless, for each project funded pursuant to this
section, the Secretary has approved a project management plan
prepared by Amtrak addressing appropriate project budget,
construction schedule, recipient staff organization, document
control and record keeping, change order procedure, quality
control and assurance, periodic plan updates, and periodic
status reports.
(f) Review of Plans.--The Secretary of Transportation shall
complete the review of the plans required by paragraphs (1)
and (2) of subsection (e) and approve or disapprove the plans
within 45 days after the date on which each such plan is
submitted by Amtrak. If the Secretary determines that a plan
is incomplete or deficient, the Secretary shall notify Amtrak
of the incomplete items or deficiencies and Amtrak shall,
within 30 days after receiving the Secretary's notification,
submit a modified plan for the Secretary's review. Within 15
days after receiving additional information on items
previously included in the plan, and within 45 days after
receiving items newly included in a modified plan, the
Secretary shall either approve the modified plan, or, if the
Secretary finds the plan is still incomplete or deficient,
the Secretary shall identify in writing to the Senate
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, the House
of Representatives Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, and the House of Representatives Committee on
Homeland Security the portions of the plan the Secretary
finds incomplete or deficient, approve all other portions of
the plan, obligate the funds associated with those other
portions, and execute an agreement with Amtrak within 15 days
thereafter on a process for resolving the remaining portions
of the plan.
(g) Financial Contribution From Other Tunnel Users.--The
Secretary shall, taking into account the need for the timely
completion of all portions of the tunnel projects described
in subsection (a)--
(1) consider the extent to which rail carriers other than
Amtrak use or plan to use the tunnels;
(2) consider the feasibility of seeking a financial
contribution from those other rail carriers toward the costs
of the projects; and
(3) obtain financial contributions or commitments from such
other rail carriers at levels reflecting the extent of their
use or planned use of the tunnels, if feasible.
SEC. 104. FREIGHT AND PASSENGER RAIL SECURITY UPGRADES.
(a) Security Improvement Grants.--The Secretary of Homeland
Security, through the Assistant Secretary of Homeland
Security (Transportation Security Administration) and other
appropriate agencies, is authorized to make grants to freight
railroads, the Alaska Railroad, hazardous materials shippers,
owners of rail cars used in the transportation of hazardous
materials, universities, colleges and research centers, State
and local governments (for rail passenger facilities and
infrastructure not owned by Amtrak), and, through the
Secretary of Transportation, to Amtrak, for full or partial
reimbursement of costs incurred in the conduct of activities
to prevent or respond to acts of terrorism, sabotage, or
other intercity passenger rail and freight rail security
vulnerabilities and risks identified under section 101,
including--
(1) security and redundancy for critical communications,
computer, and train control systems essential for secure rail
operations;
(2) accommodation of rail cargo or passenger screening
equipment at the United States-Mexico border, the United
States-Canada border, or other ports of entry;
(3) the security of hazardous material transportation by
rail;
(4) secure intercity passenger rail stations, trains, and
infrastructure;
(5) structural modification or replacement of rail cars
transporting high hazard materials to improve their
resistance to acts of terrorism;
(6) employee security awareness, preparedness, passenger
evacuation, and emergency response training;
(7) public security awareness campaigns for passenger train
operations;
(8) the sharing of intelligence and information about
security threats;
(9) to obtain train tracking and interoperable
communications systems that are coordinated to the maximum
extent possible;
(10) to hire additional police and security officers,
including canine units; and
(11) other improvements recommended by the report required
by section 101, including infrastructure, facilities, and
equipment upgrades.
(b) Accountability.--The Secretary shall adopt necessary
procedures, including audits, to ensure that grants made
under this section are expended in accordance with the
purposes of this title and the priorities and other criteria
developed by the Secretary.
[[Page 241]]
(c) Allocation.--The Secretary shall distribute the funds
authorized by this section based on risk and vulnerability as
determined under section 101, and shall encourage non-Federal
financial participation in awarding grants. With respect to
grants for intercity passenger rail security, the Secretary
shall also take into account passenger volume and whether a
station is used by commuter rail passengers as well as
intercity rail passengers.
(d) Conditions.--The Secretary of Transportation may not
disburse funds to Amtrak under subsection (a) unless Amtrak
meets the conditions set forth in section 102(b) of this Act.
(e) Allocation Between Railroads and Others.--Unless as a
result of the assessment required by section 101 the
Secretary of Homeland Security determines that critical rail
transportation security needs require reimbursement in
greater amounts to any eligible entity, no grants under this
section may be made--
(1) in excess of $45,000,000 to Amtrak; or
(2) in excess of $80,000,000 for the purposes described in
paragraphs (3) and (5) of subsection (a).
(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--Out of funds
appropriated pursuant to section 114(u) of title 49, United
States Code, as amended by section 116 of this Act,, there
shall be made available to the Secretary of Homeland Security
to carry out this section--
(1) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
(2) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
(3) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2010
.Amounts made available pursuant to this subsection shall
remain available until expended.
(g) High Hazard Materials Defined.--In this section, the
term ``high hazard materials'' means quantities of poison
inhalation hazard materials, Class 2.3 gases, Class 6.1
materials, and anhydrous ammonia that the Secretary, in
consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, determines
pose a security risk.
SEC. 105. RAIL SECURITY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.
(a) Establishment of Research and Development Program.--The
Secretary of Homeland Security, through the Under Secretary
for Science and Technology and the Assistant Secretary of
Homeland Security (Transportation Security Administration),
in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation shall
carry out a research and development program for the purpose
of improving freight and intercity passenger rail security
that may include research and development projects to--
(1) reduce the vulnerability of passenger trains, stations,
and equipment to explosives and hazardous chemical,
biological, and radioactive substances;
(2) test new emergency response techniques and
technologies;
(3) develop improved freight technologies, including--
(A) technologies for sealing rail cars;
(B) automatic inspection of rail cars;
(C) communication-based train controls; and
(D) emergency response training;
(4) test wayside detectors that can detect tampering with
railroad equipment;
(5) support enhanced security for the transportation of
hazardous materials by rail, including--
(A) technologies to detect a breach in a tank car or other
rail car used to transport hazardous materials and transmit
information about the integrity of cars to the train crew or
dispatcher;
(B) research to improve tank car integrity, with a focus on
tank cars that carry high hazard materials (as defined in
section 104(g) of this Act); and
(C) techniques to transfer hazardous materials from rail
cars that are damaged or otherwise represent an unreasonable
risk to human life or public safety; and
(6) other projects that address vulnerabilities and risks
identified under section 101.
(b) Coordination With Other Research Initiatives.--The
Secretary of Homeland Security shall ensure that the research
and development program authorized by this section is
coordinated with other research and development initiatives
at the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of
Transportation. The Secretary shall carry out any research
and development project authorized by this section through a
reimbursable agreement with the Secretary of Transportation,
if the Secretary of Transportation--
(1) is already sponsoring a research and development
project in a similar area; or
(2) has a unique facility or capability that would be
useful in carrying out the project.
(c) Grants and Accountability.--To carry out the research
and development program, the Secretary may award grants to
the entities described in section 104(a) and shall adopt
necessary procedures, including audits, to ensure that grants
made under this section are expended in accordance with the
purposes of this title and the priorities and other criteria
developed by the Secretary.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--Out of funds
appropriated pursuant to section 114(u) of title 49, United
States Code, as amended by section 116 of this Act,, there
shall be made available to the Secretary of Homeland Security
to carry out this section--
(1) $33,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
(2) $33,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
(3) $33,000,000 for fiscal year 2010.
Amounts made available pursuant to this subsection shall
remain available until expended.
SEC. 106. OVERSIGHT AND GRANT PROCEDURES.
(a) Secretarial Oversight.--The Secretary of Homeland
Security may use up to 0.5 percent of amounts made available
for capital projects under this Act to enter into contracts
for the review of proposed capital projects and related
program management plans and to oversee construction of such
projects.
(b) Use of Funds.--The Secretary may use amounts available
under subsection (a) of this subsection to make contracts to
audit and review the safety, procurement, management, and
financial compliance of a recipient of amounts under this
title.
(c) Procedures for Grant Award.--The Secretary shall,
within 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act,
prescribe procedures and schedules for the awarding of grants
under this title, including application and qualification
procedures (including a requirement that the applicant have a
security plan), and a record of decision on applicant
eligibility. The procedures shall include the execution of a
grant agreement between the grant recipient and the Secretary
and shall be consistent, to the extent practicable, with the
grant procedures established under section 70107 of title 46,
United States Code.
SEC. 107. AMTRAK PLAN TO ASSIST FAMILIES OF PASSENGERS
INVOLVED IN RAIL PASSENGER ACCIDENTS.
(a) In General.--Chapter 243 of title 49, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 24316. Plans to address needs of families of
passengers involved in rail passenger accidents
``(a) Submission of Plan.--Not later than 6 months after
the date of the enactment of the Surface Transportation and
Rail Security Act of 2007, Amtrak shall submit to the
Chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board, the
Secretary of Transportation, and the Secretary of Homeland
Security a plan for addressing the needs of the families of
passengers involved in any rail passenger accident involving
an Amtrak intercity train and resulting in a loss of life.
``(b) Contents of Plans.--The plan to be submitted by
Amtrak under subsection (a) shall include, at a minimum, the
following:
``(1) A process by which Amtrak will maintain and provide
to the National Transportation Safety Board and the Secretary
of Transportation, immediately upon request, a list (which is
based on the best available information at the time of the
request) of the names of the passengers aboard the train
(whether or not such names have been verified), and will
periodically update the list. The plan shall include a
procedure, with respect to unreserved trains and passengers
not holding reservations on other trains, for Amtrak to use
reasonable efforts to ascertain the number and names of
passengers aboard a train involved in an accident.
``(2) A plan for creating and publicizing a reliable, toll-
free telephone number within 4 hours after such an accident
occurs, and for providing staff, to handle calls from the
families of the passengers.
``(3) A process for notifying the families of the
passengers, before providing any public notice of the names
of the passengers, by suitably trained individuals.
``(4) A process for providing the notice described in
paragraph (2) to the family of a passenger as soon as Amtrak
has verified that the passenger was aboard the train (whether
or not the names of all of the passengers have been
verified).
``(5) A process by which the family of each passenger will
be consulted about the disposition of all remains and
personal effects of the passenger within Amtrak's control;
that any possession of the passenger within Amtrak's control
will be returned to the family unless the possession is
needed for the accident investigation or any criminal
investigation; and that any unclaimed possession of a
passenger within Amtrak's control will be retained by the
rail passenger carrier for at least 18 months.
``(6) A process by which the treatment of the families of
nonrevenue passengers will be the same as the treatment of
the families of revenue passengers.
``(7) An assurance that Amtrak will provide adequate
training to its employees and agents to meet the needs of
survivors and family members following an accident.
``(c) Use of Information.--The National Transportation
Safety Board, the Secretary of Transportation, and Amtrak may
not release any personal information on a list obtained under
subsection (b)(1) but may provide information on the list
about a passenger to the family of the passenger to the
extent that the Board or Amtrak considers appropriate.
``(d) Limitation on Liability.--Amtrak shall not be liable
for damages in any action
[[Page 242]]
brought in a Federal or State court arising out of the
performance of Amtrak in preparing or providing a passenger
list, or in providing information concerning a train
reservation, pursuant to a plan submitted by Amtrak under
subsection (b), unless such liability was caused by Amtrak's
conduct.
``(e) Limitation on Statutory Construction.--Nothing in
this section may be construed as limiting the actions that
Amtrak may take, or the obligations that Amtrak may have, in
providing assistance to the families of passengers involved
in a rail passenger accident.
``(f) Funding.--Out of funds appropriated pursuant to
section 116(b) of the Surface Transportation and Rail
Security Act of 2007, there shall be made available to the
Secretary of Transportation for the use of Amtrak $500,000
for fiscal year 2007 to carry out this section. Amounts made
available pursuant to this subsection shall remain available
until expended.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The chapter analysis for chapter
243 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``24316. Plan to assist families of passengers involved in rail
passenger accidents.''.
SEC. 108. NORTHERN BORDER RAIL PASSENGER REPORT.
Within 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act,
the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the
Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security (Transportation
Security Administration), the Secretary of Transportation,
heads of other appropriate Federal departments, and agencies
and the National Railroad Passenger Corporation, shall
transmit a report to the Senate Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation, the House of Representatives
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and the House
of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security that
contains--
(1) a description of the current system for screening
passengers and baggage on passenger rail service between the
United States and Canada;
(2) an assessment of the current program to provide
preclearance of airline passengers between the United States
and Canada as outlined in ``The Agreement on Air Transport
Preclearance between the Government of Canada and the
Government of the United States of America'', dated January
18, 2001;
(3) an assessment of the current program to provide
preclearance of freight railroad traffic between the United
States and Canada as outlined in the ``Declaration of
Principle for the Improved Security of Rail Shipments by
Canadian National Railway and Canadian Pacific Railway from
Canada to the United States'', dated April 2, 2003;
(4) information on progress by the Department of Homeland
Security and other Federal agencies towards finalizing a
bilateral protocol with Canada that would provide for
preclearance of passengers on trains operating between the
United States and Canada;
(5) a description of legislative, regulatory, budgetary, or
policy barriers within the United States Government to
providing pre-screened passenger lists for rail passengers
traveling between the United States and Canada to the
Department of Homeland Security;
(6) a description of the position of the Government of
Canada and relevant Canadian agencies with respect to
preclearance of such passengers;
(7) a draft of any changes in existing Federal law
necessary to provide for pre-screening of such passengers and
providing pre-screened passenger lists to the Department of
Homeland Security; and
(8) an analysis of the feasibility of reinstating in-
transit inspections onboard international Amtrak trains.
SEC. 109. RAIL WORKER SECURITY TRAINING PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and
the Secretary of Transportation, in consultation with
appropriate law enforcement, security, and terrorism experts,
representatives of railroad carriers, and nonprofit employee
organizations that represent rail workers, shall develop and
issue detailed guidance for a rail worker security training
program to prepare front-line workers for potential threat
conditions. The guidance shall take into consideration any
current security training requirements or best practices.
(b) Program Elements.--The guidance developed under
subsection (a) shall include elements, as appropriate to
passenger and freight rail service, that address the
following:
(1) Determination of the seriousness of any occurrence.
(2) Crew communication and coordination.
(3) Appropriate responses to defend or protect oneself.
(4) Use of protective devices.
(5) Evacuation procedures.
(6) Psychology of terrorists to cope with hijacker behavior
and passenger responses.
(7) Situational training exercises regarding various threat
conditions.
(8) Any other subject the Secretary considers appropriate.
(c) Railroad Carrier Programs.--Not later than 90 days
after the Secretary of Homeland Security issues guidance
under subsection (a) in final form, each railroad carrier
shall develop a rail worker security training program in
accordance with that guidance and submit it to the Secretary
for review. Not later than 30 days after receiving a railroad
carrier's program under this subsection, the Secretary shall
review the program and transmit comments to the railroad
carrier concerning any revisions the Secretary considers
necessary for the program to meet the guidance requirements.
A railroad carrier shall respond to the Secretary's comments
within 30 days after receiving them.
(d) Training.--Not later than 1 year after the Secretary
reviews the training program developed by a railroad carrier
under this section, the railroad carrier shall complete the
training of all front-line workers in accordance with that
program. The Secretary shall review implementation of the
training program of a representative sample of railroad
carriers and report to the Senate Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation, the House of Representatives
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and the House
of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security on the
number of reviews conducted and the results. The Secretary
may submit the report in both classified and redacted formats
as necessary.
(e) Updates.--The Secretary shall update the training
guidance issued under subsection (a) as appropriate to
reflect new or different security threats. Railroad carriers
shall revise their programs accordingly and provide
additional training to their front-line workers within a
reasonable time after the guidance is updated.
(f) Front-Line Workers Defined.--In this section, the term
``front-line workers'' means security personnel, dispatchers,
train operators, other onboard employees, maintenance and
maintenance support personnel, bridge tenders, as well as
other appropriate employees of railroad carriers, as defined
by the Secretary.
(g) Other Employees.--The Secretary of Homeland Security
shall issue guidance and best practices for a rail shipper
employee security program containing the elements listed
under subsection (b) as appropriate.
SEC. 110. WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--Subchapter A of chapter 201 of title 49,
United States Code, is amended by inserting after section
20117 the following:
``Sec. 20118. Whistleblower protection for rail security
matters
``(a) Discrimination Against Employee.--No rail carrier
engaged in interstate or foreign commerce may discharge a
railroad employee or otherwise discriminate against a
railroad employee because the employee (or any person acting
pursuant to a request of the employee)--
``(1) provided, caused to be provided, or is about to
provide or cause to be provided, to the employer or the
Federal Government information relating to a reasonably
perceived threat, in good faith, to security; or
``(2) provided, caused to be provided, or is about to
provide or cause to be provided, testimony before Congress or
at any Federal or State proceeding regarding a reasonably
perceived threat, in good faith, to security; or
``(3) refused to violate or assist in the violation of any
law, rule or regulation related to rail security.
``(b) Dispute Resolution.--A dispute, grievance, or claim
arising under this section is subject to resolution under
section 3 of the Railway Labor Act (45 U.S.C. 153). In a
proceeding by the National Railroad Adjustment Board, a
division or delegate of the Board, or another board of
adjustment established under section 3 to resolve the
dispute, grievance, or claim the proceeding shall be
expedited and the dispute, grievance, or claim shall be
resolved not later than 180 days after it is filed. If the
violation is a form of discrimination that does not involve
discharge, suspension, or another action affecting pay, and
no other remedy is available under this subsection, the
Board, division, delegate, or other board of adjustment may
award the employee reasonable damages, including punitive
damages, of not more than $20,000.
``(c) Procedural Requirements.--Except as provided in
subsection (b), the procedure set forth in section
42121(b)(2)(B) of this subtitle, including the burdens of
proof, applies to any complaint brought under this section.
``(d) Election of Remedies.--An employee of a railroad
carrier may not seek protection under both this section and
another provision of law for the same allegedly unlawful act
of the carrier.
``(e) Disclosure of Identity.--
``(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this
subsection, or with the written consent of the employee, the
Secretary of Transportation may not disclose the name of an
employee of a railroad carrier who has provided information
about an alleged violation of this section.
``(2) The Secretary shall disclose to the Attorney General
the name of an employee described in paragraph (1) of this
subsection if the matter is referred to the Attorney General
for enforcement.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The chapter analysis for chapter
201 of title 49, United
[[Page 243]]
States Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating
to section 20117 the following:
``20118. Whistleblower protection for rail security matters.''.
SEC. 111. HIGH HAZARD MATERIAL SECURITY THREAT MITIGATION
PLANS.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security, in
consultation with the Assistant Secretary of Homeland
Security (Transportation Security Administration) and the
Secretary of Transportation, shall require rail carriers
transporting a high hazard material, as defined in section
104(g) of this Act to develop a high hazard material security
threat mitigation plan containing appropriate measures,
including alternative routing and temporary shipment
suspension options, to address assessed risks to high
consequence targets. The plan, and any information submitted
to the Secretary under this section shall be protected as
sensitive security information under the regulations
prescribed under section 114(s) of title 49, United States
Code.
(b) Implementation.--A high hazard material security threat
mitigation plan shall be put into effect by a rail carrier
for the shipment of high hazardous materials by rail on the
rail carrier's right-of-way when the threat levels of the
Homeland Security Advisory System are high or severe and
specific intelligence of probable or imminent threat exists
towards--
(1) a high-consequence target that is within the
catastrophic impact zone of a railroad right-of-way used to
transport high hazardous material; or
(2) rail infrastructure or operations within the immediate
vicinity of a high-consequence target.
(c) Completion and Review of Plans.--
(1) Plans required.--Each rail carrier shall--
(A) submit a list of routes used to transport high hazard
materials to the Secretary of Homeland Security within 60
days after the date of enactment of this Act;
(B) develop and submit a high hazard material security
threat mitigation plan to the Secretary within 180 days after
it receives the notice of high consequence targets on such
routes by the Secretary; and
(C) submit any subsequent revisions to the plan to the
Secretary within 30 days after making the revisions.
(2) Review and updates.--The Secretary, with assistance of
the Secretary of Transportation, shall review the plans and
transmit comments to the railroad carrier concerning any
revisions the Secretary considers necessary. A railroad
carrier shall respond to the Secretary's comments within 30
days after receiving them. Each rail carrier shall update and
resubmit its plan for review not less than every 2 years.
(d) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``high-consequence target'' means a building,
buildings, infrastructure, public space, or natural resource
designated by the Secretary of Homeland Security that is
viable terrorist target of national significance, the attack
of which could result in--
(A) catastrophic loss of life; and
(B) significantly damaged national security and defense
capabilities; or
(C) national economic harm.
(2) The term ``catastrophic impact zone'' means the area
immediately adjacent to, under, or above an active railroad
right-of-way used to ship high hazard materials in which the
potential release or explosion of the high hazard material
being transported would likely cause--
(A) loss of life; or
(B) significant damage to property or structures.
(3) The term ``rail carrier'' has the meaning given that
term by section 10102(5) of title 49, United States Code.
SEC. 112. MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT.
(a) Memorandum of Agreement.--Similar to the public
transportation security annex between the two departments
signed on September 8, 2005, within 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation and
the Secretary of Homeland Security shall execute and develop
an annex to the memorandum of agreement between the two
departments signed on September 28, 2004, governing the
specific roles, delineations of responsibilities, resources
and commitments of the Department of Transportation and the
Department of Homeland Security, respectively, in addressing
railroad transportation security matters, including the
processes the departments will follow to promote
communications, efficiency, and nonduplication of effort.
(b) Rail Safety Regulations.--Section 20103(a) of title 49,
United States Code, is amended by striking ``safety'' the
first place it appears, and inserting ``safety, including
security,''.
SEC. 113. RAIL SECURITY ENHANCEMENTS.
(a) Rail Police Officers.--Section 28101 of title 49,
United States Code, is amended--
(1) by inserting ``(a) In General.--'' before ``Under'';
and
(2) by striking ``the rail carrier'' each place it appears
and inserting ``any rail carrier''.
(b) Review of Rail Regulations.--Within 1 year after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of
Transportation, in consultation with the Secretary of
Homeland Security and the Assistant Secretary of Homeland
Security (Transportation Security Administration), shall
review existing rail regulations of the Department of
Transportation for the purpose of identifying areas in which
those regulations need to be revised to improve rail
security.
SEC. 114. PUBLIC AWARENESS.
Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with
the Secretary of Transportation, shall develop a national
plan for public outreach and awareness. Such plan shall be
designed to increase awareness of measures that the general
public, railroad passengers, and railroad employees can take
to increase railroad system security. Such plan shall also
provide outreach to railroad carriers and their employees to
improve their awareness of available technologies, ongoing
research and development efforts, and available Federal
funding sources to improve railroad security. Not later than
9 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Secretary of Homeland Security shall implement the plan
developed under this section.
SEC. 115. RAILROAD HIGH HAZARD MATERIAL TRACKING.
(a) Wireless Communications.--
(1) In general.--In conjunction with the research and
development program established under section 105 and
consistent with the results of research relating to wireless
tracking technologies, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in
consultation with the Assistant Secretary of Homeland
Security (Transportation Security Administration), shall
develop a program that will encourage the equipping of rail
cars transporting high hazard materials (as defined in
section 104(g) of this Act) with wireless terrestrial or
satellite communications technology that provides--
(A) car position location and tracking capabilities;
(B) notification of rail car depressurization, breach, or
unsafe temperature; and
(C) notification of hazardous material release.
(2) Coordination.--In developing the program required by
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall--
(A) consult with the Secretary of Transportation to
coordinate the program with any ongoing or planned efforts
for rail car tracking at the Department of Transportation;
and
(B) ensure that the program is consistent with
recommendations and findings of the Department of Homeland
Security's hazardous material tank rail car tracking pilot
programs.
(b) Funding.--Out of funds appropriated pursuant to section
114(u) of title 49, United States Code, as amended by section
116 of this Act, there shall be made available to the
Secretary of Homeland Security to carry out this section
$3,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2008, 2009, and 2010.
SEC. 116. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) Transportation Security Administration Authorization.--
Section 114 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end thereof the following:
``(u) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of Homeland
Security for rail security--
``(1) $228,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
``(2) $183,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
``(3) $183,000,000 for fiscal year 2010.''.
