[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 21]
[Senate]
[Pages 29106-29131]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. COLEMAN (for himself and Ms. Klobuchar):
  S. 2280. A bill to amend the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005; to the 
Committee on Finance.
  Mr. COLEMAN. 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. 2280

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

     SECTION 1. REGULATIONS.

       Section 6052(b) of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (42 
     U.S.C. 1396n note) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(b) Final Regulations.--The Secretary shall promulgate 
     final regulations to carry out the amendment made by 
     subsection (a) consistent with the notice and comment 
     requirements in section 553 of title 5, United States Code, 
     except that the period of public comment on the proposed 
     regulations shall be not less than 180 days. Consistent with 
     the requirements of section 801(a)(1)(A) of title 5, United 
     States Code, the final regulations shall take effect not less 
     than 90 days after publication in the Federal Register or 
     presentation to each House of the Congress or the Comptroller 
     General, whichever occurs later.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LEVIN (for himself and Ms. Stabenow):
  S. 2281. A bill to expand the boundaries of the Thunder Bay National 
Marine Sanctuary and Underwater Preserve and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, today, I am introducing the Thunder Bay 
National Marine Sanctuary and Underwater Preserve Boundary Modification 
Act to expand the boundaries of the existing sanctuary.
  Created as a unique Federal-State partnership in October 2000, the 
Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary has been a resounding success. It 
has preserved the proud maritime history of the Great Lakes, offered 
educational opportunities to children and researchers, and provided a 
fascinating site for divers and snorklers to explore. Expanding the 
sanctuary will bring even greater benefits.
  When the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration originally 
considered the Sanctuary, it recommended an area that was twice as big 
as what was eventually established. That proposal was scaled back to 
address concerns raised by some state and local communities who wanted 
to begin cautiously. Some of the doubters and most cautious at the 
beginning have now become the biggest supporters of the sanctuary. 
Today, the expansion has broad support throughout the area.
  Specifically, this bill would extend the sanctuary's boundaries to 
include the waters off Alcona, Alpena and Presque Isle Counties in 
Michigan and would extend the sanctuary east to the International 
boundary. This would be a significant increase in total area. The 
current sanctuary includes 448 square miles of water and 115 miles of 
shoreline, and the expansion would include 3,722 square miles and 
include 226 miles of shoreline.
  This expansion is needed to protect the maritime history of Michigan 
and the Great Lakes. Historically, this region was influenced by the 
demand for natural resources. Because local roads were so inadequate, 
the Great Lakes became an important passageway and trading route for 
settlement and industrialization. The geography of Thunder Bay and the 
weather patterns in the lakes, however, caused dozens of ships to 
perish in what mariners call ``Shipwreck Alley.'' Many of these 
shipwrecks are well-preserved because they are in freshwater and of 
great interest to researchers and students.
  The current sanctuary holds 116 shipwrecks though many, many more 
shipwrecks in this area have been mentioned in historical records. In 
addition to shipwrecks, the sanctuary protects and interprets the 
remains of commercial fishing sites, historic docks, and other 
underwater archaeological sites.
  Expanding the boundaries as provided for in this bill will protect an 
estimated 178 additional shipwrecks. For example, it would protect the 
Cornelia B. Windiate, which is a three-mast wooden schooner and one of 
the Great Lakes' most intact shipwrecks. The ship sank in December 1875 
when bound from Milwaukee to Buffalo with a cargo of wheat, and was 
featured in an episode of Deep Sea Detectives on the History Channel. 
Expansion would also cover the H.P. Bridge, a three-mast wooden 
barkentine, containing many artifacts such as pottery, clothing, and 
ship tackle and hardware.
  These shipwrecks are not only historically important, they are very 
popular with divers. Deep water wrecks are popular for technical 
divers, and because the sites are often well preserved in the cold 
freshwater, they contain many artifacts and provide a treasure of 
information about the past. Many of the shallow water wrecks are 
accessible by snorkelers, boaters and kayakers. These sites offer a 
tremendous amount of archaeological data on ship architecture and are 
generally easier to document.
  The sanctuary is also making important contributions to research and 
education. Using real-time video links, students in Alpena interact 
with divers exploring underwater worlds with people who are thousands 
of miles away. In the near future, students from around the country 
will be able to control remote submarines that allow them to explore 
the E.B. Allen or the steamship Montana. Visitors to Thunder Bay can 
also view artifacts and interpretive exhibits and watch films about 
Thunder Bay and all of our Nation's Maritime Sanctuaries. Scientists 
from around the world dock their vessels in the Thunder Bay River as 
they use the facility for their research.
  The sanctuary has also been a real asset for the local community, and 
the community has responded in kind. Since the establishment of the 
sanctuary, the community has worked with it to improve the Alpena 
County George N. Fletcher Library, to provide volunteers at festivals 
and outreach events, and to help digitize the Thunder Bay Sanctuary 
Research Collection.
  The Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary deserves to be expanded. 
Doing so will preserve important maritime history and will continue the 
success of the current Sanctuary. It is a unique treasure that needs 
our support. I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this bill.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE:
  S. 2282. A bill to increase the number of full-time personnel of the 
Consumer Product Safety Commission assigned to duty stations at United 
States ports of entry or to inspect overseas production facilities, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill to increase 
the number of full-time personnel of the Consumer Product U.S. Safety 
Commission assigned to duty stations at U.S. ports of entry or to 
inspect overseas production facilities to ensure that the Consumer 
Product Safety Commission has the personnel necessary to adequately 
address the growing problem of import safety. This bill would more than 
triple the current number of commission staff assigned to U.S. ports of 
entry, by requiring that no less than 50 full-time import inspectors be 
in place at the beginning of the next fiscal year. Additionally, it 
would expressly authorize the CPSC to send such inspectors to examine 
the operations at overseas factories which manufacture consumer 
products destined for the U.S.
  This legislation is critically necessary, given that an ever-
increasing number of the consumer products now sold on our shelves are 
manufactured in countries with appalling safety and quality control 
standards, such as

[[Page 29107]]

China. Sine the year 2000, foreign imports to the U.S. have increased 
67 percent by value, with imports from China nearly tripling, growing 
from $100 billion in 2000 to $288 billion last year. Almost 20 percent 
of consumer products sold in the U.S. today were made in China. 
Particularly troubling is that Chinese manufacturers have cornered the 
U.S. market on toys, with over 80 percent of all toys sold in the U.S. 
coming from China. Since March 2007, over 8 million pieces of these 
Chinese-made toys have been recalled due to lead contamination alone.
  Outrageously, the number of CPSC personnel dedicated to monitoring 
import compliance with U.S. health and safety requirements has been 
slashed along with other Commission resources during the very period in 
which trade liberalization has allowed foreign producers greater access 
to our markets. With over 60 percent of CPSC staff having been cut over 
the past 27 years--from almost 1,000 employees in 1980 to a record low 
of 420 employees in 2007--there remain only 15 full-time Commission 
personnel assigned to inspect imports at U.S. ports. According to a 
September 2, 2007, New York Times article, this handful of import 
inspectors ``are hard pressed to find dangerous cargo before it enters 
the country; instead, they rely on other Federal agents, who mostly act 
as trademark enforcers.'' Similarly unacceptable is the fact that the 
CPSC lacks the staff to send a single inspector to the foreign 
factories making the goods that we put on our kitchen counters and in 
the hands of our children.
  These facts unquestionably reveal, as a Consumers Union official told 
the Senate Committee on Finance earlier this month, that the CPSC has 
not kept up with the globalization of the marketplace. That is why I 
have proposed this bill, which would rapidly shore-up the commission's 
import inspection staff, who are so critical to protecting us from 
dangerous foreign products. I urge my colleagues to support this 
common-sense solution to an urgent problem.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself, Ms. Cantwell, and Mrs. Feinstein):
  S. 2287. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal 
the percentage depletion allowance for certain hardrock mines, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today I am very pleased to be joined by 
Senators Cantwell and Feinstein in introducing legislation to eliminate 
from the Federal tax code the ``Percentage Depletion Allowance'' for 
hardrock minerals mined on Federal public lands. Elimination of this 
double subsidy will produce estimated savings of at least $500 million 
over 5 years, based on the most recent year for which figures are 
available from the Joint Committee on Taxation and the Clinton 
administration's fiscal year 2001 budget proposal. These savings will 
help fund the reclamation and restoration of abandoned mines through an 
Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund, that my bill creates, and the 
remaining \3/4\ of savings will be returned to the Federal treasury.
  Percentage depletion allowances were initiated by the Corporation 
Excise Act of 1909. That is right, these allowances were initiated 
nearly 100 years ago. Provisions for a depletion allowance based on the 
value of the mine were made under a 1912 Treasury Department 
regulation, but difficulty in applying this accounting principle to 
mineral production led to the initial codification of the mineral 
depletion allowance in the Tariff Act of 1913. The Revenue Act of 1926 
established percentage depletion much in its present form for oil and 
gas. The percentage depletion allowance was then extended to metal 
mines, coal, and other hardrock minerals by the Revenue Act of 1932, 
and has been adjusted several times since.
  Percentage depletion allowances were historically placed in the tax 
code to reduce the effective tax rates in the mineral and extraction 
industries far below tax rates on other industries, providing 
incentives to increase investment, exploration, and output. The 
problem, however, is that percentage depletion also makes it possible 
to recover many times the amount of the original investment.
  There are two methods of calculating a deduction to allow a firm to 
recover the costs of its capital investment: cost depletion and 
percentage depletion. Cost depletion allows for the recovery of the 
actual capital investment--the costs of discovering, purchasing, and 
developing a mineral reserve--over the period during which the reserve 
produces income. Under the cost depletion method, the total deductions 
cannot exceed the original capital investment.
  Under percentage depletion, however, the deduction for recovery of a 
company's investment is a fixed percentage of ``gross income,'' namely, 
sales revenue from the sale of the mineral. Under this method, total 
deductions typically exceed the capital that the company invested. The 
set rates for percentage depletion are quite significant. Section 613 
of the Internal Revenue Code contains depletion allowances for more 
than 70 metals and minerals, at rates ranging from 10 to 22 percent.
  There is no restriction in the tax code to ensure that over time 
companies do not deduct more than the capital that a company has 
invested. Furthermore, a Percentage Deduction Allowance makes sense 
only so long as the deducting company actually pays for the investment 
for which it claims the deduction.
  The result is a double subsidy for hardrock mining companies: first 
they can mine on public lands for free under the General Mining Law of 
1872, and then they are allowed to take a deduction for capital 
investment that they have not made for the privilege to mine on public 
lands. My legislation would eliminate the use of the Percentage 
Depletion Allowance for mining on public lands, resulting in an 
estimated savings of $450 million over 5 years, while continuing to 
allow companies to recover reasonable cost depletion.
  My bill would also create a new fund, called the Abandoned Mine 
Reclamation Fund. One-fourth of the revenue raised by the bill, or 
approximately $110 million, would be deposited into an interest-bearing 
fund in the Treasury to be used to clean up abandoned hardrock mines in 
states that are subject to the 1872 Mining Law. Though there is no 
comprehensive inventory of abandoned mines, estimates put the figure at 
upwards of 100,000 abandoned mines on public lands.
  There are currently no comprehensive federal or state programs to 
address the need to clean up old mine sites. Reclaiming these sites 
requires the enactment of a program with explicit authority to clean up 
abandoned mine sites and the resources to do it. My legislation is a 
first step toward providing the needed authority and resources.
  In today's budget climate, we are faced with the question of who 
should bear the costs of exploration, development, and production of 
natural resources: the taxpayers, or the users and producers of the 
resource? For more than a century, the mining industry has been paying 
next to nothing for the privilege of extracting minerals from public 
lands and then abandoning its mines. Now those mines are adding to the 
nation's environmental and financial burdens. We face serious budget 
choices this fiscal year, and one of those choices is whether to 
continue the special tax breaks provided to the mining industry.
  The measure I am introducing is straightforward. It eliminates the 
Percentage Depletion Allowance for hardrock minerals mined on public 
lands while continuing to allow companies to recover reasonable cost 
depletion.
  Though at one time there may have been an appropriate role for a 
government-driven incentive for enhanced mineral production, there is 
now sufficient reason to adopt a more reasonable depletion allowance 
that is consistent with depreciation rates given to other businesses. 
This corporate subsidy is simply not justified.
  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:

[[Page 29108]]



                                S. 2287

       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 ``Elimination of Double 
     Subsidies for the Hardrock Mining Industry Act of 2007''.

     SEC. 2. REPEAL OF PERCENTAGE DEPLETION ALLOWANCE FOR CERTAIN 
                   HARDROCK MINES.

       (a) In General.--Section 613(a) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 (relating to percentage depletion) is amended by 
     inserting ``(other than hardrock mines located on lands 
     subject to the general mining laws or on land patented under 
     the general mining laws)'' after ``In the case of the 
     mines''.
       (b) General Mining Laws Defined.--Section 613 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:
       ``(f) General Mining Laws.--For purposes of subsection (a), 
     the term `general mining laws' means those Acts which 
     generally comprise chapters 2, 12A, and 16, and sections 161 
     and 162 of title 30 of the United States Code.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2007.

     SEC. 3. ABANDONED MINE RECLAMATION FUND.

       (a) In General.--Subchapter A of chapter 98 of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to establishment of trust 
     funds) is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 9511. ABANDONED MINE RECLAMATION FUND.

       ``(a) Creation of Trust Fund.--There is established in the 
     Treasury of the United States a trust fund to be known as the 
     `Abandoned Mine Reclamation Trust Fund' (in this section 
     referred to as `Trust Fund'), consisting of such amounts as 
     may be appropriated or credited to the Trust Fund as provided 
     in this section or section 9602(b).
       ``(b) Transfers to Trust Fund.--There are hereby 
     appropriated to the Trust Fund amounts equivalent to 25 
     percent of the additional revenues received in the Treasury 
     by reason of the amendments made by section 2 of the 
     Elimination of Double Subsidies for the Hardrock Mining 
     Industry Act of 2007.
       ``(c) Expenditures From Trust Fund.--
       ``(1) In general.--Amounts in the Trust Fund shall be 
     available, as provided in appropriation Acts, to the 
     Secretary of the Interior for--
       ``(A) the reclamation and restoration of lands and water 
     resources described in paragraph (2) adversely affected by 
     mineral (other than coal and fluid minerals) and mineral 
     material mining, including--
       ``(i) reclamation and restoration of abandoned surface mine 
     areas and abandoned milling and processing areas,
       ``(ii) sealing, filling, and grading abandoned deep mine 
     entries,
       ``(iii) planting on lands adversely affected by mining to 
     prevent erosion and sedimentation,
       ``(iv) prevention, abatement, treatment, and control of 
     water pollution created by abandoned mine drainage, and
       ``(v) control of surface subsidence due to abandoned deep 
     mines, and
       ``(B) the expenses necessary to accomplish the purposes of 
     this section.
       ``(2) Lands and water resources.--
       ``(A) In general.--The lands and water resources described 
     in this paragraph are lands within States that have land and 
     water resources subject to the general mining laws or lands 
     patented under the general mining laws--
       ``(i) which were mined or processed for minerals and 
     mineral materials or which were affected by such mining or 
     processing, and abandoned or left in an inadequate 
     reclamation status before the date of the enactment of this 
     section,
       ``(ii) for which the Secretary of the Interior makes a 
     determination that there is no continuing reclamation 
     responsibility under State or Federal law, and
       ``(iii) for which it can be established to the satisfaction 
     of the Secretary of the Interior that such lands or resources 
     do not contain minerals which could economically be extracted 
     through remining of such lands or resources.
       ``(B) Certain sites and areas excluded.--The lands and 
     water resources described in this paragraph shall not include 
     sites and areas which are designated for remedial action 
     under the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 
     (42 U.S.C. 7901 et seq.) or which are listed for remedial 
     action under the Comprehensive Environmental Response 
     Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et 
     seq.).
       ``(3) General mining laws.--For purposes of paragraph (2), 
     the term `general mining laws' means those Acts which 
     generally comprise chapters 2, 12A, and 16, and sections 161 
     and 162 of title 30 of the United States Code.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of sections for 
     subchapter A of chapter 98 of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986 is amended by adding at the end the following:

``Sec. 9511. Abandoned Mine Reclamation Trust Fund.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE (for herself and Mr. Kerry):
  S. 2288. A bill to establish portfolio quality standards, improve 
lender oversight by the Small Business Administration, create economic 
outcome and performance measurements, strengthen the loan programs 
under section 7(a) of the Small Business Act and title V of the Small 
Business Investment Act of 1958, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today with Senator Kerry to 
introduce the Small Business Lending Oversight and Program Performance 
Improvements Act of 2007. I truly appreciate Senator Kerry's leadership 
on small business issues and his bipartisan work with me on this bill.
  Small businesses have propelled our Nation's economic growth, 
producing more than 50 percent of our Gross Domestic Product, GDP, and 
creating between 60 to 80 percent of all new jobs annually. The Small 
Business Administration's loan guarantee programs are a vital source of 
financing for many of these small start-up firms, entrepreneurs seeking 
working capital, and small businesses that must purchase larger office 
space or secure factory equipment so they can continue to expand.
  At the same time, the SBA's 7(a) and 504 lending programs will not 
endure if careless oversight, and a lack of standards, allow scandal to 
tarnish the good names of these programs. The 7(a) and 504 lending 
programs will not survive if we cannot prove to taxpayers that the 
money spent to guarantee small business loans actually produces 
economic vitality, opportunity, and new jobs, for our Nation. Make no 
mistake, the only way to protect these integral programs and 
demonstrate their effectiveness and economic growth capacity is through 
the use of concrete measurements.
  In order for the SBA's lending portfolios to grow and allow more 
small firms to secure the capital they require, the SBA must quantify 
both quality and performance by establishing the specific criteria it 
will examine and then assess changes in these factors over time. 
Additionally, these benchmarks must be codified and transparent so that 
lenders and small businesses understand what is being measured.
  The problem is this: Although the SBA evaluates portfolio quality, 
and uses these assessments to conduct lender oversight, the SBA has 
failed to provide participating lenders with some of the criteria or 
formulas the Agency uses to determine if their portfolios are sound or 
substandard. This lack of transparency not only hinders the SBA's 
lender oversight capabilities, it causes participating 7(a) and 504 
lenders to be critical of the SBA's ability to accurately assess 
portfolio quality. Regrettably, the SBA's current oversight and 
portfolio quality assessment methods have not prevented recent high-
profile scandals from occurring.
  Currently, the SBA has roughly $60 billion in outstanding loans 
issued to small businesses. Yet incredulously it does not track these 
businesses' economic performance. While the SBA's total loan volume has 
increased substantially over the last 10 years, the agency has no way 
to show how these loans benefitted the U.S. economy. Ultimately, the 
SBA is unaware of how many jobs these loans have created, whether 
company net-sales or revenues have increased after securing capital, or 
how many of these companies prepay, default, or go out of business. 
Though the purpose of these loans is to spur economic growth, the SBA 
does not assess the actual economic outcomes these loans help make 
possible. Without these measurements, how can the SBA attest to the 
incredible economic lift and vitality these loans help generate?
  Two recent Government Accountability Office reports, one from July of 
this year and one from June of 2004, recommended that the SBA improve 
its economic performance and portfolio quality measurements. Our bill 
would implement the GAO's recommendations and improve the performance 
measures for 7(a) and 504 loans. Among other things, the bill would 
require the SBA to: create standards for lenders'

[[Page 29109]]

portfolio quality; increase the transparency of the SBA's lender 
oversight evaluation measures; report on borrowers' economic 
performance; and create a 7(a) and 504 portfolio default rate that can 
be compared directly to commercial lenders' default rates.
  We have an obligation not only to maintain, but to strengthen and 
improve the SBA's key loan programs that I have heard time and again 
are a critical lifeline to the job generators we call small businesses. 
The remedies that Senator Kerry and I are proposing today are necessary 
for the SBA's lending programs to expand, and reach all of the small 
businesses that must have access to capital.
  I urge my colleagues to strongly support the Small Business Lending 
Oversight and Program Performance Improvements Act.
  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. 2228

       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 Lending 
     Oversight and Program Performance Improvement Act of 2007''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) Recent reports by the Government Accountability Office 
     have recommended that the Small Business Administration 
     develop better measurements and methods for measuring the 
     performance of lending programs and the effectiveness of 
     lender oversight.
       (2) A July 2007 report by the Government Accountability 
     Office entitled ``Small Business Administration: Additional 
     Measures Needed to Assess 7(a) Loan Program's Performance'' 
     found the following:
       (A) Determining the success of the loan programs under 
     section 7(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(a)) 
     ``is difficult as the performance measures show only 
     outputs--the number of loans provided--and not outcomes, or 
     the fate of the businesses borrowing with the guarantee.''.
       (B) ``The current measures do not indicate how well the 
     agency is meeting its strategic goal of helping small 
     businesses.''.
       (C) ``To better ensure that the 7(a) program is meeting its 
     mission responsibility of helping small firms succeed through 
     guaranteed loans, we recommend that the SBA administrator 
     complete and expand the SBA's current work on evaluating the 
     program's performance measures. As part of that effort, at a 
     minimum, the SBA should further utilize the loan performance 
     information it already collects, including but not limited to 
     defaults, prepayments, and number of loans in good standing, 
     to better report how small businesses fare after they 
     participate in the 7(a) program.''.
       (3) A June 2004 report by the Government Accountability 
     Office entitled ``Small Business Administration: New Services 
     for Lender Oversight Reflect Some Best Practices but Strategy 
     for Use Lags Behind'' found that ``Best practices dictate the 
     need for a clear and transparent understanding of how a risk 
     management service and the tools it provides will be used.''.

     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 ``base year'' means the year in which a 
     covered loan recipient receives a loan under section 7(a) of 
     the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(a)) or the 504 Loan 
     Program;
       (3) the term ``covered lender'' means--
       (A) a lender participating in the guarantee loan program 
     under section 7(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 
     636(a)); and
       (B) a State or local development company participating in 
     the 504 Loan Program;
       (4) the term ``covered loan recipient'' means a person that 
     receives a loan under section 7(a) of the Small Business Act 
     (15 U.S.C. 636(a)) or the 504 Loan Program;
       (5) the term ``economic performance evaluation 
     measurements'' means the economic performance evaluation 
     measurements established under section 8(a);
       (6) the term ``504 Loan Program'' means the program to 
     provide financing to small business concerns by guarantees of 
     loans under title V of the Small Business Investment Act of 
     1958 (15 U.S.C. 695 et seq.), which are funded by debentures 
     guaranteed by the Administrator;
       (7) the term ``portfolio quality evaluation standards'' 
     means the portfolio quality evaluation standards established 
     under section 5(a)(1); and
       (8) the term ``small business concern'' has the same 
     meaning as in section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 
     632).

     SEC. 4. AUTHORITY.

       Section 5 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 634) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)(14), by striking ``other lender 
     oversight activities'' and inserting ``used to improve 
     portfolio performance and lender oversight through technology 
     and software programs designed to increase program loan 
     quality, management, accuracy, and efficiency and program 
     underwriting accuracy and efficiency''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(i) In establishing lender oversight review fees 
     described in subsection (b)(14), the Administrator shall 
     follow cost containment and cost control best practices that 
     ensure that such fees are reasonable and do not become 
     burdensome or excessive.''.