(b) Department of Transportation.--There are authorized to
be appropriated to the Secretary of Transportation to carry
out this title and sections 20118 and 24316 of title 49,
United States Code, as added by this Act--
(1) $121,500,000 for fiscal year 2007;
(2) $118,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
(3) $118,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
(4) $195,000,000 for fiscal year 2011.
TITLE II--IMPROVED MOTOR CARRIER, BUS, AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL SECURITY
SEC. 201. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS HIGHWAY ROUTING.
(a) Route Plan Guidance.--Within one year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation, in
consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall--
(1) document existing and proposed routes for the
transportation of radioactive and non-radioactive hazardous
materials by motor carrier, and develop a framework for using
a Geographic Information System-based approach to
characterize routes in the National Hazardous Materials Route
Registry;
(2) assess and characterize existing and proposed routes
for the transportation of radioactive and non-radioactive
hazardous materials by motor carrier for the purpose of
identifying measurable criteria for selecting routes based on
safety and security concerns;
(3) analyze current route-related hazardous materials
regulations in the United States, Canada, and Mexico to
identify cross-border differences and conflicting
regulations;
(4) document the concerns of the public, motor carriers,
and State, local, territorial, and tribal governments about
the highway routing of hazardous materials for the purpose of
identifying and mitigating security vulnerabilities
associated with hazardous material routes;
[[Page 244]]
(5) prepare guidance materials for State officials to
assist them in identifying and reducing both safety concerns
and security vulnerabilities when designating highway routes
for hazardous materials consistent with the 13 safety-based
non-radioactive materials routing criteria and radioactive
materials routing criteria in Subpart C part 397 of title 49,
Code of Federal Regulations;
(6) develop a tool that will enable State officials to
examine potential routes for the highway transportation of
hazardous material and assess specific security
vulnerabilities associated with each route and explore
alternative mitigation measures; and
(7) transmit to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation, and the House of Representatives
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure a report on
the actions taken to fulfill paragraphs (1) through (6) of
this subsection and any recommended changes to the routing
requirements for the highway transportation of hazardous
materials in part 397 of title 49, Code of Federal
Regulations.
(b) Route Plans.--
(1) Assessment.--Within one year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall
complete an assessment of the safety and national security
benefits achieved under existing requirements for route
plans, in written or electronic format, for explosives and
radioactive materials. The assessment shall, at a minimum--
(A) compare the percentage of Department of Transportation
recordable incidents and the severity of such incidents for
shipments of explosives and radioactive materials for which
such route plans are required with the percentage of
recordable incidents and the severity of such incidents for
shipments of explosives and radioactive materials not subject
to such route plans; and
(B) quantify the security and safety benefits, feasibility,
and costs of requiring each motor carrier that is required to
have a hazardous material safety permit under part 385 of
title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, to maintain, follow,
and carry such a route plan that meets the requirements of
section 397.101 of that title when transporting the type and
quantity of hazardous materials described in section 385.403
of that title, taking into account the various segments of
the trucking industry, including tank truck, truckload and
less than truckload carriers.
(2) Report.--Within one year after the date of enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall submit a
report to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation, and the House of Representatives Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure containing the findings and
conclusions of the assessment.
(c) Requirement.--The Secretary shall require motor
carriers that have a hazardous material safety permit under
part 385 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, to
maintain, follow, and carry a route plan, in written or
electronic format, that meets the requirements of section
397.101 of that title when transporting the type and quantity
of hazardous materials described in section 385.403 of that
title if the Secretary determines, under the assessment
required in subsection (b), that such a requirement would
enhance the security and safety of the nation without
imposing unreasonable costs or burdens upon motor carriers.
SEC. 202. MOTOR CARRIER HIGH HAZARD MATERIAL TRACKING.
(a) Wireless Communications--
(1) In general.--Consistent with the findings of the
Transportation Security Administration's Hazmat Truck
Security Pilot Program and within 6 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security,
through the Transportation Security Administration and in
consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, shall
develop a program to encourage the equipping of motor
carriers transporting high hazard materials in quantities
equal to or greater than the quantities specified in subpart
171.800 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, with
wireless communications technology that provides--
(A) continuous communications;
(B) vehicle position location and tracking capabilities;
and
(C) a feature that allows a driver of such vehicles to
broadcast an emergency message.
(2) Considerations.--In developing the program required by
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall--
(A) consult with the Secretary of Transportation to
coordinate the program with any ongoing or planned efforts
for motor carrier tracking at the Department of
Transportation;
(B) take into consideration the recommendations and
findings of the report on the Hazardous Material Safety and
Security Operation Field Test released by the Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration on November 11, 2004;
(C) evaluate--
(i) any new information related to the cost and benefits of
deploying and utilizing truck tracking technology for motor
carriers transporting high hazard materials not included in
the Hazardous Material Safety and Security Operation Field
Test Report released by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration on November 11, 2004;
(ii) the ability of truck tracking technology to resist
tampering and disabling;
(iii) the capability of truck tracking technology to
collect, display, and store information regarding the
movements of shipments of high hazard materials by commercial
motor vehicles;
(iv) the appropriate range of contact intervals between the
tracking technology and a commercial motor vehicle
transporting high hazard materials; and
(v) technology that allows the installation by a motor
carrier of concealed electronic devices on commercial motor
vehicles that can be activated by law enforcement authorities
and alert emergency response resources to locate and recover
security sensitive material in the event of loss or theft of
such material.
(b) Funding.--There are authorized to be appropriated to
the Secretary of Homeland Security to carry out this section
$3,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2008, 2009, and 2010.
SEC. 203. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SECURITY INSPECTIONS AND
ENFORCEMENT.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall
establish a program within the Transportation Security
Administration, in consultation with the Secretary of
Transportation, for reviewing hazardous materials security
plans required under part 172, title 49, Code of Federal
Regulations, within 180 days after the date of enactment of
this Act. In establishing the program, the Secretary shall
ensure that--
(1) the program does not subject carriers to unnecessarily
duplicative reviews of their security plans by the 2
departments; and
(2) a common set of standards is used to review the
security plans.
(b) Civil Penalty.--The failure, by a shipper, carrier, or
other person subject to part 172 of title 49, Code of Federal
Regulations, to comply with any applicable section of that
part within 180 days after being notified by the Secretary of
such failure to comply, is punishable by a civil penalty
imposed by the Secretary under title 49, United States Code.
For purposes of this subsection, each day of noncompliance
after the 181st day following the date on which the shipper,
carrier, or other person received notice of the failure shall
constitute a separate failure.
(c) Compliance Review.--In reviewing the compliance of
hazardous materials shippers, carriers, or other persons
subject to part 172 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations,
with the provisions of that part, the Secretary shall utilize
risk assessment methodologies to prioritize review and
enforcement actions to the most vulnerable and critical
hazardous materials transportation operations.
(d) Transportation Costs Study.--Within 1 year after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of
Transportation, in conjunction with the Secretary of Homeland
Security, shall study to what extent the insurance, security,
and safety costs borne by railroad carriers, motor carriers,
pipeline carriers, air carriers, and maritime carriers
associated with the transportation of hazardous materials are
reflected in the rates paid by shippers of such commodities
as compared to the costs and rates respectively for the
transportation of non-hazardous materials.
(e) Funding.--There are authorized to be appropriated to
the Secretary of Homeland Security to carry out this
section--
(1) $2,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
(2) $2,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
(3) $2,000,000 for fiscal year 2010.
SEC. 204. TRUCK SECURITY ASSESSMENT.
Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall transmit to the
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Senate Committee on Finance, the House of Representatives
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, the House of
Representatives Committee on Homeland Security, and the House
of Representatives Committe on Ways and Means, a report on
security issues related to the trucking industry that
includes--
(1) an assessment of actions already taken to address
identified security issues by both public and private
entities;
(2) an assessment of the economic impact that security
upgrades of trucks, truck equipment, or truck facilities may
have on the trucking industry and its employees, including
independent owner-operators;
(3) an assessment of ongoing research and the need for
additional research on truck security; and
(4) an assessment of industry best practices to enhance
security.
SEC. 205. NATIONAL PUBLIC SECTOR RESPONSE SYSTEM.
(a) Development.--The Secretary of Homeland Security, in
conjunction with the Secretary of Transportation, shall
consider the development of a national public sector response
system to receive security alerts, emergency messages, and
other information used to track the transportation of high
hazard materials which can provide accurate, timely, and
actionable information to appropriate first responder, law
enforcement and public safety, and homeland security
officials, as appropriate, regarding accidents, threats,
thefts, or other safety and security risks or incidents. In
considering the development of this system, they shall
consult with law enforcement and public safety officials,
hazardous material shippers, motor
[[Page 245]]
carriers, railroads, organizations representing hazardous
material employees, State transportation and hazardous
materials officials, private for-profit and non-profit
emergency response organizations, and commercial motor
vehicle and hazardous material safety groups. Consideration
of development of the national public sector response system
shall be based upon the public sector response center
developed for the Transportation Security Administration
hazardous material truck security pilot program and hazardous
material safety and security operational field test
undertaken by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration.
(b) Capability.--The national public sector response system
to be considered shall be able to receive, as appropriate--
(1) negative driver verification alerts;
(2) out-of-route alerts;
(3) driver panic or emergency alerts; and
(4) tampering or release alerts.
(c) Characteristics.--The national public sector response
system to be considered shall--
(1) be an exception-based system;
(2) be integrated with other private and public sector
operation reporting and response systems and all Federal
homeland security threat analysis systems or centers
(including the National Response Center); and
(3) provide users the ability to create rules for alert
notification messages.
(d) Carrier Participation.--The Secretary of Homeland
Security shall coordinate with motor carriers and railroads
transporting high hazard materials, entities acting on their
behalf who receive communication alerts from motor carriers
or railroads, or other Federal agencies that receive security
and emergency related notification regarding high hazard
materials in transit to facilitate the provisions of the
information listed in subsection (b) to the national public
sector response system to the extent possible if the system
is established.
(e) Data Privacy.--The national public sector response
system shall be designed to ensure appropriate protection of
data and information relating to motor carriers, railroads,
and employees.
(f) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to the
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
the House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, and the House of Representatives Committee on
Homeland Security a report on whether to establish a national
public sector response system and the estimated total public
and private sector costs to establish and annually operate
such a system, together with any recommendations for
generating private sector participation and investment in the
development and operation of such a system.
(g) Funding.--There are authorized to be appropriated to
the Secretary of Homeland Security to carry out this
section--
(1) $1,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
(2) $1,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
(3) $1,000,000 for fiscal year 2010.
SEC. 206. OVER-THE-ROAD BUS SECURITY ASSISTANCE.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall
establish a program within the Transportation Security
Administration for making grants to private operators of
over-the-road buses or over-the-road bus terminal operators
for system-wide security improvements to their operations,
including--
(1) constructing and modifying terminals, garages,
facilities, or over-the-road buses to assure their security;
(2) protecting or isolating the driver;
(3) acquiring, upgrading, installing, or operating
equipment, software, or accessorial services for collection,
storage, or exchange of passenger and driver information
through ticketing systems or otherwise, and information links
with government agencies;
(4) training employees in recognizing and responding to
security threats, evacuation procedures, passenger screening
procedures, and baggage inspection;
(5) hiring and training security officers;
(6) installing cameras and video surveillance equipment on
over-the-road buses and at terminals, garages, and over-the-
road bus facilities;
(7) creating a program for employee identification or
background investigation;
(8) establishing and upgrading an emergency communications
system linking operational headquarters, over-the-road buses,
law enforcement, and emergency personnel; and
(9) implementing and operating passenger screening programs
at terminals and on over-the-road buses.
(b) Federal Share.--The Federal share of the cost for which
any grant is made under this section shall be 80 percent.
(c) Due Consideration.--In making grants under this
section, the Secretary shall give due consideration to
private operators of over-the-road buses that have taken
measures to enhance bus transportation security from those in
effect before September 11, 2001, and shall prioritize grant
funding based on the magnitude and severity of the security
threat to bus passengers and the ability of the funded
project to reduce, or respond to, that threat.
(d) Grant Requirements.--A grant under this section shall
be subject to all the terms and conditions that a grant is
subject to under section 3038(f) of the Transportation Equity
Act for the 21st Century (49 U.S.C. 5310 note; 112 Stat.
393).
(e) Plan Requirement.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary may not make a grant under
this section to a private operator of over-the-road buses
until the operator has first submitted to the Secretary--
(A) a plan for making security improvements described in
subsection (a) and the Secretary has approved the plan; and
(B) such additional information as the Secretary may
require to ensure accountability for the obligation and
expenditure of amounts made available to the operator under
the grant.
(2) Coordination.--To the extent that an application for a
grant under this section proposes security improvements
within a specific terminal owned and operated by an entity
other than the applicant, the applicant shall demonstrate to
the satisfaction of the Secretary that the applicant has
coordinated the security improvements for the terminal with
that entity.
(f) Over-the-Road Bus Defined.--In this section, the term
``over-the-road bus'' means a bus characterized by an
elevated passenger deck located over a baggage compartment.
(g) Bus Security Assessment.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to the
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
the House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, and the House of Representatives Committee on
Homeland Security a preliminary report in accordance with the
requirements of this section.
(2) Contents of preliminary report.--The preliminary report
shall include--
(A) an assessment of the over-the-road bus security grant
program;
(B) an assessment of actions already taken to address
identified security issues by both public and private
entities and recommendations on whether additional safety and
security enforcement actions are needed;
(C) an assessment of whether additional legislation is
needed to provide for the security of Americans traveling on
over-the-road buses;
(D) an assessment of the economic impact that security
upgrades of buses and bus facilities may have on the over-
the-road bus transportation industry and its employees;
(E) an assessment of ongoing research and the need for
additional research on over-the-road bus security, including
engine shut-off mechanisms, chemical and biological weapon
detection technology, and the feasibility of
compartmentalization of the driver; and
(F) an assessment of industry best practices to enhance
security.
(3) Consultation with industry, labor, and other groups.--
In carrying out this section, the Secretary shall consult
with over-the-road bus management and labor representatives,
public safety and law enforcement officials, and the National
Academy of Sciences.
(h) Funding.--There are authorized to be appropriated to
the Secretary of Homeland Security to carry out this
section--
(1) $12,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
(2) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
(3) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2010.
Amounts made available pursuant to this subsection shall
remain available until expended.
SEC. 207. PIPELINE SECURITY AND INCIDENT RECOVERY PLAN.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security, in
consultation with the Secretary of Transportation and the
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, and
in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding Annex
executed on August 9, 2006, shall develop a Pipeline Security
and Incident Recovery Protocols Plan. The plan shall
include--
(1) a plan for the Federal Government to provide increased
security support to the most critical interstate and
intrastate natural gas and hazardous liquid transmission
pipeline infrastructure and operations as determined under
section 208--
(A) at high or severe security threat levels of alert; and
(B) when specific security threat information relating to
such pipeline infrastructure or operations exists; and
(2) an incident recovery protocol plan, developed in
conjunction with interstate and intrastate transmission and
distribution pipeline operators and terminals and facilities
operators connected to pipelines, to develop protocols to
ensure the continued transportation of natural gas and
hazardous liquids to essential markets and for essential
public health or national defense uses in the event of an
incident affecting the interstate and intrastate natural gas
and hazardous liquid transmission and distribution pipeline
system, which shall include protocols for granting access to
pipeline operators for pipeline infrastructure repair,
replacement or bypass following an incident.
(b) Existing Private and Public Sector Efforts.--The plan
shall take into account actions taken or planned by both
private and
[[Page 246]]
public entities to address identified pipeline security
issues and assess the effective integration of such actions.
(c) Consultation.--In developing the plan under subsection
(a), the Secretary of Homeland Security shall consult with
the Secretary of Transportation, interstate and intrastate
transmission and distribution pipeline operators, pipeline
labor, first responders, shippers of hazardous materials,
State Departments of Transportation, public safety officials,
and other relevant parties.
(d) Report.--
(1) Contents.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security
shall transmit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate, the Committee on Homeland
Security of the House of Representatives, and the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives a report containing the plan required by
subsection (a), along with an estimate of the private and
public sector costs to implement any recommendations.
(2) Format.--The Secretary may submit the report in both
classified and redacted formats if the Secretary determines
that such action is appropriate or necessary.
SEC. 208. PIPELINE SECURITY INSPECTIONS AND ENFORCEMENT.
(a) In General.--Within 1 year after the date of enactment
of this Act the Secretary of Homeland Security, in
consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, shall
establish a program for reviewing pipeline operator adoption
of recommendations in the September, 5, 2002, Department of
Transportation Research and Special Programs Administration
Pipeline Security Information Circular, including the review
of pipeline security plans and critical facility inspections.
(b) Review and Inspection.--Within 9 months after the date
of enactment of this Act the Secretary shall complete a
review of the pipeline security plan and an inspection of the
critical facilities of the 100 most critical pipeline
operators covered by the September, 5, 2002, circular, where
such facilities have not been inspected for security purposes
since September 5, 2002, by either the Department of Homeland
Security or the Department of Transportation, as determined
by the Secretary in consultation with the Secretary of
Transportation.
(c) Compliance Review Methodology.--In reviewing pipeline
operator compliance under subsections (a) and (b), the
Secretary shall utilize risk assessment methodologies to
prioritize vulnerabilities and to target inspection and
enforcement actions to the most vulnerable and critical
pipeline assets.
(d) Regulations.--Within 1 year after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to pipeline
operators and the Secretary of Transportation security
recommendations for natural gas and hazardous liquid
pipelines and pipeline facilities. If the Secretary of
Homeland Security determines that regulations are
appropriate, the Secretary shall promulgate such regulations
and carry out necessary inspection and enforcement actions.
Any regulations should incorporate the guidance provided to
pipeline operators by the September 5, 2002, Department of
Transportation Research and Special Programs Administration's
Pipeline Security Information Circular and contain additional
requirements as necessary based upon the results of the
inspections performed under subsection (b). The regulations
shall include the imposition of civil penalties for non-
compliance.
(e) Funding.--There are authorized to be appropriated to
the Secretary of Homeland Security to carry out this
section--
(1) $2,000,000 for fiscal year 2008; and
(2) $2,000,000 for fiscal year 2009.
SEC. 209. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.
(a) Hazmat Licenses.--Section 5103a of title 49, United
States Code, is amended--
(1) by inserting ``of Homeland Security'' after
``Secretary'' each place it appears in subsections (a)(1),
(d)(1)(b), and (e); and
(2) by redesignating subsection (h) as subsection (i) and
inserting the following after subsection (g):
``(h) Relationship to Transportation Security Cards.--Upon
application, a State shall issue to an individual a license
to operate a motor vehicle transporting in commerce a
hazardous material without the security assessment required
by this section, provided the individual meets all other
applicable requirements for such a license, if the Secretary
of Homeland Security has previously determined, under section
70105 of title 46, United States Code, that the individual
does not pose a security risk.''.
SEC. 210. CERTAIN PERSONNEL LIMITATIONS NOT TO APPLY.
Any statutory limitation on the number of employees in the
Transportation Security Administration of the Department of
Transportation, before or after its transfer to the
Department of Homeland Security, does not apply to the extent
that any such employees are responsible for implementing the
provisions of this Act.
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, over five years since 9/11, much of
our Nation's transportation systems remain vulnerable to terror attack.
There are many reasons for the lack of action by the Federal
Government, but we can no longer simply look the other way. Last year,
the Congress had an opportunity to make significant strides to improve
the security of our freight and passenger rail systems, highways,
public transit systems, trucking and intercity bus operations, and
pipeline systems. The Senate passed my amendments and amendments by
other Senators to the SAFE Ports Act to address the security of these
important modes of transportation. In fact, the House of
Representatives overwhelmingly voted to instruct its conferees to
include these provisions in the final conference report of the SAFE
Ports Act.
Unfortunately, House Republican leaders stripped them out of the
final version of the bill behind closed doors, instead enacting a ban
on internet gambling. The actions by the House Republican leaders
further delayed real progress in securing our homeland from terror. I
believe the Federal Government must take a leadership role in securing
our country from terrorism. States cannot on their own be left
responsible for securing these interstate modes of transportation.
That is why I am proud to be an author of the Surface Transportation
and Rail Security Act of 2007. I have worked with my committee co-
chairmen--Senator Inouye and Senator Stevens--to ensure this bill gets
quickly considered. Its provisions are not new to anyone. They were
considered, and agreed to, merely four months ago by the Senate. I am
hopeful that they will again be quickly considered and adopted.
This bill specifically requires accountability from the Department of
Homeland Security, by ensuring that our rail systems have been analyzed
for security risk. It authorizes necessary funding for making these
security improvements and specifically includes $400 million for tunnel
security improvements in the New Jersey/New York region. I will seek
further Federal funding for improving security of the New Jersey/New
York region's tunnels and bridges in additional legislation to be
introduced this month, by working with my colleagues on the appropriate
committees in the Senate.
Last month, the Bush Administration proposed certain improvements to
our nation's rail systems, but these proposals fell far short of what
is needed to secure our country. For instance, the Administration
proposal fails to take specific actions to improve the security of
railroad stations, bridges, and tunnels. More people use Amtrak's Penn
Station in New York City than use all three major New Jersey-New York
region airports, Newark Liberty International, JFK, and LaGuardia
airports, every day. This bill takes a much more comprehensive
approach, by authorizing the funding needed to make these important
security improvements.
Our Nation's freight rail systems move some 12 billion tons of cargo,
but we are not doing enough to protect those systems. Some of this
cargo includes hazardous chemicals and other dangerous materials which
travel within feet of our schools, hospitals, neighborhoods, and snake
right through the middle of our cities. The potential for disaster
looms large, as the misuse of these shipments can produce an effect
that a weapon of mass destruction would on our communities. Clearly
much more thought needs to be put into how we move this dangerous
cargo, and the Federal Government must be involved. The Bush
Administration must agree with this assessment, as their proposal would
strictly forbid states or communities from acting on their own to
protect their residents from these risks.
I look forward to working with my colleagues to ensure that this
important legislation gets considered and enacted soon. We cannot
afford to delay any further these vital security improvements to our
country.
______
Mr. SPECTER (for himself and Mr. Leahy):
S. 185. A bill to restore habeas corpus for those detained by the
United States; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I will introduce legislation denominated
the
[[Page 247]]
Habeas Corpus Restoration Act. Last year, in the Military Commissions
Act, the constitutional right of habeas corpus was attempted to be
abrogated. I fought to pass an amendment to strike that provision of
the Act which was voted 51 to 48. I say ``attempted to be abrogated''
because, in my legal judgment, that provision in the Act is
unconstitutional.
It is hard to see how there can be legislation to eliminate the
constitutional right to habeas corpus when the Constitution is explicit
that habeas corpus may not be suspended except in time of invasion or
rebellion, and we do not have either of those circumstances present, as
was conceded by the advocates of the legislation last year to take away
the right of habeas corpus.
We have had Supreme Court decisions which have made it plain that
habeas corpus is available to noncitizens and that habeas corpus
applies to territory controlled by the United States, specifically,
including Guantanamo. More recently, however, we had a decision in the
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia applying the habeas
corpus jurisdiction stripping provision of the Military Commissions
Act, but I believe we will see the appellate courts strike down this
legislative provision.
The contention that the gravamen or the substance of habeas corpus is
provided by the statutory review to the Circuit Court of the District
of Columbia is fallacious on its face. All the statute does is allow
for a review of the regularity of proceedings. In my prepared
statement, I cite an example of litigation before a federal district
court, where a person charged with consorting with al-Qaida asked:
``What was the name of the person? He asked: What was the name of the
person I'm supposed to have consorted with? And the Presiding Officer
said: I don't know, which, according to the opinion, brought uproarious
laughter from the audience. Here a man is charged with consorting with
al-Qaida, and they cannot even tell him the name of the person he is
alleged to have consorted with.
The hearing before the Judiciary Committee, which I chaired,
contained expansive, detailed evidence about the proceedings under the
review provisions in Guantanamo, which are grossly, totally
insufficient.
The New York Times had an extensive article on this subject, starting
on the front page, last Sunday, and continuing on a full page on the
back page about what is happening at Guantanamo. It is hard to see how
in America, or in a jurisdiction controlled by the United States, these
proceedings could substitute for even rudimentary due process of law.
As I might add, the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act was introduced in
the 109th Congress. I offered the bill on behalf of myself and Senator
Leahy. Consequently, we had this bill listed in the 109th Congress as a
Specter-Leahy bill, and with Senator Leahy's consent, it is denominated
as the Specter-Leahy bill again in the 110th Congress.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my prepared text be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of 2007
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I seek recognition today to
introduce the ``Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of 2007.'' Last
September, during debate on the Military Commissions Act, I
introduced an amendment to strike section 7 of the Act and
thereby preserve the constitutional right of habeas corpus
for the approximately 450 individuals detained at Guantanamo
Bay. Because my amendment was not agreed to, by a narrow vote
of 48-51, the right to the writ of habeas corpus was denied
to those detainees. The privilege of the writ of habeas
corpus has therefore been suspended.
On December 5, with my colleague Senator Leahy, I
introduced the ``Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of 2006'' to
restore the writ of habeas corpus and bring this country back
into compliance with the United States Constitution. After
all, the United States Constitution is unambiguous in Article
1, Section 9, Clause 2, where it states: ``The privilege of
the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when
in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may
require it.'' Today, along with Senator Leahy, I am
reintroducing this important legislation.
The Habeas Corpus Restoration Act is very simple: It
strikes the federal habeas corpus limitations imposed by the
Military Commissions Act and the Detainee Treatment Act. In
so doing, the bill affords aliens detained by the United
States within its territorial jurisdiction, including those
detained at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, the right to
challenge their detention and military commission trial
procedures by an application for writ of habeas corpus. It
will ensure that the constitutional right of habeas corpus is
afforded to all individuals detained by the United States
government.
The Framers explicitly intended to extend habeas
protections to all, absent a case of rebellion, invasion, or
the interest of public safety. This principle was ratified by
the Supreme Court in the case of Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, where
Justice O'Connor stated ``[a]ll agree that absent suspension,
the writ of habeas corpus remains available to every
individual detained within the United States.''
This protection extends to those detained in Guantanamo
since it is a facility exclusively under the control of the
United States. In Rasul v. Bush, the Supreme Court held that
habeas corpus rights apply even to aliens held at Guantanamo
Bay. One does not need to be a United States citizen to be
afforded basic constitutional habeas corpus rights and the
U.S. Constitution draws no distinction between American
citizens and aliens held in U.S. custody.
Although some argue that Combatant Status Review Tribunals,
commonly referred to as ``CSRTs,'' are an adequate and
effective means to challenge detention in accordance with the
Supreme Court's decision in Swain v. Pressley, I couldn't
disagree more. In my view, CSRTs are a sham. We have learned
a great deal about the cursory review provided by these
tribunals at Guantanamo Bay. They operate with very little
information. Somebody is picked up on the battlefield. There
is no record preserved as to what that individual did. If
there was a weapon involved, it was collected and mixed in
with many other weapons. There is no chain of custody or even
a record of what was seized. In sum, CSRTs are nothing more
than a one-sided interrogation by the military tribunal
members. These proceedings simply do not comport with basic
fairness because the individuals detained do not have the
right to know what evidence there is against them. As Justice
O'Connor wrote in her plurality opinion in the Hamdi case,
``[a]n interrogation by one's captor, however effective an
intelligence-gathering tool, hardly constitutes a
constitutionally adequate factfinding before a neutral
decisionmaker.'' It is essential that we provide an adequate
means to evaluate the legality of an individual's continued
detention.
Typically, the CSRT will advise the detainee that the
evidence against them is classified and restrict access. The
U.S. District Court in the In re Guantanamo case criticized
the manner in which the CSRT required detainees to answer
allegations based on information that cannot be disclosed. In
a comical scene during the hearing, a detainee advised the
tribunal that he could not answer an allegation that he had
associated with a known al Qaida operative because the
tribunal would not provide the name of the alleged operative.
Since the tribunal would not even provide the name of the
operative, the detainee could not answer even the most basic
of allegations. While laughter filled the courtroom at the
time when the detainee could not answer this simple
allegation, we should not forget the seriousness of this
process and the manner in which we are treating detainees of
the United States.
The Military Commission Act's habeas corpus provisions were
debated at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing held on
September 25, 2006. At the hearing, I heard from a
distinguished and varied panel of witnesses, including the
attorney who represented Hamdan before the Supreme Court.
Perhaps most compelling during the hearing was the testimony
of the former U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of
Illinois, Thomas Sullivan, who has been to Guantanamo on many
occasions and has represented many detainees. Mr. Sullivan
was especially compelling when he made reference to a number
of individual cases where the proceedings before the CSRT
were completely insufficient. He cited hearings where
individuals were summoned before the tribunal, but did not
speak the language, did not have an attorney, did not have
access to the information which was presented against them,
and continued to be detained. These individuals either did
not know what their charges were, or those charges of which
they were aware were vague and illusory. For example, in the
case of Abdul Hadi al Siba'i, Mr. Sullivan described how his
client had been returned to Saudi Arabia after several months
of detainment and without a trial or any notice,
compensation, or apology. One can only suspect that the
United States government understood that the continued
detainment of this particular individual was wrong and would
expose weaknesses at trial.
The failure to afford habeas review rights to detainees has
concerned Kenneth Starr, former Solicitor General and U.S.
Court of Appeals Judge for the District of Columbia. In a
letter directed to me as Judiciary Chairman, Mr. Starr
expressed his concern ``about
[[Page 248]]
the limitations on writ of habeas corpus contained in the
comprehensive military commissions bill.''
If Justice O'Connor feels that detainees have the right to
habeas review, but we are denying them this avenue of review,
how are detainees supposed to rebut facts that they are not
allowed to confront? This is why federal courts should be
open to hear habeas petitions of these detainees. The Supreme
Court is clear, and we should apply this precedent to the
current situation involving detainees at Guantanamo Bay.
On the recent 5-year anniversary of 9/11, President Bush
repeated his commitment to bring terrorists to justice.
However, statistics tell us that most of the terrorists at
Guantanamo will never see the inside of a courtroom. Hundreds
will be held indefinitely. Of the over 400 detainees who
remain at Guantanamo, the Pentagon says another 110 have been
labeled as ``ready to release.'' But the real number we need
to look at is the remaining 325 or so detainees. How many
will face trial? Media reports citing Pentagon sources
suggest that only approximately 70 detainees will face trial.
This leaves approximately 250 detainees--more than half of
those still at Guantanamo--who will be held indefinitely
simply because the United States considers them to be too
dangerous or in possession of sensitive intelligence
information. These detainees will have no ability to
challenge their confinement. My bill will ensure these
individuals held in U.S. custody will be afforded the basic
constitutional right to petition for habeas corpus review.
The short history of the Military Commissions Act
underscores the need for this legislation. The day after the
Act became law, the Justice Department filed notices in each
of the 181 Guantanamo habeas cases pending before the United
States District Court for the District of Columbia,
highlighting the jurisdiction-stripping and retroactivity
provisions of the Act. In at least one noteworthy case, the
District Court has already agreed that it now lacks authority
to hear such a habeas petition.
On December 13, 2006, Judge James Robertson dismissed the
habeas petition of Salim Ahmed Hamdan--of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld
fame--for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. While I
disagree with Judge Robertson's conclusion that Hamdan has
``no constitutional entitlement to habeas'' because he was
detained in Guantanamo rather than inside the United States,
this conclusion demonstrates the lack of judicial recourse
available to such detainees. Of course, the Military
Commissions Act is not strictly limited to those held in
Guantanamo. In another case, on November 13, 2006, the
Department of Justice filed a motion with the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Fourth Circuit to dismiss the habeas petition
of alleged enemy combatant Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri. Unlike
Hamdan and other Guantanamo detainees, al-Marri has been
detained inside the United States. While we could simply wait
for the Supreme Court to rule on the constitutionality of
denying habeas rights to such detainees, I believe the United
States Congress has an obligation to act now and reverse this
wrong.
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. 185
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 ``Habeas Corpus Restoration
Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. RESTORATION OF HABEAS CORPUS FOR THOSE DETAINED BY
THE UNITED STATES.
(a) In General.--Section 2241 of title 28, United States
Code, is amended by striking subsection (e).
(b) Title 10.--Section 950j of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by striking subsection (b) and inserting the
following:
``(b) Limited Review of Military Commission Procedures and
Actions.--Except as otherwise provided in this chapter or in
section 2241 of title 28 or any other habeas corpus
provision, and notwithstanding any other provision of law, no
court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or
consider any claim or cause of action whatsoever, including
any action pending on or filed after the date of the
enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, relating
to the prosecution, trial, or judgment of a military
commission under this chapter, including challenges to the
lawfulness of procedures of military commissions under this
chapter.''.
SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE AND APPLICABILITY.
The amendments made by this Act shall--
(1) take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act;
and
(2) apply to any case that is pending on or after the date
of enactment of this Act.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, on the first day of this new Congress, I
join Senator Specter to reintroduce a bill to restore the Great Writ of
habeas corpus, a cornerstone of American liberty since the founding of
this Nation. The Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of 2007 bill continues
our efforts to amend last year's Military Commissions Act, to right a
wrong and to restore a basic protection to American law. This is an
issue on which we continue to work together and urge Senators on both
sides of the aisle to join with us.
As Justice Scalia wrote in the Hamdi case: ``The very core of liberty
secured by our Anglo-Saxon system of separated powers has been freedom
from indefinite imprisonment at the will of the Executive.'' The remedy
that secures that most basic of freedoms is habeas corpus. It provides
a check against arbitrary detentions and constitutional violations. It
guarantees an opportunity to go to court, with the aid of a lawyer, to
prove one's innocence. This fundamental protection was rolled back in
an unprecedented and unnecessary way in the run up to last fall's
election by passage of the Military Commissions Act.
The Military Commissions Act eliminated that right, permanently, for
any non-citizen determined to be an enemy combatant, or even
``awaiting'' such a determination. That includes the approximately 12
million lawful permanent residents in the United States today, people
who work and pay taxes in America and are lawful residents. This new
law means that any of these people can be detained, forever, without
any ability to challenge their detention Federal court--or anywhere
else--simply on the Government's say-so that they are awaiting
determination whether they are enemy combatants.
I deeply regret that Senator Specter and I were unsuccessful in our
efforts to stop this injustice when the President and the Republican
leadership insisted on rushing the Military Commissions Act through
Congress in the weeks before the recent elections. We proposed an
amendment that would have removed the habeas-stripping provision from
the Military Commissions Act. We fell just three votes short in those
political charged days. It is my hope that the new Senate and new
Congress will reconsider this matter, restore this fundamental
protection and revitalize our tradition of checks and balances.
Giving Government such raw, unfettered power as this law does should
concern every American. Last fall I spelled out a nightmare scenario
about a hard-working legal permanent resident who makes an innocent
donation to, among other charities, a Muslim charity that the
Government secretly suspects might be a source of funding for critics
of the United States Government. I suggested that, on the basis of this
donation and perhaps a report of ``suspicious behavior'' from an
overzealous neighbor, the permanent resident could be brought in for
questioning, denied a lawyer, confined, and even tortured. Such a
person would have no recourse in the courts for years, for decades,
forever.
Many people viewed this kind of nightmare scenario as fanciful, just
the rhetoric of a politician. It was not. It is all spelled out clearly
in the language of the law that this body passed. In November, the
scenario I spelled out was confirmed by the Department of Justice
itself in a legal brief submitted in federal court in Virginia. The
Justice Department, in a brief to dismiss a detainee's habeas case,
said that the Military Commissions Act allows the Government to detain
any non-citizen designated an enemy combatant without giving that
person any ability to challenge his detention in court. This is true,
the Justice Department said, even for someone arrested and imprisoned
in the United States. The Washington Post wrote that the brief ``raises
the possibility that any of the millions of immigrants living in the
United States could be subject to indefinite detention if they are
accused of ties to terrorist groups.''
In fact, the situation is even more stark than The Washington Post
story suggested. The Justice Department's brief says that the
Government can detain any non-citizen declared to be an enemy
combatant. But the law this
[[Page 249]]
Congress passed says the Government need not even make that
declaration: They can hold people indefinitely who are awaiting
determination whether or not they are enemy combatants.
It gets worse. Republican leaders in the Senate followed the White
House's lead and greatly expanded the definition of ``enemy
combatants'' in the dark of night in the final days before the bill's
passage, so that enemy combatants need not be soldiers on any
battlefield. They can be people who donate small amounts of money, or
people that any group of decision-makers selected by the President
decides to call enemy combatants. The possibilities are chilling.
The Administration has made it clear that they intend to use every
expansive definition and unchecked power given to them by the new law.
November's Justice Department brief made clear that any of our legal
immigrants could be held indefinitely without recourse in court.
Earlier in November, the Justice Department went to court to say that
detainees who had been held in secret CIA prisons could not even meet
with lawyers because they might tell their lawyers about the cruel
interrogation techniques used against them. In other words, if our
Government tortures somebody, that person loses his right to a lawyer
because he might tell the lawyer about having been tortured. A law
professor was quoted as saying about the Government's position in that
case: ``Kafka-esque doesn't do it justice. This is `Alice in
Wonderland.'''
We have eliminated basic legal and human rights for the 12 million
lawful permanent residents who live and work among us, to say nothing
of the millions of other legal immigrants and visitors who we welcome
to our shores each year. We have removed a vital check that our legal
system provides against the government arbitrarily detaining people for
life without charge. We may well have also made many of our remaining
limits against torture and cruel and inhuman treatment obsolete because
they are unenforceable. We have removed the mechanism the Constitution
provides to check government overreaching and lawlessness.
This is wrong. It is unconstitutional. It is un-American. It is
designed to ensure that the Bush-Cheney Administration will never again
be embarrassed by a United States Supreme Court decision reviewing its
unlawful abuses of power. The conservative Supreme Court, with seven of
its nine members appointed by Republican Presidents, has been the only
check on this Administration's lawlessness. Certainly the last Congress
did not do it. With passage of the Military Commissions Act, the
Republican Congress completed the job of eviscerating its role as a
check and balance on the Administration.
Some Senators uneasy about the Military Commissions Act's disastrous
habeas provision took solace in the thought that it would be struck
down by the courts. Instead, the first court to consider that
provision, a federal court in the District of Columbia, upheld the
provision. We should not outsource our moral, legal and constitutional
responsibility to the courts. Congress must be accountable for its
actions and we should act to right this wrong.
Abolishing habeas corpus for anyone who the Government thinks might
have assisted enemies of the United States is unnecessary and morally
wrong. It is a betrayal of the most basic values of freedom for which
America stands. It makes a mockery of the administration's lofty
rhetoric about exporting freedom across the globe.
We should take steps to ensure that our enemies can be brought to
justice efficiently and quickly. I introduced a bill to do that back in
2002, as did Senator Specter, when we each proposed a set of laws to
establish military commissions. The Bush-Cheney Administration rejected
our efforts and designed a regime the United States Supreme Court
determined to be unlawful. Establishing appropriate military
commissions is not the question. We all agree to do that. What we need
to revisit is the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus for millions
of legal immigrants and others, denying their right to challenge
indefinite detainment on the, government's say-so.
It is from strength that America should defend our values and our
Constitution. It takes commitment to those values to demand
accountability from the Government. In standing up for American values
and security, I will keep working on this issue until we restore the
checks and balances that are fundamental to preserving the liberties
that define us as a nation. We can ensure our security without giving
up our liberty.
______
By Mr. SPECTER:
S. 186. A bill to provide appropriate protection to attorney-client
privileged communications and attorney work product; to the Committee
on the Judiciary.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, the legislation which I am introducing is
the Attorney-Client Privilege Protection Act. This legislation was
previously introduced in the 109th Congress.
In 2003, the Department of Justice adopted the provisions of the so-
called Thompson Memorandum, which allowed prosecutors to request that
companies under investigation waive their attorney-client privilege,
and that, absent such a waiver, prosecutors may consider the company's
refusal to waive privilege in the charging process. As a result, the
legal and business community complained that, if the attorney-client
privilege is not waived, the corporation and individuals may get a
stiffer charge.
The Department of Justice has recently revised the Thompson
Memorandum, with Deputy Attorney General McNulty substituting what is
now known as the McNulty Memorandum. Prior to the release of the
McNulty Memorandum, I had a number of discussions with Department of
Justice officials, and I thank the Department of Justice for the effort
which they have made, but it is not sufficient. The new memorandum is
inadequate in its protection of the attorney-client privilege.
Although the McNulty Memorandum is inadequate in failing to protect
attorney-client privilege, it does improve another part of the
Department of Justice's prior procedure under the Thompson Memorandum,
which effectively denied the payment of counsel fees so that people who
were charged were unable to defend themselves without bankrupting
themselves in defense. That provision of the earlier Thompson
Memorandum was declared unconstitutional in a case in the Southern
District of New York.
Mr. President, again, I ask unanimous consent that the full text of
my statement be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Attorney-Client Privilege Protection Act of 2006
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I seek recognition today to
introduce the ``Attorney-Client Privilege Protection Act of
2007,'' which remains necessary despite Deputy Attorney
General Paul McNulty's issuance of a new set of corporate
prosecution guidelines on December 12 of last year. Although
the new McNulty memorandum, which replaces the memorandum
issued by former Deputy Attorney General Larry Thompson,
makes some improvements, the revision continues to erode the
attorney-client relationship by allowing prosecutors to
request privileged information backed by the hammer of
prosecution if the request is denied.
This bill will protect the sanctity of the attorney-client
relationship by prohibiting federal prosecutors and
investigators from requesting waiver of attorney-client
privilege and attorney work product protections in corporate
investigations. The bill would similarly prohibit the
government from conditioning charging decisions or any
adverse treatment on an organization's payment of employee
legal fees, invocation of the attorney-client privilege, or
agreement to a joint defense agreement. This bill will
hopefully force the Department of Justice to issue a
meaningful change to its corporate charging policies beyond
the changes in the McNulty Memorandum, which came ``a day
late and a dollar short'' according to Frederick Krebs, the
president of the Association of Corporate Counsel.
There is no need to wait to see how the McNulty memorandum
will operate in practice. The flaws in that memorandum are
already apparent. Moreover, before the issuance of the
McNulty memorandum last month, the Thompson memorandum has
[[Page 250]]
been undermining the attorney-client relationship in the
corporate context for nearly 4 years. In January 2003, then-
Deputy Attorney General Larry Thompson issued a memorandum to
all Justice Department components throughout the United
States entitled ``Principles of Federal Prosecution of
Business Organizations.'' This memorandum, which was prepared
on the heels of the establishment of the President's
Corporate Fraud Task Force, set forth various factors for
federal prosecutors to consider when deciding to prosecute
corporations or other business organizations. The so-called
``Thompson memorandum'' lists a corporation's ``cooperation
and voluntary disclosure'' as one of the chief factors to be
considered in making a charging decision.
Just as the Thompson memorandum was issued with laudable
goals in mind, the McNulty memorandum was, no doubt, the
product of good intentions. Nevertheless, it continues to
threaten the viability of the attorney-client privilege in
business organizations by allowing prosecutors to request
privilege waiver upon a finding of ``legitimate need''--a
standard that should guide the most basic of prosecutorial
requests, not sensitive requests for privileged information.
Just as the standard is inadequate, so is the level of
internal review. Although the McNulty memorandum establishes
some internal review for such waiver requests, it does so in
a way that diminishes the importance of a corporate client's
ability to communicate with its lawyers. The memo creates two
different categories of privileged information and provides
very little protection to client communications to the
attorney while providing significant protection and DOJ
internal review for attorney communications to the client.
The memo identifies the two subcategories of privileged
information as: (1) ``purely factual information,'' which
consists of witness statements, interview memoranda, factual
chronologies and summaries, and reports containing
investigative facts documented by counsel; and (2) attorney
advice to the client, including attorney notes, memoranda,
and notes.
The first category of information, formally labeled
Category 1 information by DOJ, may be requested with approval
at the U.S. Attorney-level with consultation with the
Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division. The
consultation requirement is not defined in any way in the
memo. By failing to define what it means ``to consult'' with
the Assistant Attorney General, the McNulty memo fails to say
whether the Assistant Attorney General can overrule the U.S.
Attorney's decision. Unless there is a meaningful review of
the U.S. Attorney's decision, it is difficult to see how the
McNulty memo provides better safeguards for Category 1
information than the interim-McCallum memo, issued in October
2005, which mandated a U.S. Attorney-level ``written waiver
review process'' for all attorney client privilege waiver
requests.
As noted above, the new McNulty memo does provide greater
protections for attorney advice and communication to the
client, which the memo labels ``Category 2'' information. The
McNulty memo protects Category 2 information in the first
instance by making clear that it may be sought only if the
prosecutor thinks Category 1 information provides an
incomplete basis for the investigation. If such a request is
deemed necessary, the request for Category 2 information must
be approved by the Deputy Attorney General.
Although the McNulty memo provides greater protection for
Category 2 information, the memo does not explain why such
information will ever be needed by prosecutors outside of
attorney advice in furtherance of a crime or fraud or where
the advice is subject to an advice of counsel defense, both
of which are expressly exempted from the waiver request
process outlined in the memorandum. Thus, the only two types
of attorney advice that are likely to be relevant in a
criminal investigation are exempted from the memo's coverage.
With that exception, I fail to see why Category 2 information
is needed at all. Prosecutors do not need to know what
attorneys are advising their clients unless the advice is in
furtherance of a crime or the client puts the advice in issue
by raising it as a defense.
No less than the Thompson memo, the new McNulty memo
discourages corporate employees from having frank
conversations with lawyers, which makes it difficult for
companies who desire to prevent possible corruption from
making appropriate remedies. The Department of Justice will
not prevent corporate misconduct if it continues to
inadvertently discourage the types of internal investigations
and dialogues corporate officials need to detect and prevent
corporate fraud.
In the next rewrite of its corporate prosecution
guidelines, the Administration needs to look in the mirror.
If the President refused to disclose documents or information
after invoking a claim of executive privilege, it would not
consider itself to be ``uncooperative.'' Rather, the
executive would simply be doing its job in representing a
client. Yet, when the tables are turned, the Justice
Department has memorialized a policy instructing its
prosecutors to discourage attorneys from doing their job
effectively.
The right to counsel is too important to be passed over for
prosecutorial convenience. It has been engrained in American
jurisprudence since the 18th century when the Bill of Rights
was adopted. The 6th Amendment is a fundamental right
afforded to individuals charged with a crime and guarantees
proper representation by counsel throughout a prosecution.
However, the right to counsel is largely ineffective unless
the confidential communications made by a client to his or
her lawyer are protected by law. As the Supreme Court
observed in Upjohn Co. v. United States, ``the attorney-
client privilege is the oldest of the privileges for
confidential communications known to the common law.'' When
the Upjohn Court affirmed that attorney-client privilege
protections apply to corporate internal legal dialogue, the
Court manifested in the law the importance of the attorney-
client privilege in encouraging full and frank communication
between attorneys and their clients, as well as the broader
public interests the privilege serves in fostering the
observance of law and the administration of justice. The
Upjohn Court also made clear that value of legal advice and
advocacy depends on the lawyer having been fully informed by
the client.
As a former prosecutor, I am acutely aware of the enormous
power and tools a prosecutor has at his or her disposal. As
former Supreme Court Justice and then Attorney-General Robert
Jackson stated in his 1940 speech to U.S. Attorneys, ``The
prosecutor has more control over life, liberty, and
reputation than any other person in America. His discretion
is tremendous. He can have citizens investigated and, if he
is that kind of person, he can have this done to the tune of
public statements and veiled or unveiled intimations.'' Thus,
the federal prosecutor has enough power without the coercive
tools of the privilege waiver, whether that waiver policy is
embodied in the Holder, Thompson, McCallum, or McNulty
memorandum. I see no need to have the Justice Department
publicly express a policy that encourages waiver of attorney-
client privilege, especially where the policy is backed by
the heavy hammer of possible criminal charges. Cases should
be prosecuted based on their merits, not based on how well an
organization works with the prosecutor. As Justice Jackson
warned in the same speech, ``the most dangerous power of the
prosecutor [is] that he will pick people that he thinks he
should get, rather than pick cases that need to be
prosecuted.''
Just as the Holder and Thompson memoranda before it, the
McNulty memorandum embodies bad public policy by empowering
federal prosecutors at the expense of the attorney-client
relationship. Consequently, I echo the comments of the
following organizations and individuals who have criticized
the McNulty memorandum:
``The Justice Department's new corporate charging guidelines
for federal prosecutors fall far short of what is needed to
prevent further erosion of fundamental attorney-client
privilege, work product, and employee protections during
government investigations.''--Karen Mathis, ABA President.