     SEC. 5. PORTFOLIO QUALITY EVALUATION STANDARDS.

       (a) Standards.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall develop and 
     publish in the Federal Register portfolio quality evaluation 
     standards for covered lenders, which shall include portfolio 
     quality criteria, including--
       (A) a liquidation rate;
       (B) a currency rate;
       (C) a recovery rate;
       (D) a delinquency rate; and
       (E) other portfolio risk indicators.
       (2) Use.--The Administration shall use the portfolio 
     quality evaluation standards--
       (A) to determine the portfolio quality of a covered lender, 
     in comparison to the portfolio quality of all covered 
     lenders; and
       (B) for conducting lender oversight of covered lenders.
       (b) Implementation.--The Administrator shall--
       (1) rank and determine a separate score for each covered 
     lender, on each of the portfolio quality evaluation 
     standards;
       (2) combine the portfolio quality rankings described in 
     paragraph (1) to establish the overall lender portfolio 
     quality score for each covered lender, based on the 
     compliance of that covered lender with the portfolio quality 
     evaluation standards;
       (3) provide a covered lender access to--
       (A) the score of that covered lender for each of the 
     portfolio quality evaluation standards; and
       (B) the overall portfolio quality score for that covered 
     lender; and
       (4) provide a written explanation of the factors affecting 
     the score described in paragraph (3)(A) for a covered lender 
     to that covered lender.
       (c) Quarterly Evaluations.--Not less frequently than once 
     each quarter, the Administrator shall evaluate each covered 
     lender to determine whether--
       (1) there has been a statistically significant adverse 
     change in the criteria evaluated under the portfolio quality 
     evaluation standards relating to a covered lender; and
       (2) the portfolio of that covered lender has a higher 
     concentration of loans made to businesses in a specific North 
     American Industry Classification System code (or any 
     successor thereto) than is typical for businesses in that 
     code, as determined by the Administrator.
       (d) Additional Onsite Review.--
       (1) Deterioration in loan portfolio.--If the Administrator 
     determines that there is significant and sustained 
     statistically adverse change in the loan portfolio of a 
     covered lender, based on the quarterly evaluation of that 
     covered lender under subsection (c), the Administrator 
     shall--
       (A) determine the reason for such deterioration;
       (B) determine if the deterioration should lead to an onsite 
     review of the loan portfolio of that covered lender;
       (C) taking into consideration the opinion of the relevant 
     district director of the Administration, determine whether it 
     is appropriate for the Administrator to adjust the preferred 
     lender or other loan making status of that covered lender;
       (D) document the decision by the Administrator regarding 
     whether to conduct an onsite review or adjust the loan making 
     status of that covered lender; and
       (E) inform that covered lender of any statistically adverse 
     change in loan quality of the portfolio of that covered 
     lender.
       (2) Adverse changes.--If the Administrator determines there 
     has been a statistically significant adverse change in the 
     criteria evaluated under the portfolio quality evaluation 
     standards relating to a covered lender, the Administrator 
     shall determine whether it is necessary to conduct an onsite 
     review of that covered lender.
       (3) Scope of review.--Any onsite review of a covered lender 
     under this subsection shall focus on--
       (A) the credit quality of the loans within the portfolio of 
     that covered lender;
       (B) the soundness of the credit evaluation and underwriting 
     processes and procedures of that covered lender;
       (C) the adherence by that covered lender to the policies 
     and procedures of the Administration; and
       (D) any other measures that the Administrator determines 
     appropriate.
       (e) Defaults.--The Administrator shall provide to a covered 
     lender information relating to any indicator under the 
     portfolio quality evaluation standards that indicate an 
     increased risk of default for specific loans.

[[Page 29110]]

       (f) Document Retention.--The Administrator shall maintain 
     an electronic copy of any document relating to any portfolio 
     quality evaluation or onsite review under this section 
     (including documents relating to any determination regarding 
     whether to conduct such a review).
       (g) Data Collection.--The Administrator shall enter into a 
     contract with a fiscal and transfer agent of the 
     Administration under which that fiscal and transfer agent 
     shall provide to the Administrator the data necessary to 
     conduct the quarterly evaluation of covered lenders using the 
     portfolio quality evaluation standards under this section.

     SEC. 6. DEFAULT RATE.

       (a) In General.--Using established industry standards for 
     calculating loan default rates, and not later than 1 year 
     after the date of enactment of this Act, and every year 
     thereafter, the Administrator shall calculate a loan default 
     rate for--
       (1) loans under section 7(a) of the Small Business Act (15 
     U.S.C. 636(a));
       (2) loans under the 504 Loan Program; and
       (3) specialty loan programs under section 7(a) of the Small 
     Business Act or the 504 Loan Program, including the Express 
     Loan program under section 7(a)(31) of the Small Business Act 
     and the Export Working Capital Program under section 7(a)(14) 
     of the Small Business Act.
       (b) Methodology.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall publish in the 
     Federal Register the methodology the Administrator will use 
     to calculate default rates under subsection (a).
       (c) Purpose.--The purpose of the default rates calculated 
     under subsection (a) is to provide a cumulative default rate 
     for loans under section 7(a) of the Small Business Act (15 
     U.S.C. 636(a)) and loans under the 504 Loan Program that may 
     be compared directly to the default rates of other commercial 
     loans.

     SEC. 7. COMPUTER MODELING.

       (a) Transparency in Ranking Criteria.--The Administrator--
       (1) shall provide each covered lender with the data, 
     factors, statistical methods, ranking criteria, indicators, 
     and other measures used to make the ranking described in 
     section 5(b); and
       (2) may not charge a fee for providing the information 
     described in paragraph (1).
       (b) Failure To Provide.--In ranking a covered lender under 
     section 5(b), the Administrator may not use any data, factor, 
     statistical method, ranking criteria, indicator, or other 
     measure that the Administrator has not provided to that 
     covered lender.
       (c) Contracts.--Before establishing or modifying any system 
     or mechanism for evaluating the making of loans, the 
     accounting for loans, the underwriting of loans, or otherwise 
     overseeing loans made by covered lenders, the Administrator 
     shall consult with relevant covered lenders.

     SEC. 8. ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE EVALUATION MEASUREMENTS.

       (a) Measurements.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall develop and 
     publish in the Federal Register economic performance 
     evaluation measurements for evaluating the economic 
     performance and economic outcomes of each covered loan 
     recipient, which shall include--
       (1) number of individuals employed by that covered loan 
     recipient;
       (2) the annual sales receipts of that covered loan 
     recipient;
       (3) an estimate of the total annual Federal income tax paid 
     by that covered loan recipient;
       (4) whether the covered loan recipient prepaid the covered 
     loan;
       (5) whether the covered loan recipient defaulted on the 
     covered loan;
       (6) the number of businesses operated by covered loan 
     recipients that cease operations; and
       (7) the number of covered loan recipients that establish a 
     new business relating to the business for which that covered 
     loan recipient received a loan under section 7(a) of the 
     Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(a)) or the 504 Loan 
     Program.
       (b) Collection of Information.--
       (1) In general.--On and after the date that is 2 years 
     after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator 
     shall electronically collect, as part of the loan application 
     process, from the person applying for a loan under section 
     7(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(a)) or the 504 
     Loan Program--
       (A) the number of individuals employed by the applicant;
       (B) the annual sales receipts of the applicant for the year 
     before the date of the application; and
       (C) an estimate of the total annual Federal income tax paid 
     by that covered loan recipient.
       (2) Base year.--The Administrator shall use the information 
     collected under paragraph (1) to establish the base year 
     statistics for the applicant.
       (3) Information compliance.--
       (A) In general.--During the 12-year period beginning on the 
     date that a covered loan recipient receives a loan under 
     section 7(a) of the Small Business Act or the 504 Loan 
     Program, as the case may be, the covered loan recipient shall 
     provide to the Administrator information relating to the 
     economic performance evaluation measurements upon requested.
       (B) Frequency.--The Administrator shall request information 
     from a covered loan recipient under subparagraph (A) not less 
     frequently than once every 4 years.
       (c) Reporting.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 6 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, and every 4 years thereafter, the 
     Administrator shall publish a report assessing the 
     information relating to the economic performance evaluation 
     measurements submitted by covered loan recipients during the 
     period described in paragraph (2), including an evaluation of 
     the aggregate changes, if any, in the economic performance 
     evaluation measurements since the relevant base years for 
     such covered loan recipients.
       (2) Period.--The period described in this paragraph is--
       (A) for the first report submitted under this subsection, 
     not shorter than the 4-year period before the date of that 
     report;
       (B) for the second report submitted under this subsection, 
     not shorter than the 8-year period before the date of that 
     report; and
       (C) for the third report submitted under this subsection, 
     and each report submitted thereafter, not shorter than the 
     12-year period before the date of that report.

     SEC. 9. PRIVACY.

       In collecting data and preparing reports under this Act, 
     the Administrator shall ensure that the privacy and 
     information of covered loan recipients is protected.

     SEC. 10. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION.

       Section 503 of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 
     (15 U.S.C. 697) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(j) Executive Compensation.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (4), a 
     State or local development company shall have a written 
     contract with each executive or highly paid employee of that 
     development company relating to the employment of that 
     executive or highly paid employee, which shall include, for 
     that executive or employee, the amount of compensation, 
     benefits, and any transfer of anything of value to that 
     executive or highly paid employee, including any rental or 
     sale.
       ``(2) Approval by board of directors.--
       ``(A) In general.--A written contract described in 
     paragraph (1) shall be approved by the board of directors of 
     the State or local development company.
       ``(B) Evaluation.--In evaluating a contract described in 
     paragraph (1), the members of the board of directors of a 
     State or local development company shall--
       ``(i) determine the fair market value of the benefits 
     received by an executive or highly paid employee from that 
     development company; and
       ``(ii) evaluate the amount paid by other State or local 
     development companies and commercial lenders for comparable 
     services, including, if a rental of property for that 
     executive or highly paid employee is part of that contract, 
     the amount of annual rent paid locally for comparable 
     property.
       ``(C) Distribution of evaluation.--The board of directors 
     of a State or local development company shall ensure that the 
     information described in subparagraph (B) is made available 
     to each member of that board of directors before the date of 
     the meeting at which the board of directors will determine 
     whether to approve the relevant contract and include the 
     information described in subparagraph (B) in the minutes of 
     that meeting.
       ``(D) Participation.--An executive or highly paid official, 
     and any other party with personal interest in a contract, 
     shall not attend a meeting of the board of directors to 
     determine whether to approve the contract with that executive 
     or highly paid official, unless the members of the board of 
     directors request that executive or highly paid official 
     respond to questions.
       ``(E) Voting.--An executive or highly paid official, and 
     any other party with personal interest in a contract, shall 
     not be present during, and shall not vote on, whether to 
     approve the contract with that executive or highly paid 
     official.
       ``(3) Annual reports.--A State or local development company 
     shall report annually to the Administration regarding the 
     terms of each contract with each executive or highly paid 
     official of that development company.
       ``(4) Exception.--This subsection shall not apply to--
       ``(A) a small State or local development company;
       ``(B) a State or local development company that makes a low 
     number of loans under the 504 Loan Program; or
       ``(C) a State or local development company regulated by a 
     State or local government.
       ``(5) Regulations.--The Administrator shall promulgate 
     regulations to carry out this subsection, including defining 
     the terms `executive', `highly paid', `small State or local 
     development company', and `low number of loans'.''.

     SEC. 11. STUDY AND REPORT ON EXAMINATION AND REVIEW FEES.

       (a) Study.--The Comptroller General of the United States 
     shall conduct a study of the loan guaranty program under 
     section 7(a) of the Small Business Act to determine--
       (1) the scope of lender oversight needed by the 
     Administration;

[[Page 29111]]

       (2) what other entities regulate the lenders that 
     participate in that loan guaranty program, what activities 
     are being reviewed, and the scope of such reviews;
       (3) how the amounts of examination and review fees are 
     determined by such other regulatory entities, who pays for 
     such fees, and how they compare with examination and review 
     fees proposed in regulations issued by the Administration on 
     May 4, 2007;
       (4) how examination and review fees factor into the risk-
     adjusted return on capital (or ``RAROC'') ratings of lenders;
       (5) what would be reasonable fees to be charged for 
     Administration lender oversight;
       (6) whether Administration lender oversight functions can 
     be executed in conjunction with other lender reviews 
     currently required by other regulatory entities, including 
     those that review Federal banks, credit unions, or entities 
     reviewed by the Farm Credit Administration; and
       (7) the impact of lender oversight fees proposed by the 
     Administration on lending to borrowers, including cost 
     changes, availability of credit, and increased or decreased 
     lender participation.
       (b) Report.--The Comptroller General shall submit to 
     Congress a report on the results of the study required by 
     subsection (a) not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. BOXER (for herself and Mrs. Feinstein):
  S. 2290. A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal 
Service located at 16731 Santa Ana Avenue in Fontana, California, as 
the ``Beatrice E. Watson Post Office Building''; to the Committee on 
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today I am joined by my colleague, Senator 
Feinstein in introducing legislation to designate the facility of the 
U.S. Postal Service located at 16731 Santa Ana Avenue in Fontana, 
California, as the ``Beatrice E. Watson Post Office Building.''
  Beatrice ``Bea'' Watson was a former city clerk and councilwoman of 
Fontana who volunteered tirelessly for her community. In an Inland 
Valley Daily Bulletin profile last year, fellow Fontana residents 
described Bea as a generous person who was devoted to her city, her 
friends, and the many organizations with which she worked.
  Over the 40 years of her residence in Fontana, Bea was involved with 
numerous civic and community service organizations, including the 
Fontana Woman's Club, the Fontana Historical Society, Chamber of 
Commerce, the Fontana Exchange Club, Parks and Recreation and the 
Fontana Parent Teacher Association.
  Bea also was responsible for the continued existence of the Fontana 
Days Parade, the annual summer celebration of the city's 1913 founding 
by A.B. Miller, even dipping into her own pocket at times to keep the 
parade going.
  This August, Bea Watson, ``Mrs. Fontana,'' passed away, and I know 
her loss has been deeply felt by her family and the community. The 
Fontana City Council asked Congress to honor Bea for bringing the whole 
community together for the betterment of Fontana. I am proud to 
introduce this bill, and encourage my colleagues to join me in 
recognizing Bea Watson's example of dedicated service.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. AKAKA (for himself, Mrs. McCaskill, Mr. Carper, and Mr. 
        Levin):
  S. 2291. A bill to enhance citizen access to Government information 
and services by establishing plain language as the standard style of 
Government documents issued to the public, and for other purposes; to 
the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Plain 
Language in Government Communications Act of 2007. I am pleased that 
Senators Claire McCaskill, Tom Carper, and Carl Levin have joined me as 
original co-sponsors of this bill.
  Our bill is very similar to H.R. 3548, introduced by Representative 
Bruce Braley in September, along with original co-sponsors 
Representatives Todd Akin, Dan Burton, James McGovern, and Nancy Boyda.
  This bill would establish plain language as the standard writing 
style for Government documents issued to the public. Plain language is 
language that the intended audience can readily understand and use 
because it is clear, concise, well-organized, and follows other best 
practices of plain language writing.
  This bill would extend an initiative that President Bill Clinton and 
Vice President Al Gore started nearly a decade ago as part of the 
Reinventing Government initiative. In 1998 President Clinton directed 
agencies to write in plain language. Although many agencies have made 
progress in writing more clearly, the requirement never was fully 
implemented, and in recent years, the focus on writing in plain 
language has flagged. This legislation will renew that focus.
  The benefits of requiring the Government to write in plain language 
are numerous.
  For example, using plain language improves customer service. 
Veterans, taxpayers, senior citizens, and others who need to understand 
Government instructions and fill out Government forms should not have 
to wade through complicated, bureaucratic language. Needlessly 
complicated Government documents waste countless hours of taxpayers' 
time and cause unnecessary errors. The Federal Government works best 
for the American people if Government documents are clear and 
straightforward. Filling out Government forms should not be like 
solving a complex crossword puzzle.
  Writing in plain language also will make the Government more 
efficient and cost effective. Agencies that write in plain language 
spend less time answering customer service questions, and they obtain 
better compliance because people make fewer mistakes.
  Furthermore, using plain language makes Government more transparent. 
The American people cannot hold their Government accountable if no one 
can understand the information that the Government provides about its 
actions and its requirements.
  Numerous organizations have called on Congress to require the Federal 
Government to use plain language. For example, the AARP wrote a letter 
in support of this legislation stating that every day AARP members 
contact AARP staff because they do not understand letters that they 
received from the Federal Government. The confusion is not the readers' 
fault. It is because many Federal Government letters are written in 
dense, complicated language that few people who are not lawyers could 
be expected to understand. Certainly, anyone who has ever filled out 
their own tax forms can sympathize.
  Additionally, several small business organizations--including the 
National Small Business Association, the Small Business Legislative 
Council, and Women Impacting Public Policy--support the need for plain 
language. The reason is simple. Small businesses waste considerable 
time, effort, and money trying to decipher what the Federal Government 
requires of them.
  This bill addresses two important elements for ensuring that use of 
plain language becomes standard in Federal agencies: training and 
oversight.
  Each agency will report their plans to train employees to write in 
plain language. Writing in plain, clear, concise, and easily 
understandable language is a skill that Congress and Federal agencies 
must foster. As Thomas Jefferson once said, ``The most valuable of all 
talents is that of never using two words when one will do.'' As a 
former teacher and principal, I understand that even very smart people 
must be trained to write plainly.
  Additionally, strong congressional oversight will ensure that 
agencies implement the plain language requirements. Agencies will be 
required to designate a senior official responsible for implementing 
plain language requirements. Each agency will be required to report to 
Congress how it will ensure compliance with the plain language 
requirement and on its progress.
  A few examples of the documents that will be covered by the plain 
language requirement are Federal tax forms; veterans' benefit forms; 
information for workers about Federal health, safety, overtime pay, and 
medical leave laws; Social Security and Medicare benefit forms; and 
Federal college aid applications. These documents help the American 
people obtain important Government benefits and improve their quality 
of life.

[[Page 29112]]

  To avoid imposing an unmanageable burden on agencies, agencies will 
not be required to re-write existing documents in plain language. Only 
new or substantially revised documents will be covered. Similarly, this 
bill does not cover regulations, so that agencies can focus first on 
improving their every day communications with the American people. We 
recognize that it will be more challenging to write regulations--which 
by their nature often will be complex and technical--in plain language.
  Requiring agencies to write in plain language is an important step in 
improving the way the Federal Government communicates with the American 
people.
  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. 2291

       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 ``Plain Language in Government 
     Communications Act of 2007''.

     SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

       The purpose of this Act is to improve the effectiveness and 
     accountability of Federal agencies to the public by promoting 
     clear Government communication that the public can understand 
     and use.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Agency.--The term ``agency'' means an Executive agency, 
     as defined under section 105 of title 5, United States Code.
       (2) Covered document.--The term ``covered document''--
       (A) means any document (other than a regulation) issued by 
     an agency to the public that--
       (i) provides information about any Federal Government 
     requirement or program; or
       (ii) is relevant to obtaining any Federal Government 
     benefit or service; and
       (B) includes a letter, publication, form, notice, or 
     instruction.
       (3) Plain language.--The term ``plain language'' means 
     language that the intended audience can readily understand 
     and use because that language is clear, concise, well-
     organized, and follows other best practices of plain language 
     writing.

     SEC. 4. RESPONSIBILITIES OF FEDERAL AGENCIES.

       (a) Requirement to Use Plain Language in New Documents.--
     Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, each agency shall use plain language in any covered 
     document of the agency issued or substantially revised after 
     the date of enactment of this Act.
       (b) Guidance.--
       (1) In general.--
       (A) Development.--Not later than 6 months after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Office of Management and Budget 
     shall develop guidance on implementing the requirements of 
     subsection (a).
       (B) Issuance.--The Office of Management and Budget shall 
     issue the guidance developed under subpargraph (A) to 
     agencies as a circular.
       (2) Interim guidance.--Before the issuance of guidance 
     under paragraph (1), agencies may follow the guidance of--
       (A) the Plain English Handbook published by the Securities 
     and Exchange Commission;
       (B) the plain language guidelines developed by the Plain 
     Language Action and Information Network; or
       (C) guidance provided by the head of the agency that is 
     consistent with the guidelines referred to under subparagraph 
     (B).

     SEC. 5. REPORTS TO CONGRESS.