``While containing some improvements, this new policy does
not adequately protect the right to attorney-client
privilege, and unwisely ignores many of the recommendations
of former senior Justice Department officials, the American
Bar Association, and a massive coalition of some of the
nation's most prominent business, legal, and civil rights
groups.''--Stanton Anderson, U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
``The McNulty Memorandum still falls short of protecting the
attorney-client privilege, and the related work product
doctrine, which derives from it.''--Martin Pinales,
President, National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.
``[T]his memo is a day late and a dollar short. Asking
prosecutors to get permission before formally requesting that
companies waive their attorney-client privilege will not put
an end to the `culture of waiver' that exists within DOJ. Our
research shows that more often than not, requests for waiver
are not asked for outright, but are coercively inferred.''--
Frederick Krebs, President, Association of Corporate Counsel.
``Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty's memorandum is a
disappointment. It perpetuates the dynamic that compels
companies to ``voluntarily'' waive their rights in order to
get favorable treatment or to avoid the death penalty of a
federal indictment.''--Caroline Fredrickson, Director, ACLU
Washington legislative office; George Landrith, President,
Frontiers of Freedom; Stephanie A. Martz, Director, White
Collar Crime Project, National Association of Criminal
Defense Lawyers; Daniel J. Popeo, Chairman, Washington Legal
Foundation, in a letter to the editor of USA Today.
My bill amends title 18 of the United States Code by adding
a new section, Sec. 3014, that would prohibit any agent or
attorney of the United States government in any criminal or
civil case to demand, request or condition treatment on the
disclosure of any communication protected by the attorney-
client privilege or attorney work product. The bill would
also prohibit government lawyers and agents from conditioning
any charge or adverse treatment on whether an organization
pays attorneys' fees for its employees or signs a joint
defense agreement.
[[Page 251]]
While I am glad that the Justice Department revised the
Thompson memorandum, I am hopeful that the Department will
act again to reform the McNulty memorandum. In the absence of
such action, this legislation is needed to ensure that basic
protections of the attorney-client relationship are
preserved.
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. 186
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 ``Attorney-Client Privilege
Protection Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) Justice is served when all parties to litigation are
represented by experienced diligent counsel.
(2) Protecting attorney-client privileged communications
from compelled disclosure fosters voluntary compliance with
the law.
(3) To serve the purpose of the attorney-client privilege,
attorneys and clients must have a degree of confidence that
they will not be required to disclose privileged
communications.
(4) The ability of an organization to have effective
compliance programs and to conduct comprehensive internal
investigations is enhanced when there is clarity and
consistency regarding the attorney-client privilege.
(5) Prosecutors, investigators, enforcement officials, and
other officers or employees of Government agencies have been
able to, and can continue to, conduct their work while
respecting attorney-client and work product protections and
the rights of individuals, including seeking and discovering
facts crucial to the investigation and prosecution of
organizations.
(6) Despite the existence of these legitimate tools, the
Department of Justice and other agencies have increasingly
employed tactics that undermine the adversarial system of
justice, such as encouraging organizations to waive attorney-
client privilege and work product protections to avoid
indictment or other sanctions.
(7) An indictment can have devastating consequences on an
organization, potentially eliminating the ability of the
organization to survive post-indictment or to dispute the
charges against it at trial.
(8) Waiver demands and other tactics of Government agencies
are encroaching on the constitutional rights and other legal
protections of employees.
(9) The attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine,
and payment of counsel fees shall not be used as devices to
conceal wrongdoing or to cloak advice on evading the law.
(b) Purpose.--It is the purpose of this Act to place on
each agency clear and practical limits designed to preserve
the attorney-client privilege and work product protections
available to an organization and preserve the constitutional
rights and other legal protections available to employees of
such an organization.
SEC. 3. DISCLOSURE OF ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE OR
ADVANCEMENT OF COUNSEL FEES AS ELEMENTS OF
COOPERATION.
(a) In General.--Chapter 201 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after section 3013 the
following:
``Sec. 3014. Preservation of fundamental legal protections
and rights in the context of investigations and enforcement
matters regarding organizations
``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Attorney-client privilege.--The term `attorney-client
privilege' means the attorney-client privilege as governed by
the principles of the common law, as they may be interpreted
by the courts of the United States in the light of reason and
experience, and the principles of article V of the Federal
Rules of Evidence.
``(2) Attorney work product.--The term `attorney work
product' means materials prepared by or at the direction of
an attorney in anticipation of litigation, particularly any
such materials that contain a mental impression, conclusion,
opinion, or legal theory of that attorney.
``(b) In General.--In any Federal investigation or criminal
or civil enforcement matter, an agent or attorney of the
United States shall not--
``(1) demand, request, or condition treatment on the
disclosure by an organization, or person affiliated with that
organization, of any communication protected by the attorney-
client privilege or any attorney work product;
``(2) condition a civil or criminal charging decision
relating to a organization, or person affiliated with that
organization, on, or use as a factor in determining whether
an organization, or person affiliated with that organization,
is cooperating with the Government--
``(A) any valid assertion of the attorney-client privilege
or privilege for attorney work product;
``(B) the provision of counsel to, or contribution to the
legal defense fees or expenses of, an employee of that
organization;
``(C) the entry into a joint defense, information sharing,
or common interest agreement with an employee of that
organization if the organization determines it has a common
interest in defending against the investigation or
enforcement matter;
``(D) the sharing of information relevant to the
investigation or enforcement matter with an employee of that
organization; or
``(E) a failure to terminate the employment of or otherwise
sanction any employee of that organization because of the
decision by that employee to exercise the constitutional
rights or other legal protections of that employee in
response to a Government request; or
``(3) demand or request that an organization, or person
affiliated with that organization, not take any action
described in paragraph (2).
``(c) Inapplicability.--Nothing in this Act shall prohibit
an agent or attorney of the United States from requesting or
seeking any communication or material that such agent or
attorney reasonably believes is not entitled to protection
under the attorney-client privilege or attorney work product
doctrine.
``(d) Voluntary Disclosures.--Nothing in this Act is
intended to prohibit an organization from making, or an agent
or attorney of the United States from accepting, a voluntary
and unsolicited offer to share the internal investigation
materials of such organization.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of sections for
chapter 201 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``3014. Preservation of fundamental legal protections and rights in the
context of investigations and enforcement matters
regarding organizations.''.
______
By Mr. SPECTER:
S. 187. A bill to provide sufficient resources to permit electronic
surveillance of United States persons for foreign intelligence purposes
to be conducted pursuant to individualized court-issued orders for
calls originating in the United States, to provide additional resources
to enhance oversight and streamline the procedures of the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, to ensure review of the
Terrorist Surveillance Program by the United States Supreme Court, and
for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I am reintroducing the text of S. 4051,
which I originally introduced on November 14 of last year. And the
title articulates it in a succinct way, so I will read that. It is: a
bill to provide sufficient resources to permit electronic surveillance
of United States persons for foreign intelligence purposes to be
conducted pursuant to individualized court-issued warrants for calls
originating in the United States, to provide additional resources to
enhance oversight and streamline the procedures of the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, and to ensure review of the
Terrorist Surveillance Program by the United States Supreme Court.
I made a number of efforts in the 109th Congress to subject the
President's surveillance program to judicial review in accordance with
the existing law that a search-and-seizure warrant or a wiretap ought
not to be issued without a judge making a finding of probable cause and
authorizing that kind of a search and seizure or that kind of a
wiretap.
Without going into the entire history, that bill was refined to the
point where it is articulated in S. 4051 of the 109th Congress, which
would provide for individualized warrants for calls originating in the
United States and going out. That can be accomplished, according to the
CIA, if there are additional resources, which this bill provides, and
if the time for retroactive approval is extended from 3 days to 7 days.
With respect to calls originating outside the United States and
coming in, we are advised there are simply too many of those to cover,
so that on those calls the bill would expedite the judicial review
which is currently in process.
A Federal court in Detroit has declared the President's program
unconstitutional, and it is now pending in
[[Page 252]]
the Sixth Circuit. This bill would mandate review by the Supreme Court
of the United States and would put review in the Federal courts on an
accelerated timetable.
There are objections to proceeding with legislation along this line
because of an interest in having hearings. Well, we have had a whole
series of hearings, and the administration has refused to tell the
Judiciary Committee the details of the program. Under our division of
authority, it is the Intelligence Committee which has jurisdiction over
this kind of a program.
But, we could proceed with hearings and still enact legislation which
would provide constitutional protection for calls originating in the
United States, which is the more serious category. Citizens here,
people here in the United States, would have individual warrants and a
judicial determination of probable cause before the surveillance and
the wiretaps were put into effect.
Meanwhile, the program goes on. It has been going on since late 2001.
It has been known to the public since December 16, 2005. And each day
that passes, there are more taps, there are more searches and seizures,
there is more surveillance, which may not comport with constitutional
provisions.
There may be the motivation to show that the President has broken the
law. And there is no doubt that the surveillance program does violate
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. But the President
contends that he has inherent article II power as Commander in Chief
which supersedes the statute. And he may be right about that. But only
a court can determine. And under the existing standards, the court must
make a determination of the nature of the invasion of privacy
contrasted with the importance for the public welfare of providing
security. That is a judicial function.
It seems to me that where you have an avenue to have probable cause
established in the traditional way on calls going out of the United
States, we ought to utilize it. We ought not to have that program
continue in effect without having that kind of constitutional
procedure.
And then, as to calls originating outside of the United States, if
the President is right, that can be determined by the courts. Let that
proceed in that manner. And, the justification for delay--that we need
to show the President of the United States has violated the law--is a
wholly insufficient justification to withhold legislation that would be
a major improvement to this surveillance program.
We can conclude, in my view, that he has violated FISA. But to
repeat--and I do not like to repeat--he may have the constitutional
authority for the surveillance program, but that has to be determined
by a judicial proceeding.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
S. 187
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Oversight and Resource Enhancement Act of
2007''.
TITLE I--ENHANCEMENT OF RESOURCES AND PERSONNEL FOR ELECTRONIC
SURVEILLANCE FOR FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE PURPOSES
SEC. 101. FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE COURT MATTERS.
(a) Authority for Additional Judges.--Section 103(a) of the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C.
1803(a)) is amended--
(1) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(a)'';
(2) in paragraph (1), as so designated, by inserting ``at
least'' before ``seven of the United States judicial
circuits'';
(3) by designating the second sentence as paragraph (4) and
indenting such paragraph, as so designated, accordingly; and
(4) by inserting after paragraph (1), as so designated, the
following new paragraph:
``(2) In addition to the judges designated under paragraph
(1), the Chief Justice of the United States may designate as
judges of the court established by paragraph (1) such judges
appointed under Article III of the Constitution of the United
States as the Chief Justice determines appropriate in order
to provide for the prompt and timely consideration under
section 105 of applications under section 104 for electronic
surveillance under this title. Any judge designated under
this paragraph shall be designated publicly.''.
(b) Consideration of Emergency Applications.--Such section
is further amended by inserting after paragraph (2), as added
by subsection (a) of this section, the following new
paragraph:
``(3) A judge of the court established by paragraph (1)
shall make a determination to approve, deny, or seek
modification of an application submitted under section
subsection (f) or (g) of section 105 not later than 24 hours
after the receipt of such application by the court.''.
SEC. 102. ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL FOR PREPARATION AND
CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATIONS FOR ORDERS
APPROVING ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE.
(a) Office of Intelligence Policy and Review.--
(1) Additional personnel.--The Office of Intelligence
Policy and Review of the Department of Justice is authorized
such additional personnel, including not fewer than 21 full-
time attorneys, as may be necessary to carry out the prompt
and timely preparation, modification, and review of
applications under section 104 of the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1804) for orders under
section 105 of that Act (50 U.S.C. 1805) approving electronic
surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes.
(2) Assignment.--The Attorney General shall assign
personnel authorized by paragraph (1) to and among
appropriate offices of the National Security Agency in order
that such personnel may directly assist personnel of the
Agency in preparing applications described in that paragraph.
(b) Federal Bureau of Investigation.--
(1) Additional legal and other personnel.--The National
Security Branch of the Federal Bureau of Investigation is
authorized such additional legal and other personnel as may
be necessary to carry out the prompt and timely preparation
of applications under section 104 of the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act of 1978 for orders under section 105 of that
Act approving electronic surveillance for foreign
intelligence purposes.
(2) Assignment.--The Director of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation shall assign personnel authorized by paragraph
(1) to and among the field offices of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation in order that such personnel may directly
assist personnel of the Bureau in such field offices in
preparing applications described in that paragraph.
(c) Additional Legal and Other Personnel for National
Security Agency.--The National Security Agency is authorized
such additional legal and other personnel as may be necessary
to carry out the prompt and timely preparation of
applications under section 104 of the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act of 1978 for orders under section 105 of that
Act approving electronic surveillance for foreign
intelligence purposes.
(d) Additional Legal and Other Personnel for Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Court.--There is authorized for the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court such additional
personnel (other than judges) as may be necessary to
facilitate the prompt and timely consideration by that Court
of applications under section 104 of the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act of 1978 for orders under section 105 of that
Act approving electronic surveillance for foreign
intelligence purposes. Personnel authorized by this paragraph
shall perform such duties relating to the consideration of
such applications as that Court shall direct.
(e) Supplement Not Supplant.--The personnel authorized by
this section are in addition to any other personnel
authorized by law.
SEC. 103. TRAINING OF FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND
NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY PERSONNEL IN FOREIGN
INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE MATTERS.
The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the
Director of the National Security Agency shall each, in
consultation with the Attorney General--
(1) develop regulations establishing procedures for
conducting and seeking approval of electronic surveillance on
an emergency basis, and for preparing and properly submitting
and receiving applications and orders, under sections 104 and
105 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50
U.S.C. 1804 and 1805); and
(2) prescribe related training for the personnel of the
applicable agency.
TITLE II--IMPROVEMENT OF FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY
SEC. 201. EXTENSION OF PERIOD FOR APPLICATIONS FOR ORDERS FOR
EMERGENCY ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE.
Section 105(f) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1805(f)) is amended by striking ``72
hours'' both places it appears and inserting ``168 hours''.
SEC. 202. ACQUISITION OF FOREIGN-FOREIGN COMMUNICATIONS.
(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
this Act or the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978
(50 U.S.C.
[[Page 253]]
1801 et seq.), no court order shall be required for the
acquisition through electronic surveillance of the contents
of any communication between one person who is not located
within the United States and another person who is not
located within the United States for the purpose of
collecting foreign intelligence information even if such
communication passes through, or the surveillance device is
located within, the United States.
(b) Treatment of Intercepted Communications Involving
Domestic Party.--If surveillance conducted, as described in
subsection (a), inadvertently collects a communication in
which at least one party is within the United States, the
contents of such communications shall be handled in
accordance with the minimization procedures set forth in
section 101(h)(4) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801(h)(4)).
(c) Definitions.--In this section, the terms ``contents'',
``electronic surveillance'', and ``foreign intelligence
information'' have the meaning given such terms in section
101 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50
U.S.C. 1801).
SEC. 203. INDIVIDUALIZED FISA APPLICATIONS.
The contents of any wire or radio communication sent by a
person who is reasonably believed to be inside the United
States to a person outside the United States may not be
retained or used unless a court order authorized under the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is obtained.
SEC. 204. ISSUES RESERVED FOR THE COURTS.
Nothing in this Act shall be deemed to amend those
provisions of FISA concerning any wire or radio communication
sent from outside the United States to a person inside the
United States. The constitutionality of such interceptions
shall be determined by the courts, including the President's
claim that his Article II authority supersedes FISA.
TITLE III--ENHANCED CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT AND SUPREME COURT REVIEW OF
THE TERRORIST SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM
SEC. 301. CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT.
(a) Electronic Surveillance Under FISA.--Section 108 of the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C.
1808) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(2)--
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period and
inserting ``; and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(D) the authority under which the electronic surveillance
is conducted.''; and
(2) by striking subsection (b) and inserting the following:
``(b) On a semiannual basis, the Attorney General
additionally shall fully inform the Permanent Select
Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives and
the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate on
electronic surveillance conducted without a court order.''.
(b) Intelligence Activities.--The National Security Act of
1947 (50 U.S.C. 401 et seq.) is amended--
(1) in section 501 (50 U.S.C. 413)--
(A) by redesignating subsection (f) as subsection (g); and
(B) by inserting after subsection (e) the following new
subsection:
``(f) The Chair of each of the congressional intelligence
committees, in consultation with the ranking member of the
committee for which the person is Chair, may inform, on a
bipartisan basis, all members or any individual members of
such committee of a report submitted under subsection (a)(1)
or subsection (b) as such Chair considers necessary.''; and
(2) in section 502 (50 U.S.C. 414), by adding at the end
the following new subsection:
``(d) Informing of Committee Members.--The Chair of each of
the congressional intelligence committees, in consultation
with the ranking member of the committee for which the person
is Chair, may inform, on a bipartisan basis, all members or
any individual members of such committee of a report
submitted under subsection (a) as such Chair considers
necessary.''.
SEC. 302. SUPREME COURT REVIEW OF THE TERRORIST SURVEILLANCE
PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--Upon appeal by the United States or any
party to the underlying proceedings, the Supreme Court of the
United States shall review the final decision of any United
States court of appeal concerning the legality of the
Terrorist Surveillance Program.
(b) Expedited Consideration.--It shall be the duty of the
Supreme Court of the United States to advance on the docket
and to expedite to the greatest possible extent the
disposition of any matter brought under subsection (a).
(c) Definition.--In this section, the term ``Terrorist
Surveillance Program'' means the program identified by the
President of the United States on December 17, 2005, to
intercept international communications into and out of the
United States of persons linked to al Qaeda or related
terrorist organizations.
TITLE IV--OTHER MATTERS
SEC. 401. DEFINITION.
In this Act, the term ``Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Court'' means the court established by section 103(a) of the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C.
1803(a)).
SEC. 402. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There is authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be
necessary to carry out this Act and the amendments made by
this Act.
SEC. 403. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Act, and the amendments made by this Act, shall take
effect on the date that is 30 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
______
By Mr. SALAZAR (for himself, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Reid, Mr. Menendez,
Mrs. Boxer, and Mrs. Feinstein):
S. 188. A bill to revise the short title of the Fannie Lou Hamer,
Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King Voting Rights Act Reauthorization
and Amendments Act of 2006; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to speak on behalf of
legislation I am introducing today, which has the support and co-
sponsorship of several of my colleagues including Senators Reid, Leahy,
Feinstein, Boxer and Menendez.
This is a simple, straight forward measure to include the name of
Cesar E. Chavez, a truly remarkable civil rights leader and American,
into the title of the reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act passed
last year.
With my bill, the title of this Act would be referred to as the
Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, Coretta Scott King, and Cesar E. Chavez
Voting Rights Act Reauthorization and Amendments Act of 2006. I am
proud to have been part of a unanimous Senate that reauthorized this
landmark piece of civil rights legislation. Reauthorizing the Voting
Rights Act extended the open door for every American to exercise their
right to participate in the representative democracy founded by our
Constitution, and cherished by our people. In that spirit, it is
fitting that Cesar Chavez's name be included with the other names
honored in this bill--as pioneers who helped pave the way to ensure
that all Americans have a voice in electing their Government at the
voting booth.
Cesar Chavez is an American hero. Like the venerable American leaders
who are now associated with this effort, he sacrificed his life to
empower the most vulnerable in America. For this reason, he continues
to be an important part of our country's journey on the path to a more
inclusive America. Cesar Chavez believed strongly in our American
democracy and saw the right to vote as a fundamental cornerstone of our
freedom. I believe it is fitting that his name be a part of the
reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act.
President Lyndon Johnson once stated: ``The vote is the most powerful
instrument ever devised by man for breaking down injustice and
destroying the terrible walls which imprison men because they are
different from other men.'' With his simple but powerful slogan ``Si Se
Puede'' or yes, it can be done, Cesar Chavez reminded us of this truth.
Still, throughout our history and even today, many Americans have
been shut out of our most fundamental right, the right to vote. When
President Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act of 1965 into law, he
restored the faith of millions of African Americans, Hispanic
Americans, Native Americans, and others who had historically been kept
from voting.
As our Nation moved forward in the next chapter of civic equality and
inclusion with the reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act last year,
we demonstrated to millions of Hispanic Americans this body's continued
commitment to safeguarding their right to vote. To include Cesar E.
Chavez's name to that commitment today is an important change because
of the message it sends Hispanic Americans. It serves as a signal of
Congress' commitment to an inclusive America that brings all Americans
into our democratic process.
This past November, more than 86 million Americans voted all across
the country. Fifty years ago, before the enactment of the Voting Rights
Act, many would not have been able to do so. It is important and
fitting that we
[[Page 254]]
honor those civil rights leaders whose contributions and courage helped
pave the way for today's more inclusive democracy, and it is fitting
that the name of Cesar E. Chavez be included with them in the title of
last year's Voting Rights Act reauthorization. I look forward to
working with my colleagues on this small change, and am hopeful that
they will approve my proposal to revise the official title of this
landmark reauthorization as the Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, Coretta
Scott King, and Cesar E. Chavez Voting Rights Act Reauthorization and
Amendments Act of 2006.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, today I join Senator Salazar in introducing
a bill to include Cesar E. Chavez among the names of the great civil
rights leaders we honor in the title of last year's Voting Rights Act
Reauthorization and Amendments Act of 2006, ``VRARA''. I supported
taking this action last year during the Senate Judiciary Committee's
consideration of the VRARA when I offered an amendment on behalf of
Senator Salazar to add the Hispanic civil rights leader to those for
whom the law is named. As Senator Salazar reminded us, Cesar Chavez is
an American hero who sacrificed his life to empower the most vulnerable
in America. Like Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King,
for whom the VRARA is named, he believed strongly in the right to vote
as a cornerstone of American democracy. I offered the amendment in the
Judiciary Committee and it was adopted without dissent.
In order not to complicate final passage of the Voting Rights Act,
the Senate proceeded to adopt the House-passed bill without amendment
so that it could be signed into law without having to be reconsidered
by the House. At that time, I committed to work with Senator Salazar to
conform the law to include recognition of the contribution to our civil
rights, voting rights and American society by Cesar Chavez.
Cesar Chavez's name should be added to the law as important
recognition of the broad landscape of political inclusion made possible
by the Voting Rights Act. This bill would not alter the bill's vital
remedies for continuing discrimination in voting, but is overdue
recognition of the importance of the Voting Rights Act to Hispanic-
Americans. Prior to the VRA, Hispanics, like minorities of all races,
faced major barriers to participation in the political process, through
the use of such devices as poll taxes, exclusionary primaries,
intimidation by voting officials, language barriers, and systematic
vote dilution.
I urge the Senate quickly to take up and pass this measure as we
convene the new Congress and commit ourselves again to ensuring that
the great promises of the 14th and 15th amendments are kept for all
Americans and that the Voting Rights Act Reauthorization and Amendments
Act is fully implemented to protect the rights of all Americans.
______
By Mr. McCAIN (for himself, Mr. Lieberman, Ms. Collins, and Mr.
Feingold):
S. 192. A bill providing greater transparency with respect to
lobbying activities, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to be joined by
Senators Feingold, Collins, and Lieberman in introducing a bill to
provide greater transparency into the process of influencing our
Government, and to ensure greater accountability among public
officials.
The legislation proposes a number of important and necessary reforms.
It would provide for faster reporting and greater public access to
reports filed by lobbyists and their employers under current law. It
would require greater disclosure of lobbyists' contributions and
payments to lawmakers and entities associated with them, as well as
fundraising and other events they host. the bill also would require
greater disclosure from both lobbyists, and Members and employees of
Congress, of travel that is arranged or financed by a lobbyist or his
client.
To address the problem of the revolving door between Government and
the private sector, the bill would strengthen the lobbying restrictions
on former senior members of the Executive Branch, former Members of
Congress, and former senior congressional staff. It would require that
Members publicly disclose negotiations they are having with prospective
private employers to ensure there is no conflict of interests. The bill
also would modify the provision in current law that exempts former
Federal employees who go to work for Indian tribes as outside lobbyists
and agents from the revolving door laws.
The bill would prohibit all gifts from lobbyists to lawmakers and
their staff. To ensure that such a ban is not circumvented, the bill
also would require Members of Congress and their staff to pay the fair
market value for travel on private planes and the fair market value of
sports and entertainment tickets. Members and staff would also have to
post the details of their privately-sponsored work trips on-line for
public inspection.
The bill would establish an independent, non-partisan Office of
Public Integrity. Armed with a number of investigative tools, the
Office of Public Integrity would investigate alleged misconduct by
Members and their staff and make appropriate recommendations to the
Senate Ethics Committee for final disposition.