       (a) Initial Report.--Not later than 6 months after the date 
     of enactment of this Act, the head of each agency shall 
     submit to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
     Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Oversight and 
     Government Reform of the House of Representatives a report 
     that describes how the agency intends to meet the following 
     objectives:
       (1) Communicating the requirements of this Act to agency 
     employees.
       (2) Training agency employees to write in plain language.
       (3) Meeting the requirement under section 4(a).
       (4) Ensuring ongoing compliance with the requirements of 
     this Act.
       (5) Designating a senior official to be responsible for 
     implementing the requirements of this Act.
       (b) Annual and Other Reports.--
       (1) Agency reports.--
       (A) In general.--The head of each agency shall submit 
     reports on compliance with this Act to the Office of 
     Management and Budget.
     (B) Submission dates.--The Office of Management and Budget 
     shall notify each agency of the date each report under 
     subparagraph (A) is required for submission to enable the 
     Office of Management and Budget to meet the requirements of 
     paragraph (2).
       (2) Reports to congress.--The Office of Management and 
     Budget shall review agency reports submitted under paragraph 
     (1) using the guidance issued under section 4(b)(1)(B) and 
     submit a report on the progress of agencies to the Committee 
     on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate 
     and the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of 
     Representatives--
       (A) annually for the first 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act; and
       (B) once every 3 years thereafter.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Mr. Lieberman):
  S. 2292. A bill to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002, to 
establish the Office for Bombing Prevention, to address terrorist 
explosive threats, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Homeland 
Security and Governmental Affairs.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President. I rise to introduce the National Bombing 
Prevention Act of 2007, an important measure to strengthen our domestic 
defenses against terrorist attacks using explosives.
  Terror bombings have a long and bloody history around the world and 
here in the United States. In 1920, for example, an anarchist bombing 
in front of the New York Stock Exchange killed 38 people and wounded 
hundreds more. More recently, the 1990s bombings of the World Trade 
Center and the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, and attacks in 
Indonesia, Spain, and Great Britain remind us of the vicious and 
indiscriminate threat posed by bombs. As Secretary of Homeland Security 
Michael Chertoff has noted, they are the weapon of choice for 
terrorists.
  The FBI and the Department of Homeland Security tell us that threat 
from these devices is not only real, but growing. Furthermore, the 
National Intelligence Estimate has identified improvised explosive 
devices or IEDs as a significant homeland-security threat.
  As recent years' bombings demonstrate, the costs of inadequate 
precautions can be horrendous. And as the threat of bomb attacks by 
home-grown terrorist rises--witness the plot to bomb the JFK airport in 
New York--we must be increasingly on guard. Much effort and much 
funding has been directed to train and equip law-enforcement and other 
personnel to detect and disrupt bomb plots, yet we still lack a formal, 
full-fledged national strategy to coordinate and improve the 
effectiveness of those efforts.
  The legislation I introduce today will improve our defenses against 
these weapons. I am proud to be working again with the bill's chief co-
sponsor, Senator Joe Lieberman, on this new effort to protect our 
nation.
  The bill has also won the support of people directly involved in the 
fight against the threat of terrorist bombings. They include the U.S. 
Department of Homeland Security; the National Bomb Squad Commanders 
Advisory Board; the National Tactical Officers Association; the 
International Association of Bomb Technicians and Investigators; the 
Maine Emergency Management Agency; and the police departments of Bangor 
and Portland, Maine.
  The National Bombing Prevention Act of 2007 has three main elements: 
First, the bill will clarify the responsibilities of the DHS Office of 
Bombing Prevention and authorize $25 million funding in both FY 2009 
and 2010, up from the current Senate-passed funding level of $10 
million in the Homeland Security Appropriations bill now pending at 
conference.
  Our national fight against terrorist bombings is a large and multi-
faceted undertaking. It includes screening airline passengers, checking 
cargo, securing dangerous chemicals, protecting critical 
infrastructure, promoting research and development of anti-IED 
technology, and sharing information among Government and private-sector 
partners. The DHS Office of Bombing Prevention is a leader in this 
fight.
  The Collins-Lieberman bill builds on the Office's past efforts. Among 
other things, the bill designates the Office of Bombing Protection as 
the lead agency in DHS for combating terrorist explosive attacks; tasks 
OBP with coordinating national and intergovernmental bombing-prevention 
activities; and assigns it responsibility for assisting

[[Page 29113]]

state and local governments and cooperating with the private sector.
  A key element of Federal assistance is training. Last week, for 
example, members of several Maine and Connecticut police departments 
received DHS training and briefings here in Washington, as well as an 
FBI update, and fresh information on improvised explosive devices. My 
bill will bring more of that training to the States and make it more 
accessible to local law-enforcement officers.
  Second, the bill directs the President to accelerate the release of 
the National Strategy for Bombing Prevention and to update it every 
four years. As terrorists' tactics change, we must review and adjust 
our counter-measures to defeat them.
  Third, the bill will promote more research and development of 
counter-explosive technologies and facilitate the transfer of military 
technologies for domestic anti-terror use.
  My legislation is badly needed. We need to make sure that bomb squads 
have the latest and most accurate information on bombing threats. We 
need to raise awareness of the signs of possible threats, including 
purchases of pre-cursor materials and other suspicious activities. We 
need to improve information sharing and coordination of activities 
among all levels of government as well as the private sector.
  Under my legislation, the Department of Homeland Security will have 
the legal authority, the responsibility, and the resources to ensure 
that state and local law-enforcement personnel receive the training and 
information they need to protect us.
  The National Bombing Prevention Act of 2007 will give our country 
important new protections. The need for that protection has been amply 
demonstrated by repeated acts of savagery, and the threat of terrorist 
bombs continues to grow. I urge my colleagues to support this measure.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to join my Ranking Member 
on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Senator 
Collins, in introducing bipartisan legislation to strengthen our 
Nation's ability to deter, detect, prevent, and respond to attacks 
using improvised explosive devices, IED, in the U.S.
  As we have seen in Iraq, London, and Germany, IEDs are a weapon of 
choice for terrorists. The reality is that an IED is relatively easy 
and inexpensive to make and can cause mass casualties, even to armored 
military personnel. IEDs are a global threat, and the American public, 
here at home, is not immune.
  Federal efforts to address this threat, however, have not been 
adequate. The Department of Homeland Security, Office of Bombing 
Prevention, which is the Department's lead agent for IED countermeasure 
coordination, is currently operating with a substantially reduced 
budget of $5 million, down from the $14 million it received in fiscal 
years 2005 and 2006. Only $6 million has been requested for 2008. By 
contrast, the DHS Office of Health Affairs, which has a similar 
coordination responsibility for biosecurity and medical preparedness, 
has a proposed budget for personnel and coordination activities of $28 
million for 2008. Given the likelihood of an IED attack, we need to 
make a comparable commitment in this area. As Secretary Chertoff said 
in an October 19 speech, ``although we can conceive of a terrorist 
attack that would be focused on a biological infection or some kind of 
a chemical spray, the reality is the vast majority of terrorist attacks 
are conducted with bombs. And of those, the vast majority are 
improvised explosive devices.''
  The National Bombing Prevention Act of 2007, NBPA, would formally 
authorize the Office of Bombing Prevention, OBP, and increase its 
budget to $25 million. In addition to leading bombing prevention 
activities within DHS, OBP would be directed to coordinate with other 
Federal, State, and local agencies and fill the existing gaps that are 
not covered by another Federal agency's current bombing prevention 
efforts. For example, OBP would work with state and local officials to 
conduct a national analysis of bomb squad capabilities. This type of 
comprehensive assessment does not currently exist at any level of 
government, yet it is integral to understanding what resources are 
available in the event of an explosion and where we should invest in 
order to better prepare the Nation as a whole. OBP would also improve 
information sharing with state and local bomb squads by providing 
regular updates on terrorist tactics, techniques, and procedures.
  The NBPA would require the President to deliver a long awaited 
National Strategy for Improvised Explosive Devices. This Strategy was 
supposed to be delivered to Congress by DHS in January 2007 but was 
then reassigned to the Department of Justice by presidential directive. 
Turf battles have caused further delay. This is simply unacceptable. 
Regardless of who takes the lead, the Nation must have a coherent 
strategy guiding its counter IED efforts that will clarify the roles 
and responsibilities of all Federal agencies.
  Finally, our legislation would require DHS to establish a program 
expediting the transfer of counter IED technology to first responders. 
Under this program, the Department would work with other Federal 
agencies, including the Department of Defense, the private sector, and 
state and local bomb experts to identify existing technologies that 
could help deter, detect, prevent, or respond to an explosive attack. 
Often, there is a significant lag time between the research and 
development of such technologies and deployment by the end user. This 
bill would hold DHS accountable for seeing products through to the 
deployment phase. Specifically, DHS would be required to develop an 
electronic countermeasures capability to disable radio controlled 
bombs. Radio ``jammers'' have been developed by DoD for Iraq and 
Afghanistan, but that technology needs to be significantly modified for 
the civilian environment.
  Improvised explosive devices are one of the most popular weapons 
terrorists are using today. They can be easily assembled from 
instructions available on the Internet with readily available chemicals 
such as peroxide or ammonium nitrate. And, most importantly, terrorists 
all over the world have demonstrated their intent and ability to use 
these weapons to kill and maim large numbers of people. If DHS is to 
plan effectively for future attacks here at home, it must have a 
cohesive and robust defense against the most likely threats. I ask my 
colleagues to join us in ensuring DHS and its partners have the 
necessary tools to protect the U.S. from an improvised explosive 
device.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LOTT (for himself, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Kyl, Mr. Smith, Mr. 
        Bunning, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Hatch, Ms. Snowe, and Mr. 
        Ensign):
  S. 2293. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal 
the individual alternative minimum tax, and for other purposes; read 
the first time.
  Mr. LOTT. 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 
placed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 2293

       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 ``Individual Alternative 
     Minimum Tax Repeal Act of 2007''.

     SEC. 2. REPEAL OF INDIVIDUAL ALTERNATIVE MINIMUM TAX.

       (a) In General.--Section 55(a) of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986 (relating to alternative minimum tax imposed) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new flush 
     sentence:

     ``For purposes of this title, the tentative minimum tax on 
     any taxpayer other than a corporation for any taxable year 
     beginning after December 31, 2006, shall be zero.''.
       (b) Modification of Limitation on Use of Credit for Prior 
     Year Minimum Tax Liability.--Subsection (c) of section 53 of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to credit for 
     prior year minimum tax liability) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(c) Limitation.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the 
     credit allowable under subsection (a) for any taxable year 
     shall not exceed the excess (if any) of--
       ``(A) the regular tax liability of the taxpayer for such 
     taxable year reduced by the

[[Page 29114]]

     sum of the credits allowable under subparts A, B, D, E, and F 
     of this part, over
       ``(B) the tentative minimum tax for the taxable year.
       ``(2) Taxable years beginning after 2006.--In the case of 
     any taxable year beginning after 2006, the credit allowable 
     under subsection (a) to a taxpayer other than a corporation 
     for any taxable year shall not exceed 90 percent of the 
     regular tax liability of the taxpayer for such taxable year 
     reduced by the sum of the credits allowable under subparts A, 
     B, D, E, and F of this part.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2006.

     SEC. 3. ONE-TIME ESTIMATED TAX SAFE HARBOR FOR ALTERNATIVE 
                   MINIMUM TAX LIABILITY.

       For purposes of any taxable year beginning in 2006, in the 
     case of any individual with respect to whom there was no 
     liability for the tax imposed under section 55 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 for the preceding taxable 
     year--
       (1) the tax shown on the return under section 
     6654(d)(1)(B)(i) of such Code shall be reduced (but not below 
     zero) by the amount of tax imposed by such section 55 shown 
     on the return,
       (2) the tax for the taxable year under section 
     6654(d)(2)(B)(i) of such Code (before multiplication by the 
     applicable percentage) shall be reduced (but not below zero) 
     by the tax imposed by such section 55, and
       (3) the amount of tax for the taxable year for purposes of 
     section 6654(e)(1) of such Code shall be reduced (but not 
     below zero) by the amount of tax imposed by such section 55.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. NELSON of Florida (for himself and Mr. Whitehouse):
  S. 2295. A bill to amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to require 
a voter-verified permanent paper ballot under title III of such Act, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, today, joined by Senator 
Whitehouse, I am introducing the Voter Confidence and Increased 
Accessibility Act of 2007. As we enter the month of November, next 
year's national election is just one year away, and we must act now to 
ensure that the next time Americans go to the polls nationwide, they 
have the chance to cast their vote and have their vote counted as 
intended.
  Our bill will require all voting machines--beginning in the 2008 
election--to produce a paper record of each ballot that can be verified 
by the voter before a ballot is submitted to be counted. This also is 
the first bill to propose a nationwide ban, by 2012, on the use of 
touch-screen voting machines in Federal elections.
  We are introducing this bill to address the problems that have 
plagued the accuracy and integrity of our voting systems. We know all 
too well the problems that have occurred in Florida--in the 2000 
election and, most recently in the 2006 congressional election in the 
13th Congressional District--but my State is not alone. Recent studies 
in California and elsewhere have demonstrated that touch-screen voting 
machines are unreliable and vulnerable to error.
  The bottom line is we have to ensure that every vote is counted--and 
counted properly. Citizens must have confidence in the integrity of 
their elections.
  Florida, under the leadership of Governor Charlie Crist and Secretary 
of State Kurt Browning, has acted decisively, and on a bipartisan 
basis, to require the replacement of paperless touch-screen voting 
machines throughout the State with optical scan equipment. By using op-
scan machines, voters will have the opportunity to complete a paper 
ballot that will be verified by the voter before it is electronically 
counted. By 2012, touchscreen voting machines will be a thing of the 
past in Florida. Using Florida's model, the bill I am filing today will 
phase out touch-screen voting machines in Federal elections nationwide 
by 2012.
  This morning I met with Secretary Browning to discuss my intent to 
file legislation modeled on Florida's initiative. Secretary Browning 
indicated his support for a ban on touch-screen voting machines.
  In addition to banning touch-screen machines by 2012, and requiring a 
voter-verified paper ballot for every vote that is cast, beginning in 
November 2008, other highlights of the bill are as follows.
  It will require and fund routine random audits to be conducted by 
hand count in 3 percent of precincts in all Federal elections. If the 
vote is very close, that percentage goes up to 5 or 10 percent. On the 
other hand, if the winning candidate received more than 80 percent of 
the vote, no audit of that race will be necessary.
  The bill will authorize adequate funding--$1 billion--for replacing 
and upgrading voting equipment.
  Our legislation will require that every voter has the opportunity to 
vote by paper ballot if the voting machine in their precinct is broken, 
and beginning in 2012, for any reason.
  Finally, the bill will establish an arms-length relationship between 
test labs and voting machine vendors, to prevent any efforts, malicious 
or otherwise, to compromise the accuracy and integrity of voting 
machines.
  A companion version of our bill was introduced in the House by 
Representative Rush Holt of New Jersey, and was passed out of 
Committee. The bill now awaits a vote by the full Chamber. I hope my 
colleagues in the House will act to pass this important legislation, 
and I invite my colleagues in the Senate to join me by co-sponsoring 
our bill in the Senate. Florida not only provides a model for what can 
be done to increase our confidence in the integrity of elections, it 
provides a model for how to do it--on a bipartisan basis, with the 
support of election officials, voting integrity groups and, most 
importantly, the millions of voters in my state who have a 
constitutional right to vote and want to be sure that their votes are 
counted--and counted accurately.
  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 
placed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 2295

       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 ``Voter Confidence and 
     Increased Accessibility Act of 2007''.

     SEC. 2. PROMOTING ACCURACY, INTEGRITY, AND SECURITY THROUGH 
                   VOTER-VERIFIED PERMANENT PAPER BALLOT.

       (a) Ballot Verification and Audit Capacity.--
       (1) In general.--Section 301(a)(2) of the Help America Vote 
     Act of 2002 (42 U.S.C. 15481(a)(2)) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(2) Ballot verification and audit capacity.--
       ``(A) Voter-verified paper ballots.--
       ``(i) Verification.--(I) The voting system shall require 
     the use of or produce an individual, durable, voter-verified, 
     paper ballot of the voter's vote that shall be created by or 
     made available for inspection and verification by the voter 
     before the voter's vote is cast and counted. For purposes of 
     this subclause, the term `individual, durable, voter-
     verified, paper ballot' includes (but is not limited to) a 
     paper ballot marked by the voter for the purpose of being 
     counted by hand or read by an optical scanner or other 
     similar device, a paper ballot prepared by the voter to be 
     mailed to an election official (whether from a domestic or 
     overseas location), a paper ballot created through the use of 
     a nontabulating ballot marking device or system, or, in the 
     case of an election held before 2012, a paper ballot produced 
     by a direct recording electronic voting machine, so long as 
     in each case the voter is permitted to verify the ballot in a 
     paper form in accordance with this subparagraph.
       ``(II) The voting system shall provide the voter with an 
     opportunity to correct any error made by the system in the 
     voter-verified paper ballot before the permanent voter-
     verified paper ballot is preserved in accordance with clause 
     (ii).
       ``(III) The voting system shall not preserve the voter-
     verified paper ballots in any manner that makes it possible, 
     at any time after the ballot has been cast, to associate a 
     voter with the record of the voter's vote.
       ``(ii) Preservation.--The individual, durable, voter-
     verified, paper ballot produced in accordance with clause (i) 
     shall be used as the official ballot for purposes of any 
     recount or audit conducted with respect to any election for 
     Federal office in which the voting system is used, and shall 
     be preserved--

       ``(I) in the case of votes cast at the polling place on the 
     date of the election, within the polling place in a secure 
     manner; or
       ``(II) in any other case, in a secure manner which is 
     consistent with the manner employed by the jurisdiction for 
     preserving paper ballots in general.

       ``(iii) Manual audit capacity.--(I) Each paper ballot 
     produced pursuant to clause (i)

[[Page 29115]]

     shall be suitable for a manual audit equivalent to that of a 
     paper ballot voting system, and shall be counted by hand in 
     any recount or audit conducted with respect to any election 
     for Federal office.
       ``(II) In the event of any inconsistencies or 
     irregularities between any electronic vote tallies and the 
     vote tallies determined by counting by hand the individual, 
     durable, voter-verified, paper ballots produced pursuant to 
     clause (i), and subject to subparagraph (B), the individual, 
     durable, voter-verified, paper ballots shall be the true and 
     correct record of the votes cast.
       ``(B) Special rule for treatment of disputes when paper 
     ballots have been shown to be compromised.--
       ``(i) In general.--In the event that--

       ``(I) there is any inconsistency between any electronic 
     vote tallies and the vote tallies determined by counting by 
     hand the individual, durable, voter-verified, paper ballots 
     produced pursuant to subparagraph (A)(i) with respect to any 
     election for Federal office; and
       ``(II) it is demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence 
     (as determined in accordance with the applicable standards in 
     the jurisdiction involved) in any recount, audit, or contest 
     of the result of the election that the paper ballots have 
     been compromised (by damage or mischief or otherwise) and 
     that a sufficient number of the ballots have been so 
     compromised that the result of the election could be changed,

     the determination of the appropriate remedy with respect to 
     the election shall be made in accordance with applicable 
     State law, except that the electronic tally shall not be used 
     as the exclusive basis for determining the official certified 
     vote tally.
       ``(ii) Rule for consideration of ballots associated with 
     each voting machine.--For purposes of clause (i), only the 
     paper ballots deemed compromised, if any, shall be considered 
     in the calculation of whether or not the result of the 
     election could be changed due to the compromised paper 
     ballots.''.
       (2) Conforming amendment clarifying applicability of 
     alternative language accessibility.--Section 301(a)(4) of 
     such Act (42 U.S.C. 15481(a)(4)) is amended by inserting 
     ``(including the paper ballots required to be produced under 
     paragraph (2) and the notices required under paragraphs (7) 
     and (13)(C)'' after ``voting system''.
       (3) Other conforming amendments.--Section 301(a)(1) of such 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 15481(a)(1)) is amended--
       (A) in subparagraph (A)(i), by striking ``counted'' and 
     inserting ``counted, in accordance with paragraphs (2) and 
     (3)'';
       (B) in subparagraph (A)(ii), by striking ``counted'' and 
     inserting ``counted, in accordance with paragraphs (2) and 
     (3)'';
       (C) in subparagraph (A)(iii), by striking ``counted'' each 
     place it appears and inserting ``counted, in accordance with 
     paragraphs (2) and (3)''; and
       (D) in subparagraph (B)(ii), by striking ``counted'' and 
     inserting ``counted, in accordance with paragraphs (2) and 
     (3)''.
       (b) Accessibility and Ballot Verification for Individuals 
     With Disabilities.--
       (1) In general.--Section 301(a)(3)(B) of such Act (42 
     U.S.C. 15481(a)(3)(B)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(B)(i) satisfy the requirement of subparagraph (A) 
     through the use of at least one voting system equipped for 
     individuals with disabilities, including nonvisual and 
     enhanced visual accessibility for the blind and visually 
     impaired, at each polling place; and
       ``(ii) meet the requirements of subparagraph (A) and 
     paragraph (2)(A) by using a system that--
       ``(I) allows the voter to privately and independently 
     verify the permanent paper ballot through the presentation, 
     in accessible form, of the printed or marked vote selections 
     from the same printed or marked information that would be 
     used for any vote counting or auditing;
       ``(II) ensures that the entire process of ballot 
     verification and vote casting is equipped for individuals 
     with disabilities, including nonvisual and enhanced visual 
     accessibility for the blind and visually impaired; and
       ``(III) does not preclude the supplementary use of Braille 
     or tactile ballots; and''.
       (2) Specific requirement of study, testing, and development 
     of accessible ballot verification mechanisms.--
       (A) Study and reporting.--Subtitle C of title II of such 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 15381 et seq.) is amended--
       (i) by redesignating section 247 as section 248; and
       (ii) by inserting after section 246 the following new 
     section:

     ``SEC. 247. STUDY AND REPORT ON ACCESSIBLE BALLOT 
                   VERIFICATION MECHANISMS.

       ``(a) Study and Report.--The Director of the National 
     Institute of Standards and Technology shall study, test, and 
     develop best practices to enhance the accessibility of ballot 
     verification mechanisms for individuals with disabilities, 
     for voters whose primary language is not English, and for 
     voters with difficulties in literacy, including best 
     practices for the mechanisms themselves and the processes 
     through which the mechanisms are used. In carrying out this 
     section, the Director shall specifically investigate existing 
     and potential methods or devices, including non-electronic 
     devices, that will assist such individuals and voters in 
     creating voter-verified paper ballots and presenting or 
     transmitting the information printed or marked on such 
     ballots back to such individuals and voters.
       ``(b) Coordination With Grants for Technology 
     Improvements.--The Director shall coordinate the activities 
     carried out under subsection (a) with the research conducted 
     under the grant program carried out by the Commission under 
     section 271, to the extent that the Director and Commission 
     determine necessary to provide for the advancement of 
     accessible voting technology.
       ``(c) Deadline.--The Director shall complete the 
     requirements of subsection (a) not later than December 31, 
     2008.
       ``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out subsection (a) 
     $3,000,000, to remain available until expended.''.
       (B) Clerical amendment.--The table of contents of such Act 
     is amended--
       (i) by redesignating the item relating to section 247 as 
     relating to section 248; and
       (ii) by inserting after the item relating to section 246 
     the following new item:

``Sec. 247. Study and report on accessible ballot verification 
              mechanisms.''.

       (3) Clarification of accessibility standards under 
     voluntary voting system guidance.--In adopting any voluntary 
     guidance under subtitle B of title III of the Help America 
     Vote Act with respect to the accessibility of the paper 
     ballot verification requirements for individuals with 
     disabilities, the Election Assistance Commission shall 
     include and apply the same accessibility standards applicable 
     under the voluntary guidance adopted for accessible voting 
     systems under such subtitle.
       (c) Additional Voting System Requirements.--
       (1) Requirements described.--Section 301(a) of such Act (42 
     U.S.C. 15481(a)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new paragraphs:
       ``(7) Instruction reminding voters of importance of 
     verifying paper ballot.--
       ``(A) In general.--The appropriate election official at 
     each polling place shall cause to be placed in a prominent 
     location in the polling place which is clearly visible from 
     the voting booths a notice, in large font print accessible to 
     the visually impaired, advising voters that the paper ballots 
     representing their votes shall serve as the vote of record in 
     all audits and recounts in elections for Federal office, and 
     that they should not leave the voting booth until confirming 
     that such paper ballots accurately record their vote.
       ``(B) Systems for individuals with disabilities.--All 
     voting systems equipped for individuals with disabilities 
     shall present or transmit in accessible form the statement 
     referred to in subparagraph (A), as well as an explanation of 
     the verification process described in paragraph (3)(B)(ii).
       ``(8) Prohibiting use of uncertified election-dedicated 
     voting system technologies; disclosure requirements.--
       ``(A) In general.--A voting system used in an election for 
     Federal office in a State may not at any time during the 
     election contain or use any election-dedicated voting system 
     technology--
       ``(i) which has not been certified by the State for use in 
     the election; and
       ``(ii) which has not been deposited with an accredited 
     laboratory described in section 231 to be held in escrow and 
     disclosed in accordance with this section.
       ``(B) Requirement for and restrictions on disclosure.--An 
     accredited laboratory under section 231 with whom an 
     election-dedicated voting system technology has been 
     deposited shall--
       ``(i) hold the technology in escrow; and
       ``(ii) disclose technology and information regarding the 
     technology to another person if--

       ``(I) the person is a qualified person described in 
     subparagraph (C) who has entered into a nondisclosure 
     agreement with respect to the technology which meets the 
     requirements of subparagraph (D); or
       ``(II) the laboratory is required to disclose the 
     technology to the person under State law, in accordance with 
     the terms and conditions applicable under such law.