Finally, the bill would help us combat wasteful, porkbarrel spending.
It would amend Congressional rules to allow lawmakers to challenge
unauthorized appropriations, earmarks, and policy riders in
appropriations bills.
Mr. President, when I introduced similar legislation over a year ago,
I regretted that such reform was even necessary. And, I voted against
the bill that was ultimately passed in the Senate because it lacked a
number of elements essential to true reform.
Unfortunately, the need for such reform has only become more acute.
The American people's faith and confidence in this venerable
institution has steadily eroded. The day after the mid-term elections,
CNN reported that, according to national exit polls, voters were
concerned about corruption and ethics in Government more than any other
issue. I can tell you the polls, if not spot on, are not far off.
During my travels around the country last year, it quickly became
clear that there is a deep perception that we legislators do not act on
the priorities of the American people, that special interests, and not
the people's interests, guide our legislative hand. This loss in
confidence is not limited to a single party or ideology; rather, it
cuts across the spectrum. It is a perception bred by recent
Congressional failures and scandals, which I need not chronicle here.
We can begin to restore faith in this institution by divesting
ourselves of some of the perks and privileges that have somehow crept
into public service. Take, for example, free meals and sports and
entertainment tickets. The American people have rightfully come to see
the abuse of such perks as a corrupting influence. In a string of
guilty pleas last year, several lobbyists, former congressional aides,
and a congressman admitted that such gifts were used as bribes. Quite
frankly, there is no good reason why Members of Congress and their
staff cannot forgo such gifts from lobbyists. No one would seriously
contend that they are necessary for us to conduct the people's
business. A total gift ban would go a long way towards restoring the
public's confidence in us.
Another critical aspect requiring reform is the ability of a Member
to travel on a corporate jet and only pay the rate of a first class
plane ticket. This bill requires Senators and their employees who use
corporate or charter aircraft to pay the fair market value for that
travel. While I appreciate that such a change is not popular with some
of my colleagues, the time has come to fundamentally change the way we
do things in this town. Much of the public views our ability to travel
on corporate jets, often accompanied by lobbyists, while only
reimbursing the first-class rate, as a huge loophole in the current
gift rules. And they are right--it is. I
[[Page 255]]
have no doubt that the average American would love to fly around the
country on very comfortable corporate-owned aircraft and only be
charged the cost of a first-class ticket. It is a pretty good deal we
have got going here. We need to face the fact that the time has come to
end this Congressional perk.
At a time when the public is questioning our integrity, the Senate
needs to more aggressively enforce its own rules. We can do this not
just by making more public the work that the Senate Ethics Committee
currently undertakes, but by addressing the conflict that is inherent
in any body that regulates itself. That is why I am again proposing the
creation of a new Office of Public Integrity with the capacity to
initiate and conduct investigations, uncolored by partisan concerns and
unconstrained by collegial relationships.
Finally, Mr. President, if we are truly serious about reform, we need
to address what some have coined the currency of corruption--earmarks.
In 1994, there were 4,126 earmarks. In 2005, there were 15,877--an
increase of nearly 400 percent! But there was a little good news for
2006 solely due to the good sense that occurred unexpectedly when the
Labor HHS appropriations bill was approved with almost no earmarks, an
amazing feat given that there were over 3,000 earmarks the prior year
for just that bill. Yet despite this first reduction in 12 years, it
does not change the fact that the largest number of earmarks have still
occurred in the last three years--2004, 2005, and 2006.
Now, let us consider the level of funding associated with those
earmarks. The amount of earmarked funding increased from $23.2 billion
in 1994 to $64 billion in FY 2006. Remarkably, it rose by 34 percent
from 2005 to 2006, even though the number of earmarks decreased!
Earmarked dollars have doubled just since 2000, and more than tripled
in the last 10 years. This explosion in earmarks led one lobbyist to
deride the appropriations committees as favor factories. The time for
us to fix this broken process is long overdue.
Mr. President, this past election, the American people sent a clear
message: clean up the way business is done in our capitol. As faithful
public servants, we are obligated to respond. Let us respond
meaningfully, to assure the American people that we are here promoting
the interests of main street over that of K Street, and that we are
more interested in public service than the perks and privileges offered
us. Let us also remind ourselves that we came here in the sincere
belief that public service is a noble calling, a reward unto itself.
I therefore urge my colleagues in joining me on this bill. I think
our Nation and this venerable institution will be all the better for
it.
______
By Mr. CRAIG:
S.J. Res. 1. A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the
Constitution of the United States relative to require a balanced budget
and protect Social Security surpluses; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing the balanced
budget amendment to the Constitution of the United States. I, for some
years, along with my colleagues in a bipartisan way, have spoke to this
issue. Today, in a new year and in a new Congress, Americans are eager
to see a new direction for our country. They have seen Federal spending
increase by $200 billion from fiscal years 2005 to 2006. They have
watched the Federal deficit swell into hundreds of billions of dollars,
and they have borne the costs. Our spending system is broken and, in my
opinion, so is our Tax Code.
The new year is a time for new solutions to this problem. When new
solutions that draw upon old principles of limited government and
fiscal responsibility and tax simplicity and fairness are how you
approach a problem, I think Americans once again will listen, and they
will allow us to build a system that increasingly builds faith, once
again, with the American people and America's taxpayers. It is simply
getting back to basics. We must look at the big picture of Federal
spending as a crisis in our country and begin to speak the language
that is fundamental to reform in itself, not instead of half measures
or bits or pieces or nibbling around the edges. But as both of our
leaders have spoken in the last hour to bipartisan efforts, they speak
of bold strokes to solving problems for America, and I think that is
what Americans expect of us as their leaders. We must look at it simply
and reduce the deficit--I would hope we could eliminate it--and to do
so with a Tax Code that is fairer, more balanced, certainly simpler,
and not so complex that the American taxpayers collectively have to
spend billions of dollars a year simply in complying with the Tax Code
itself.
In the coming months, I will address all three components of the
Federal spending crisis, including a flat tax and a budget process that
reforms what we get done here, and that we get it done in a timely
manner. I begin with a balanced budget amendment to the United States
Constitution. For many Americans, one of the signs of our deep respect
for the Constitution is to acknowledge that, in exceptional cases, a
problem finally rises to a level that it can only be addressed through
a constitutional adjustment in our government.
I believe spending is at that crisis level and we here, Democrat and
Republican, have demonstrated our inability to deal with it in a timely
and responsible fashion. So it is time we act. My balanced budget
amendment would require Congress to pass a balanced budget every year
to ensure that Social Security surpluses are set aside exclusively to
meet the future needs of beneficiaries and to require a supermajority
in both the House and the Senate to raise the Nation's debt limit. In
addition, it recognizes that national security is a priority of this
Congress by providing essential exceptions for war and imminent
military threats. In other words, over the last several years a
balanced budget amendment would not have deterred us from funding, as
appropriate and necessary, our engagement in Iraq and to make sure the
men and women who are there on the front lines today are adequately
provided with the necessary tools.
Thomas Jefferson said it so well, and he said this:
. . .with respect to future debt, would it not be wise and
just for that nation to declare in the constitution they are
forming that neither the legislature, nor the nation itself
can validly contract more debt than they may pay?
His logic is simple. His logic is right. I urge you to join me in
making fiscal responsibility constitutionally acceptable--and a habit--
of this Nation's Capitol.
With the first piece of legislation I introduce to the 110th
Congress, I call on the Senate to pass a balanced budget amendment to
the Constitution, a bill of economic rights for our future and our
children.
I ask unanimous consent that a copy of this joint resolution
proposing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution be printed in
the Record.
Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of
the joint resolution be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the joint resolution was
ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
S.J. Res. 1
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That the
following article is proposed as an amendment to the
Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to
all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several
States within seven years after the date of its submission by
the Congress:
``Article--
``Section 1. Total outlays for any fiscal year shall not
exceed total receipts for that fiscal year, unless three-
fifths of the whole number of each House of Congress shall
provide by law for a specific excess of outlays over receipts
by a rollcall vote.
``Section 2. Total receipts shall include all receipts of
the United States Government except those derived from
borrowing. Total outlays shall include all outlays of the
United States Government except for those for repayment of
debt principal.
``Section 3. Any surplus of receipts (including
attributable interest) over outlays of the Federal Old-Age
and Survivors Insurance and the Federal Disability Insurance
Trust Funds shall not be counted for purposes of
[[Page 256]]
this article. Any deficit of receipts (including attributable
interest) relative to outlays of the Federal Old-Age and
Survivors Insurance and the Federal Disability Insurance
Trust Funds shall be counted for purposes of this article,
and must be completely offset by a surplus of all other
receipts over all other outlays.
``Section 4. The limit on the debt of the United States
held by the public shall not be increased, unless three-
fifths of the whole number of each House shall provide by law
for such an increase by a rollcall vote.
``Section 5. Prior to each fiscal year, the President shall
transmit to the Congress a proposed budget for the United
States Government for that fiscal year, in which total
outlays do not exceed total receipts.
``Section 6. No bill to increase revenue shall become law
unless approved by a majority of the whole number of each
House by a rollcall vote.
``Section 7. The Congress may waive the provisions of this
article for any fiscal year in which a declaration of war is
in effect. The provisions of this article may be waived for
any fiscal year in which the United States is engaged in
military conflict which causes an imminent and serious
military threat to national security and is so declared by a
joint resolution, adopted by a majority of the whole number
of each House, which becomes law.
``Section 8. The Congress shall enforce and implement this
article by appropriate legislation, which may rely on
estimates of outlays and receipts.
``Section 9. This article shall take effect the second
fiscal year beginning after its ratification.''.
____________________
SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS
______
SENATE RESOLUTION 1--INFORMING THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES THAT
A QUORUM OF EACH HOUSE IS ASSEMBLED
Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell) submitted the following
resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
S. Res. 1
Resolved, That a committee consisting of two Senators be
appointed to join such committee as may be appointed by the
House of Representatives to wait upon the President of the
United States and inform him that a quorum of each House is
assembled and that the Congress is ready to receive any
communication he may be pleased to make.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 2--INFORMING THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES THAT A
QUORUM OF THE SENATE IS ASSEMBLED
Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell) submitted the following
resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
S. Res. 2
Resolved, That the Secretary inform the House of
Representatives that a quorum of the Senate is assembled, and
that the Senate is ready to proceed to business.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 3--TO ELECT ROBERT C. BYRD, A SENATOR FROM THE STATE
OF WEST VIRGINIA, TO BE PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE OF THE SENATE OF THE
UNITED STATES
Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell) submitted the following
resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
S. Res. 3
Resolved, That Robert C. Byrd, a Senator from the State of
West Virginia, be, and he is hereby, elected President of the
Senate pro tempore.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 4--NOTIFYING THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF
THE ELECTION OF A PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE
Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell) submitted the following
resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
S. Res. 4
Resolved, That the President of the United States be
notified of the election of the Honorable Robert C. Byrd as
President of the Senate pro tempore.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 5--NOTIFYING THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE
ELECTION OF A PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE
Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell) submitted the following
resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
S. Res. 5
Resolved, That the House of Representatives be notified of
the election of the Honorable Robert C. Byrd as President of
the Senate pro tempore.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 6--EXPRESSING THE THANKS OF THE SENATE TO THE
HONORABLE TED STEVENS FOR HIS SERVICE AS PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE OF THE
UNITED STATES SENATE AND TO DESIGNATE SENATOR STEVENS AS PRESIDENT PRO
TEMPORE EMERITUS OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE
Mr. McCONNELL (for himself and Mr. Reid) submitted the following
resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
S. Res. 6
Resolved, That the United States Senate expresses its
deepest gratitude to Senator Ted Stevens for his dedication
and commitment during his service to the Senate as the
President Pro Tempore.
Further, as a token of appreciation of the Senate for his
long and faithful service, Senator Ted Stevens is hereby
designated President Pro Tempore Emeritus of the United
States Senate.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 7--FIXING THE HOUR OF DAILY MEETING OF THE SENATE
Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell) submitted the following
resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
S. Res. 7
Resolved, That the daily meeting of the Senate be 12
o'clock meridian unless otherwise ordered.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 8--ELECTING NANCY ERICKSON AS SECRETARY OF THE SENATE
Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell) submitted the following
resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
S. Res. 8
Resolved, That Nancy Erickson of South Dakota be, and she
is hereby, elected Secretary of the Senate.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 9--NOTIFYING THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF
THE ELECTION OF THE SECRETARY OF THE SENATE
Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell) submitted the following
resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
S. Res. 9
Resolved, That the President of the United States be
notified of the election of the Honorable Nancy Erickson as
Secretary of the Senate.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 10--NOTIFYING THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE
ELECTION OF A SECRETARY OF THE SENATE
Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell) submitted the following
resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
S. Res. 10
Resolved, That the House of Representatives be notified of
the election of the Honorable Nancy Erickson as Secretary of
the Senate.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 11--ELECTING TERRANCE W. GAINER AS THE SERGEANT AT
ARMS AND DOORKEEPER OF THE SENATE
Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell) submitted the following
resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
S. Res. 11
Resolved, That Terrance W. Gainer of Illinois be, and he is
hereby, elected Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the
Senate.
[[Page 257]]
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 12--NOTIFYING THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF
THE ELECTION OF A SERGEANT AT ARMS AND DOORKEEPER OF THE SENATE
Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell) submitted the following
resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
S. Res. 12
Resolved, That the President of the United States be
notified of the election of the Honorable Terrance W. Gainer
as Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 13--NOTIFYING THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE
ELECTION OF A SERGEANT AT ARMS AND DOORKEEPER OF THE SENATE
Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell) submitted the following
resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
S. Res. 13
Resolved, That the House of Representatives be notified of
the election of the Honorable Terrance W. Gainer as Sergeant
at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 14--ELECTING MARTIN P. PAONE OF VIRGINIA AS SECRETARY
FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE SENATE
Mr. REID submitted the following resolution; which was considered and
agreed to:
S. Res. 14
Resolved, That Martin P. Paone of Virginia be, and he is
hereby, elected Secretary for the Majority of the Senate.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 15--ELECTING DAVID J. SCHIAPPA OF MARYLAND AS
SECRETARY FOR THE MINORITY OF THE SENATE
Mr. McCONNELL submitted the following resolution; which was
considered and agreed to:
S. Res 15
Resolved, That David J. Schiappa of Maryland be, and he is
hereby, elected Secretary for the Minority of the Senate.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 16--TO MAKE EFFECTIVE APPOINTMENT OF THE SENATE LEGAL
COUNSEL
Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. McConnell) submitted the following
resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
S. Res. 16
Resolved, That the appointment of Morgan J. Frankel to be
Senate Legal Counsel made by the President pro tempore this
day is effective as of January 3, 2007, and the term of
service of the appointee shall expire at the end of the One
Hundred Eleventh Congress.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 17--TO MAKE EFFECTIVE APPOINTMENT OF THE DEPUTY
SENATE LEGAL COUNSEL
Mr. McCONNELL (for himself and Mr. Reid) submitted the following
resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
S. Res. 17
Resolved, That the appointment of Patricia Mack Bryan, of
Virginia, to be Deputy Senate Legal Counsel made by the
President pro tempore this day is effective as of January 3,
2007, and the term of service of the appointee shall expire
at the end of the One Hundred Eleventh Congress.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 18--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING
DESIGNATION OF THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER ``NATIONAL MILITARY FAMILY MONTH''
Mr. REID (for Mr. Inouye) submitted the following resolution; which
was referred to the Committee on armed Services:
S. Res. 18
Whereas military families, through their sacrifices and
their dedication to the United States and its values,
represent the bedrock upon which the United States was
founded and upon which the country continues to rely in these
perilous and challenging times: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That--
(1) it is the sense of the Senate that the month of
November should be designated as ``National Military Family
Month''; and
(2) the Senate encourages the people of the United States
to observe ``National Military Family Month'' with
appropriate ceremonies and activities.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, today I rise to honor all our military
families by submitting a Resolution to designate November as National
Military Family Month. As we all know, memories fade and the hardships
experienced by our military families are easily forgotten unless they
touch our own immediate family.
Today, we have our men and women deployed all over the world, engaged
in this war on terrorism. These far-ranging military deployments are
extremely difficult on the families who bear this heavy burden.
To honor these families, the Armed Services YMCA has sponsored
Military Family Week in late November since 1996. However, due to
frequent ``short week'' conflicts around the Thanksgiving holidays, the
designated week has not always afforded enough time to schedule
observances on and near our military bases.
I believe a month long observation will allow greater opportunity to
plan events. Moreover, it will provide a greater opportunity to
stimulate media support.
A resolution will help pave the way for this effort. I ask my
colleagues to join me in supporting this tribute to our military
families.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 19--HONORING PRESIDENT GERALD RUDOLPH FORD
Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. McConnell, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Levin, Mr.
Akaka, Mr. Alexaner, Mr. Allard, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Bayh, Mr. Bennett, Mr.
Biden, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Bond, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Brown, Mr. Brownback,
Mr. Bunning, Mr. Burr, Mr. Byrd, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Cardin, Mr. Carper,
Mr. Casey, Mr. Chambliss, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Coburn, Mr. Cochran, Mr.
Coleman, Ms. Collins, Mr. Conrad, Mr. Corker, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Craig,
Mr. Crapo, Mr. DeMint, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Dole, Mr. Domenici, Mr. Dorgan,
Mr. Durbin, Mr. Ensign, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Feingold, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr.
Graham, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Gregg, Mr. Hagel, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Hatch, Mrs.
Hutchison, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Inouye, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Johnson, Mr.
Kennedy, Mr. Kerry, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Kohl, Mr. Kyl, Ms. Landrieu, Mr.
Lautenberg, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Lieberman, Mrs. Lincoln, Mr. Lott, Mr.
Lugar, Mr. Martinez, Mr. McCain, Mrs. McCaskill, Mr. Menendez, Ms.
Mikulski, Ms. Murkowski, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Nelson of Florida, Mr. Nelson
of Nebraska, Mr. Obama, Mr. Pryor, Mr. Reed, Mr. Roberts, Mr.
Rockefeller, Mr. Salazar, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Sessions, Mr.
Shelby, Mr. Smith, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Specter, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Sununu, Mr.
Tester, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Thune, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Voinovich, Mr. Warner,
Mr. Webb, Mr. Whitehouse, and Mr. Wyden) submitted the following
resolution; which was ordered held at the desk:
S. Res. 19
Whereas Gerald Rudolph Ford, the 38th President of the
United States, was born on July 14, 1913, in Omaha, Nebraska;
Whereas Gerald Ford was raised in Grand Rapids, Michigan,
where he was active in the Boy Scouts and where he excelled
as both a student and an athlete during high school;
Whereas after graduating from high school, Gerald Ford
attended the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, where he
played on the university's national championship football
teams in 1932 and 1933, and was honored as the team's most
valuable player in 1934, before graduating with a B.A. degree
in 1935;
Whereas Gerald Ford later attended Yale Law School and
earned an LL.B. degree in 1941, after which he began to
practice law in Grand Rapids;
Whereas Gerald Ford joined the United States Naval Reserve
in 1942 and served his country honorably during World War II;
Whereas upon returning from his service in the military,
Gerald Ford ran for the United States House of
Representatives and was elected to Congress;
Whereas Gerald Ford served in the House of Representatives
from January 1949 to December 1973, winning reelection 12
times, each time with more than 60 percent of the vote;
Whereas Gerald Ford served with great distinction in
Congress, in particular through his service on the Defense
Appropriations Subcommittee, of which he rose to become
ranking member in 1961;
[[Page 258]]
Whereas in addition to his work in the House of
Representatives, Gerald Ford served as a member of the Warren
Commission, which investigated the assassination of President
John F. Kennedy;
Whereas, in 1965, Gerald Ford was selected as minority
leader of the House of Representatives, a position he held
for 8 years;
Whereas after the resignation of Vice President Spiro Agnew
in 1973, Gerald Ford was chosen by President Richard Nixon to
serve as Vice President of the United States;
Whereas following the resignation of President Nixon,
Gerald Ford took the oath of office as President of the
United States on August 9, 1974;
Whereas upon assuming the presidency, Gerald Ford helped
the nation heal from one of the most difficult and
contentious periods in United States history, and restored
public confidence in the country's leaders;
Whereas Gerald Ford's basic human decency, his integrity,
and his ability to work cooperatively with leaders of all
political parties and ideologies, earned him the respect and
admiration of Americans throughout the country; and
Whereas Gerald Ford was able to serve his country with such
great distinction in large part because of the continuing
support of his widely admired wife, Elizabeth (Betty), who
also has contributed much to the nation in many ways, and of
their 4 children, Michael, John, Steven, and Susan: Now,
therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate notes with deep sorrow and solemn
mourning the death of President Gerald Rudolph Ford.
Resolved, That the Senate extends its heartfelt sympathy to
Mrs. Ford and the family of President Ford.
Resolved, That the Senate honors and, on behalf of the
nation, expresses deep appreciation for President Ford's
outstanding and important service to his country.
Resolved, That the Senate directs the Secretary of the
Senate to communicate these resolutions to the House of
Representatives and transmit a copy thereof to the family of
the former President.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 20--RECOGNIZING THE UNCOMMON VALOR OF WESLEY AUTRY OF
NEW YORK, NEW YORK
Mrs. CLINTON submitted the following resolution; which was referred
to the Committee on the Judiciary:
S. Res. 20
Whereas Wesley Autry is a citizen of New York, New York;
Whereas Wesley Autry is a veteran of the United States
Navy;
Whereas Wesley Autry witnessed a fellow subway passenger
suffer from a seizure and fall onto the train tracks;
Whereas Wesley Autry was compelled by his belief that he
should ``do the right thing'' and serve as an example to his
2 young daughters;
Whereas Wesley Autry demonstrated uncommon valor and
tremendous bravery in diving onto the train tracks to save
the life of his fellow subway passenger only moments before
an incoming train passed over them;
Whereas the beneficiary of Wesley Autry's courageous
actions is now recovering at St. Luke's Roosevelt Hospital
Center, New York;
Whereas Wesley Autry has conducted himself with the utmost
humility in the midst of his newfound fame; and
Whereas Wesley Autry stands out as an example of
selflessness to members of his community, his state, and the
Nation: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) recognizes that Wesley Autry acted heroically by
putting his own life at risk to save that of his fellow
citizen; and
(2) expresses its deep appreciation for Wesley Autry's
example and the values that his actions represent.
____________________
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF CONGRESS THAT
AN ARTISTIC TRIBUTE TO COMMEMORATE THE SPEECH GIVEN BY PRESIDENT RONALD
REAGAN AT THE BRANDENBURG GATE ON JUNE 12, 1987, SHOULD BE PLACED
WITHIN THE UNITED STATES CAPITOL
Mr. ALLARD submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was
referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
S. Con. Res. 1
Whereas the people of the United States successfully
defended freedom and democracy for over 40 years in a global
Cold War against an aggressive Communist tyranny;
Whereas President Ronald Wilson Reagan's demonstration of
unwavering personal conviction during this conflict served to
inspire millions of people throughout the United States and
around the world to seek democracy, freedom, and greater
individual liberty; and
Whereas President Reagan's determined stand against the
Soviet Union during his 8 years as President served as the
catalyst for the collapse of the Soviet Union: Now,
therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives
concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that an
artistic tribute to commemorate the speech given by President
Ronald Reagan at the Brandenburg Gate on June 12, 1987,
during which he uttered the immortal words, ``Mr. Gorbachev,
tear down this wall!'', should be placed within the United
States Capitol.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, finally, I would like to note that nearly
20 years ago, on June 12, 1987, President Ronald Reagan stood at the
Berlin Wall, at the Brandenburg Gate, and issued his--issued
liberty's--famous challenge to Soviet tyranny:
Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this Wall!
I am submitting a resolution today calling for an artistic rendering
of that moment in time to be painted into the Capitol, along with the
other significant scenes of our Nation's past. As we walk through the
building today, we can see scenes from the Nation's founding, from the
Civil War, our westward expansion, even the Moon landing and Challenger
astronauts. I would like to also see Reagan at the Brandenburg Gate. I
think it would be entirely appropriate to have this image added. It
would be an important reminder of the struggle this Nation undertook.
It would stand for the millions of Americans who did their part for
nearly half a century in that struggle, both military and civilian. And
it would testify to the greatness of our Nation, and the greatness of
our 40th President.