       ``(C) Qualified persons described.--With respect to the 
     disclosure of election-dedicated voting system technology by 
     a laboratory under subparagraph (B)(ii)(I), a `qualified 
     person' is any of the following:
       ``(i) A governmental entity with responsibility for the 
     administration of voting and election-related matters for 
     purposes of reviewing, analyzing, or reporting on the 
     technology.
       ``(ii) A party to pre- or post-election litigation 
     challenging the result of an election or the administration 
     or use of the technology used in an election, including but 
     not limited to election contests or challenges to the 
     certification of the technology, or an expert for a party to 
     such litigation, for purposes of reviewing or analyzing the 
     technology to support or oppose the litigation, and all 
     parties to the litigation shall have access to the technology 
     for such purposes.
       ``(iii) A person not described in clause (i) or (ii) who 
     reviews, analyzes, or reports on the

[[Page 29116]]

     technology solely for an academic, scientific, technological, 
     or other investigation or inquiry concerning the accuracy or 
     integrity of the technology.
       ``(D) Requirements for nondisclosure agreements.--A 
     nondisclosure agreement entered into with respect to an 
     election-dedicated voting system technology meets the 
     requirements of this subparagraph if the agreement--
       ``(i) is limited in scope to coverage of the technology 
     disclosed under subparagraph (B) and any trade secrets and 
     intellectual property rights related thereto;
       ``(ii) does not prohibit a signatory from entering into 
     other nondisclosure agreements to review other technologies 
     under this paragraph;
       ``(iii) exempts from coverage any information the signatory 
     lawfully obtained from another source or any information in 
     the public domain;
       ``(iv) remains in effect for not longer than the life of 
     any trade secret or other intellectual property right related 
     thereto;
       ``(v) prohibits the use of injunctions barring a signatory 
     from carrying out any activity authorized under subparagraph 
     (C), including injunctions limited to the period prior to a 
     trial involving the technology;
       ``(vi) is silent as to damages awarded for breach of the 
     agreement, other than a reference to damages available under 
     applicable law;
       ``(vii) allows disclosure of evidence of crime, including 
     in response to a subpoena or warrant;
       ``(viii) allows the signatory to perform analyses on the 
     technology (including by executing the technology), disclose 
     reports and analyses that describe operational issues 
     pertaining to the technology (including vulnerabilities to 
     tampering, errors, risks associated with use, failures as a 
     result of use, and other problems), and describe or explain 
     why or how a voting system failed or otherwise did not 
     perform as intended; and
       ``(ix) provides that the agreement shall be governed by the 
     trade secret laws of the applicable State.
       ``(E) Election-dedicated voting system technology 
     defined.--For purposes of this paragraph:
       ``(i) In general.--The term `election-dedicated voting 
     system technology' means the following:

       ``(I) The source code used for the trusted build and its 
     file signatures.
       ``(II) A complete disk image of the pre-build, build 
     environment, and any file signatures to validate that it is 
     unmodified.
       ``(III) A complete disk image of the post-build, build 
     environment, and any file signatures to validate that it is 
     unmodified.
       ``(IV) All executable code produced by the trusted build 
     and any file signatures to validate that it is unmodified.
       ``(V) Installation devices and software file signatures.

       ``(ii) Exclusion.--Such term does not include `commercial-
     off-the-shelf' software and hardware defined under under the 
     2005 voluntary voting system guidelines adopted by the 
     Commission under section 222.
       ``(9) Prohibition of use of wireless communications devices 
     in voting systems.--No voting device upon which ballots are 
     programmed or votes are cast or tabulated shall contain, use, 
     or be accessible by any wireless, power-line, or concealed 
     communication device, except that enclosed infrared 
     communications devices which are certified for use in such 
     device by the State and which cannot be used for any remote 
     or wide area communications or used without the knowledge of 
     poll workers shall be permitted.
       ``(10) Prohibiting connection of system or transmission of 
     system information over the internet.--
       ``(A) In general.--No voting device upon which ballots are 
     programmed or votes are cast or tabulated shall be connected 
     to the Internet at any time.
       ``(B) Rule of construction.--Nothing contained in this 
     paragraph shall be deemed to prohibit the Commission from 
     conducting the studies under section 242 or to conduct other 
     similar studies under any other provision of law in a manner 
     consistent with this paragraph.
       ``(11) Security standards for voting systems used in 
     federal elections.--
       ``(A) In general.--No voting system may be used in an 
     election for Federal office unless the manufacturer of such 
     system and the election officials using such system meet the 
     applicable requirements described in subparagraph (B).
       ``(B) Requirements described.--The requirements described 
     in this subparagraph are as follows:
       ``(i) The manufacturer and the election officials shall 
     document the secure chain of custody for the handling of all 
     software, hardware, vote storage media, ballots, and voter-
     verified ballots used in connection with voting systems, and 
     shall make the information available upon request to the 
     Commission.
       ``(ii) The manufacturer shall disclose to an accredited 
     laboratory under section 231 and to the appropriate election 
     official any information required to be disclosed under 
     paragraph (8).
       ``(iii) After the appropriate election official has 
     certified the election-dedicated and other voting system 
     software for use in an election, the manufacturer may not--

       ``(I) alter such software; or
       ``(II) insert or use in the voting system any software not 
     certified by the State for use in the election.

       ``(iv) At the request of the Commission--

       ``(I) the appropriate election official shall submit 
     information to the Commission regarding the State's 
     compliance with this subparagraph; and
       ``(II) the manufacturer shall submit information to the 
     Commission regarding the manufacturer's compliance with this 
     subparagraph.

       ``(C) Development and publication of best practices on 
     documentation of secure chain of custody.--Not later than 
     August 1, 2008, the Commission shall develop and make 
     publicly available best practices regarding the requirement 
     of subparagraph (B)(i).
       ``(D) Disclosure of secure chain of custody.--The 
     Commission shall make information provided to the Commission 
     under subparagraph (B)(i) available to any person upon 
     request.
       ``(12) Durability and readability requirements for 
     ballots.--
       ``(A) Durability requirements for paper ballots.--
       ``(i) In general.--All voter-verified paper ballots 
     required to be used under this Act (including the paper 
     ballots provided to voters under paragraph (13)) shall be 
     marked, printed, or recorded on durable paper.
       ``(ii) Definition.--For purposes of this Act, paper is 
     `durable' if it is capable of withstanding multiple counts 
     and recounts by hand without compromising the fundamental 
     integrity of the ballots, and capable of retaining the 
     information marked, printed, or recorded on them for the full 
     duration of a retention and preservation period of 22 months.
       ``(B) Readability requirements for machine-marked or 
     printed paper ballots.--All voter-verified paper ballots 
     completed by the voter through the use of a marking or 
     printing device shall be clearly readable by the voter 
     without assistance (other than eyeglasses or other personal 
     vision enhancing devices) and by a scanner or other device 
     equipped for individuals with disabilities.
       ``(13) Mandatory availability of paper ballots at polling 
     places.--
       ``(A) Requiring ballots to be offered and provided.--
       ``(i) In general.--The appropriate election official at 
     each polling place in any election for Federal office shall 
     offer each individual who is eligible to cast a vote in the 
     election at the polling place the opportunity to cast the 
     vote using a blank pre-printed paper ballot which the 
     individual may mark by hand and which is not produced by the 
     direct recording electronic voting machine. The official 
     shall provide the individual with the ballot and the supplies 
     necessary to mark the ballot.
       ``(ii) Special rule for locations using dre voting 
     systems.--In the case of a polling place that uses a direct 
     recording electronic voting device, if the individual accepts 
     the offer to cast the vote using a paper ballot, the official 
     shall ensure (to the greatest extent practicable) that the 
     waiting period for the individual to cast a vote is not 
     greater than the waiting period for an individual who does 
     not agree to cast the vote using such a paper ballot under 
     this paragraph.
       ``(B) Treatment of ballot.--Any paper ballot which is cast 
     by an individual under this paragraph shall be counted and 
     otherwise treated as a regular ballot for all purposes 
     (including by incorporating it into the final unofficial vote 
     count (as defined by the State) for the precinct) and not as 
     a provisional ballot, unless the individual casting the 
     ballot would have otherwise been required to cast a 
     provisional ballot.
       ``(C) Posting of notice.--The appropriate election official 
     shall ensure there is prominently displayed at each polling 
     place a notice that describes the obligation of the official 
     to offer individuals the opportunity to cast votes using a 
     pre-printed blank paper ballot.
       ``(D) Training of election officials.--The chief State 
     election official shall ensure that election officials at 
     polling places in the State are aware of the requirements of 
     this paragraph, including the requirement to display a notice 
     under subparagraph (C), and are aware that it is a violation 
     of the requirements of this title for an election official to 
     fail to offer an individual the opportunity to cast a vote 
     using a blank pre-printed paper ballot.''.
       (2) Requiring laboratories to meet standards prohibiting 
     conflicts of interest as condition of accreditation for 
     testing of voting system hardware and software.--
       (A) In general.--Section 231(b) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     15371(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraphs:
       ``(3) Prohibiting conflicts of interest; ensuring 
     availability of results.--
       ``(A) In general.--A laboratory may not be accredited by 
     the Commission for purposes of this section unless--
       ``(i) the laboratory certifies that the only compensation 
     it receives for the testing carried out in connection with 
     the certification, decertification, and recertification of 
     the

[[Page 29117]]

     manufacturer's voting system hardware and software is the 
     payment made from the Testing Escrow Account under paragraph 
     (4);
       ``(ii) the laboratory meets such standards as the 
     Commission shall establish (after notice and opportunity for 
     public comment) to prevent the existence or appearance of any 
     conflict of interest in the testing carried out by the 
     laboratory under this section, including standards to ensure 
     that the laboratory does not have a financial interest in the 
     manufacture, sale, and distribution of voting system hardware 
     and software, and is sufficiently independent from other 
     persons with such an interest;
       ``(iii) the laboratory certifies that it will permit an 
     expert designated by the Commission to observe any testing 
     the laboratory carries out under this section; and
       ``(iv) the laboratory, upon completion of any testing 
     carried out under this section, discloses the test protocols, 
     results, and all communication between the laboratory and the 
     manufacturer to the Commission.
       ``(B) Availability of results.--Upon receipt of information 
     under subparagraph (A), the Commission shall make the 
     information available promptly to election officials and the 
     public.
       ``(4) Procedures for conducting testing; payment of user 
     fees for compensation of accredited laboratories.--
       ``(A) Establishment of escrow account.--The Commission 
     shall establish an escrow account (to be known as the 
     `Testing Escrow Account') for making payments to accredited 
     laboratories for the costs of the testing carried out in 
     connection with the certification, decertification, and 
     recertification of voting system hardware and software.
       ``(B) Schedule of fees.--In consultation with the 
     accredited laboratories, the Commission shall establish and 
     regularly update a schedule of fees for the testing carried 
     out in connection with the certification, decertification, 
     and recertification of voting system hardware and software, 
     based on the reasonable costs expected to be incurred by the 
     accredited laboratories in carrying out the testing for 
     various types of hardware and software.
       ``(C) Requests and payments by manufacturers.--A 
     manufacturer of voting system hardware and software may not 
     have the hardware or software tested by an accredited 
     laboratory under this section unless--
       ``(i) the manufacturer submits a detailed request for the 
     testing to the Commission; and
       ``(ii) the manufacturer pays to the Commission, for deposit 
     into the Testing Escrow Account established under 
     subparagraph (A), the applicable fee under the schedule 
     established and in effect under subparagraph (B).
       ``(D) Selection of laboratory.--Upon receiving a request 
     for testing and the payment from a manufacturer required 
     under subparagraph (C), the Commission shall select at random 
     (to the greatest extent practicable), from all laboratories 
     which are accredited under this section to carry out the 
     specific testing requested by the manufacturer, an accredited 
     laboratory to carry out the testing.
       ``(E) Payments to laboratories.--Upon receiving a 
     certification from a laboratory selected to carry out testing 
     pursuant to subparagraph (D) that the testing is completed, 
     along with a copy of the results of the test as required 
     under paragraph (3)(A)(iv), the Commission shall make a 
     payment to the laboratory from the Testing Escrow Account 
     established under subparagraph (A) in an amount equal to the 
     applicable fee paid by the manufacturer under subparagraph 
     (C)(ii).
       ``(5) Dissemination of additional information on accredited 
     laboratories.--
       ``(A) Information on testing.--Upon completion of the 
     testing of a voting system under this section, the Commission 
     shall promptly disseminate to the public the identification 
     of the laboratory which carried out the testing.
       ``(B) Information on status of laboratories.--The 
     Commission shall promptly notify Congress, the chief State 
     election official of each State, and the public whenever--
       ``(i) the Commission revokes, terminates, or suspends the 
     accreditation of a laboratory under this section;
       ``(ii) the Commission restores the accreditation of a 
     laboratory under this section which has been revoked, 
     terminated, or suspended; or
       ``(iii) the Commission has credible evidence of significant 
     security failure at an accredited laboratory.''.
       (B) Conforming amendments.--Section 231 of such Act (42 
     U.S.C. 15371) is further amended--
       (i) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ``testing, 
     certification,'' and all that follows and inserting the 
     following: ``testing of voting system hardware and software 
     by accredited laboratories in connection with the 
     certification, decertification, and recertification of the 
     hardware and software for purposes of this Act.'';
       (ii) in subsection (a)(2), by striking ``testing, 
     certification,'' and all that follows and inserting the 
     following: ``testing of its voting system hardware and 
     software by the laboratories accredited by the Commission 
     under this section in connection with certifying, 
     decertifying, and recertifying the hardware and software.'';
       (iii) in subsection (b)(1), by striking ``testing, 
     certification, decertification, and recertification'' and 
     inserting ``testing''; and
       (iv) in subsection (d), by striking ``testing, 
     certification, decertification, and recertification'' each 
     place it appears and inserting ``testing''.
       (C) Deadline for establishment of standards, escrow 
     account, and schedule of fees.--The Election Assistance 
     Commission shall establish the standards described in section 
     231(b)(3) of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 and the 
     Testing Escrow Account and schedule of fees described in 
     section 231(b)(4) of such Act (as added by subparagraph (A)) 
     not later than January 1, 2008.
       (D) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Election Assistance Commission such 
     sums as may be necessary to carry out the Commission's duties 
     under paragraphs (3) and (4) of section 231 of the Help 
     America Vote Act of 2002 (as added by subparagraph (A)).
       (3) Special certification of ballot durability and 
     readability requirements for states not currently using 
     durable paper ballots.--
       (A) In general.--If any of the voting systems used in a 
     State for the regularly scheduled 2006 general elections for 
     Federal office did not require the use of or produce durable 
     paper ballots, the State shall certify to the Election 
     Assistance Commission not later than 90 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act that the State will be in 
     compliance with the requirements of sections 301(a)(2) and 
     301(a)(12) of the Help America Vote of 2002, as added or 
     amended by this subsection, in accordance with the deadlines 
     established under this Act, and shall include in the 
     certification the methods by which the State will meet the 
     requirements.
       (B) Certifications by states that require changes to state 
     law.--In the case of a State that requires State legislation 
     to carry out an activity covered by any certification 
     submitted under this paragraph, the State shall be permitted 
     to make the certification notwithstanding that the 
     legislation has not been enacted at the time the 
     certification is submitted and such State shall submit an 
     additional certification once such legislation is enacted.
       (4) Grants for research on development of election-
     dedicated voting system software.--
       (A) In general.--Subtitle D of title II of the Help America 
     Vote Act of 2002 (42 U.S.C. 15401 et seq.) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new part:

  ``PART 7--GRANTS FOR RESEARCH ON DEVELOPMENT OF ELECTION-DEDICATED 
                         VOTING SYSTEM SOFTWARE

     ``SEC. 297. GRANTS FOR RESEARCH ON DEVELOPMENT OF ELECTION-
                   DEDICATED VOTING SYSTEM SOFTWARE.

       ``(a) In General.--The Director of the National Science 
     Foundation (hereafter in this part referred to as the 
     `Director') shall make grants to not fewer than 3 eligible 
     entities to conduct research on the development of election-
     dedicated voting system software.
       ``(b) Eligibility.--An entity is eligible to receive a 
     grant under this part if it submits to the Director (at such 
     time and in such form as the Director may require) an 
     application containing--
       ``(1) certifications regarding the benefits of operating 
     voting systems on election-dedicated software which is easily 
     understandable and which is written exclusively for the 
     purpose of conducting elections;
       ``(2) certifications that the entity will use the funds 
     provided under the grant to carry out research on how to 
     develop voting systems that run on election-dedicated 
     software and that will meet the applicable requirements for 
     voting systems under title III; and
       ``(3) such other information and certifications as the 
     Director may require.
       ``(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated for grants under this section 
     $1,500,000 for each of fiscal years 2008 and 2009, to remain 
     available until expended.''.
       (B) Clerical amendment.--The table of contents of such Act 
     is amended by adding at the end of the items relating to 
     subtitle D of title II the following:

  ``Part 7--Grants for Research on Development of Election-Dedicated 
                         Voting System Software

``Sec. 297. Grants for research on development of election-dedicated 
              voting system software.''.

       (d) Availability of Additional Funding To Enable States To 
     Meet Costs of Revised Requirements.--
       (1) Extension of requirements payments for meeting revised 
     requirements.--Section 257(a) of the Help America Vote Act of 
     2002 (42 U.S.C. 15407(a)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(4) For fiscal year 2008, $1,000,000,000, except that any 
     funds provided under the authorization made by this paragraph 
     shall be used by a State only to meet the requirements of 
     title III which are first imposed on the State pursuant to 
     the amendments made by section 2 of the Voter Confidence and 
     Increased Accessibility Act of 2007, or to otherwise modify 
     or replace its voting systems in response to such 
     amendments.''.

[[Page 29118]]

       (2) Use of revised formula for allocation of funds.--
     Section 252(b) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 15402(b)) is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(b) State Allocation Percentage Defined.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the 
     `State allocation percentage' for a State is the amount 
     (expressed as a percentage) equal to the quotient of--
       ``(A) the voting age population of the State (as reported 
     in the most recent decennial census); and
       ``(B) the total voting age population of all States (as 
     reported in the most recent decennial census).
       ``(2) Special rule for payments for fiscal year 2008.--
       ``(A) In general.--In the case of the requirements payment 
     made to a State for fiscal year 2008, the `State allocation 
     percentage' for a State is the amount (expressed as a 
     percentage) equal to the quotient of--
       ``(i) the sum of the number of noncompliant precincts in 
     the State and 50% of the number of partially noncompliant 
     precincts in the State; and
       ``(ii) the sum of the number of noncompliant precincts in 
     all States and 50% of the number of partially noncompliant 
     precincts in all States.
       ``(B) Noncompliant precinct defined.--In this paragraph, a 
     `noncompliant precinct' means any precinct (or equivalent 
     location) within a State for which the voting system used to 
     administer the regularly scheduled general election for 
     Federal office held in November 2006 did not meet either of 
     the requirements described in subparagraph (D).
       ``(C) Partially noncompliant precinct defined.--In this 
     paragraph, a `partially noncompliant precinct' means any 
     precinct (or equivalent location) within a State for which 
     the voting system used to administer the regularly scheduled 
     general election for Federal office held in November 2006 met 
     only one of the requirements described in subparagraph (D).
       ``(D) Requirements described.--The requirements described 
     in this subparagraph with respect to a voting system are as 
     follows:
       ``(i) The primary voting system required the use of or 
     produced durable paper ballots (as described in section 
     301(a)(12)(A)) for every vote cast.
       ``(ii) The voting system provided that the entire process 
     of paper ballot verification was equipped for individuals 
     with disabilities.''.
       (3) Revised conditions for receipt of funds.--Section 253 
     of such Act (42 U.S.C. 15403) is amended--
       (A) in subsection (a), by striking ``A State is eligible'' 
     and inserting ``Except as provided in subsection (f), a State 
     is eligible''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(f) Special Rule for Fiscal Year 2008.--
       ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this part, a State is eligible to receive a requirements 
     payment for fiscal year 2008 if, not later than 90 days after 
     the date of the enactment of the Voter Confidence and 
     Increased Accessibility Act of 2007, the chief executive 
     officer of the State, or designee, in consultation and 
     coordination with the chief State election official--
       ``(A) certifies to the Commission the number of 
     noncompliant and partially noncompliant precincts in the 
     State (as defined in section 252(b)(2)); and
       ``(B) files a statement with the Commission describing the 
     State's need for the payment and how the State will use the 
     payment to meet the requirements of title III (in accordance 
     with the limitations applicable to the use of the payment 
     under section 257(a)(4)).
       ``(2) Certifications by states that require changes to 
     state law.--In the case of a State that requires State 
     legislation to carry out any activity covered by any 
     certification submitted under this subsection, the State 
     shall be permitted to make the certification notwithstanding 
     that the legislation has not been enacted at the time the 
     certification is submitted and such State shall submit an 
     additional certification once such legislation is enacted.''.
       (4) Permitting use of funds for reimbursement for costs 
     previously incurred.--Section 251(c)(1) of such Act (42 
     U.S.C. 15401(c)(1)) is amended by striking the period at the 
     end and inserting the following: ``, or as a reimbursement 
     for any costs incurred after November 2004 in meeting the 
     requirements of title III which are imposed pursuant to the 
     amendments made by section 2 of the Voter Confidence and 
     Increased Accessibility Act of 2007 or in otherwise upgrading 
     or replacing voting systems in a manner consistent with such 
     amendments (so long as the voting systems meet any of the 
     requirements that apply with respect to elections for Federal 
     office held in 2012 and each succeeding year).''.
       (5) Rule of construction regarding states receiving other 
     funds for replacing punch card, lever, or other voting 
     machines.--Nothing in the amendments made by this subsection 
     or in any other provision of the Help America Vote Act of 
     2002 may be construed to prohibit a State which received or 
     was authorized to receive a payment under title I or II of 
     such Act for replacing punch card, lever, or other voting 
     machines from receiving or using any funds which are made 
     available under the amendments made by this subsection.
       (6) Rule of construction regarding use of funds received in 
     prior years.--
       (A) In general.--Nothing contained in this Act or the Help 
     America Vote Act of 2002 may be construed to prohibit a State 
     from using funds received under title I or II of the Help 
     America Vote Act of 2002--
       (i) to purchase or acquire by other means a voting system 
     that meets the requirements of paragraphs (2) and (3) of 
     section 301 of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (as amended 
     by this Act); or
       (ii) to retrofit a voting system so that it will meet such 
     requirements,
     in order to replace or upgrade (as the case may be) voting 
     systems purchased with funds received under the Help America 
     Vote Act of 2002 that do not require the use of or produce 
     paper ballots.
       (B) Waiver of notice and comment requirements.--The 
     requirements of subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) of section 
     254(a)(11) of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 shall not 
     apply to any State using funds received under such Act for 
     the purposes described in clause (i) or (ii) of subparagraph 
     (A).
       (7) Effective date.--The amendments made by this subsection 
     shall apply with respect to fiscal years beginning with 
     fiscal year 2008.
       (e) Restriction on Use of Direct Recording Electronic 
     Voting Systems.--Section 301 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 15481), 
     as amended by this section, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (b) and (c) as subsections 
     (c) through (d), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (a) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(b) Restriction on Use of Direct Recording Electronic 
     Voting Systems.--A direct recording electronic voting system 
     may not be used to administer any election for Federal office 
     held in 2012 or any subsequent year.''
       (f) Effective Date For New Requirements.--Section 301(d) of 
     such Act (42 U.S.C. 15481(d)), as redesignated by subsection 
     (e), is amended to read as follows:
       ``(d) Effective Date.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), 
     each State and jurisdiction shall be required to comply with 
     the requirements of this section on and after January 1, 
     2006.
       ``(2) Special rule for certain requirements.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     the requirements of this section which are first imposed on a 
     State and jurisdiction pursuant to the amendments made by 
     section 2 of the Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility 
     Act of 2007 shall apply with respect to the regularly 
     scheduled general election for Federal office held in 
     November 2008 and each succeeding election for Federal 
     office.
       ``(B) Delay for jurisdictions using certain paper ballot 
     printers or certain paper ballot-equipped accessible machines 
     in 2006.--
       ``(i) Delay.--In the case of a jurisdiction described in 
     clause (ii), subparagraph (A) shall apply to the jurisdiction 
     as if the reference in such subparagraph to `the regularly 
     scheduled general election for Federal office held in 
     November 2008 and each succeeding election for Federal 
     office' were a reference to `elections for Federal office 
     occurring during 2012 and each succeeding year', but only 
     with respect to the following requirements of this section:

       ``(I) Paragraph (3)(B)(ii)(I) and (II) of subsection (a) 
     (relating to access to verification from the durable paper 
     ballot).
       ``(II) Paragraph (12) of subsection (a) (relating to 
     durability and readability requirements for ballots).