____________________
FOREIGN TRAVEL FINANCIAL REPORTS
In accordance with the appropriate provisions of law, the Secretary
of the Senate herewith submits the following reports for standing
committees of the Senate, certain joint committees of the Congress,
delegations and groups, and select and special committees of the
Senate, relating to expenses incurred in the performance of authorized
foreign travel:
CONSOLIDATED REPORT OF EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR FOREIGN TRAVEL BY MEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE U.S. SENATE, UNDER AUTHORITY OF SEC. 22, P.L. 95-384--22 U.S.C. 1754(b), COMMITTEE ON
AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION AND FORESTRY FOR TRAVEL FROM JULY 1 TO SEPT. 30, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per diem Transportation Miscellaneous Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar
Name and country Name of currency Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent
currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S.
currency currency currency currency
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Saxby Chambliss:
Greenland.............................. Krone...................................... ........... 46.75 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 46.75
Turkey................................. Lira....................................... ........... 462.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 462.00
Georgia................................ Lari....................................... ........... 99.10 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 99.10
Montenegro............................. Euro....................................... ........... 710.24 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 710.24
Italy.................................. Euro....................................... ........... 81.48 ........... 3,290.59 ........... ........... ........... 3,372.07
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 259]]
Total................................ ........................................... ........... 1,399.57 ........... 3,290.59 ........... ........... ........... 4,690.16
SAXBY CHAMBLISS,
Chairman, Committee on Agriculture,
Nutrition and Forestry, Oct. 3, 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSOLIDATED REPORT OF EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR FOREIGN TRAVEL BY MEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE U.S. SENATE, UNDER AUTHORITY OF SEC. 22, P.L. 95-384--22 U.S.C. 1754(b), COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS FOR TRAVEL FROM JULY 1 TO SEPT. 30, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per diem Transportation Miscellaneous Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar
Name and country Name of currency Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent
currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S.
currency currency currency currency
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Gove:
Kuwait................................. Dinar...................................... ........... 292.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 292.00
France................................. Euro....................................... ........... 1,470.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,470.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 8,373.50 ........... ........... ........... 8,373.50
Tom Hawkins:
Kuwait................................. Dinar...................................... ........... 292.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 292.00
France................................. Euro....................................... ........... 1,470.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,470.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 8,373.50 ........... ........... ........... 8,373.50
James Hayes:
United Kingdon......................... Pound...................................... ........... 302.75 ........... ........... ........... 27.26 ........... 330.01
France................................. Euro....................................... ........... 914.25 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 914.25
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 1,322.70 ........... ........... ........... 1,322.70
Howard Sutton:
United Kingdom......................... Pound...................................... ........... 302.75 ........... ........... ........... 39.26 ........... 342.01
France................................. Euro....................................... ........... 914.25 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 914.25
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 1,322.70 ........... ........... ........... 1,322.70
Dennis Balkham:
Belgium................................ Euro....................................... ........... 400.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 400.00
Romania................................ Lei........................................ ........... 202.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 202.00
Switzerland............................ Euro....................................... ........... 356.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 356.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 6,480.96 ........... ........... ........... 6,480.96
Sean Knowles:
Belgium................................ Euro....................................... ........... 400.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 400.00
Romania................................ Lei........................................ ........... 202.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 202.00
Switzerland............................ Euro....................................... ........... 356.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 356.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 6,480.96 ........... ........... ........... 6,480.96
B.G. Wright:
Belgium................................ Euro....................................... ........... 400.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 400.00
Romania................................ Lei........................................ ........... 202.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 202.00
Switzerland............................ Euro....................................... ........... 356.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 356.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 6,480.96 ........... ........... ........... 6,480.96
Christina Evans:
Belgium................................ Euro....................................... ........... 400.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 400.00
Romania................................ Lei........................................ ........... 202.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 202.00
Switzerland............................ Euro....................................... ........... 356.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 356.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 6,480.96 ........... ........... ........... 6,480.96
Allen Cutler:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 906.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 906.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... 6,967.75 ........... ........... ........... ........... 6,967.75
Michele Gordon:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 2,300.00 ........... ........... ........... 2,300.00
Marshall Islands....................... Dollar..................................... ........... 1,200.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,200.00
Emily Brunini:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 2,300.00 ........... ........... ........... 2,300.00
Marshall Islands....................... Dollar..................................... ........... 1,200.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,200.00
Sudip Parikh:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 1,573.63 ........... ........... ........... 72.00 ........... 1,645.63
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 8,539.60 ........... ........... ........... 8,539.60
Bettilou Taylor:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 1,573.63 ........... ........... ........... 72.00 ........... 1,645.63
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 8,539.60 ........... ........... ........... 8,539.60
Scott Dalzell:
Marshall Islands....................... Dollar..................................... ........... 900.76 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 900.76
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 3,114.90 ........... ........... ........... 3,114.90
Ellen Murray:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 1,573.63 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,5373.63
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 8,539.60 ........... ........... ........... 8,539.60
Paul Carliner:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 906.76 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 906.76
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 6,967.75 ........... ........... ........... 6,967.75
Erik Fatemi:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 1,573.63 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,573.63
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 8,539.60 ........... 90.00 ........... 8,629.60
Adrienne Hallett:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 1,573.63 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,573.63
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 8,539.60 ........... ........... ........... 8,539.60
Charles Houy:
Phillipines............................ Peso....................................... ........... 846.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 846.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 2,843.75 ........... ........... ........... 2,843.75
Senator Inouye:
Phillipines............................ Peso....................................... ........... 846.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 846.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 2,843.75 ........... ........... ........... 2,843.75
Jennifer Park:
Kenya.................................. Shillings.................................. ........... 1,440.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,440.00
Rwanda................................. Francs..................................... ........... 626.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 626.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 8,144.27 ........... ........... ........... 8,144.27
Erik Fatemi:
United Kingdom......................... Pound...................................... ........... 2,354.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,354.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 2,160.54 ........... ........... ........... 2,160.54
........................................... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 0.00
Timothy Rieser:
Colombia............................... Dollar..................................... ........... 708.00 ........... ........... ........... 92.00 ........... 800.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 1,050.92 ........... ........... ........... 1,050.92
........................................... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 0.00
B.G. Wright:
South Korea............................ Won........................................ ........... 1,158.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,158.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 9,336.74 ........... ........... ........... 9,336.74
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................ ........................................... ........... 30,749.67 ........... 136,044.61 ........... 392.52 ........... 166,794.28
THAD COCHRAN,
Chairman, Committee on Appropriations, Oct.
6, 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 260]]
CONSOLIDATED REPORT OF EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR FOREIGN TRAVEL BY MEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE U.S. SENATE, UNDER AUTHORITY OF SEC. 22, P.L. 95-384--22 U.S.C. 1754(b), COMMITTEE ON ARMED
SERVICES FOR TRAVEL FROM JULY 1 TO SEPT. 30, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per diem Transportation Miscellaneous Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar
Name and country Name of currency Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent
currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S.
currency currency currency currency
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator John Cornyn:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 5,693.00 ........... ........... ........... 5,693.00
Brazil................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 288.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 288.00
Colombia............................... Dollar..................................... ........... 165.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 165.00
Russell J. Thomasson:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 5,693.00 ........... ........... ........... 5,693.00
Brazil................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 288.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 288.00
Colombia............................... Dollar..................................... ........... 165.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 165.00
Senator Jack Reed:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 7,546.16 ........... ........... ........... 7,546.16
Kuwait................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 311.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 311.00
Jordan................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 159.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 159.00
Elizabeth King:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 7,546.16 ........... ........... ........... 7,546.16
Kuwait................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 313.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 313.00
Jordan................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 154.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 154.00
Gregory T. Kiley:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 8,513.11 ........... ........... ........... 8,513.11
Kuwait................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 909.80 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 909.80
Afghanistan............................ Dollar..................................... ........... 4.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 4.00
Derek M. Maurer:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... 8,533.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... 8,533.00
Kuwait................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 908.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 908.80
Afghanistan............................ Dollar..................................... ........... 4.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 4.00
Michael J. McCord:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... 8,533.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... 8,533.00
Kuwait................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 853.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 853.00
Afghanistan............................ Dollar..................................... ........... 25.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 25.00
Senator John McCain:
Greenland.............................. Dollar..................................... ........... 46.75 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 46.75
Turkey................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 462.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 462.00
Georgia................................ Dollar..................................... ........... 77.70 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 77.70
Montenegro............................. Dollar..................................... ........... 331.42 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 331.42
Italy.................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 206.79 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 206.79
Senator Lindsey O. Graham:
Greenland.............................. Dollar..................................... ........... 18.70 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 18.70
Turkey................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 349.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 349.00
Georgia................................ Dollar..................................... ........... 9.35 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 9.35
Montenegro............................. Dollar..................................... ........... 301.95 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 301.95
Italy.................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 178.64 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 178.64
Richard H. Fontaine, Jr.:
Greenland.............................. Dollar..................................... ........... 274.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 274.00
Turkey................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 388.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 388.00
Georgia................................ Dollar..................................... ........... 375.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 375.00
Montenegro............................. Dollar..................................... ........... 615.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 615.00
Italy.................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 423.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 423.00
Senator Jeff Sessions:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 6,506.21 ........... ........... ........... 6,506.21
Belgium................................ Euro....................................... ........... 204.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 204.00
United Kingdom......................... Pound...................................... ........... 223.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 223.00
Archibald Galloway:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 6,506.21 ........... ........... ........... 6,506.21
Belgium................................ Euro....................................... ........... 204.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 204.00
United Kingdom......................... Pound...................................... ........... 223.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 223.00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................ ........................................... ........... 9,458.10 ........... 65,069.85 ........... ........... ........... 74,527.95
JOHN WARNER,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, Oct.
30, 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSOLIDATED REPORT OF EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR FOREIGN TRAVEL BY MEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE U.S. SENATE, UNDER AUTHORITY OF SEC. 22, P.L. 95-384--22 U.S.C. 1754(b), COMMITTEE ON ARMED
SERVICES FOR TRAVEL FROM APR. 1 TO JUNE 30, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per diem Transportation Miscellaneous Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar
Name and country Name of currency Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent
currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S.
currency currency currency currency
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator James M. Inhofe:
Ethiopia............................... Dollar..................................... ........... 265.71 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 265.71
Uganda................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 58.02 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 58.02
Italy.................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 152.60 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 152.60
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 7,205.66 ........... ........... ........... 7,205.66
John Bonsell:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 6,670.66 ........... ........... ........... 6,670.66
Ethiopia............................... Dollar..................................... ........... 251.78 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 251.78
Uganda................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 654.39 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 654.39
Italy.................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 141.33 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 141.33
Mark Powers:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 6,690.66 ........... ........... ........... 6,690.66
Qatar.................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 266.61 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 266.61
Ethiopia............................... Dollar..................................... ........... 243.83 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 243.83
Uganda................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 61.61 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 61.61
Italy.................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 191.88 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 191.88
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................ ........................................... ........... 2,287.76 ........... 20,566.98 ........... ........... ........... 22,854.74
JOHN WARNER,
Chairman, Committee on: Armed Services,
Oct. 30, 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 261]]
CONSOLIDATED REPORT OF EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR FOREIGN TRAVEL BY MEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE U.S. SENATE, UNDER AUTHORITY OF SEC. 22, P.L. 95-384--22 U.S.C. 1754(b), COMMITTEE ON BANKING,
HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS FOR TRAVEL FROM JULY 1 TO SEPT. 30, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per diem Transportation Miscellaneous Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar
Name and country Name of currency Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent
currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S.
currency currency currency currency
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Richard Shelby:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 12,102.76 ........... ........... ........... 12,102.76
Japan.................................. Yen........................................ ........... 1,692.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,692.00
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 1,538.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,538.00
Russia................................. Ruble...................................... ........... 1,976.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,976.00
Germany................................ Euro....................................... ........... 1,017.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,017.00
Belgium................................ Euro....................................... ........... 509.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 509.00
United Kingdom......................... Pound...................................... ........... 2,409.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,409.00
William D. Duhnke:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 12,102.76 ........... ........... ........... 12,102.76
Japan.................................. Yen........................................ ........... 830.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 830.00
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 1,002.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,002.00
Russia................................. Ruble...................................... ........... 1,395.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,395.00
Germany................................ Euro....................................... ........... 701.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 701.00
Belgium................................ Euro....................................... ........... 347.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 347.00
United Kingdom......................... Pound...................................... ........... 1,712.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,712.00
Steven B. Harris:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 12,102.76 ........... ........... ........... 12,102.76
Japan.................................. Yen........................................ ........... 1,180.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,180.00
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 1,073.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,073.00
Russia................................. Ruble...................................... ........... 1,379.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,379.00
Germany................................ Euro....................................... ........... 678.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 678.00
Belgium................................ Euro....................................... ........... 355.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 355.00
United Kingdom......................... Pound...................................... ........... 1,681.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,681.00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................ ........................................... ........... 21,474.00 ........... 36,308.28 ........... ........... ........... 57,782.28
RICHARD C. SHELBY,
Chairman, Committee on Banking, Housing,
and Urban Affairs,
Oct. 18, 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSOLIDATED REPORT OF EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR FOREIGN TRAVEL BY MEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE U.S. SENATE, UNDER AUTHORITY OF SEC. 22, P.L. 95-384--22 U.S.C. 1754(b), COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET
FOR TRAVEL FROM JULY 1 TO SEPT. 30, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per diem Transportation Miscellaneous Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar
Name and country Name of currency Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent
currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S.
currency currency currency currency
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Gudes:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 2,259.00 ........... ........... ........... 2,259.00
Honduras............................... Dollar..................................... ........... 50.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 50.00
Nicaragua.............................. Dollar..................................... ........... 146.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 146.00
El Salvador............................ Dollar..................................... ........... 571.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 571.00
Cheryl Reidy:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 2,259.00 ........... ........... ........... 2,259.00
Honduras............................... Dollar..................................... ........... 50.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 50.00
Nicaragua.............................. Dollar..................................... ........... 146.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 146.00
El Salvador............................ Dollar..................................... ........... 571.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 571.00
Michael Lofgren:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 7,277.80 ........... ........... ........... 7,277.80
Norway................................. Kroner..................................... ........... 748.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 748.00
Germany................................ Euro....................................... ........... 1,072.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,072.00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................ ........................................... ........... 3,354.00 ........... 11,795.80 ........... ........... ........... 15,149.80
JUDD GREGG,
Chairman, Committee on U.S. Senate Budget
Committee, Oct. 2, 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSOLIDATED REPORT OF EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR FOREIGN TRAVEL BY MEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE U.S. SENATE, UNDER AUTHORITY OF SEC. 22, P.L. 95-384--22 U.S.C. 1754(b), COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION FOR TRAVEL FROM JULY 1 TO SEPT. 30, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per diem Transportation Miscellaneous Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar
Name and country Name of currency Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent
currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S.
currency currency currency currency
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator David Vitter:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 6,754.82 ........... ........... ........... 6,754.82
Kuwait................................. Dinar...................................... ........... 406.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 406.00
France................................. Euro....................................... ........... 205.00 ........... ........... ........... 369.89 ........... 574.89
Tonya Newman:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 6,754.82 ........... ........... ........... 6,754.82
Kuwait................................. Dinar...................................... ........... 406.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 406.00
France................................. Euro....................................... ........... 205.00 ........... ........... ........... 369.89 ........... 574.89
Justin Crossie:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 6,754.82 ........... ........... ........... 6,754.82
Kuwait................................. Dinar...................................... ........... 406.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 406.00
France................................. Euro....................................... ........... 205.00 ........... ........... ........... 369.89 ........... 574.89
Marie Blanco:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 2,217.50 ........... ........... ........... 2,217.50
Philippines............................ Peso....................................... ........... 774.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 774.00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................ ........................................... ........... 2,607.00 ........... 22,481.96 ........... 1,109.67 ........... 26,198.63
TED STEVENS,
Chairman, Committee on Commerce, Science
and Transportation,
Oct. 11, 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 262]]
CONSOLIDATED REPORT OF EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR FOREIGN TRAVEL BY MEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE U.S. SENATE, UNDER AUTHORITY OF SEC. 22, P.L. 95-384--22 U.S.C. 1754(b), COMMITTEE ON ENERGY &
NATURAL RESOURCES FOR TRAVEL FROM JULY 1 TO SEPT. 30, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per diem Transportation Miscellaneous Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar
Name and country Name of currency Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent
currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S.
currency currency currency currency
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joshua Johnson:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 3,125.27 ........... ........... ........... 3,125.27
Marshall Islands....................... Dollar..................................... ........... 1,200.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,200.00
Allen Stayman:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 2,989.79 ........... ........... ........... 2,989.79
Marshall Islands....................... Dollar..................................... ........... 1,016.73 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,016.73
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................ ........................................... ........... 2,216.73 ........... 6,115.06 ........... ........... ........... 8,331.79
PETE V. DOMENICI,
Chairman, Committee on Energy & Natural
Resources, Sept. 18, 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSOLIDATED REPORT OF EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR FOREIGN TRAVEL BY MEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE U.S. SENATE, AMENDED FROM 1ST QUARTER, UNDER AUTHORITY OF SEC. 22, P.L. 95-384--22 U.S.C.
1754(b), COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS FOR TRAVEL FROM JAN. 1 TO MAR. 31, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per diem Transportation Miscellaneous Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar
Name and country Name of currency Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent
currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S.
currency currency currency currency
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator John F. Kerry:
India.................................. Rupeer..................................... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,495.00 ........... 2,495.00
Nancy Stetson:
India.................................. Rupee...................................... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,495.00 ........... 2,495.00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................ ........................................... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 4,990.00 ........... 4,990.00
RICHARD G. LUGAR,
Chairman, Committee on Foreign Relatins,
Oct. 16, 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSOLIDATED REPORT OF EXPENDITURE OF FOREIGN CURRENCIES AND APPROPRIATED FUNDS FOR FOREIGN TRAVEL BY MEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE U.S. SENATE, UNDER AUTHORITY OF SEC. 22, P.L. 95-384--22
U.S.C. 1754(b), COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS FOR TRAVEL FROM JULY 1 TO SEPT. 30, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per diem Transportation Miscellaneous Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar
Name and country Name of currency Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent
currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S.
currency currency currency currency
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Joseph R. Biden, Jr.:
Kuwait................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 406.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 406.00
Jordan................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 289.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 289.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 7,815.00 ........... ........... ........... 7,815.00
Senator Richard Lugar:
Poland................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 1,000.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,000.00
Kazakhstan............................. Dollar..................................... ........... 400.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 400.00
Azerbaijian............................ Dollar..................................... ........... 400.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 400.00
Georgia................................ Dollar..................................... ........... 400.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 400.00
Albania................................ Dollar..................................... ........... 200.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 200.00
United Kingdom......................... Dollar..................................... ........... 300.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 300.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 3,697.57 ........... ........... ........... 3,697.57
Senator Mel Martinez:
Greenland.............................. Dollar..................................... ........... 53.80 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 53.80
Turkey................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 462.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 462.00
Georgia................................ Dollar..................................... ........... 58.30 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 58.30
Montenegro............................. Dollar..................................... ........... 541.55 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 541.55
Italy.................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 372.13 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 372.13
Senator Barack Obama:
South Africa........................... Rand....................................... ........... 664.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 664.00
Kenya.................................. Shilling................................... ........... 715.00 ........... 185.00 ........... ........... ........... 900.00
Djibouti............................... Franc...................................... ........... 378.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 378.00
Chad................................... CFA........................................ ........... 492.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 492.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 7,667,83 ........... ........... ........... 7,667.83
Senator John Sununu:
Georgia................................ Dollar..................................... ........... 29.51 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 29.51
Montenegro............................. Dollar..................................... ........... 773.94 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 773.94
Italy.................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 385.84 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 385.84
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 549.93 ........... ........... ........... 549.93
Jonah Blank:
Afghanistan............................ Dollar..................................... ........... 591.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 591.00
Tajikistan............................. Dollar..................................... ........... 582.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 582.00
Kazakhstan............................. Dollar..................................... ........... 340.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 340.00
United Arab Emirates................... Dollar..................................... ........... 336.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 336.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 8,636.29 ........... ........... ........... 8,636.29
Jonah Blank:
Vietnam................................ Dollar..................................... ........... 2,613.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,613.00
Cambodia............................... Dollar..................................... ........... 636.00 ........... 598.90 ........... 63.00 ........... 1,297.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 7,686.00 ........... ........... ........... 7,686.00
Anthony Blinken:
Kuwait................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 406.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 406.00
Jordan................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 289.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 289.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 7,442.00 ........... ........... ........... 7,442.00
Perry Cammack:
Israel................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 2,382.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,382.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 3,683.00 ........... ........... ........... 3,683.00
Heather Flynn:
Zimbabwe............................... Dollar..................................... ........... 915.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 915.00
South Africa........................... Rand....................................... ........... 1,330.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,330.00
Botswana............................... Pula....................................... ........... 920.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 920.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 10,269.00 ........... ........... ........... 10,269.00
James Greene:
Belgium................................ Euro....................................... ........... 645.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 645.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 7,154.74 ........... ........... ........... 7,154.74
Frank Jannuzzi:
South Korea............................ Won........................................ ........... 1,544.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,544.00
[[Page 263]]
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 921.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 921.00
United States.......................... Won........................................ ........... ........... ........... 6,015.32 ........... ........... ........... 6,015.32
Mark Lippert:
South Africa........................... Rand....................................... ........... 664.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 664.00
Kenya.................................. Shilling................................... ........... 888.00 ........... 185.00 ........... ........... ........... 1,073.00
Djibouti............................... Franc...................................... ........... 378.00 ........... 0.00 ........... ........... ........... 378.00
Chad................................... CFA........................................ ........... 492.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 492.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... 0.00 ........... 7,047.83 ........... ........... ........... 7,047.83
W. Keith Luse:
Idonesia............................... Rupiah..................................... ........... 1,687.00 ........... 0.00 ........... ........... ........... 1,687.00
Singapore.............................. Dollar..................................... ........... 286.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 286.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... 0.00 ........... 3,031.00 ........... ........... ........... 3,031.00
Kenneth A. Myers, Jr.:
Portland............................... Dollar..................................... ........... 200.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 200.00
Kazakhstan............................. Dollar..................................... ........... 400.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 400.00
Azerbaijan............................. Dollar..................................... ........... 400.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 400.00
Georgia................................ Dollar..................................... ........... 400.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 400.00
Albania................................ Dollar..................................... ........... 200.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 200.00
United Kingdom......................... Dollar..................................... ........... 300.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 300.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... 0.00 ........... 7,022.03 ........... ........... ........... 7,022.03
Kenneth A. Myers, III:
Poland................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 200.00 ........... 0.00 ........... ........... ........... 200.00
Kazakhstan............................. Dollar..................................... ........... 400.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 400.00
Azerbaijan............................. Dollar..................................... ........... 400.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 400.00
Georgia................................ Dollar..................................... ........... 400.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 400.00
Albania................................ Dollar..................................... ........... 200.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 200.00
United Kingdom......................... Dollar..................................... ........... 300.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 300.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... 0.00 ........... 7,670.48 ........... ........... ........... 7,670.48
Michael V. Phelan:
Afghanistan............................ Afghani.................................... ........... 1,287.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,287.00
Pakistan............................... Rupee...................................... ........... 927.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 927.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 8,408.44 ........... ........... ........... 8,408.00
Jordan Lee Talge:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 2,054.75 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,054.75
Puneet Talwar:
Kuwait................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 406.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 406.00
Jordan................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 289.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 289.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 7,442.00 ........... ........... ........... 7,442.00
Puneet Talwar:
Cyprus................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 327.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 327.00
Lebanon................................ Dollar..................................... ........... 94.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 94.00
Israel................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 1,385.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,385.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 5,807.60 ........... ........... ........... 5,807.60
Tomicah Tillemann:
Serbia................................. Dinar...................................... ........... 322.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 322.00
Bosnia................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 602.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 602.00
Serbia................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 424.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 424.00
Chris Ann Keehner:
Kenya.................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 1,941.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,941.00
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 9,321.00 ........... ........... ........... 9,321.00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................ ........................................... ........... 41,024.82 ........... 127,335.96 ........... 63.00 ........... 168,423.78
RICHARD G. LUGAR,
Chairman, Committee on Foreign Relations,
Oct. 16, 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSOLIDATED REPORT OF EXPENDITURE OF FOREIGN CURRENCIES AND APPROPRIATED FUNDS FOR FOREIGN TRAVEL BY MEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE U.S. SENATE, UNDER AUTHORITY OF SEC. 22, P.L. 95-384--22
U.S.C. 1754(b), COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE FOR TRAVEL FROM JULY 1 TO SEPT. 30, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per diem Transportation Miscellaneous Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar
Name and country Name of currency Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent
currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S.
currency currency currency currency
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Tom Coburn:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 6,862.82 ........... ........... ........... 6,862.82
Kuwait................................. Dinar...................................... ........... 272.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 272.00
Leland Erickson:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 691.62 ........... ........... ........... 691.62
United Kingdom......................... Pound...................................... ........... 1,060.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,060.00
Belgium................................ Euro....................................... ........... 800.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 800.00
Netherlands............................ Euro....................................... ........... 400.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 400.00
Robert Strayer:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 711.62 ........... ........... ........... 711.62
United Kingdom......................... Pound...................................... ........... 1,000.00 ........... 282.00 ........... ........... ........... 1,282.00
Belgium................................ Euro....................................... ........... 760.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 760.00
Netherlands............................ Euro....................................... ........... 375.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 375.00
Jason Yanussi:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 711.62 ........... ........... ........... 711.62
United Kingdom......................... Pound...................................... ........... 1,010.09 ........... 282.00 ........... ........... ........... 1,292.09
Belgium................................ Euro....................................... ........... 776.74 ........... 22.08 ........... ........... ........... 798.82
Netherlands............................ Euro....................................... ........... 367.71 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 367.71
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................ ........................................... ........... 6,821.54 ........... 9,563.76 ........... ........... ........... 16,385.30
SUSAN M. COLLINS,
Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs
Committee, Oct. 10, 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 264]]
CONSOLIDATED REPORT OF EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR FOREIGN TRAVEL BY MEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE U.S. SENATE, UNDER AUTHORITY OF SEC. 22, P.L. 95-384--22 U.S.C. 1754(b), COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
FOR TRAVEL FROM JULY 1 TO SEPT. 30, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per diem Transportation Miscellaneous Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar
Name and country Name of currency Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent
currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S.
currency currency currency currency
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Arlen Specter:
Nepal.................................. Rupee...................................... ........... 287.46 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 287.46
Bhutan................................. Ngultrum................................... ........... 545.86 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 545.86
Kuwait................................. Dinar...................................... ........... 406.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 406.00
Israel................................. New Shekel................................. ........... 588.41 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 588.41
Libya.................................. Dinar...................................... ........... 528.58 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 528.58
Ireland................................ Euro....................................... ........... 179.76 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 179.76
Christopher Bradish:
Nepal.................................. Rupee...................................... ........... 397.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 397.00
Bhutan................................. Ngultrum................................... ........... 587.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 587.00
Kuwait................................. Dinar...................................... ........... 421.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 421.00
Israel................................. New Shekel................................. ........... 810.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 810.00
Libya.................................. Dinar...................................... ........... 725.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 725.00
Ireland................................ Euro....................................... ........... 283.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 283.00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................ ........................................... ........... 5,759.07 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 5,759.07
ARLEN SPECTER,
Chairman, Committee on Judiciary, Nov. 9,
2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSOLIDATED REPORT OF EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR FOREIGN TRAVEL BY MEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE U.S. SENATE, UNDER AUTHORITY OF SEC. 22, P.L. 95-384--22 U.S.C. 1754(b), COMMITTEE ON HEALTH,
EDUCATION, LABOR, AND PENSIONS FOR TRAVEL FROM APR. 1 TO JUNE 30, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per diem Transportation Miscellaneous Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar
Name and country Name of currency Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent
currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S.
currency currency currency currency
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Michael B. Enzi:
Italy.................................. Euros...................................... ........... 909.99 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 909.99
Kuwait................................. Dinar...................................... ........... 406.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 406.00
India.................................. Rupee...................................... ........... 2,108.07 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,108.07
Austria................................ Euros...................................... ........... 423.12 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 423.12
Senator Lamar Alexander:
Italy.................................. Euros...................................... ........... 909.99 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 909.99
Kuwait................................. Dinar...................................... ........... 406.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 406.00
India.................................. Rupee...................................... ........... 2,108.07 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,108.07
Austria................................ Euros...................................... ........... 423.12 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 423.12
Senator Johnny Isakson:
Italy.................................. Euros...................................... ........... 909.99 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 909.99
Kuwait................................. Dinar...................................... ........... 406.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 406.00
India.................................. Rupee...................................... ........... 2,108.07 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,108.07
Austria................................ Euros...................................... ........... 423.12 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 423.12
Katherine B. McGuire:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 909.47 ........... ........... ........... 909.47
Italy.................................. Euros...................................... ........... 1,127.99 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,127.99
Kuwait................................. Dinar...................................... ........... 406.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 406.00
India.................................. Rupee...................................... ........... 2,108.07 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,108.07
Austria................................ Euros...................................... ........... 423.12 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 423.12
David P. Cleary:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 10,358.73 ........... ........... ........... 10,358.73
Italy.................................. Euros...................................... ........... 909.99 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 909.99
India.................................. Rupee...................................... ........... 2,108.07 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,108.07
Austria................................ Euros...................................... ........... 423.12 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 423.12
Beth B. Buehlmann:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 10,358.73 ........... ........... ........... 10,358.73
Italy.................................. Euros...................................... ........... 909.99 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 909.99
India.................................. Rupee...................................... ........... 2,108.07 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,108.07
Austria................................ Euros...................................... ........... 423.12 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 423.12
Glee C. Smith:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 10,358.73 ........... ........... ........... 10,358.73
Italy.................................. Euros...................................... ........... 909.99 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 909.99
India.................................. Rupee...................................... ........... 2,108.07 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,108.07
Austria................................ Euros...................................... ........... 423.11 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 423.11
Delegation Expenses:
Italy.................................. Euros...................................... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,905.49 ........... 1,905.49
Kuwait................................. Dinar...................................... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,460.20 ........... 1,460.20
Sri Lanka.............................. Rupee...................................... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 3,835.00 ........... 3,835.00
India.................................. Rupee...................................... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 28,153.03 ........... 28,153.03
Austria................................ Euros...................................... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 4,427.62 ........... 4,427.62
Charlotte S. Ivancic:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 862.27 ........... ........... ........... 862.27
United Kingdom......................... Pound...................................... ........... 1,539.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,539.00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................ ........................................... ........... 27,469.25 ........... 32,847.93 ........... 39,781.34 ........... 100,098.52
MICHAEL B. ENZI,
Chairman, Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions,
Aug. 16, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSOLIDATED REPORT OF EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR FOREIGN TRAVEL BY MEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE U.S. SENATE, UNDER AUTHORITY OF SEC. 22, P.L. 95-384--22 U.S.C. 1754(b), COMMITTEE ON HEALTH,
EDUCATION, LABOR, AND PENSIONS FOR TRAVEL FROM JULY 1 TO SEPT. 30, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per diem Transportation Miscellaneous Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar
Name and country Name of currency Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent
currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S.
currency currency currency currency
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Richard Burr:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 2,294.50 ........... ........... ........... 2,294.50
Georgia................................ Lari....................................... ........... 375.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 375.00
Montenegro............................. Euros...................................... ........... 615.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 615.00
Italy.................................. Euros...................................... ........... 423.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 423.00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 265]]
Total................................ ........................................... ........... 1,413.00 ........... 2,294.50 ........... ........... ........... 3,707.50
MICHAEL B. ENZI,
Chairman, Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions,
Oct. 3, 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSOLIDATED REPORT OF EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR FOREIGN TRAVEL BY MEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE U.S. SENATE, UNDER AUTHORITY OF SEC. 22, P.L. 95-384--22 U.S.C. 1754(b), COMMITTEE ON VETERANS'
AFFAIRS FOR TRAVEL FROM JULY 1 TO SEPT. 30, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per diem Transportation Miscellaneous Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar
Name and country Name of currency Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent
currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S.
currency currency currency currency
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Richard Burr:......................
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 6,734.82 ........... ........... ........... 6,734.82
France................................. Euro....................................... ........... 205.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 205.00
Kuwait................................. Dinar...................................... ........... 406.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 406.00
Kevin Hernandez:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 6,734.82 ........... ........... ........... 6,734,82
France................................. Euro....................................... ........... 205.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 205.00
Kuwait................................. Dinar...................................... ........... 406.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 406.00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................ ........................................... ........... 1,222.00 ........... 13,469.64 ........... ........... ........... 14,691.64
LARRY E. CRAIG,
Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
Oct. 6, 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSOLIDATED REPORT OF EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR FOREIGN TRAVEL BY MEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE U.S. SENATE, UNDER AUTHORITY OF SEC. 22, P.L. 95-384--22 U.S.C. 1754(b), COMMITTEE ON
INTELLIGENCE FOR TRAVEL FROM APR. 1 TO JUNE 30, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per diem Transportation Miscellaneous Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar
Name and country Name of currency Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent
currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S.
currency currency currency currency
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William Castle............................. ........................................... ........... 201.62 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 201.62
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................ ........................................... ........... 201.62 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 201.62
PAT ROBERTS,
Chairman, Committee on Intelligence, Oct.
24, 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSOLIDATED REPORT OF EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR FOREIGN TRAVEL BY MEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE U.S. SENATE, UNDER AUTHORITY OF SEC. 22, P.L. 95-384--22 U.S.C. 1754(b), COMMITTEE ON
INTELLIGENCE FOR TRAVEL FROM JULY 1 TO SEPT. 30, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per diem Transportation Miscellaneous Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar
Name and country Name of currency Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent
currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S.
currency currency currency currency
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Randall Bookout:........................... ........................................... ........... 2,596.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,596.00
Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 6,395.00 ........... ........... ........... 6,395.00
Lorenzo Goco:.............................. ........................................... ........... 1,976.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,976.00
Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 7,151.43 ........... ........... ........... 7,151.43
Senator Christopher Bond:.................. ........................................... ........... 1,332.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,332.00
Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 100.00 ........... 100.00
Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 8,433.92 ........... ........... ........... 8,433.92
Louis Tucker:.............................. ........................................... ........... 1,332.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,332.00
Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 7,865.07 ........... ........... ........... 7,865.07
Mike DuBois:............................... ........................................... ........... 1,382.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,382.00
Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 7,865.07 ........... ........... ........... 7,865.07
Eric Rosenbach:............................ ........................................... ........... 895.27 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 895.27
Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 98.94 ........... 98.94
Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 8,275.26 ........... ........... ........... 8,275.26
Thomas Pack:............................... ........................................... ........... 1,327.10 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,372.10
Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 8,275.26 ........... ........... ........... 8,275.26
Paul Matulic:.............................. ........................................... ........... 1,477.95 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,477.95
Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 8,275.26 ........... ........... ........... 8,275.26
Jennifer Wagner:........................... ........................................... ........... 1,286.20 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,286.20
Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 8,275.26 ........... ........... ........... 8,275.26
John Maguire:.............................. ........................................... ........... 1,881.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,881.00
Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 6,737.36 ........... ........... ........... 6,737.36
John Dickas:............................... ........................................... ........... 1,562.17 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,562.17
Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 6,737.49 ........... ........... ........... 6,737.49
Todd Rosenblum:............................ ........................................... ........... 1,907.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,907.00
Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 6,757.00 ........... ........... ........... 6,757.00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................ ........................................... ........... 18,954.69 ........... 91,043.38 ........... 198.94 ........... 110.197.01
PAT ROBERTS
Chairman, Committee on Intelligence, Oct.
24, 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 266]]
CONSOLIDATED REPORT OF EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR FOREIGN TRAVEL BY MEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE U.S. SENATE, UNDER AUTHORITY OF SEC. 22, P.L. 95-384--22 U.S.C. 1754(b), COMMISSION ON SECURITY
AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE FOR TRAVEL FROM JULY 1 TO SEPT. 30, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per diem Transportation Miscellaneous Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar
Name and country Name of currency Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent
currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S.
currency currency currency currency
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Kearney:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 2,665.46 ........... ........... ........... 2,665.46
Macedonia.............................. Dinar...................................... ........... 865.30 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 865.30
Knox Thames:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 1,640.90 ........... ........... ........... 1,640.90
Canada................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 74.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 74.00
Ronald McNamara:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 1,640.90 ........... ........... ........... 1,640.90
Canada................................. Dollar..................................... ........... 90.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 90.00
Chadwick Gore:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 5,706.83 ........... ........... ........... 5,706.83
Austria................................ Euro....................................... ........... 574.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 574.00
Sean Woo:
United States.......................... Dollar..................................... ........... ........... ........... 5,598.08 ........... ........... ........... 5,598.08
South Korea............................ Won........................................ ........... 1,950.00 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,950.00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................ ........................................... ........... 3,553.30 ........... 17,252.17 ........... ........... ........... 20,805.47
SAM BROWNBACK,
Chairman, Commission on Security and
Cooperation in Europe,
Nov. 25, 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSOLIDATED REPORT OF EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR FOREIGN TRAVEL BY MEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE U.S. SENATE, UNDER AUTHORITY OF SEC. 22, P.L. 95-384--22 U.S.C. 1754(b), OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
PRO TEMPORE FOR TRAVEL FROM JULY 1, TO SEPT. 30, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per diem Transportation Miscellaneous Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar
Name and country Name of currency Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent
currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S.
currency currency currency currency
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Ted Stevens:
United Kingdom......................... Pounds..................................... ........... 2,314.36 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,314.36
Sid Ashworth:
United Kingdom......................... Pounds..................................... ........... 2,314.36 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,314.36
Brian Wilson:
United Kingdom......................... Pounds..................................... ........... 2,314.36 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,314.36
Brian Potts:
United Kingdom......................... Pounds..................................... ........... 2,314.36 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,314.36
Clayton Heil:
United Kingdom......................... Pounds..................................... ........... 2,314.36 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,314.36
Charlie Houy:
United Kingdom......................... Pounds..................................... ........... 2,314.36 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,314.36
Betsey Schmid:
United Kingdom......................... Pounds..................................... ........... 2,314.36 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,314.36
Keith Kennedy:
United Kingdom......................... Pounds..................................... ........... 2,314.36 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,314.36
Senator James Inhofe:
United Kingdom......................... Pounds..................................... ........... 2,314.36 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,314.36
Kay Webber:
United Kingdom......................... Pounds..................................... ........... 2,314.36 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,314.36
Senator Thad Cochran:
United Kingdom......................... Pounds..................................... ........... 2,314.36 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,314.36
John Eisold
United Kingdom......................... Pounds..................................... ........... 2,314.36 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,314.36
Anne Caldwell:
United Kingdom......................... Pounds..................................... ........... 2,314.36 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,314.36
Senator Richard Shelby:
United Kingdom......................... Pounds..................................... ........... 2,314.36 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,314.36
Senator Pat Roberts:
United Kingdom......................... Pounds..................................... ........... 2,314.36 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,314.36
Terry Sauvin:
United Kingdom......................... Pounds..................................... ........... 2,314.36 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,314.36
Stewart Holmes:
United Kingdom......................... Pounds..................................... ........... 2,314.36 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,314.36
DeLynn Henry:
United Kingdom......................... Pounds..................................... ........... 2,314.36 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,314.36
Dave Schiappa:
United Kingdom......................... Pounds..................................... ........... 2,314.36 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,314.36
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................ ........................................... ........... 43,972.84 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 43,972.84
TED STEVENS,
Chairman, Office of the President Pro
Tempore, Oct. 13, 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSOLIDATED REPORT OF EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR FOREIGN TRAVEL BY MEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE U.S. SENATE, UNDER AUTHORITY OF SEC. 22, P.L. 95-384--22 U.S.C. 1754(b), MAJORITY LEADER FOR
TRAVEL FROM AUG. 5 TO AUG. 13, 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per diem Transportation Miscellaneous Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar
Name and country Name of currency Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent
currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S.
currency currency currency currency
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anna M. Gallagher
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 2,054.75 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,054.75
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................ ........................................... ........... 2,054.75 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,054.75
WILLIAM H. FRIST,
Majority Leader, Oct. 19, 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 267]]
CONSOLIDATED REPORT OF EXPENDITURE OF FOREIGN CURRENCIES AND APPROPRIATED FUNDS FOR FOREIGN TRAVEL BY MEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE U.S. SENATE, UNDER AUTHORITY OF SEC. 22, P.L. 95-384--22
U.S.C. 1754(b), PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE FOR TRAVEL FROM AUG. 5 TO AUG. 13, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per diem Transportation Miscellaneous Total
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar U.S. dollar
Name and country Name of currency Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent Foreign equivalent
currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S. currency or U.S.
currency currency currency currency
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Ted Stevens:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 2,054.75 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,054.75
Senator Daniel Inouye:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 1,747.75 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,747.75
Senator Thad Cochran:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 2,054.75 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,054.75
Senator Arlen Specter:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 1,386.54 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,386.54
Senator Norm Coleman:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 2,054.75 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,054.75
Senator Patty Murray:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 2,054.75 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,054.75
Senator Lamar Alexander:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 1,897.15 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,897.15
Senator Richard Burr:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 2,054.75 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,054.75
Sid Ashworth:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 1,747.75 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,747.75
Charlie Houy:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 1,747.75 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,747.75
George Lowe:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 1,389.87 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,389.87
Jennifer Lowe:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 1,389.87 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,389.87
Claire Jolly:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 2,054.75 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,054.75
Dr. John Eisold:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 2,054.75 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,054.75
Kay Webber:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 2,054.75 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,054.75
Rick Desimone:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... 2,054.75 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 2,054.75
*Delegation Expenses:
China.................................. Yuan....................................... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... 19,068.26 ........... 19,068.26
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................ ........................................... ........... 29,799.43 ........... ........... ........... 19,068.26 ........... 48,867.69
TED STEVENS,
Chairman, Presidential Pro Tempore, Nov.
28, 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Delegation expenses include payments and reimbursements to the Department of State and the Department of Defense under the authority of Sec. 502(b) of the Mutual Security Act of 1954, as
amended by Sec. 22 of P.L. 95-384, and S. Res 179 agreed to May 25, 1977.
____________________
____________________
MEASURES READ THE FIRST TIME--S. 1, S. 2, S. 5, S. 113
Mr. REID. Madam President, it is my understanding there are four
bills at the desk. I ask for their first reading, en bloc.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will read the four bills, en bloc,
for the first time.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 1) to provide greater transparency in the
legislative process.
A bill (S. 2) to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938
to provide for an increase in Federal minimum wage.
A bill (S. 5) to amend the Public Health Service Act to
provide for human embryonic stem cell research.
A bill (S. 113) to make appropriations for military
construction and family housing projects for the Department
of Defense for fiscal year 2007.
Mr. REID. Madam President, I ask for a second reading in order to
place the bills on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, and
having done that, I object to my own requests en bloc.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
The bills will receive their second reading on the next legislative
day.
____________________
ROBERT T. STAFFORD WHITE ROCKS NATIONAL RECREATION AREA
Mr. REID. Madam President, I ask consent that the Senate proceed to
the consideration of S. 159 which was introduced earlier today.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 159) to redesignate the White Rocks National
Recreation Area in the State of Vermont as the Robert T.
Stafford White Rocks National Recreation Area.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, it is with great sadness that I rise
today to bid a final goodbye to one of Vermont's most distinguished
public servants. On Saturday, December 23, just before Christmas,
former Senator Bob Stafford from Vermont passed away at the venerable
age of 93. He leaves behind a tremendous legacy of which he and his
family and fellow Vermonters and all Americans should be exceptionally
proud. I take this opportunity to pay tribute to Robert Stafford, an
extraordinary Vermonter, and especially a very dear and close friend.
He will be greatly missed by me, my wife Marcelle, and by so many
other Americans all across our country. We send our condolences to his
wife Helen and his family.
Born in Rutland in 1913, Senator Stafford attended his hometown's
public schools. He completed his undergraduate work at one of our
Nation's finest undergraduate institutions, Middlebury College. He
briefly attended the University of Michigan Law School but ultimately
earned his law degree from Boston University School of Law in 1938.
Bob was a remarkable person not only because of his service as a
statesman but also for his service in the military. He is a prime
example of what has been so aptly named the ``greatest generation.''
Senator Stafford courageously stepped forward to serve our Nation
during not one but two foreign wars. In 1942, he enlisted in the U.S.
Navy and served on active duty from 1942 to 1946. Again, when the
Korean war began, he served from 1951 to 1953 as an officer in the
Navy. Bob later became the first commander of the Navy Reserve Center
in Burlington, VT. The center later moved to White River Junction in
1995, and I was pleased to recommend to the Navy that the new facility
be named the Robert T. Stafford Naval Reserve Center. They happily
obliged. Throughout his life, Bob remained extremely proud of his Navy
career. I still remember that beautiful day when we opened the new
Naval Reserve facility named in honor of his leadership.
[[Page 268]]
Indeed, the recently completed Lake Champlain Navy Memorial was
dedicated in his honor by the unanimous recommendation of its founding
committee, made up of Navy veterans, retirees, and reservists.
Bob Stafford was an absolute giant in Vermont politics. He spent
almost 30 years representing our great State, first in the U.S. House
of Representatives, and then in the U.S. Senate. Prior to his arrival
in Washington in the early 1960s, he served his fellow Vermonters
closer to home, holding a number of prominent State positions.
He served as Rutland County State's attorney and deputy State
attorney general, and finally as our State attorney general. From 1957
to 1959, Bob Stafford held the post of Lieutenant Governor. In 1959, he
went on to become Governor.
In 1960, Bob Stafford was elected to Vermont's sole seat in the U.S.
House of Representatives. He won five successive reelections. In
September of 1971, he resigned his House seat to accept an appointment
to the U.S. Senate following the death of Senator Winston Prouty.
After he won a special election in January 1972, Bob proceeded to
represent Vermont in the Senate during the next 17 years. I had the
distinct privilege of serving with him during all but 2 of those years.
He also had serving with him from the time he was Governor through the
House and the U.S. Senate a most remarkable Chief of Staff, Neal
Houston. He and Neal Houston were like brothers. They could almost
complete each other's sentences. When I spoke to Neal and heard the sad
news about Senator Stafford's passing, I knew he felt that he had lost
a member of his own family.
When I first came to Washington as a young man in 1974, I was a 34-
year-old junior Senator from Vermont. We didn't have any kind of
orientation for new Senators at that time. Bob Stafford was an
indispensable mentor to me. I will never forget the leadership and
friendship he offered me during that challenging time.
Interestingly enough, Senator Stafford was sort of the epitome of a
Vermont Republican in the proudest tradition. I was the only Democrat
ever elected. He took me under his wing during those early years. He
was enormously helpful to me, his younger, far less experienced junior
colleague. I will never forget that he even allowed me the use of his
office before I was assigned a space of my own, where we could
interview people for positions in my office and where telephone calls
could be answered. He brought me around and introduced me to both
Republicans and Democrats and basically vouched for me.
But Bob and his wife Helen's kindness extended far beyond the
confines of the Senate office buildings. Helen was kind enough even to
offer to babysit our children when Marcelle and I were so new in town
that we had nowhere to turn for childcare while we were house-hunting.
This is a remarkable couple.
To this day, Marcelle and I hold enormous gratitude for the
friendship the Staffords offered during our early years in Washington.
That friendship has continued throughout the years, and we have many
fond memories of visiting their home on Sugar Hill Road. Even after Bob
left the Senate, we would drop by and visit. We had some most
remarkable conversations--some political, some family, and after all of
them I would leave with a smile on my face.
Bob was an extremely well liked member of the Republican Party. He
served at one time in the Republican leadership, but he also formed
many close friendships with Senators on the Democratic side. Always
respectful, always polite, Bob Stafford consistently recognized the
importance of moderation and compromise. He, better than most, knew how
to form bipartisan alliances.
In his quiet and unassuming manner, Bob Stafford fought hard for the
issues that mattered most to him. He believed passionately that higher
education should be more accessible to all Americans, regardless of
their socioeconomic status, and he was instrumental in creating the
student loan program which today bears his name. The Stafford Student
Loan Program has made higher education more accessible for millions of
Americans, even for some who work in my office today. Bob was a
champion of vocational education. Today the Stafford Technical Center,
located in his hometown of Rutland, serves the needs of hundreds of
students in Rutland County.
Bob showed tremendous leadership in blocking President Reagan's
attempts to slash health and education funding. Thanks to Bob
Stafford's hard work, programs for disabled Americans and legal aid
were left largely intact during much of the 1980s when other programs
were starkly scaled back. His chairmanship made sure they were
protected.