       ``(ii) Jurisdictions described.--A jurisdiction described 
     in this clause is--

       ``(I) a jurisdiction which used thermal reel-to-reel voter 
     verified paper ballot printers attached to direct recording 
     electronic voting machines for the administration of the 
     regularly scheduled general election for Federal office held 
     in November 2006 and which will continue to use such printers 
     (or other printers which meet the requirements of paragraph 
     (3)(B)(ii)(I) and (II) of subsection (a)) attached to such 
     voting machines for the administration of elections for 
     Federal office held in years before 2012; or
       ``(II) a jurisdiction which used voting machines which met 
     the accessibility requirements of paragraph (3) of subsection 
     (a) (as in effect with respect to such election) for the 
     administration of the regularly scheduled general election 
     for Federal office held in November 2006 and which used or 
     produced a paper ballot, and which will continue to use such 
     voting machines (or other voting machines which meet the 
     requirements of this section) for the administration of 
     elections for Federal office held in years before 2012.''.

     SEC. 3. ENHANCEMENT OF ENFORCEMENT OF HELP AMERICA VOTE ACT 
                   OF 2002.

       Section 401 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 15511) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``The Attorney General'' and inserting 
     ``(a) In General.--The Attorney General''; and

[[Page 29119]]

       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsections:
       ``(b) Filing of Complaints by Aggrieved Persons.--
       ``(1) In general.--A person who is aggrieved by a violation 
     of section 301, 302, or 303 which has occurred, is occurring, 
     or is about to occur may file a written, signed, notarized 
     complaint with the Attorney General describing the violation 
     and requesting the Attorney General to take appropriate 
     action under this section. The Attorney General shall 
     immediately provide a copy of a complaint filed under the 
     previous sentence to the entity responsible for administering 
     the State-based administrative complaint procedures described 
     in section 402(a) for the State involved.
       ``(2) Response by attorney general.--The Attorney General 
     shall respond to each complaint filed under paragraph (1), in 
     accordance with procedures established by the Attorney 
     General that require responses and determinations to be made 
     within the same (or shorter) deadlines which apply to a State 
     under the State-based administrative complaint procedures 
     described in section 402(a)(2). The Attorney General shall 
     immediately provide a copy of the response made under the 
     previous sentence to the entity responsible for administering 
     the State-based administrative complaint procedures described 
     in section 402(a) for the State involved.
       ``(c) Clarification of Availability of Private Right of 
     Action.--Nothing in this section may be construed to prohibit 
     any person from bringing an action under section 1979 of the 
     Revised Statutes of the United States (42 U.S.C. 1983) 
     (including any individual who seeks to enforce the 
     individual's right to a voter-verified paper ballot, the 
     right to have the voter-verified paper ballot counted in 
     accordance with this Act, or any other right under subtitle A 
     of title III) to enforce the uniform and nondiscriminatory 
     election technology and administration requirements under 
     sections 301, 302, and 303.
       ``(d) No Effect on State Procedures.--Nothing in this 
     section may be construed to affect the availability of the 
     State-based administrative complaint procedures required 
     under section 402 to any person filing a complaint under this 
     subsection.''.

     SEC. 4. REQUIREMENT FOR MANDATORY MANUAL AUDITS BY HAND 
                   COUNT.

       (a) Mandatory Manual Audits.--Title III of the Help America 
     Vote Act of 2002 (42 U.S.C. 15481 et seq.) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subtitle:

                 ``Subtitle C--Mandatory Manual Audits

     ``SEC. 321. REQUIRING AUDITS OF RESULTS OF ELECTIONS.

       ``(a) Requiring Audits.--
       ``(1) In general.--In accordance with this subtitle, each 
     State shall administer, without advance notice to the 
     precincts selected, audits of the results of elections for 
     Federal office held in the State (and, at the option of the 
     State or jurisdiction involved, of elections for State and 
     local office held at the same time as such election) 
     consisting of random hand counts of the voter-verified paper 
     ballots required to be produced and preserved pursuant to 
     section 301(a)(2).
       ``(2) Exception for certain elections.--A State shall not 
     be required to administer an audit of the results of an 
     election for Federal office under this subtitle if the 
     winning candidate in the election--
       ``(A) had no opposition on the ballot; or
       ``(B) received 80% or more of the total number of votes 
     cast in the election, as determined on the basis of the final 
     unofficial vote count.
       ``(b) Determination of Entity Conducting Audits; 
     Application of GAO Independence Standards.--The State shall 
     administer audits under this subtitle through an entity 
     selected for such purpose by the State in accordance with 
     such criteria as the State considers appropriate consistent 
     with the requirements of this subtitle, except that the 
     entity must meet the general standards established by the 
     Comptroller General and as set forth in the Comptroller 
     General's Government Auditing Standards to ensure the 
     independence (including the organizational independence) of 
     entities performing financial audits, attestation 
     engagements, and performance audits.
       ``(c) References to Election Auditor.--In this subtitle, 
     the term `Election Auditor' means, with respect to a State, 
     the entity selected by the State under subsection (b).

     ``SEC. 322. NUMBER OF BALLOTS COUNTED UNDER AUDIT.

       ``(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), 
     the number of voter-verified paper ballots which will be 
     subject to a hand count administered by the Election Auditor 
     of a State under this subtitle with respect to an election 
     shall be determined as follows:
       ``(1) In the event that the unofficial count as described 
     in section 323(a)(1) reveals that the margin of victory 
     between the two candidates receiving the largest number of 
     votes in the election is less than 1 percent of the total 
     votes cast in that election, the hand counts of the voter-
     verified paper ballots shall occur in at least 10 percent of 
     all precincts or equivalent locations (or alternative audit 
     units used in accordance with the method provided for under 
     subsection (b)) in the Congressional district involved (in 
     the case of an election for the House of Representatives) or 
     the State (in the case of any other election for Federal 
     office).
       ``(2) In the event that the unofficial count as described 
     in section 323(a)(1) reveals that the margin of victory 
     between the two candidates receiving the largest number of 
     votes in the election is greater than or equal to 1 percent 
     but less than 2 percent of the total votes cast in that 
     election, the hand counts of the voter-verified paper ballots 
     shall occur in at least 5 percent of all precincts or 
     equivalent locations (or alternative audit units used in 
     accordance with the method provided for under subsection (b)) 
     in the Congressional district involved (in the case of an 
     election for the House of Representatives) or the State (in 
     the case of any other election for Federal office).
       ``(3) In the event that the unofficial count as described 
     in section 323(a)(1) reveals that the margin of victory 
     between the two candidates receiving the largest number of 
     votes in the election is equal to or greater than 2 percent 
     of the total votes cast in that election, the hand counts of 
     the voter-verified paper ballots shall occur in at least 3 
     percent of all precincts or equivalent locations (or 
     alternative audit units used in accordance with the method 
     provided for under subsection (b)) in the Congressional 
     district involved (in the case of an election for the House 
     of Representatives) or the State (in the case of any other 
     election for Federal office).
       ``(b) Use of Alternative Mechanism.--Notwithstanding 
     subsection (a), a State may adopt and apply an alternative 
     mechanism to determine the number of voter-verified paper 
     ballots which will be subject to the hand counts required 
     under this subtitle with respect to an election, so long as 
     the alternative mechanism uses the voter-verified paper 
     ballots to conduct the audit and the National Institute of 
     Standards and Technology determines that the alternative 
     mechanism will be at least as statistically effective in 
     ensuring the accuracy of the election results as the 
     procedure under this subtitle.

     ``SEC. 323. PROCESS FOR ADMINISTERING AUDITS.

       ``(a) In General.--The Election Auditor of a State shall 
     administer an audit under this section of the results of an 
     election in accordance with the following procedures:
       ``(1) Within 24 hours after the State announces the final 
     unofficial vote count (as defined by the State) in each 
     precinct in the State, the Election Auditor shall determine 
     and then announce the precincts or equivalent locations (or 
     alternative audit units used in accordance with the method 
     provided under section 322(b)) in the State in which it will 
     administer the audits.
       ``(2) With respect to votes cast at the precinct or 
     equivalent location on or before the date of the election 
     (other than provisional ballots described in paragraph (3)), 
     the Election Auditor shall administer the hand count of the 
     votes on the voter-verified paper ballots required to be 
     produced and preserved under section 301(a)(2)(A) and the 
     comparison of the count of the votes on those ballots with 
     the final unofficial count of such votes as announced by the 
     State.
       ``(3) With respect to votes cast other than at the precinct 
     on the date of the election (other than votes cast before the 
     date of the election described in paragraph (2)) or votes 
     cast by provisional ballot on the date of the election which 
     are certified and counted by the State on or after the date 
     of the election, including votes cast by absent uniformed 
     services voters and overseas voters under the Uniformed and 
     Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, the Election Auditor 
     shall administer the hand count of the votes on the 
     applicable voter-verified paper ballots required to be 
     produced and preserved under section 301(a)(2)(A) and the 
     comparison of the count of the votes on those ballots with 
     the final unofficial count of such votes as announced by the 
     State.
       ``(b) Use of Personnel.--In administering the audits, the 
     Election Auditor may utilize the services of the personnel of 
     the State or jurisdiction, including election administration 
     personnel and poll workers, without regard to whether or not 
     the personnel have professional auditing experience.
       ``(c) Location.--The Election Auditor shall administer an 
     audit of an election--
       ``(1) at the location where the ballots cast in the 
     election are stored and counted after the date of the 
     election or such other appropriate and secure location agreed 
     upon by the Election Auditor and the individual that is 
     responsible under State law for the custody of the ballots; 
     and
       ``(2) in the presence of the personnel who under State law 
     are responsible for the custody of the ballots.
       ``(d) Special Rule in Case of Delay in Reporting Absentee 
     Vote Count.--In the case of a State in which the final count 
     of absentee and provisional votes is not announced until 
     after the expiration of the 7-day period which begins on the 
     date of the election, the Election Auditor shall initiate the 
     process described in subsection (a) for administering the 
     audit not later than 24 hours after the State announces the 
     final unofficial vote count for the votes cast at the 
     precinct or equivalent location on or before the date of the 
     election, and shall initiate the administration of the audit 
     of the absentee and provisional votes pursuant to subsection 
     (a)(3)

[[Page 29120]]

     not later than 24 hours after the State announces the final 
     unofficial count of such votes.
       ``(e) Additional Audits if Cause Shown.--
       ``(1) In general.--If the Election Auditor finds that any 
     of the hand counts administered under this section do not 
     match the final unofficial tally of the results of an 
     election, the Election Auditor shall administer hand counts 
     under this section of such additional precincts (or 
     equivalent jurisdictions) as the Election Auditor considers 
     appropriate to resolve any concerns resulting from the audit 
     and ensure the accuracy of the results.
       ``(2) Establishment and publication of procedures governing 
     additional audits.--Not later than August 1, 2008, each State 
     shall establish and publish procedures for carrying out the 
     additional audits under this subsection, including the means 
     by which the State shall resolve any concerns resulting from 
     the audit with finality and ensure the accuracy of the 
     results.
       ``(f) Public Observation of Audits.--Each audit conducted 
     under this section shall be conducted in a manner that allows 
     public observation of the entire process.

     ``SEC. 324. SELECTION OF PRECINCTS.

       ``(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (c), 
     the selection of the precincts in the State in which the 
     Election Auditor of the State shall administer the hand 
     counts under this subtitle shall be made by the Election 
     Auditor on an entirely random basis using a uniform 
     distribution in which all precincts in a Congressional 
     district have an equal chance of being selected, in 
     accordance with procedures adopted by the National Institute 
     of Standards and Technology, except that at least one 
     precinct shall be selected at random in each county.
       ``(b) Public Selection.--The random selection of precincts 
     under subsection (a) shall be conducted in public, at a time 
     and place announced in advance.
       ``(c) Mandatory Selection of Precincts Established 
     Specifically For Absentee Ballots.--If a State establishes a 
     separate precinct for purposes of counting the absentee 
     ballots cast in an election and treats all absentee ballots 
     as having been cast in that precinct, and if the state does 
     not make absentee ballots sortable by precinct and include 
     those ballots in the hand count administered with respect to 
     that precinct, the State shall include that precinct among 
     the precincts in the State in which the Election Auditor 
     shall administer the hand counts under this subtitle.
       ``(d) Deadline for Adoption of Procedures by Commission.--
     The National Institute of Standards and Technology shall 
     adopt the procedures described in subsection (a) not later 
     than March 31, 2008, and shall publish them in the Federal 
     Register upon adoption.

     ``SEC. 325. PUBLICATION OF RESULTS.

       ``(a) Submission to Commission.--As soon as practicable 
     after the completion of an audit under this subtitle, the 
     Election Auditor of a State shall-- submit to the Commission 
     the results of the audit, and shall include in the submission 
     a comparison of the results of the election in the precinct 
     as determined by the Election Auditor under the audit and the 
     final unofficial vote count in the precinct as announced by 
     the State and all undervotes, overvotes, blank ballots, and 
     spoiled, voided, or cancelled ballots, as well as a list of 
     any discrepancies discovered between the initial, subsequent, 
     and final hand counts administered by the Election Auditor 
     and such final unofficial vote count and any explanation for 
     such discrepancies, broken down by the categories of votes 
     described in paragraphs (2) and (3) of section 323(a).
       ``(b) Publication by Commission.--Immediately after 
     receiving the submission of the results of an audit from the 
     Election Auditor of a State under subsection (a), the 
     Commission shall publicly announce and publish the 
     information contained in the submission.
       ``(c) Delay in Certification of Results by State.--
       ``(1) Prohibiting certification until completion of 
     audits.--No State may certify the results of any election 
     which is subject to an audit under this subtitle prior to--
       ``(A) to the completion of the audit (and, if required, any 
     additional audit conducted under section 323(e)(1)) and the 
     announcement and submission of the results of each such audit 
     to the Commission for publication of the information required 
     under this section; and
       ``(B) the completion of any procedure established by the 
     State pursuant to section 323(e)(2) to resolve discrepancies 
     and ensure the accuracy of results.
       ``(2) Deadline for completion of audits of presidential 
     elections.--In the case of an election for electors for 
     President and Vice President which is subject to an audit 
     under this subtitle, the State shall complete the audits and 
     announce and submit the results to the Commission for 
     publication of the information required under this section in 
     time for the State to certify the results of the election and 
     provide for the final determination of any controversy or 
     contest concerning the appointment of such electors prior to 
     the deadline described in section 6 of title 3, United States 
     Code.

     ``SEC. 326. PAYMENTS TO STATES.

       ``(a) Payments For Costs of Conducting Audits.--In 
     accordance with the requirements and procedures of this 
     section, the Commission shall make a payment to a State to 
     cover the costs incurred by the State in carrying out this 
     subtitle with respect to the elections that are the subject 
     of the audits conducted under this subtitle.
       ``(b) Certification of Compliance and Anticipated Costs.--
       ``(1) Certification required.--In order to receive a 
     payment under this section, a State shall submit to the 
     Commission, in such form as the Commission may require, a 
     statement containing--
       ``(A) a certification that the State will conduct the 
     audits required under this subtitle in accordance with all of 
     the requirements of this subtitle;
       ``(B) a notice of the reasonable costs incurred or the 
     reasonable costs anticipated to be incurred by the State in 
     carrying out this subtitle with respect to the elections 
     involved; and
       ``(C) such other information and assurances as the 
     Commission may require.
       ``(2) Amount of payment.--The amount of a payment made to a 
     State under this section shall be equal to the reasonable 
     costs incurred or the reasonable costs anticipated to be 
     incurred by the State in carrying out this subtitle with 
     respect to the elections involved, as set forth in the 
     statement submitted under paragraph (1).
       ``(3) Timing of notice.--The State may not submit a notice 
     under paragraph (1) until candidates have been selected to 
     appear on the ballot for all of the elections for Federal 
     office which will be the subject of the audits involved.
       ``(c) Timing of Payments.--The Commission shall make the 
     payment required under this section to a State not later than 
     30 days after receiving the notice submitted by the State 
     under subsection (b).
       ``(d) Recoupment of Overpayments.--No payment may be made 
     to a State under this section unless the State agrees to 
     repay to the Commission the excess (if any) of--
       ``(1) the amount of the payment received by the State under 
     this section with respect to the elections involved; over
       ``(2) the actual costs incurred by the State in carrying 
     out this subtitle with respect to the elections involved.
       ``(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to the Commission for fiscal 
     year 2008 and each succeeding fiscal year $100,000,000 for 
     payments under this section.

     ``SEC. 327. EXCEPTION FOR ELECTIONS SUBJECT TO RECOUNT UNDER 
                   STATE LAW PRIOR TO CERTIFICATION.

       ``(a) Exception.--This subtitle does not apply to any 
     election for which a recount under State law will commence 
     prior to the certification of the results of the election, 
     including but not limited to a recount required automatically 
     because of the margin of victory between the 2 candidates 
     receiving the largest number of votes in the election, but 
     only if each of the following applies to the recount:
       ``(1) The recount commences prior to the determination and 
     announcement by the Election Auditor under section 323(a)(1) 
     of the precincts in the State in which it will administer the 
     audits under this subtitle.
       ``(2) If the recount would apply to fewer than 100% of the 
     ballots cast in the election--
       ``(A) the number of ballots counted will be at least as 
     many as would be counted if an audit were conducted with 
     respect to the election in accordance with this subtitle; and
       ``(B) the selection of the precincts in which the recount 
     will be conducted will be made in accordance with the random 
     selection procedures applicable under section 324.
       ``(3) The recount for the election meets the requirements 
     of section 323(f) (relating to public observation).
       ``(4) The State meets the requirements of section 325 
     (relating to the publication of results and the delay in the 
     certification of results) with respect to the recount.
       ``(b) Clarification of Effect on Other Requirements.--
     Nothing in this section may be construed to waive the 
     application of any other provision of this Act to any 
     election (including the requirement set forth in section 
     301(a)(2) that the voter verified paper ballots serve as the 
     vote of record and shall be counted by hand in all audits and 
     recounts, including audits and recounts described in this 
     subtitle).

     ``SEC. 328. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       ``This subtitle shall apply with respect to elections for 
     Federal office beginning with the regularly scheduled general 
     elections held in November 2008.''.
       (b) Availability of Enforcement Under Help America Vote Act 
     of 2002.--Section 401 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 15511), as 
     amended by section 3, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting the following: ``, or the requirements of 
     subtitle C of title III.'';
       (2) in subsection (b)(1), by striking ``303'' and inserting 
     ``303, or subtitle C of title III,''; and
       (3) in subsection (c)--
       (A) by striking ``subtitle A'' and inserting ``subtitles A 
     or C'', and
       (B) by striking the period at the end and inserting the 
     following: ``, or the requirements of subtitle C of title 
     III.''.

[[Page 29121]]

       (c) Guidance on Best Practices for Alternative Audit 
     Mechanisms.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than May 1, 2008, the Director 
     of the National Institute for Standards and Technology shall 
     establish guidance for States that wish to establish 
     alternative audit mechanisms under section 322(b) of the Help 
     America Vote Act of 2002 (as added by subsection (a)). Such 
     guidance shall be based upon scientifically and statistically 
     reasonable assumptions for the purpose of creating an 
     alternative audit mechanism that will be at least as 
     effective in ensuring the accuracy of election results and as 
     transparent as the procedure under subtitle C of title III of 
     such Act (as so added).
       (2) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out paragraph (1) $100,000, to 
     remain available until expended.
       (d) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents of such Act 
     is amended by adding at the end of the items relating to 
     title III the following:

                 ``Subtitle C--Mandatory Manual Audits

``Sec. 321. Requiring audits of results of elections.
``Sec. 322. Number of ballots counted under audit.
``Sec. 323. Process for administering audits.
``Sec. 324. Selection of precincts.
``Sec. 325. Publication of results.
``Sec. 326. Payments to States.
``Sec. 327. Exception for elections subject to recount under State law 
              prior to certification.
``Sec. 328. Effective date.''.