Bob Stafford also played an important role in another issue of
enormous relevance today, Federal emergency assistance. In 1988,
President Reagan signed into law the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief
and Emergency Assistance Act, a bill which provides the statutory
authority for Federal disaster response activities pertaining to FEMA
programs.
While his achievements in the areas of education and Federal disaster
relief were certainly superb, I believe his most enduring legacy will
be for the work he did in protecting the environment and public health.
He helped shape and strengthen some of our Nation's most critical
environmental laws for over two decades.
As chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee from 1981
to 1986, Bob Stafford was instrumental in persuading Congress to expand
and strengthen the Superfund toxic waste cleanup law in the mid-1980s.
It was in large part due to Robert Stafford's unwavering commitment to
this bill in 1980 that the Superfund Act became law at all. As many of
us know, this law has been indispensable in forcing industry polluters
to contribute money to finance cleanup and restoration of contaminated
wastesites.
Bob Stafford believed passionately in the Federal Government's
commitment to improving the quality of our Nation's air. This was never
more evident than in his steadfast work to uphold the Clean Air Act
when it was under attack during the 1980s. He did not shirk from taking
on his friend President Reagan as well as auto manufacturers and other
industry groups in refusing to roll back this critical air pollution
law.
In fact, I remember talking to him once. They were so anxious to get
him to change and let these rollbacks go through that they invited him
down to the White House, to spend some one-on-one time with President
Reagan. The Reagan administration amazed many of their members
afterward that Bob didn't back off at all. He came back and kept on
protecting the environment.
I said to him: Bob, what happened when you went down there to talk
with President Regan?
He said: Well, the President had notes of what he was supposed to say
and he said it. Then he looked at me and he said: Bob, you're probably
not going to give in, are you? Bob said: No, no, I'm not, Mr.
President, but I certainly appreciate the time to be with you.
I said then: What did you talk about the rest of the time?
Oh, we talked about our kids, we talked about sports, we talked about
a lot of other things. He said: I had a wonderful conversation with
President Reagan. But he did not budge on the environment, something no
Vermonter would do.
His concern about the contamination of our air was truly remarkable.
The consistent and clear manner in which he spoke about the danger of
ozone depletion, acid rain, and the release of greenhouse gases related
to global warming, during a very difficult period, was a source of
inspiration to so many of his colleagues on both sides of the aisle. It
certainly was an inspiration to me.
As EPW chairman, Senator Stafford also led the fight to improve the
quality of our water. Working closely with Senator John Chafee and
others on both sides of the aisle, his leadership
[[Page 269]]
was critical in reauthorizing the Clean Water Act in 1987. Bob cited
the passage of this act as the culmination of one of the greatest
bipartisan efforts in protecting our Nation's environment. It really
was. Republicans and Democrats came together. It gave me enormous pride
to see him appear 3 years ago before the Senate in celebrating the
act's 30-year anniversary. Thanks to Bob's leadership during those
difficult years of deregulation, our Nation was able to make great
strides in reducing the levels of pollutants and contaminants in our
water.
Even after he retired from Congress, he served Vermont in many ways.
He was a member of the University of Vermont's School of Natural
Resources Advisory Committee and attended the day-long hearings with
his wife Helen up to just a few years ago. He also lectured at UVM,
Norwich University, and Castleton State College. In 2003, his old alma
mater, Middlebury College, honored both Bob and his wife Helen, also a
Middlebury graduate, by inaugurating the Robert and Helen Stafford
Professorship in Public Policy. Two people who had been together almost
all their lives are together in this professorship.
Also in retirement, Bob continued to fight for clean air. In 1995, he
joined forces with his friend and former colleague, Senator Edmund
Muskie, in incorporating the Clean Air Trust, a nonprofit organization
dedicated to upholding and enforcing clean air legislation.
He leaves so many impressive achievements for his lifelong work in
public service. But outside these public accomplishments, Senator
Stafford was also a man of many personal hobbies and interests. It kind
of reflects who he is. On weekends, he liked to slip out of Washington
with his wife Helen and enjoy time on his boat, a full Moon, cruising
down the Chesapeake Bay. Marcelle and I were fortunate enough to join
them on occasion. He loved the water. He loved everything about
sailing. You can tell why the Navy holds him in such high regard back
home.
He took flying lessons as a young man. He eventually got his pilot's
license in the early sixties. In fact, he would pilot a leased Cessna
back and forth between Washington and Vermont.
It was a mark of this unique Senator that he welcomed and helped the
first Senator of the other party to be elected in Vermont. I will
always remember and cherish the walks we took down the halls and the
times we would sit and talk at lunch. People thought we were talking so
much about politics. We were talking about Vermont. We were talking
about whether the foliage season was going to start early or late, and
we would make a determined judgment when it would be. Heck, we had not
the foggiest idea but, boy, we had fun determining when it would start.
No Senator could have learned as much from his fellow Senator as I
did, nor could a senior Senator be so patient and understanding with
his junior. Throughout our time together, when I had been inclined to
move impulsively, it would be Bob Stafford who would help me decide
what was truly in the best interest of the country and Vermont. He was
the most unflappable person I have ever known.
I remember flying to Vermont with him once on a commercial airline.
The plane hit a tremendous amount of turbulence. We suddenly dropped
thousands of feet. At least one person was airborne in the cabin, and
things were flying around. I know my pulse raced ever so fast. When the
pilot finally got control of the plane with a shuddering, banging
maneuver, I sat there stunned. I had sweat soaking through my shirt.
Bob simply folded his paper--which he never stopped reading--turned to
me and in a quiet voice said: Patrick, just think if this plane had
gone down. Tomorrow morning there would have been a long line outside
the Governor's office. Everybody would be saying what a terrible
tragedy that we have lost our Senators, but, Governor, I am willing to
be appointed to either one of the seats. I found that I was not so
frightened, and I was able to laugh until it hurt, and I did laugh.
Bob Stafford was a man who dedicated his entire adult life to public
service because he deeply believed in the value of public service. And
no matter where life took him, Bob stayed close to his Vermont roots.
He never forgot the people he served. While many younger Vermonters and
Americans may not know much about Bob Stafford, his public service and
leadership are examples for all of us. Our country would do well to
stop and take notice of his life and reflect on how we should all serve
our Nation better with his bipartisan leadership style.
It is with tremendous sadness that I say goodbye to this truly
distinguished American, more importantly to an exceptionally dear
friend. To honor Robert Stafford's legacy, Senator Sanders and I, along
with Congressman Peter Welch from Vermont, introduced a bill to rename
the White Rocks National Recreation Area. This is an area Senator
Stafford created in 1984. We are naming it after him. White Rocks was
among his most beloved natural areas in our State. We know that he and
Helen could actually see the towering white cliff face of White Rocks
Mountain from their home. This will remind generations of future
Vermonters of Senator Stafford's towering achievements and the humanity
of his spirits.
I hope all my colleagues will support this legislation.
Mr. SANDERS. Madam President, on this first day of the 110th
Congress, I pay tribute to a former Member of this esteemed Chamber. On
December 23, 2006, Senator Robert Stafford passed away. This was a
tremendous loss for both Vermont and the country. There is no doubt,
however, that his accomplishments in many areas will continue to be
felt across this great Nation for countless years to come.
A native of Rutland, VT, Senator Stafford was born in 1913. Before
representing Vermont in Washington, Bob Stafford spent years serving
the people of our State, including as Attorney General. In 1960 he
began service as Vermont's single voice in the U.S. House of
Representatives, where he remained until 1971, when he became a Member
of this hallowed body. During his 17 years in the United States Senate,
Senator Stafford was known for his commitment to bipartisanship and
congeniality.
Senator Stafford left his mark on our country in more ways than can
be mentioned here today. He had an unwavering dedication to making
education within reach of all our country's citizens and today,
countless Americans--maybe even some of the younger members in this
Chamber--have benefited from the Stafford Student Loan program.
Additionally, his commitment to the environment and public health was
unshakable. Bob Stafford, from his position as Chairman of the
Environment and Public Works Committee from 1981 until 1986, worked
tirelessly to address both air and water quality issues, even when it
meant doing so against the wishes of his own leadership, at the highest
levels. His courage on all of these issues, and so many others, will
never be forgotten.
Leaving the Senate did not stop Robert Stafford from contributing to
the common good. In fact, he remained active at the state level and
continued to fight for protection of the environment. I can only hope
that I will be as engaged for as long as he was.
To honor Senator Stafford, Senator Leahy and I, along with
Representative Welch, introduced a bill today to re-designate the White
Rocks National Recreation Area in our fine state as the ``Robert T.
Stafford White Rocks National Recreation Area.'' This is a small, but
fitting, tribute to his memory.
Bob Stafford was a true public servant. I am humbled to be serving
the State of Vermont in the seat he once held. He dedicated his life to
serving others and to creating a better world. My thoughts are with his
family as they mourn his passing. And may the example he set during his
many years be emulated for many to come.
Mr. REID. Madam President, I ask consent that the bill be read the
third time, passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table,
and any statements related to the bill be printed in the Record.
[[Page 270]]
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (S. 159) was ordered to a third reading, was read the third
time, and passed, as follows:
S. 159
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. ROBERT T. STAFFORD WHITE ROCKS NATIONAL RECREATION
AREA .
(a) Redesignation.--The White Rocks National Recreation
Area in the State of Vermont, as established by section 202
of the Vermont Wilderness Act of 1984 (16 U.S.C. 460nn-1), is
redesignated as the ``Robert T. Stafford White Rocks National
Recreation Area''.
(b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation,
document, paper, or other record of the United States to the
recreation area referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed
to be a reference to the Robert T. Stafford White Rocks
National Recreation Area.
____________________
ORDERS FOR MONDAY, JANUARY 8, 2007
Mr. REID. Madam President, it is my understanding that there are a
couple of Senators who wish to speak. We will take care of that in a
minute.
I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business
today, it stand adjourned until 11:30 a.m., on Monday, January 8; that
following the prayer and the pledge, the Journal of proceedings be
approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their
use later in that day, and that the time until 12 noon be equally
divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees; that
at noon, the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 19, a
resolution celebrating the life of the late President Gerald R. Ford;
that once the resolution is reported, the Senate then vote, without
intervening objection or debate, on adoption of that resolution; that
upon the adoption of the resolution, the preamble be agreed to and the
motion to reconsider be laid on the table.
I further ask consent that notwithstanding the adjournment of the
Senate on Friday, January 5, S. 1 be considered to have received its
second reading.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
PROGRAM
Mr. REID. Today was a good day in the Senate. The spirit of
bipartisanship is in the air. I look forward to working with the
Republican leaders and Members of Congress as we move ahead and forward
in this Congress, the 110th Congress.
For the information of Members, the first vote next week is Monday,
January 8, at 12 noon. Therefore, Members should be prepared to be here
and ready to vote. Time will show what we will do, but votes will be a
lot quicker than they used to be. We will not wait around for long
times. Most of the votes are not very close, and it is not fair to keep
Members from their constituents and other work in their office. If some
people are not here, they will not be recorded within a reasonable
period of time after the vote is called.
We hoped to proceed to S. 1. We do not have consent to move forward
on that yet, but we are confident we will.
____________________
ORDER FOR ADJOURNMENT
Mr. REID. If there is no further business to come before the Senate,
I ask unanimous consent the Senate stand adjourned under the previous
order, following the remarks of Senator Landrieu for 10 minutes and
Senator Coburn for 15 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.
____________________
AUTHORIZATION OF MORGANZA TO THE GULF OF MEXICO HURRICANE PROTECTION
PROJECT
Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, I come to the floor briefly to speak
about a bill I introduced today on the first day of this 110th Congress
to signify its importance to our State and to speak about that for a
moment.
But before I do, I want to give my public congratulations to the new
leadership of this Chamber, to thank the Senator from Nevada and the
Senator from Kentucky, the majority leader and the minority leader, for
their gathering together of the Senators today, as the Presiding
Officer also attended--a quite historic meeting of almost 100 of us in
the Old Senate Chamber--and their commitment to us and to the Nation,
although it was a private meeting, to work in a more collegial,
cooperative way as this Congress begins and to try to forge the
bipartisan solutions I think our country called for as a reflection of
the outcome of the last elections.
I, for one, publicly want to commit myself to that endeavor and to
work toward that end, as I continue to work across the aisle with many
in the other party, and even Members such as the Presiding Officer in
our own party, in the Democratic Party, to get the job done for our
States.
In that regard, I introduced this bill today to authorize a project
and to ask for special consideration for this very important levee and
hurricane protection project in the State of Louisiana called Morganza
to the Gulf. As today we look forward into what we are going to do with
this new hope and new spring and new era of cooperation, that is
terrific. But we also need to think about looking a little bit backward
as to what we did not get done in the last Congress or the Congresses
before so we can pick up that work and move forward.
This initiative, Morganza to the Gulf, would fall into that category
of a project that was actually approved not only by the last Congress,
the 109th Congress, but the 108th and the 107th, and started back
actually decades ago. And because of just a few technical glitches
resulting in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' failure to timely
complete its report, the contingent authorization of the Morganza
project expired. Eventually, the Corps submitted its report more than a
year late and recommended authorization of the project.
Madam President, this project when completed will protect 120,000
people in south Louisiana, many of whom were devastated by two of the
worst storms and subsequent flooding in the history of our country only
2 years ago, in 2005. However, these people are left vulnerable without
this project being completed. It was part of a major WRDA bill, the
Water Resources Development Act, of which this Congress worked together
in quite an extraordinary bipartisan effort, as the Presiding Officer
knows. You have been a part of that effort.
It comes out of the EPW Committee, the Environment and Public Works
Committee. Democrats on that committee and Republicans worked very
hard, into the late hours of the night, trying to get that bill
through. But for a number of reasons, this massive bill, with billions
of dollars of projects, could not pass in the final hours.
But this one project, of all of the projects in the Nation, I believe
deserves special attention, not because it is in Louisiana, not because
Senator Vitter and I represent this, and not only because our State
received devastation from Katrina and Rita but because this is the one
hurricane protection project that actually had been approved in the
last WRDA bill. But because of untimeliness on the part of the Corps of
Engineers, we could not get it authorized in the last bill, and it
should be first to be approved now.
I do not know what is going to happen with our WRDA bill. I am
certain the Senator from California, who has pledged her support, and
the ranking member of that committee, Senator Inhofe from Oklahoma, who
is familiar with this, understand the special nature of this issue.
Whether we can move this independently, I do not know. But I am going
to ask. Until we are told no, we are going to try. Senator Vitter is
not here to speak for himself, but I know he feels very strongly about
this, as indicated by his own actions and strong words he has put in
the Record. Our House Members, both Republicans and Democrats,
[[Page 271]]
could make the same arguments on the House side.
I know people may be tired of seeing the Senators from Louisiana and
Mississippi come down and talk about the gulf coast. But it is
America's energy coast. It is a working coast. There are working people
who live in real communities, large and small, whose homes have been
devastated, whose churches have been destroyed, whose schools have been
destroyed, and who still look to us to help them, to not waste their
money or others' money in the relief but to spend it wisely and well
and to provide at least the Federal partnership for these hurricane
protection levees. And that is what this is.
The communities of Lafourche and Terrebonne Parishes, located in
southeast Louisiana, which are the heart of America's energy coast, are
willing and able to do their engineering, to put up their own money, to
make sure that the projects are done in an expedited fashion. But they
cannot begin without this Federal authorization.
So I have introduced as stand-alone legislation, the Morganza to the
Gulf of Mexico Hurricane Protection Project, as my first bill, to
indicate the continued need throughout south Louisiana and the gulf
coast for more protection from hurricanes and smart engineering, to say
we are not going to stop asking for the things we think are most
certainly meritorious of this Congress's attention and to continue to
say that with all the challenges of housing, health care, education,
small business recovery, et cetera, that hurricane protection for
levees and coastal restoration remains a constant need for the gulf
coast and, I would predict, for other coasts around the country that
need to wake up to the dangers of rising tides, surges from whatever,
tsunamis on the west coast, hurricanes on the east coast, as a
potential, and get serious about the business of stronger
infrastructure and better planning about where and where not to build
close to the coast.
But again, these are working communities that are there--not
sunbathing, not condos--running ports, laying pipelines, and giving the
Nation the energy infrastructure it needs. These people, just like in
the big cities of New Orleans and Baton Rouge and Lafayette and Lake
Charles--these small communities of Houma and Lafourche and Cocherie
and Golden Meadow and places that no one in Washington has ever heard
of, but we visit all the time, deserve the protection of their Federal
Government based on what they contribute to the Nation.
So I thank the Presiding Officer for letting me speak for the Record
on this issue. I thank the leadership for giving me this time and
commend it for the Senate to consider. Hopefully, we can pass it within
the first weeks of this Congress.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Landrieu). The Senator from Oklahoma.
____________________
STEWARDSHIP OF THE TAXPAYERS' MONEY
Mr. COBURN. Madam President, I want to spend a few minutes today to
kind of summarize some of the events of the past year and kind of also
to put the Senate on notice that what this election was about is us
being good stewards with the taxpayers' money.
I appreciate the distinguished Senator from Louisiana. I happen to be
the Senator who held that bill up in the wee hours of the morning.
There were some real good reasons why I did that. It is a great example
of the habits that we have to change. There is no question that levee
system needs to be authorized, and it will be authorized this year.
There is no question. But there was a drudging component that was added
to that bill. Nobody knew what it was going to cost, at least $100
million. That portion had not cleared the committee, and it was
important that we not have habits such as that, to authorize programs
that we do not have any idea what they cost.
We have heard a lot of talk about bipartisanship. We can all be
partisan for America. If you go to the Federal Government's Web site
and go to the Comptroller General, David Walker, and you read what is
there--I would encourage every American and every Senator to go read
it--what you will find is we are on an absolute unsustainable course.
And the problems are bad now. Madam President, we have a $260 billion
deficit this year with ``Enron'' accounting statistics, about a $360
billion accounting deficit by real accounting statistics. That is what
we are adding to the Nation's debt. That is what our kids get to pay
back through a decreased standard of living. But I would encourage you
to go read it. We cannot continue to do what Congresses over the last 5
years have done; that is, we cannot spend new money because there is no
new money. So that means if we are going to authorize a new program, we
need to make sure a couple things happen. One is we need to make sure
it does not duplicate something that is already there. And if it does,
we need to eliminate what it duplicates if, in fact, it is better
because there is an opportunity cost of funding two programs that do
the same thing. One of them does it better, so every dollar you spend
on the one that does it less well costs us money in terms of the value
for our children.
Let me give you a couple other examples, things where our rules kind
of mess us up. Because of the budgetary rules, Federal buildings in
this country are no longer owned by the Federal Government--new ones.
Why is that? For any other business, any individual would, if they are
going to lease a building, try to lease purchase it. Because of our
accounting rules, we lease them. Because if we lease purchase, then the
agency has to show the entire cost of the building in their budget that
year.
Well, it does not make accounting sense. I happen to have a degree in
accounting. It is crazy accounting. But what it does is force us to
make bad financial choices on fixed assets for the Federal Government.
We cannot get rid of the buildings that we don't want now. We spend $6
billion--that is billion with a ``b''--a year maintaining buildings the
Federal Government does not want. That is $6 billion. The Pentagon
spends $3 billion. That is a total of $9 billion.
So if we had the $9 billion, if we could get rid of the buildings we
wanted to by streamlining that process, we could save $9 billion a
year. Madam President, $9 billion would do a whole lot for the people
of Louisiana as far as this levee system repair.
We know we can save about $30 billion every 5 years by having the
buildings we acquire or lease become lease purchase because then the
taxpayer gains from the real estate rise in value associated with those
buildings. We have a lot to change in what we do. I am not a partisan
Republican, but I am very partisan about the future of this country and
what has to change to do that.
Some other examples I would want the American public to know that we
could do something about tomorrow: We have an earned-income tax credit
that has a 40-percent error rate on it. That means billions of dollars
every year get paid to people who do not qualify for their earned-
income tax credit, but we do not fix it. We have not fixed it. Shame on
us. We have $350 billion a year that is owed in taxes to the Federal
Government--that is what the tax gap is this year--that will not be
collected.
As a matter of fact, last year, the IRS, through incompetency, was
putting on board a new program. They threw away their old program. But
the new program was not ready, so they do not have a way to go back and
track the problem tax payments. That is going to cost us $50 billion,
$60 billion in lost revenues--one stupid error after another.
We have a program to help people with food called food stamps, except
we have an error rate there, where we give out $1.6 billion to people
who are absolutely not eligible for that program every year. In this
very short conversation of what we have talked about, we have talked
about over $400 billion that we would have. We would not be running a
deficit now if we did some things efficiently.
In the last 2 years, the subcommittee I chaired, along with Tom
Carper, the
[[Page 272]]
Senator from Delaware, had 46 hearings oversighting Federal financial
management. We came up with, either from waste, fraud or duplication--
not counting the tax gap, not counting any of these other things I have
talked about--$200 billion of fraudulent, wasteful or duplicative
programs associated with the Federal Government.
What the American people ought to be asking us is, rather than
creating new programs, fix the ones we have. Make them efficient.
Eliminate the duplications.
I am planning, when I come back, to send a letter to my colleagues
outlining what my procedures plan to be in terms of blocking new bills
to the floor. I thought I would read it into the Record tonight so that
if anybody has any disagreement with it, they would come speak with me.
First is for me to agree to a unanimous consent on legislation in the
110th Congress, the bill has to conform to the vision of the limited
Federal Government set forth by the Constitution and our Founding
Fathers. In other words, it has to be constitutional.
Second, if it creates or authorizes a new Federal program or
activity, it must not duplicate an existing program or activity.
Third, if a bill authorizes new spending, it must be offset by
reductions in real spending elsewhere.
If a program or activity currently receives funding from sources
including, but not limited to, the Federal Government, the bill shall
not increase the Federal Government's share of that spending.
Finally, if a bill establishes a new foundation, museum, cultural or
historic site, or other entity that is not an agency or a department,
the Federal funding should be limited to the initial start-up cost plus
an endowment that can be added to through private funding.
The way we get out of the problems facing our country starting in
2012 is to endow the future rather than expand it. If we start endowing
things--one of the former Presiding Officers, the Senator from
Arkansas, had a plan to honor Bill Clinton's birthplace home. I am not
against that at all. But the average cost to the American taxpayer for
every President's birthplace home--and there are only 22 of them--is a
million dollars a year. Divide that out for a minute. That is $3,000 a
day to take care of a birthplace home. Most Americans would kind of
like to have that to care for their home.
The answer to that is to create an endowment with a million dollars,
set it up as a fund for the Bill Clinton birthplace home endowment. It
can never be touched. People can give money to that, and they can care
for that. The earnings off of that will be about $60,000 a year. That
is about $200 a day, or about $5,800 a month. Most people in America--
as a matter of fact, the vast majority of people in America don't come
close to spending that on maintaining their home in a year. So we can
generously endow what needs to happen for the future and use the power
of compound interest to help secure the future for our kids.
My hope is that this spirit of bipartisanship we are starting off
with will lead us to do the things the American people want us to do,
and that is to get control of this behemoth we call the Federal
Government. We can do it if we work together and if we are partisan for
our children, partisan for the future of our country, and if we will do
the oversight. If our oversight is going to point at what President
Bush did wrong rather than what we can do right to fix programs,
eliminate inefficiencies and fraud and waste, we will do much more for
the country.
I hope the words we have heard today will be acted on the entire 2
years of the 110th Congress. If they are and we follow these
guidelines, we will see a surplus much sooner than 2012. We can do that
but not without the hard work and dedication that says future
generations are worth it, worth us doing what we need to do to make the
difference. We could take care of every need of the people in Louisiana
because we have tons of waste where we are spending in the wrong way,
whether it is bridges to Alaska or railroads across Mississippi or
financing defense contractors when insurance is going to pay their bill
anyway; we could do it.
We have to stop playing the game and start thinking about the long
term. My hand is out to work with anybody, whether on this side of the
aisle or the other side, who wants to solve the fiscal problems facing
this country. Then we can get about solving health care and retirement
programs associated with Social Security and Medicare.
____________________
ORDER FOR MEASURE TO BE HELD AT THE DESK--S. RES. 19
Mr. COBURN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that S. Res. 19
be held at the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. COBURN. I yield the floor.
____________________
ADJOURNMENT UNTIL MONDAY, JANUARY 8, 2007, AT 11:30 A.M.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate is
adjourned until Monday, January 8, 2007, at 11:30 a.m.
Thereupon, the Senate, at 6:28 p.m., adjourned until Monday, January
8, 2007, at 11:30 a.m.