     SEC. 5. REPEAL OF EXEMPTION OF ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION 
                   FROM CERTAIN GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING 
                   REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) In General.--Section 205 of the Help America Vote Act 
     of 2002 (42 U.S.C. 15325) is amended by striking subsection 
     (e).
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply with respect to contracts entered into by the 
     Election Assistance Commission on or after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 6. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       Except as otherwise provided, this Act and the amendments 
     made by this Act shall apply with respect to the regularly 
     scheduled general election for Federal office in November 
     2008 and each succeeding election for Federal office.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE:
  S. 2297. A bill to require the FCC to conduct an economic study on 
the impact that low-power FM stations will have on full-power 
commercial FM stations; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that 
would require the Federal Communications Commission to fulfill its 
obligation of conducting an economic study on the impact low-power FM 
stations have on full-power commercial stations. The reason it is 
imperative the FCC perform this study is because we don't have a 
comprehensive understanding as to the effect that low-power FM stations 
have on their full-power counterparts.
  When Congress imposed the three-adjacent-channel restriction on low-
power licensees in 2001, we tasked the FCC with conducting two studies 
because we were concerned about the interference LPFM stations could 
cause with being too close in frequency to full-power commercial 
stations. The two studies were to determine the impact that the 
presence of a low-power channel would have with respect to interference 
with a nearby full-power station and the economic impact the presence 
of low power stations would bring to the commercial licensees. However, 
the FCC completed only one study--the interference analysis.
  My legislation calls for the FCC to complete an economic study on the 
impact LPFM stations have on full-power commercial radio stations 
within 18 months and report its findings to Congress.
  Volunteer, non-profit LPFM stations have found a niche but they also 
provide competition to full-power stations without having to incur the 
same costs as those commercial stations, particularly with the absence 
of licensing fees and employees' salaries. Most of us have raised 
serious concerns about the continued media consolidation that is 
occurring and negatively affecting localism and diversity.
  Part of the reason for this consolidation is because local, 
independently owned stations are seeing lower profit margins, which are 
making it more and more difficult to continue broadcasting. Due to 
shrinking profit, these stations either go out of business or are sold 
out to larger, nationwide companies. The buy-out of local stations by 
out-of-town firms does more to harm diverse and locally oriented 
broadcasting than anything else. So we must actively investigate this 
trend and determine what is contributing to the diminishing returns of 
independently owned stations.
  Some may question why perform this study since Mitre Corporation, the 
company that performed the initial interference study, recommended the 
FCC should not undertake the additional expense of a formal listener 
test program or a Phase II economic analysis. The reason is because the 
Phase II economic analysis was only on the potential radio interference 
impact of LPFM on incumbent full-power stations and did not take into 
account other economic impacts that were outside the scope of that 
effort. The Government must ensure that by opening up low-power FM 
broadcast opportunities we are not causing any undue harm to the full-
power radio stations, which we have obligations to as the issuer of 
their licenses.
  I hope my colleagues join me in supporting the critical legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE:
  S. 2298. A bill to prohibit an applicant from obtaining a low-power 
FM license if an applicant has engaged in any manner in the unlicensed 
operation of any station in violation of section 301 of the 
Communications Act of 1934; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that 
would preserve the Federal Communications Commission's right to deny a 
low-power FM license if the applicant has run afoul of basic, 
longstanding Federal restrictions on the transmission of radio waves, 
such as if the applicant has been previously fined for running an 
unlicensed ``pirate'' radio station.
  Before the issuance of low-power licenses, numerous individuals and 
entities operated low-power FM stations without a broadcast license. 
These ``pirate'' stations many times broadcasted in open defiance of 
the Commission's initial ban on LPFM broadcasts. From January 1998 to 
February 2000, the Commission shut down, on average, more than a dozen 
unlicensed radio stations each month. On several separate occasions, 
these unlicensed radio stations actually disrupted air traffic control 
communications.
  Congress, through the enactment of the Radio Broadcast Preservation 
Act of 2000, directed the FCC to modify its low-power FM rules to 
``prohibit any applicant from obtaining a low-power FM license if the 
applicant has engaged in any manner in the unlicensed operation of any 
station in violation of section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934'' 
so the Commission could curtail these pirate stations and disruption 
occurrence.
  My concern is by completely repealing section 632, which pending 
legislation proposes, it hinders the ability of the FCC to prohibit 
applicants from receiving low-power FM licenses. The Commission is 
responsible for making sure broadcasters follow the basic rules and 
regulations that are inherently essential to having a broadcast service 
that serves public interest since broadcasters are utilizing public 
spectrum. This legislation retains a targeted response to the problem 
of pirate broadcasting.
  The commission is to grant a broadcast license only if the ``public 
interest, convenience, and necessity would be served.'' Completely 
repealing Section 632 could hinder the FCC from upholding this 
responsibility with respect to low-power FM broadcasters. For this 
reason, we must act to preserve the FCC's authority to be able to 
prohibit low-power FM licenses to applicants that have violated basic 
tenets of broadcast policy--it is only logical that we do this to 
ensure businesses that use the public spectrum, in any capacity, 
adhered to laws government has put in place to serve and protect the 
public interest.
  I hope my colleagues join me in supporting the critical legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE:

[[Page 29122]]

  S. 2299. A bill to require the Secretary of Agriculture to establish 
an advisory committee to develop recommendations regarding the national 
aquatic animal health plan developed by the National Aquatic Animal 
Health Task Force, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that 
I believe is vital to the prosperity and competitiveness of an element 
of agriculture that is often overlooked: American aquaculture. Some 
experts estimate that to meet the demand for healthy, fresh 
aquacultural products, global production will have to double in the 
next 40 years. Yet in spite of this skyrocketing demand, America is at 
risk of being left behind by other nations who have thus far exhibited 
greater foresight than we have; putting into place a comprehensive 
infrastructure for sustainable seafood. While it is true that American 
aquaculture sales exceeded an impressive one billion dollars in 2005, 
this was a pittance when compared to the $70 billion market worldwide. 
In fact, in 2006 the U.S. had a trade deficit in seafood production of 
$9.1 billion. With demand rising so dramatically globally and, in 
particular, here at home, we cannot afford to fall behind any further.
  That is why I have taken this opportunity to introduce the National 
Aquatic Animal Health Act. This legislation will begin the process of 
creating a national infrastructure that will attract investment, 
protect the valuable stocks of our aquaculture farmers from disease, 
and create a unique, flexible partnership between the Federal 
Government, State agencies, and industry groups. Dedicated to 
proactively monitoring seafood stocks for disease, this program will 
employ the resources and vast field experience of the Animal and Plant 
Health Inspection Service, or APHIS, coupled with experts on disease at 
various State agriculture and marine agencies and industry 
professionals to certify the health of all participating aquaculture 
species.
  Modeled after similar animal monitoring programs already in place at 
APHIS, this program will provide a nationwide set of standards, the 
kind of uniformity that is currently absent in the aquaculture 
community. Instead, a myriad of jurisdictional conflicts and competing 
regulations among various states creates uncertainty and erects 
impediments to interstate commerce. But this bill is not a set of 
onerous regulations imposed upon the private sector by a federal 
agency; under the legislation, states are required to opt-in to the 
program. They must choose to utilize the assets available in this 
legislation to assist in preserving that state's particular aquaculture 
products.
  My home State of Maine has tremendously benefited from aquaculture. 
There are nearly three dozen hatcheries in the State, handling both 
finfish and shellfish. Our 3,500 miles of coastline has served as an 
ideal incubator for the expansion of the aquaculture industry. The 
total economic activity generated from the industry State-wide was over 
$130 million last year, providing jobs for over 1,000 hard-working 
Mainers. This sort of productivity was not always the case. In 2001, 
nearly all the salmon stocks in Maine had to be eliminated due to an 
outbreak of a crippling, infectious disease known as ISA. It took the 
industry years to recover. Now, the Great Lakes face the threat of the 
virulent pathogen known as VHS. It is my hope that with swift passage 
of this legislation, we will no longer have to fear this kind of 
widespread disease and the subsequent containment costs that could 
cause inestimable damage to an industry that is struggling to catch up 
to its global competitors. I urge my colleagues to support this 
legislation as we move forward on debating Federal farm policy.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KERRY (for himself and Ms. Snowe):
  S. 2300. A bill to improve the Small Business Act, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship.
  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I am pleased today to be introducing 
legislation, the Small Business Contracting Revitalization Act of 2007, 
designed to protect the interests of small businesses in the Federal 
marketplace.
  As the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Small Business and 
Entrepreneurship, I have focused a considerable amount of energy 
promoting the interests of small businesses in the Federal marketplace. 
The legislation that we are introducing today marks a critical step 
forward in this process.
  It is no secret that the Committee on Small Business and 
Entrepreneurship places a great deal of importance on moving 
legislation forward in a bipartisan manner, the members of my Committee 
understand we represent the interests of all of our Nation's small 
businesses, the most important and dynamic segment of our economy. And 
nowhere is the bipartisan consensus stronger than in the area of 
Federal procurement and ensuring that our Nation's small businesses 
receive their fair share of procurement opportunities. I am pleased to 
once again be introducing bipartisan legislation with the Committee's 
ranking member, Senator Olympia Snowe. Regardless of who has chaired 
the Committee during our tenure together, we have both worked hard to 
improve small business Federal procurement opportunities.
  The legislation we are introducing today has one ultimate purpose, to 
expand opportunities for small businesses to contract with the Federal 
government. And the reality is that small businesses need all the help 
they can get with respect to accessing the Federal marketplace. In 
fiscal year 2006 according to Eagle Eye Publishing, the Federal 
Government missed its 23 percent contracting goal by 3 percent. That 3 
percent represents more than $12 billion in lost contracting dollars 
for small businesses. Service-disabled veterans fared the worst when it 
came to Federal contracting with only 0.87 percent of Federal dollars 
going to their firms. Women-owned firms only took in 2.57 percent of 
Federal dollars while they make up more than 30 percent of all 
privately held firms. Minority-owned firms continue to face barriers to 
Federal contracting. The SDB and 8(a) program only accounted for 6.75 
percent of Federal contracting. These numbers tell the stark story of 
why this legislation is so important. If small business is the engine 
that drives our economy when it comes to Federal procurement that 
engine needs an overhaul. Our bill looks to make that overhaul as we 
look at making improvements in five key areas.
  The first area we attempt to make improvements in is the area of 
contract bundling. Although contracting bundling may have started out 
as a good idea it has now become the prime example of the old saying 
that too much of a good thing can be very, very bad. The proliferation 
of bundled contracts coupled with a decimation of contracting 
professionals within the Government threatens to kill small businesses' 
ability to compete for Federal contracts. In our hearing on July 18, 
2007, on contracting, we heard testimony about the damage to 
opportunities for small businesses because of the lack of oversight and 
contract bundling.
  Our bill looks to address those issues by ensuring: accountability of 
senior agency management for all incidents of bundling; timely and 
accurate reporting of contract bundling information by all Federal 
agencies; and improved oversight of bundling regulation compliance by 
the Small Business Administration.
  The bill also ensures that contract consolidation decisions made by a 
department or agency, other than the Defense Department and its 
agencies, provide small businesses with appropriate opportunities to 
participate as prime contractors and subcontractors.
  The second area that this bill attempts to address is subcontracting. 
The Committee heard in the July 18 hearing and in a May 22, 2007, 
hearing on minority business about the challenges that many small 
business subcontractors face when dealing with prime contractors. 
Witnesses related that the way subcontracting compliance is calculated 
creates opportunity for abuse. They also related that many

[[Page 29123]]

small businesses will spend time, money and effort preparing bid 
proposals to be a part of a bid team and that once the contract is won 
they never hear from the prime contractor again. Many also complain 
about lack of timely payments after they have completed work.
  This bill attempts to deal with some of these issues by including 
provisions designed to prevent misrepresentations in subcontracting by 
prime contractors. To accomplish this, the bill: provides guidelines 
and procedures for reviewing and evaluating subcontractor participation 
in prime contracts; authorizes agency pilot programs that will grant 
contractual incentives to prime contractors who exceed their small 
business goals; and requires prime contractors who fail to comply with 
subcontracting plans to fund mentor-protege assistance programs for 
small businesses.
  The third area that our legislation attempts to address is the 
updating of the socioeconomic programs administered by the SBA. In our 
first hearing of the year on January 31, 2007, we heard veterans with 
service connected disabilities speak about the difficulty that they are 
having accessing the Federal marketplace. It is clear that the 
Government is not doing enough. In fiscal year 2006, service-disabled 
veteran-owned businesses only got 0.87 percent of all Federal 
procurement--well short of the 3 percent statutory goal.
  Our bill will assist service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses 
in obtaining Government contract and subcontract opportunities by 
expanding the authority for sole-source awards to SDV firms. In 
addition, the bill will allow: the surviving spouse of a service-
disabled veteran to retain the business's SDV designation for up to 10 
years following the veteran's death; the SBA to accept SDV firm 
certifications from the Department of Veterans Affairs; and the 
establishment of an SDV mentor-protege program by the SBA. Our veterans 
are returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, and we owe it to them to give 
them every opportunity at fulfilling the dream of entrepreneurship.
  We heard from women business owners in our September 20, 2007, 
hearing, on women's entrepreneurship that the time has come to 
implement the women's procurement program. The administration has 
continually postponed implementing a women's procurement program that 
became law 7 years ago. This bill tells SBA to get it done within 90 
days.
  Another program sorely needing our attention is the 8(a) program. 
This program was created to assist socially and economically 
disadvantaged small businesses, but, as we heard during the May 22, 
2007, hearing, the financial threshold for inclusion in the program is 
out-dated and too restrictive. The net-worth thresholds have not been 
updated since 1989. This bill allows for an inflationary adjustment to 
be made to the threshold and it excludes qualified retirement accounts 
from consideration while calculating the threshold so that businesses 
that belong in this program won't be shut out.
  This bill also makes a number of changes to the HUBZone program. The 
bill would expand HUBZones to areas adjacent to military installations 
affected by BRAC. It will also make other changes that will expand the 
HUBZone program to subcontracting as well as creating a mentor protege 
program. I understand the stated goal of this program is to develop 
areas of poverty through government contracting. And while I agree that 
this is a laudable goal I also remember the controversy that surrounded 
the creation of this program in 1996. I am keenly aware that the 
HUBZone program was created to supplant race-conscious programs like 
8(a) and the small disadvantaged business program. I fought hard to 
preserve those programs then and I will continue to preserve and 
strengthen those programs in the future. In the interests of moving 
this bill forward and improving all of the programs I have agreed to 
include these priorities for Ranking Member Snowe. I look forward to 
working with her to move the priorities that are important to all of 
the socio-economic groups in this legislation.
  The fourth area that we intend to update is the acquisition process. 
This bill aims to increase the number of small business contracting 
opportunities by including additional provisions to reduce bundled 
contracts and by reserving more contracts for small business concerns. 
The bill accomplishes this by: authorizing small business set-asides in 
multiple-award, multi-agency contracting vehicles; and requiring that 
agencies include advance plans on small business spending in their 
budgets and submit a report describing the impact of each bundled 
contract awarded by an agency. The bill also directs the SBA to 
annually report to Congress on small business participation in overseas 
Government contracts.
  The last area that we tackle in this legislation is small business 
size and status integrity. The Committee has heard from a number of 
small businesses about large businesses parading as small businesses. 
During our July hearing we looked at the list of the top 25 small 
businesses doing Federal contracting. On that list at least six clearly 
recognizable multi-billion dollar corporations were among the top 25 
small businesses listed including SAIC at number two. I have been 
adamant that small business contracts must go to small businesses. 
Small businesses are losing billions of dollars in opportunities 
because of these size standard loopholes.
  This bill attempts to address these issues by adding a new section, 
Sec. 38, to the Small Business Act that is designed to strengthen the 
Government's ability to enforce the size and status standards for small 
business certification. To achieve this, the new section establishes 
procedures for protests, through the SBA, of small business set-aside 
awards made to large businesses; requires the development of training 
programs for small business size standards; requires a government-wide 
policy on prosecutions of size and status fraud; and requires a 
detailed review of the size standards for small businesses by the SBA 
within 1 year.
  In closing, I want to reiterate that this has been a truly bi-
partisan effort and we look forward to working with the rest of the 
Senate as we move this legislation forward. It is well past time to 
provide greater opportunities for the thousands of small business 
owners who wish to do business with the Federal government. I believe 
that this legislation is a good step toward opening those doors of 
opportunity.
  I hope all of my colleagues will join us in supporting this bill. 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. 2300

       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 Contracting Revitalization 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--CONTRACT BUNDLING

Sec. 101. Leadership and oversight.
Sec. 102. Removal of impediments to contract bundling database 
              implementation.
Sec. 103. Contract consolidation.
Sec. 104. Small business teams.

                   TITLE II--SUBCONTRACTING INTEGRITY

Sec. 201. GAO recommendations on subcontracting misrepresentations.
Sec. 202. Small business subcontracting improvements.
Sec. 203. Evaluating subcontracting participation.
Sec. 204. Pilot program.

       TITLE III--SMALL BUSINESS PROCUREMENT PROGRAMS IMPROVEMENT

   Subtitle A--Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Program

Sec. 321. Certification.
Sec. 322. Transition period for surviving spouses or permanent care 
              givers.
Sec. 323. Mentor-protege program.
Sec. 324. Improving opportunities for service disabled veterans.

             Subtitle B--Women-Owned Small Business Program

Sec. 341. Implementation deadline.
Sec. 342. Certification.

[[Page 29124]]

            Subtitle C--Small Disadvantaged Business Program

Sec. 361. Certification.
Sec. 362. Net worth threshold.
Sec. 363. Extension of socially and economically disadvantaged business 
              program.

     Subtitle D--Historically Underutilized Business Zones Programs

Sec. 381. HUBZone small business concerns.
Sec. 382. Military base closings.

                    Subtitle E--BusinessLINC Program

Sec. 391. BusinessLINC Program.

                     TITLE IV--ACQUISITION PROCESS

Sec. 401. Procurement improvements.
Sec. 402. Reservation of prime contract awards for small businesses.
Sec. 403. GAO study of reporting systems.
Sec. 404. Micropurchase guidelines.
Sec. 405. Reporting on overseas contracts.
Sec. 406. Agency accountability.

           TITLE V--SMALL BUSINESS SIZE AND STATUS INTEGRITY

Sec. 501. Policy and presumptions.
Sec. 502. Annual certification.
Sec. 503. Meaningful protests of small business size and status.
Sec. 504. Training for contracting and enforcement personnel.
Sec. 505. Updated size standards.
Sec. 506. Small business size and status for purpose of multiple award 
              contracts.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act--
       (1) the terms ``Administration'' and ``Administrator'' mean 
     the Small Business Administration and the Administrator 
     thereof, respectively;
       (2) the terms ``service-disabled veteran'', ``small 
     business concern'', and ``small business concern owned and 
     controlled by service-disabled veterans'' have the same 
     meanings as in section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 
     632); and
       (3) the terms ``small business concern owned and controlled 
     by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals'' and 
     ``small business concern owned and controlled by women'' have 
     the same meanings as in section 8(d) of the Small Business 
     Act (15 U.S.C. 637(d)).

                       TITLE I--CONTRACT BUNDLING

     SEC. 101. LEADERSHIP AND OVERSIGHT.

       (a) In General.--Section 15 of the Small Business Act (15 
     U.S.C. 644) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(q) Bundling Accountability Measures.--
       ``(1) Governmentwide accountability on bundling.--
       ``(A) Reinstatement of reporting requirements.--In addition 
     to submitting such annual reports on all incidents of 
     bundling to the Administrator as may be required under 
     Federal law, the head of each Federal agency shall submit an 
     annual report on all incidents of bundling to the 
     Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy.
       ``(B) Report to congress.--The Administrator shall promptly 
     review and annually report to Congress information on any 
     discrepancies between the reports on bundled contracts from 
     Federal agencies to the Administration, the Office of Federal 
     Procurement Policy, and the Federal procurement data system 
     described in subsection (c)(5).
       ``(2) Teaming requirements.--Each Federal agency shall 
     include in each solicitation for any contract award above the 
     substantial bundling threshold of such agency a provision 
     soliciting small business teams and joint ventures.
       ``(3) Implementation of comptroller general's 
     recommendations.--Not later than 270 days after the date of 
     enactment of this subsection, the Administrator, with the 
     concurrence of the Administrator for Federal Procurement 
     Policy, shall ensure that, in response to the recommendations 
     of the Comptroller General of the United States contained in 
     Report No. GAO-04-454, titled `Contract Management: Impact of 
     Strategy to Mitigate Effects of Contract Bundling Is 
     Uncertain'--
       ``(A) modifications are made to the Federal procurement 
     data system described in subsection (c)(5) to capture 
     information concerning the impact of bundling on small 
     business concerns;
       ``(B) the Administrator receives from each Federal agency 
     an annual report containing information concerning--
       ``(i) the number and dollar value of bundled contract 
     actions and contracts;
       ``(ii) benefit analyses (including the total dollars saved) 
     to justify why contracts are bundled;
       ``(iii) the number of small business concerns losing 
     Federal contracts because of bundling;
       ``(iv) how contractors awarded bundled contracts complied 
     with the agencies subcontracting plans; and
       ``(v) how mitigating actions, such as teaming arrangements, 
     provided increased contracting opportunities to small 
     business concerns.
       ``(4) Governmentwide review of bundling interpretations.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Administrator, with the concurrence 
     of the Chief Counsel for Advocacy and the Inspector General, 
     shall conduct a governmentwide review of the Federal agencies 
     legal interpretations of antibundling statutory and 
     regulatory requirements.
       ``(B) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this subsection, the Administrator shall submit 
     to Congress a report containing the findings of the review 
     conducted under subparagraph (A).
       ``(5) Agency policies on reduction of contract bundling.--
     Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this 
     subsection, the head of each Federal agency shall, with 
     concurrence of the Administrator, issue a policy on the 
     reduction of contract bundling.
       ``(6) Best practices on contract bundling reduction and 
     mitigation.--Not later than 60 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this subsection, the Administrator shall publish 
     a guide on best practices to reduce contract bundling, as 
     directed by the Strategy and Report on Contract Bundling 
     issued by the Office of Management and Budget on October 29, 
     2002.
       ``(7) Contract bundling mitigation through 
     subcontracting.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Administrator shall ensure that each 
     State is assigned a commercial market representative to 
     provide services for that State.
       ``(B) Assignment.--A commercial market representative may 
     not be assigned by the Administrator to provide services for 
     more than 2 States.
       ``(8) Contract bundling oversight.--
       ``(A) Policy.--It is the policy of Congress that the 
     Administrator shall take appropriate actions to remedy 
     contract bundling oversight problems identified by the 
     Inspector General of the Administration in Report No. 5-14, 
     titled `Audit of the Contract Bundling Program'.
       ``(B) Corrective action.--
       ``(i) Assignment of procurement center representatives.--

       ``(I) In general.--The Administrator shall assign not fewer 
     than 1 procurement center representative to each major 
     procurement center, as designated by the Administrator under 
     section 8(l)(6).
       ``(II) Reporting.--The Administrator shall annually submit 
     to Congress a report--

       ``(aa) containing a list of designations of major 
     procurement centers in effect during the relevant fiscal 
     year;
       ``(bb) detailing the criteria for designations; and
       ``(cc) including a trend analysis concerning the impact of 
     reviews and placements of procurement center representatives 
     and breakout procurement center representatives.
       ``(ii) Timely review of bundled contracts.--Not later than 
     30 days after receiving a submission from a Federal agency, 
     the Administrator shall review any potential bundled contract 
     submitted to the Administrator for review by any Federal 
     agency.''.
       (b) Technical Correction.--Section 15(g) of the Small 
     Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644(g)) is amended by striking 
     ``Administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy'' 
     each place such term appears and inserting ``Administrator 
     for Federal Procurement Policy''.
       (c) Procurement Center Representatives.--Section 15(l) of 
     the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644(l)) is amended--
       (1) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
       ``(1)(A) A procurement center representative shall carry 
     out the activities described in paragraph (2), and shall be 
     an advocate for the maximum practicable utilization of small 
     business concerns, whenever appropriate.
       ``(B) A procurement center representative is authorized to 
     assist contracting officers in the performance of market 
     research in order to locate small business concerns, small 
     business concerns owned and controlled by socially and 
     economically disadvantaged individuals, small business 
     concerns owned and controlled by women, small business 
     concerns owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans, 
     small business concerns owned and controlled by veterans, and 
     HUBZone small business concerns capable of satisfying agency 
     needs.
       ``(C) Any procurement center representative assigned under 
     this paragraph shall be in addition to the representative 
     referred to in subsection (k).'';
       (2) in paragraph (2)--
       (A) by striking ``breakout'' each place that term appears;
       (B) in subparagraph (F), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (C) in subparagraph (G), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting a semicolon; and
       (D) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(H)(i) identify and review solicitations that involve 
     contract consolidations for potential bundling of contract 
     requirements; and
       ``(ii) recommend small business concern participation as 
     contractors, including small business concern teams, whenever 
     appropriate, prior to the issuance of a solicitation 
     described in clause (i);
       ``(I) manage the activities of the breakout procurement 
     center representative, commercial marketing representative, 
     and technical assistant; and
       ``(J) submit an annual report to the Administrator 
     containing--

[[Page 29125]]

       ``(i) the number of proposed solicitations reviewed;
       ``(ii) the contract recommendations made on behalf of small 
     business concerns;
       ``(iii) the number and total amount of contracts broken out 
     from bundled or consolidated contracts for full and open 
     competition or small business concern set-aside; and
       ``(iv) the number and total amount of contract dollars 
     awarded to small business concerns as a result of actions 
     taken by the procurement center office.'';
       (3) by redesignating paragraphs (4) through (7) as 
     paragraphs (5) through (8), respectively;
       (4) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
       ``(3)(A) The Administrator may assign a breakout 
     procurement center representative, which shall be in addition 
     to any representative assigned under paragraph (1).
       ``(B) A breakout procurement center representative--
       ``(i) shall be an advocate for the breakout of items for 
     procurement through full and open competition or small 
     business concern set-aside, whenever appropriate, from new, 
     existing, bundled, or consolidated contracts; and
       ``(ii) is authorized--
       ``(I) to recommend small business concern participation in 
     existing contracts that were previously not reviewed for 
     small business concern participation;
       ``(II) to perform the duties described in paragraph (2), as 
     necessary to perform the due diligence required for a 
     breakout recommendation; and
       ``(III) to appeal the failure to act favorably on any 
     recommendation made under subclause (I).
       ``(C) Any appeal under subparagraph (B)(ii)(III) shall be 
     filed and processed in the same manner and subject to the 
     same conditions and limitations as an appeal filed by the 
     Administrator under subsection (a).
       ``(4)(A) The Administrator may assign a commercial 
     marketing representative to identify and market small 
     business concerns to large prime contractors and assist small 
     business concerns in identifying and obtaining subcontracts.
       ``(B) A commercial marketing representative assigned under 
     this paragraph shall--
       ``(i) conduct compliance reviews of prime contractors;
       ``(ii) counsel small business concerns on how to obtain 
     subcontracts;
       ``(iii) conduct matchmaking activities to facilitate 
     subcontracting to small business concerns;
       ``(iv) work in coordination with local small business 
     development centers, technical assistance centers, and other 
     regional economic development entities to identify small 
     business concerns capable of competing for Federal contracts; 
     and
       ``(v) provide orientation and training on the 
     subcontracting assistance program under section 8(d)(4)(E) 
     for both large and small business concerns.
       ``(C) Any commercial marketing representative assigned 
     under this paragraph shall be in addition to any procurement 
     center representative assigned under paragraph (1) or (3).'';
       (5) in paragraph (5), as so designated by this section--
       (A) in the second sentence, by inserting ``the procurement 
     center representative and'' before ``the breakout 
     procurement''; and
       (B) in the third sentence, by striking ``(6)'';
       (6) in paragraph (6), as so designated by this section--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``The breakout 
     procurement center representative'' and inserting the 
     following: ``The procurement center representative, breakout 
     procurement center representative, commercial marketing 
     representative,'';
       (B) by striking subparagraph (B); and
       (C) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (B);
       (7) in paragraph (7), as so designated by this section, by 
     striking ``other than commercial items'' and all that follows 
     through the end of the paragraph and inserting the following: 
     ``commercial items for authorized resale, or other than 
     commercial items, and which has the potential to incur 
     significant savings or create significant procurement 
     opportunities for small business concerns as the result of 
     the placement of a breakout procurement center 
     representative.''; and
       (8) in paragraph (8), as so designated by this section--
       (A) by striking ``breakout'' each place the term appears; 
     and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) The procurement center representative shall conduct 
     training sessions to inform procurement staff at Federal 
     agencies about the reporting requirements for bundled 
     contracts and potentially bundled contracts, and how to work 
     effectively with the procurement center representative 
     assigned to such agencies to locate capable small business 
     concerns to meet the needs of the agencies.''.

     SEC. 102. REMOVAL OF IMPEDIMENTS TO CONTRACT BUNDLING 
                   DATABASE IMPLEMENTATION.

       Section 15(p)(5)(B) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 
     644(p)(5)(B) is amended by striking ``procurement 
     information'' and all that follows through the end of the 
     subparagraph and inserting the following: ``any relevant 
     procurement information as may be required to implement this 
     section, and shall perform, at the request of the 
     Administrator, any other action necessary to enable 
     completion of the contract bundling database authorized by 
     this section by not later than 270 days after the date of 
     enactment of the Small Business Contracting Revitalization 
     Act of 2007.''.

     SEC. 103. CONTRACT CONSOLIDATION.

       The Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 631 et seq.) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating section 37 as section 39; and
       (2) by inserting after section 36 the following:

     ``SEC. 37. CONTRACT CONSOLIDATION.

       ``(a) Policy.--Except for the Department of Defense and any 
     agency of that department, the head of each Federal 
     department or agency shall ensure that the decisions made by 
     that department or agency regarding consolidation of contract 
     requirements of that department or agency are made with a 
     view to providing small business concerns with appropriate 
     opportunities to participate in the procurements of that 
     department or agency as prime contractors and appropriate 
     opportunities to participate in such procurements as 
     subcontractors.
       ``(b) Limitation on Use of Acquisition Strategies Involving 
     Consolidation.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except for the Department of Defense and 
     any agency of that department, the head of a Federal 
     department or agency may not execute an acquisition strategy 
     that includes a consolidation of contract requirements of 
     that department or agency with a total value in excess of 
     $2,000,000, unless the senior procurement executive concerned 
     first--
       ``(A) conducts market research;
       ``(B) identifies any alternative contracting approaches 
     that would involve a lesser degree of consolidation of 
     contract requirements; and
       ``(C) determines that the consolidation is necessary and 
     justified.
       ``(2) Determination that consolidation is necessary and 
     justified.--A senior procurement executive may determine that 
     an acquisition strategy involving a consolidation of contract 
     requirements is necessary and justified for the purposes of 
     paragraph (1) if the benefits of the acquisition strategy 
     substantially exceed the benefits of each of the possible 
     alternative contracting approaches identified under 
     subparagraph (B) of that paragraph. However, savings in 
     administrative or personnel costs alone do not constitute, 
     for such purposes, a sufficient justification for a 
     consolidation of contract requirements in a procurement 
     unless the total amount of the cost savings is expected to be 
     substantial in relation to the total cost of the procurement.
       ``(3) Benefits to be considered.--Benefits considered for 
     the purposes of paragraphs (1) and (2) may include cost and, 
     regardless of whether quantifiable in dollar amounts--
       ``(A) quality;
       ``(B) acquisition cycle;
       ``(C) terms and conditions; and
       ``(D) any other benefit.
       ``(c) Definitions.--In this section--
       ``(1) the terms `consolidation of contract requirements' 
     and `consolidation', with respect to contract requirements of 
     a Federal department or agency, mean a use of a solicitation 
     to obtain offers for a single contract or a multiple award 
     contract to satisfy 2 or more requirements of that department 
     or agency for goods or services that have previously been 
     provided to, or performed for, that department or agency 
     under 2 or more separate contracts smaller in cost than the 
     total cost of the contract for which the offers are 
     solicited;
       ``(2) the term `multiple award contract' means--
       ``(A) a multiple award task order contract or delivery 
     order contract that is entered into under the authority of 
     sections 303H through 303K of the Federal Property and 
     Administrative Services Act of 1949 (41 U.S.C. 253h through 
     253k); and
       ``(B) any other indeterminate delivery, indeterminate 
     quantity contract that is entered into by the head of a 
     Federal department or agency with 2 or more sources pursuant 
     to the same solicitation; and
       ``(3) the term `senior procurement executive concerned' 
     means, with respect to a Federal department or agency, the 
     official designated under section 16(c) of the Office of 
     Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 414(c)) as the 
     senior procurement executive for that department or 
     agency.''.

     SEC. 104. SMALL BUSINESS TEAMS.

       If more than 1 business concern that is a small business 
     concern based on the size standards established under section 
     3(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632(a)) is 
     participating in a contract that is subject to section 125.6 
     of title 13, Code of Federal Regulations (or any successor 
     thereto), the portion of that contract performed by each such 
     small business concern may be aggregated in determining 
     whether the performance of that contract is in compliance 
     with that section if--
       (1) the head of the Federal department or agency concerned 
     makes a determination in the solicitation that such 
     aggregation will improve contracting opportunities for such 
     small business concerns; and

[[Page 29126]]

       (2) the Administrator does not object to such aggregation.

                   TITLE II--SUBCONTRACTING INTEGRITY

     SEC. 201. GAO RECOMMENDATIONS ON SUBCONTRACTING 
                   MISREPRESENTATIONS.

       Section 8 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(o) Prevention of Misrepresentations in Subcontracting; 
     Implementation of Comptroller General's Recommendations.--
       ``(1) Statement of policy.--It is the policy of Congress 
     that the recommendations of the Comptroller General of the 
     United States in Report No. 05-459, concerning oversight 
     improvements necessary to ensure maximum practicable 
     participation by small business concerns in subcontracting, 
     shall be implemented governmentwide, to the maximum extent 
     possible.
       ``(2) Contractor compliance.--Compliance of Federal prime 
     contractors with small business subcontracting plans shall be 
     evaluated as a percentage of obligated prime contract 
     dollars, as well as a percentage of subcontracts awarded.
       ``(3) Issuance of agency policies.--Not later than 180 days 
     after the date of enactment of this subsection, the head of 
     each Federal agency shall issue a policy on small business 
     subcontracting compliance, including assignment of compliance 
     responsibilities between contracting, small business, and 
     program offices and periodic oversight and review 
     activities.''.

     SEC. 202. SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING IMPROVEMENTS.

       (a) Certifications Required.--Section 8(d)(6) of the Small 
     Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(d)(6)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (E), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in subparagraph (F), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end, the following:
       ``(G) certification that the offeror or bidder will acquire 
     articles, equipment, supplies, services, or materials, or 
     obtain the performance of construction work from small 
     business concerns in the amount and quality used in preparing 
     and submitting to the contracting agency the bid or proposal, 
     unless such small business concerns are no longer in business 
     or can no longer meet the quality, quantity, or delivery 
     date.''.
       (b) Penalties for False Certifications.--Section 16(f) of 
     the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 645(f)) is amended by 
     striking ``of this Act'' and inserting ``or the reporting 
     requirements of section 8(d)(11)''.

     SEC. 203. EVALUATING SUBCONTRACTING PARTICIPATION.

       (a) Significant Factors.--Section 8(d)(4)(G) of the Small 
     Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(d)(4)(G)) is amended by striking 
     ``a bundled'' and inserting ``any''.
       (b) Evaluation Reports.--Section 8(d)(10) of the Small 
     Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(d)(10)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``is authorized to'' and inserting 
     ``shall'';
       (2) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (3) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (4) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) report the results of each evaluation under 
     subparagraph (C) to the appropriate contracting officers.''.
       (c) Centralized Database; Payments Pending Reports.--
     Section 8(d) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(d)) is 
     amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraph (11) as paragraph (14); and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (10) the following:
       ``(11) Certification.--A report submitted by the prime 
     contractor under paragraph (6)(E) to determine the attainment 
     of a subcontract utilization goal under any subcontracting 
     plan entered into with a Federal agency under this subsection 
     shall contain the name and signature of the president or 
     chief executive officer of the contractor, certifying that 
     the subcontracting data provided in the report are accurate 
     and complete.
       ``(12) Centralized database.--The results of an evaluation 
     under paragraph (10)(C) shall be included in a national 
     centralized governmentwide database.
       ``(13) Payments pending reports.--Each Federal agency 
     having contracting authority shall ensure that the terms of 
     each contract for goods and services includes a provision 
     allowing the contracting officer of an agency to withhold an 
     appropriate amount of payment with respect to a contract 
     (depending on the size of the contract) until the date of 
     receipt of complete, accurate, and timely subcontracting 
     reports in accordance with paragraph (11).''.

     SEC. 204. PILOT PROGRAM.

       Section 8 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637), as 
     amended by this Act, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(p) Subcontracting Incentives and Remedial Assistance.--
       ``(1) Pilot program on incentives and mentor-protege 
     remedial assistance.--
       ``(A) In general.--Each Federal agency is authorized to 
     operate a pilot program to provide contractual incentives to 
     prime contractors that exceed their small business 
     subcontracting goals and to direct prime contractors that 
     fail to comply with their small business subcontracting plans 
     to fund mentor-protege assistance for small business concerns 
     (in this subsection referred to as the `program').
       ``(B) Termination.--The authority under this paragraph 
     shall terminate on September 30, 2010.
       ``(2) Assessment of mentor-protege assistance funding.--The 
     mentor-protege assistance funding assessed by an agency under 
     the terms of the program shall be determined in relation to 
     the dollar amount by which the prime contractor failed its 
     small business subcontracting goals.
       ``(3) Expenditure of mentor-protege assistance funding.--
     The prime contractor shall expend the mentor-protege 
     assistance funding assessed by the agency under the terms of 
     the program on mentor-protege assistance to small business 
     concerns, as provided by a mentor-protege agreement approved 
     by the relevant Federal agency.
       ``(4) Annual report required.--Each Federal agency 
     described in paragraph (1) shall submit an annual report to 
     the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship of the 
     Senate and the Committee on Small Business of the House of 
     Representatives containing a detailed description of the 
     pilot program, as carried out by that agency, including the 
     number of participating companies, any incentives provided to 
     prime contractors, as appropriate, and the amounts and types 
     of mentor-protege assistance provided to small business 
     concerns.''.

       TITLE III--SMALL BUSINESS PROCUREMENT PROGRAMS IMPROVEMENT

   Subtitle A--Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Program

     SEC. 321. CERTIFICATION.

       (a) Congressional Intent.--It is the intent of Congress 
     that the Administrator should accept certifications by the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs, under such criteria as the 
     Administrator may prescribe, by regulation or order, in 
     certifying small business concerns owned and controlled by 
     service-disabled veterans
       (b) Regulations.--Before implementing subsection (a), the 
     Administrator shall promulgate regulations or orders ensuring 
     appropriate certification safeguards to be implemented by the 
     Administration and the Department of Veterans Affairs.
       (c) Registration Portal.--The Administrator and the 
     Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall ensure that small 
     business concerns owned and controlled by service-disabled 
     veterans may apply to participate in all programs for such 
     small business concerns of the Administrator or the Secretary 
     through a single process.

     SEC. 322. TRANSITION PERIOD FOR SURVIVING SPOUSES OR 
                   PERMANENT CARE GIVERS.

       Section 3(q)(2) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 
     632(q)(2)) is amended by striking subparagraph (B) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(B) the management and daily business operations of which 
     are controlled--
       ``(i) by 1 or more service-disabled veterans or, in the 
     case of a veteran with permanent and severe disability, the 
     spouse or permanent care giver of such veteran; or
       ``(ii) for a period of not longer than 10 years after the 
     death of a service-disabled veteran, by a surviving spouse or 
     permanent caregiver thereof.''.

     SEC. 323. MENTOR-PROTEGE PROGRAM.

       The Administrator may establish a mentor-protege program 
     for small business concerns owned and controlled by service-
     disabled veterans, modeled on the mentor-protege program of 
     the Administration for small businesses participating in 
     programs under section 8(a) of the Small Business Act (15 
     U.S.C. 637(a)).

     SEC. 324. IMPROVING OPPORTUNITIES FOR SERVICE DISABLED 
                   VETERANS.

       Section 36(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 657f(a)) 
     is amended--
       (1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking 
     ``may'' and inserting ``shall''; and
       (2) in paragraph (1), by striking ``and the contracting 
     officer'' and all that follows through ``contracting 
     opportunity''.

             Subtitle B--Women-Owned Small Business Program

     SEC. 341. IMPLEMENTATION DEADLINE.

       Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Administrator shall implement the procurement 
     program for small business concerns owned and controlled by 
     women under section 8(m) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 
     637(m)).

     SEC. 342. CERTIFICATION.

       (a) Congressional Intent.--It is the intent of Congress 
     that the Administrator should accept certifications by other 
     Federal agencies and State and local governments and 
     certifications from responsible national certifying entities, 
     under such criteria as the Administrator may prescribe, by 
     regulation or order, in certifying small business concerns 
     owned and controlled by women for purposes of the program 
     under section 8(m) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 
     637(m)).
       (b) Regulations.--Prior to implementing subsection (a), the 
     Administrator shall promulgate regulations ensuring 
     appropriate certification safeguards to be implemented by the 
     Administration and the agencies and entities described in 
     subsection (a).

[[Page 29127]]



            Subtitle C--Small Disadvantaged Business Program

     SEC. 361. CERTIFICATION.

       (a) Congressional Intent.--It is the intent of Congress 
     that the Administrator should accept certifications by other 
     Federal agencies and State and local governments and 
     certifications from responsible national certifying entities, 
     under such criteria as the Administrator may prescribe, by 
     regulation or order, in certifying small business concerns 
     owned and controlled by socially and economically 
     disadvantaged individuals.
       (b) Regulations.--Prior to implementing subsection (a), the 
     Administrator shall promulgate regulations or orders ensuring 
     appropriate certification safeguards to be implemented by the 
     Administration and the agencies and entities described in 
     subsection (a).

     SEC. 362. NET WORTH THRESHOLD.

       Section 8(a)(6)(A) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 
     637(a)(6)(A)) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(i)'' after ``(6)(A)'';
       (2) by striking ``In determining the degree of diminished 
     credit'' and inserting the following:
       ``(ii)(I) In determining the degree of diminished credit'';
       (3) by striking ``In determining the economic 
     disadvantage'' and inserting the following:
       ``(iii) In determining the economic disadvantage''; and
       (4) by inserting after clause (ii)(I), as so designated by 
     this section, the following:
       ``(II) In determining the assets and net worth of a 
     socially disadvantaged individual under this subparagraph, 
     the Administrator shall not consider any assets of such 
     individual in a qualified retirement plan, as that term is 
     defined in section 4974(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986.
       ``(III) The Administrator shall establish procedures that--
       ``(aa) account for inflationary adjustments to, and include 
     a reasonable assumption of, the average income and net worth 
     of market dominant competitors; and
       ``(bb) require an annual inflationary adjustment to the 
     average income and net worth requirements under this 
     subsection.''.

     SEC. 363. 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, 
     2012''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall take effect 30 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act.

     Subtitle D--Historically Underutilized Business Zones Programs

     SEC. 381. HUBZONE SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS.

       Section 3(p)(3) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 
     632(p)(3) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``or'' at the end;
       (2) in subparagraph (E), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting ``; or''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(F) a small business concern owned and controlled by an 
     organization described in section 8(a)(15).''.

     SEC. 382. MILITARY BASE CLOSINGS.

       (a) HUBZone Status.--
       (1) In general.--Section 3(p)(4)(D) of the Small Business 
     Act (15 U.S.C. 632(p)(4)(D)) is amended--
       (A) by redesignating clauses (i), (ii), (iii), and (iv) as 
     subclauses (I), (II), (III), and (IV), respectively, and 
     adjusting the margin accordingly;
       (B) by striking ``means lands'' and inserting the following 
     ``means--
       ``(i) lands''; and
       (C) by striking the period at the end and inserting the 
     following: ``; and
       ``(ii) during the 5-year period beginning on the date that 
     a military installation is closed or leased space is vacated 
     under an authority described in clause (i), areas adjacent to 
     or within a reasonable commuting distance of lands described 
     in clause (i) (which shall not include any area that is more 
     than 15 miles from the exterior boundary of that military 
     installation) that are detrimentally, substantially, and 
     directly economically affected by the closing of that 
     military installation, as determined by the Secretary of 
     Housing and Urban Development.''.
       (2) Feasibility study.--Not later than 6 months after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Housing and 
     Urban Development shall conduct a study of the feasibility 
     of, and 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 regarding, 
     designating as a HUBZone (as that term is defined in section 
     3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632), as amended by 
     this Act) any area that does not qualify as a HUBZone solely 
     because that area is located within a county located within a 
     metropolitan statistical area (as defined by the Office of 
     Management and Budget). The report submitted under this 
     paragraph shall include any legislative recommendations 
     relating to the findings of the feasibility study conducted 
     under this paragraph.
       (b) Subcontracting Goal.--Section 15(g)(1) of the Small 
     Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644(g)(1)) is amended by inserting 
     ``and subcontract'' after ``not less than 3 percent of the 
     total value of all prime contract''.
       (c) Mentor-Protege Program.--The Administrator may 
     establish a mentor-protege program for HUBZone small business 
     concerns (as that term is defined in section 3 of the Small 
     Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632)) and small business concerns 
     owned and controlled by women, modeled on the mentor-protege 
     program of the Administration for small business concerns 
     participating in programs under section 8(a) of the Small 
     Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(a)).

                    Subtitle E--BusinessLINC Program

     SEC. 391. BUSINESSLINC PROGRAM.

       Section 8(n) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(n)) 
     is amended to read as follows:
       ``(n) Business Grants and Cooperative Agreements.--
       ``(1) In general.--In accordance with this subsection, the 
     Administrator shall make grants available to enter into 
     cooperative agreements with any coalition of private 
     entities, not-for-profit entities, public entities, or any 
     combination of private, not-for-profit, and public entities--
       ``(A) to expand business-to-business relationships between 
     large and small business concerns; and
       ``(B) to provide, directly or indirectly, with online 
     information and a database of companies that are interested 
     in mentor-protege programs or community-based, statewide, or 
     local business development programs.
       ``(2) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $3,000,000 
     for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2010, to remain 
     available until expended.
       ``(3) Reports to congress.--
       ``(A) In general.--Not later than April 30, 2009, and 
     annually thereafter, the Associate Administrator of Business 
     Development of the Administration shall collect data on the 
     BusinessLINC Program and 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 BusinessLINC Program.
       ``(B) Contents.--Each report submitted under subparagraph 
     (A) shall include, for the year covered by the report--
       ``(i) the number of programs administered in each State 
     under the BusinessLINC Program;
       ``(ii) the number of grant awards under each program 
     described in clause (i) and the date of each such award;
       ``(iii) the number of participating large businesses and 
     participating small business concerns;
       ``(iv) the number and dollar amount of the contracts in 
     effect in each State as a result of the programs run by each 
     grant recipient under the BusinessLINC Program; and
       ``(v) the number of mentor-protege, teaming relationships, 
     or partnerships created as a result of the BusinessLINC 
     Program.
       ``(4) Definition.--In this subsection, the term 
     `BusinessLINC Program' means the grant program authorized 
     under paragraph (1).''.

                     TITLE IV--ACQUISITION PROCESS

     SEC. 401. PROCUREMENT IMPROVEMENTS.

       Section 15 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644), as 
     amended by this Act, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(r) Bundling Data Fields.--For each contract (including 
     task or delivery orders against governmentwide or other 
     multiple award contracts, indefinite quantity or indefinite 
     delivery contracts, and blanket purchase agreements) that is 
     bundled or consolidated, an agency shall report publicly, not 
     later than 7 days after the date of the award, by means of 
     the Federal governmentwide procurement data system described 
     in subsection (c)(5)--
       ``(1) the number of contracts involving small business 
     concerns that were displaced by the bundled or consolidated 
     action;
       ``(2) the number of small business concerns that the 
     contracting officer identified as able to bid on all or part 
     of requirements; and
       ``(3) the projected cost savings anticipated as a result of 
     bundling or consolidating the requirements.
       ``(s) Governmentwide Small Business Training.--The 
     Administrator, in conjunction with the head of any other 
     appropriate Federal agency, shall coordinate the development 
     of governmentwide training courses on small business 
     contracting and subcontracting with small business concerns, 
     with special focus on the role of the small business 
     specialist as a vital part of the acquisition team.''.

     SEC. 402. RESERVATION OF PRIME CONTRACT AWARDS FOR SMALL 
                   BUSINESSES.

       Section 15 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644), as 
     amended by this Act, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(t) Multiple Award Contracts.--Not later than 180 days 
     after the date of enactment of this subsection, the head of 
     each Federal agency, with the concurrence of the 
     Administrator, shall, by regulation, establish criteria for 
     such agency--
       ``(1) setting aside part or parts of a multiple award 
     contract for small business concerns, including the 
     subcategories of small

[[Page 29128]]

     business concerns identified in subsection (g)(2);
       ``(2) setting aside multiple award contracts for small 
     business concerns, including the subcategories of small 
     business concerns identified in subsection (g)(2); and
       ``(3) reserving 1 or more contract awards for small 
     business concerns under full and open multiple award 
     procurements, including the subcategories of small business 
     concerns identified in subsection (g)(2).''.

     SEC. 403. GAO STUDY OF REPORTING SYSTEMS.

       (a) Study Required.--The Comptroller General of the United 
     States shall conduct a study of--
       (1) the accuracy and timeliness of data collected under the 
     Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 631 et seq.) in the CCR 
     database of the Administration, or any successor database, 
     the Federal procurement data system described in section 
     15(c)(5) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644(c)(5)), and 
     the Subcontracting Reporting System; and
       (2) the availability of small business information in these 
     computer-based systems to Congress, Federal agencies, and the 
     public.
       (b) Matters Covered.--The study conducted under subsection 
     (a) shall include--
       (1) an assessment of the accuracy and timeliness of the 
     information provided by the data collection systems described 
     in subsection (a)(1) and recommendations as to how any 
     deficiencies in such systems can be eliminated;
       (2) a review of the system manuals for such systems and a 
     determination of the adequacy of such manuals in assisting 
     proper operation and administration of the systems;
       (3) a review of the user manuals for such systems and a 
     determination of the clarity and ease of use of such manuals 
     in assisting those reporting into such systems and those 
     obtaining information from such systems;
       (4) the adequacy of the training given to individuals 
     responsible for reporting into such systems and 
     recommendations for any necessary improvements;
       (5) an assessment of the adequacy of any safeguards in such 
     systems against the reporting of inaccurate and untimely data 
     and the need for any additional safeguards; and
       (6) the system architecture, Internet access, user-friendly 
     characteristics, flexibility to add new data fields, ability 
     to provide structured and unstructured reports, range of 
     information necessary to meet user needs, and adequacy of 
     system and user manuals and instructions of such systems.
       (c) Report.--Not later than November 30, 2008, the 
     Comptroller General 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 
     containing the results of the study under this section.

     SEC. 404. MICROPURCHASE GUIDELINES.

       Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Director of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy 
     shall issue guidelines regarding the analysis of purchase 
     card expenditures to identify opportunities for achieving and 
     accurately measuring fair participation of small business 
     concerns in micropurchases, consistent with the national 
     policy on small business participation in Federal 
     procurements set forth in sections 2(a) and 15(g) of the 
     Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 631(a) and 644(g)), and 
     dissemination of best practices for participation of small 
     business concerns in micropurchases.

     SEC. 405. REPORTING ON OVERSEAS CONTRACTS.

       Not later than 180 days after the end of each fiscal year, 
     the Administrator shall submit to Congress a report 
     identifying what portion of contracts and subcontracts 
     awarded for performance outside of the United States were 
     awarded to small business concerns.

     SEC. 406. AGENCY ACCOUNTABILITY.

       (a) In General.--Section 15(g)(2) of the Small Business Act 
     (15 U.S.C. 644(g)(2)) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(A)'' after ``(2)'';
       (2) in the first sentence, by striking ``shall, after 
     consultation'' and inserting the following: ``shall--
       ``(i) after consultation'';
       (3) by striking ``agency. Goals established'' and inserting 
     the following: ``agency;
       ``(ii) identify a percentage of the procurement budget of 
     the agency to be awarded to small business concerns, in 
     consultation with the Office of Small and Disadvantaged 
     Business Utilization of the agency, which information shall 
     be included in the strategic plan required under section 306 
     of title 5, United States Code, and the annual budget 
     submission to Congress by that agency, and, upon request, in 
     any testimony provided by that agency before Congress in 
     connection with the budget process; and
       ``(iii) report, as part of its annual performance plan, the 
     extent to which the agency achieved the goals referred to in 
     clause (ii), and appropriate justification for any failure to 
     do so.
       ``(B) Goals established'';
       (4) by striking ``Whenever'' and inserting the following:
       ``(C) Whenever'';
       (5) by striking ``For the purpose of'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(D) For the purpose of'';
       (6) in the last sentence--
       (A) by striking ``(A) contracts'' and inserting ``(i) 
     contracts''; and
       (B) by striking ``(B) contracts'' and inserting ``(ii) 
     contracts''; and
       (7) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(E)(i) Each procurement employee described in clause 
     (ii)--
       ``(I) shall communicate to their subordinates the 
     importance of achieving small business goals; and
       ``(II) shall have as a significant factor in the annual 
     performance evaluation of that procurement employee, where 
     appropriate, the success of that procurement employee in 
     small business utilization, in accordance with the goals 
     established under this subsection.
       ``(ii) A procurement employee described in this clause is a 
     senior procurement executive, senior program manager, or 
     small and disadvantaged business utilization manager of a 
     Federal agency having contracting authority.''.
       (b) Annual Reports.--Section 10(d) of the Small Business 
     Act (15 U.S.C. 639(d)) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``and each agency that is a member of the 
     President's Management Council (or any successor thereto)'' 
     after ``Department of Defense'' the first place that term 
     appears; and
       (2) by inserting ``or that agency'' after ``Department of 
     Defense'' the second place that term appears.

           TITLE V--SMALL BUSINESS SIZE AND STATUS INTEGRITY

     SEC. 501. POLICY AND PRESUMPTIONS.

       Section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(s) Presumption.--
       ``(1) In general.--In every contract, subcontract, 
     cooperative agreement, cooperative research and development 
     agreement, or grant which is set aside, reserved, or 
     otherwise classified as intended for award to small business 
     concerns, there shall be a presumption of loss to the United 
     States based on the total dollars expended on such contract, 
     subcontract, cooperative agreement, cooperative research and 
     development agreement, or grant whenever it is established 
     that a business concern other than a small business concern 
     willfully sought and received the award by misrepresentation.
       ``(2) Deemed certifications.--The following actions shall 
     be deemed affirmative, willful, and intentional 
     certifications of small business size and status:
       ``(A) Submission of a bid or proposal for a Federal grant, 
     contract, subcontract, cooperative agreement, or cooperative 
     research and development agreement reserved, set aside, or 
     otherwise classified as intended for award to small business 
     concerns.
       ``(B) Submission of a bid or proposal for a Federal grant, 
     contract, subcontract, cooperative agreement, or cooperative 
     research and development agreement which in any way 
     encourages a Federal agency to classify such bid or proposal, 
     if awarded, as an award to a small business concern.
       ``(C) Registration on any Federal electronic database for 
     the purpose of being considered for award of a Federal grant, 
     contract, subcontract, cooperative agreement, or cooperative 
     research agreement, as a small business concern.
       ``(3) Paper-based certification by signature of responsible 
     official.--
       ``(A) In general.--Each solicitation, bid, or application 
     for a Federal contract, subcontract, or grant shall contain a 
     certification concerning the small business size and status 
     of a business concern seeking such Federal contract, 
     subcontract, or grant.
       ``(B) Content of certifications.--A certification that a 
     business concern qualifies as a small business concern of the 
     exact size and status claimed by such business concern for 
     purposes of bidding on a Federal contract or subcontract, or 
     applying for a Federal grant, shall contain the signature of 
     a director, officer, or counsel on the same page on which the 
     certification is contained.
       ``(4) Regulations.--The Administrator shall promulgate 
     regulations to provide adequate protections to individuals 
     and business concerns from liability under this subsection in 
     cases of unintentional errors, technical malfunctions, and 
     other similar situations.''.

     SEC. 502. ANNUAL CERTIFICATION.

       Section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632), as 
     amended by this Act, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(t) Annual Certification.--
       ``(1) In general.--Each business certified as a small 
     business concern under this Act shall annually certify its 
     small business size and, if appropriate, its small business 
     status, by means of a confirming entry on the CCR database of 
     the Administration, or any successor thereto.
       ``(2) Regulations.--Not later than 120 days after the date 
     of enactment of this subsection, the Administrator, in 
     consultation with the Inspector General and the Chief Counsel 
     for Advocacy of the Administration, shall promulgate 
     regulations to ensure that--
       ``(A) no business concern continues to be certified as a 
     small business concern on the CCR database of the 
     Administration, or any successor thereto, without fulfilling 
     the requirements for annual certification under this 
     subsection; and
       ``(B) the requirements of this subsection are implemented 
     in a manner presenting the

[[Page 29129]]

     least possible regulatory burden on small business concerns.
       ``(3) Determination of size status.--Small business size or 
     status for purposes of this Act shall be determined at the 
     time of the award of a Federal--
       ``(A) contract, provided that, in the case of interagency 
     multiple award contracts, small business size, or status 
     shall be determined annually, except for purposes of the 
     award of each task or delivery order set aside or reserved 
     for small business concerns;
       ``(B) subcontract;
       ``(C) grant;
       ``(D) cooperative agreement; or
       ``(E) cooperative research and development agreement.''.

     SEC. 503. MEANINGFUL PROTESTS OF SMALL BUSINESS SIZE AND 
                   STATUS.

       The Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 631 et seq.) is amended 
     by inserting after section 37, as added by this Act, the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 38. SMALL BUSINESS SIZE AND STATUS PROTEST SYSTEM.

       ``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Protest.--The term `protest' means a written 
     objection by an interested party to a violation of any small 
     business size or status requirement established under any 
     provision of law, including section 3, in connection with--
       ``(A) a solicitation or other request by a Federal agency 
     for offers for a contract for the procurement of property or 
     services;
       ``(B) the cancellation of such a solicitation or other 
     request;
       ``(C) an award or proposed award of such a contract; or
       ``(D) a termination or cancellation of an award of such a 
     contract, if the written objection contains an allegation 
     that the termination or cancellation is based in whole or in 
     part on improprieties concerning the award of the contract.
       ``(2) Interested party.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `interested party', with 
     respect to a contract or a solicitation or other request for 
     offers described in paragraph (1), means an actual or 
     prospective bidder or offeror whose direct economic interest 
     would be affected by the award of the contract or by failure 
     to award the contract.
       ``(B) Inclusions.--The term `interested party' includes the 
     official responsible for submitting the Federal agency tender 
     in a public-private competition conducted under Office of 
     Management and Budget Circular A-76 (or any successor 
     thereto) regarding an activity or function of a Federal 
     agency performed by more than 65 full-time equivalent 
     employees of the Federal agency.
       ``(3) Federal agency.--The term `Federal agency' has the 
     same meaning as in section 102 of title 40, United States 
     Code.
       ``(b) Review of Protests; Effect on Contracts Pending 
     Decision.--
       ``(1) In general.--Under procedures established under 
     subsection (d), the Administrator shall decide a protest 
     submitted to the Administrator by an interested party.
       ``(2) Receipts of protests.--
       ``(A) In general.--Not later than 1 day after the receipt 
     of a protest, the Administrator shall notify the Federal 
     agency involved of the protest.
       ``(B) Agencies.--Except as provided in subparagraph (C), a 
     Federal agency receiving a notice of a protested procurement 
     under subparagraph (A) shall submit to the Administrator a 
     complete report (including all relevant documents) on the 
     small business size or status aspects of the protested 
     procurement--
       ``(i) not later than 30 days after the date of the receipt 
     of that notice by the agency;
       ``(ii) if the Administrator, upon a showing by the Federal 
     agency, determines (and states the reasons in writing) that 
     the specific circumstances of the protest require a longer 
     period, within the longer period determined by the 
     Administrator; or
       ``(iii) in a case determined by the Administrator to be 
     suitable for the express option under subsection (c)(1)(B), 
     not later than 20 days after the date of the receipt of that 
     determination by the agency.
       ``(C) Exceptions.--A Federal agency need not submit a 
     report to the Administrator under subparagraph (B) if the 
     agency is notified by the Administrator before the date on 
     which such report is to be submitted that the protest 
     concerned has been dismissed under subsection (c)(1)(D).
       ``(3) Award of contracts.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     a contract may not be awarded in any procurement after the 
     Federal agency has received notice of a protest with respect 
     to such procurement from the Administrator and while the 
     protest is pending.
       ``(B) Exceptions.--The head of the procuring activity 
     responsible for award of a contract may authorize the award 
     of the contract (notwithstanding a protest of which the 
     Federal agency has notice under this section)--
       ``(i) upon a written finding that urgent and compelling 
     circumstances which significantly affect interests of the 
     United States will not permit waiting for the decision of the 
     Administrator under this section; and
       ``(ii) after the Administrator is advised of that finding.
       ``(C) Urgent and compelling circumstances.--A finding may 
     not be made under subparagraph (B)(i), unless the award of 
     the contract is otherwise likely to occur within 30 days 
     after the making of such finding.
       ``(4) Performance.--
       ``(A) In general.--A contractor awarded a Federal agency 
     contract may, during the period described in subparagraph 
     (D), begin performance of the contract and engage in any 
     related activities that result in obligations being incurred 
     by the United States under the contract, unless the 
     contracting officer responsible for the award of the contract 
     withholds authorization to proceed with performance of the 
     contract.
       ``(B) Authorization withheld.--The contracting officer may 
     withhold an authorization to proceed with performance of the 
     contract during the period described in subparagraph (D) if 
     the contracting officer determines in writing that--
       ``(i) a protest is likely to be filed with the 
     Administrator alleging a violation of a small business size 
     or status requirement; and
       ``(ii) the immediate performance of the contract is not in 
     the best interests of the United States.
       ``(C) Notice of protest.--
       ``(i) In general.--If the Federal agency awarding the 
     contract receives notice of a protest in accordance with this 
     subsection during the period described in subparagraph (D)--

       ``(I) the contracting officer may not authorize performance 
     of the contract to begin while the protest is pending; or
       ``(II) if authorization for contract performance to proceed 
     was not withheld in accordance with subparagraph (B) before 
     receipt of the notice, the contracting officer shall 
     immediately direct the contractor to cease performance under 
     the contract and to suspend any related activities that may 
     result in additional obligations being incurred by the United 
     States under that contract.

       ``(ii) Performance.--Performance and related activities 
     suspended under clause (i)(II) by reason of a protest may not 
     be resumed while the protest is pending.
       ``(iii) Exceptions.--The head of the procuring activity may 
     authorize the performance of the contract (notwithstanding a 
     protest of which the Federal agency has notice under this 
     section)--

       ``(I) upon a written finding that--

       ``(aa) performance of the contract is in the best interests 
     of the United States; or
       ``(bb) urgent and compelling circumstances that 
     significantly affect interests of the United States will not 
     permit waiting for the decision of the Administrator 
     concerning the protest; and

       ``(II) after the Administrator is notified of that finding.

       ``(D) Time period.--The period described in this 
     subparagraph, with respect to a contract, is the period 
     beginning on the date of the contract award and ending on the 
     later of--
       ``(i) the date that is 10 days after the date of the 
     contract award; or
       ``(ii) the date that is 5 days after the debriefing date 
     offered to an unsuccessful offeror for any debriefing that is 
     requested and, when requested, is required.
       ``(5) Nondelegation.--The authority of the head of the 
     procuring activity to make findings and to authorize the 
     award and performance of contracts under paragraphs (3) and 
     (4) may not be delegated.
       ``(6) Provision of documents.--
       ``(A) In general.--Within such deadlines as the 
     Administrator prescribes, and upon request, each Federal 
     agency shall provide to an interested party any document 
     relevant to a protested procurement action (including the 
     report required by paragraph (2)(B)) that would not give that 
     party a competitive advantage and that the party is otherwise 
     authorized by law to receive.
       ``(B) Protective orders.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Administrator may issue protective 
     orders which establish terms, conditions, and restrictions 
     for the provision of any document to a party under 
     subparagraph (A), that prohibit or restrict the disclosure by 
     the party of information described in clause (ii) that is 
     contained in such a document.
       ``(ii) Types of information.--Information referred to in 
     clause (i) is procurement sensitive information, trade 
     secrets, or other proprietary or confidential research, 
     development, or commercial information.
       ``(iii) Information to the federal government.--A 
     protective order under this subparagraph shall not be 
     considered to authorize the withholding of any document or 
     information from Congress or an executive agency.
       ``(7) Interested parties.--If an interested party files a 
     protest in connection with a public-private competition 
     described in subsection (a)(2)(B), a person representing a 
     majority of the employees of the Federal agency who are 
     engaged in the performance of the activity or function 
     subject to the public-private competition may intervene in 
     protest.
       ``(c) Decisions on Protests.--
       ``(1) In general.--
       ``(A) Inexpensive and expeditious resolution.--To the 
     maximum extent practicable, the Administrator shall provide 
     for the inexpensive and expeditious resolution of protests 
     under this section. Except as provided

[[Page 29130]]

     under subparagraph (B), the Administrator shall issue a final 
     decision concerning a protest not later than 100 days after 
     the date on which the protest is submitted to the 
     Administration.
       ``(B) Express option.--The Administrator shall, by 
     regulation established under subsection (d), establish an 
     express option for deciding those protests which the 
     Administrator determines suitable for resolution, not later 
     than 65 days after the date on which the protest is 
     submitted.
       ``(C) Amendments.--An amendment to a protest that adds a 
     new ground of protest, if timely made, should be resolved, to 
     the maximum extent practicable, within the time limit 
     established under subparagraph (A) for final decision of the 
     initial protest. If an amended protest cannot be resolved 
     within such time limit, the Administrator may resolve the 
     amended protest through the express option under subparagraph 
     (B).
       ``(D) Frivolous protests.--The Administrator may dismiss a 
     protest that the Administrator determines is frivolous or 
     which, on its face, does not state a valid basis for protest.
       ``(2) Compliance with law.--
       ``(A) In general.--With respect to a solicitation for a 
     contract, or a proposed award or the award of a contract, 
     protested under this section, the Administrator may determine 
     whether the solicitation, proposed award, or award complies 
     with statutes and regulations regarding small business size 
     or status. If the Administrator determines that the 
     solicitation, proposed award, or award does not comply with a 
     statute or regulation, the Administrator shall recommend that 
     the Federal agency--
       ``(i) refrain from exercising any of its options under the 
     contract;
       ``(ii) recompete the contract immediately;
       ``(iii) issue a new solicitation;
       ``(iv) terminate the contract;
       ``(v) award a contract consistent with the requirements of 
     such statutes and regulations; or
       ``(vi) implement such other recommendations as the 
     Administrator determines to be necessary in order to promote 
     compliance with procurement statutes and regulations.
       ``(B) Best interests of united states.--If the head of the 
     procuring activity responsible for a contract makes a finding 
     described in subsection (b)(4)(C)(iii)(I)(aa), the 
     Administrator shall make recommendations under this paragraph 
     without regard to any cost or disruption from terminating, 
     recompeting, or reawarding the contract.
       ``(C) Implementation.--If the Federal agency fails to 
     implement fully the recommendations of the Administrator 
     under this paragraph with respect to a solicitation for a 
     contract or an award or proposed award of a contract by the 
     date that is 60 days after the date on which the agency 
     received the recommendations, the head of the procuring 
     activity responsible for that contract shall report such 
     failure to the Administrator not later than 5 days after the 
     end of such 60-day period.
       ``(3) Payment of costs.--
       ``(A) In general.--If the Administrator determines that a 
     solicitation for a contract or a proposed award or the award 
     of a contract does not comply with a statute or regulation, 
     the Administrator may recommend that the Federal agency 
     conducting the procurement pay to an appropriate interested 
     party the costs of--
       ``(i) filing and pursuing the protest, including reasonable 
     attorney's fees and consultant and expert witness fees; and
       ``(ii) bid and proposal preparation.
       ``(B) Costs not included.--No party (other than a small 
     business concern) may be paid, under a recommendation made 
     under the authority of subparagraph (A)--
       ``(i) costs for consultant and expert witness fees that 
     exceed the highest rate of compensation for expert witnesses 
     paid by the Federal Government; or
       ``(ii) costs for attorney's fees that exceed $300 per hour, 
     unless the agency determines, based on the recommendation of 
     the Administrator on a case by case basis, that an increase 
     in the cost of living or a special factor, such as the 
     limited availability of qualified attorneys for the 
     proceedings involved, justifies a higher fee.
       ``(C) Recommendation to pay costs.--If the Administrator 
     recommends under subparagraph (A) that a Federal agency pay 
     costs to an interested party, the Federal agency shall--
       ``(i) pay the costs promptly; or
       ``(ii) if the Federal agency does not make such payment, 
     promptly report to the Administrator the reasons for the 
     failure to follow the Administrator's recommendation.
       ``(D) Agreement on amount.--If the Administrator recommends 
     under subparagraph (A) that a Federal agency pay costs to an 
     interested party, the Federal agency and the interested party 
     shall attempt to reach an agreement on the amount of the 
     costs to be paid. If the Federal agency and the interested 
     party are unable to agree on the amount to be paid, the 
     Administrator may, upon the request of the interested party, 
     recommend to the Federal agency the amount of the costs that 
     the Federal agency should pay.
       ``(4) Decisions.--Each decision of the Administrator under 
     this section shall be signed by the Administrator or a 
     designee for that purpose. A copy of the decision shall be 
     made available to the interested parties, the head of the 
     procuring activity responsible for the solicitation, proposed 
     award, or award of the contract, and the senior procurement 
     executive of the Federal agency involved.
       ``(5) Reports.--
       ``(A) Failure to implement recommendations.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Administrator shall report promptly 
     to the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship of 
     the Senate and to the Committee on Small Business of the 
     House of Representatives any case in which a Federal agency 
     fails to implement fully a recommendation of the 
     Administrator under paragraph (2) or (3).
       ``(ii) Contents.--Each report under clause (i) shall 
     include--

       ``(I) a comprehensive review of the pertinent procurement, 
     including the circumstances of the failure of the Federal 
     agency to implement a recommendation of the Administrator; 
     and
       ``(II) a recommendation regarding whether, in order to 
     correct an inequity or to preserve the integrity of the 
     procurement process, Congress should consider--

       ``(aa) private relief legislation;
       ``(bb) legislative rescission or cancellation of funds;
       ``(cc) further investigation by Congress; or
       ``(dd) other action.
       ``(B) Annual reports.--Not later than January 31 of each 
     year, the Administrator shall transmit to Congress a report 
     containing a summary of each instance in which a Federal 
     agency did not fully implement a recommendation of the 
     Administrator under subsection (b) or this subsection during 
     the preceding year. The report shall also describe each 
     instance in which a final decision in a protest was not 
     rendered within 100 days after the date on which the protest 
     was submitted to the Administrator.
       ``(d) Regulations; Authority of Administrator to Verify 
     Assertions.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Administrator shall establish such 
     procedures as may be necessary for the expeditious decision 
     of protests under this section, including procedures for 
     accelerated resolution of protests under the express option 
     authorized by subsection (c)(1)(B). Such procedures shall 
     provide that the protest process may not be delayed by the 
     failure of a party to make a filing within the time provided 
     for the filing.
       ``(2) Computation of time.--The procedures established 
     under paragraph (1) shall provide that, in the computation of 
     any period described in this section--
       ``(A) the day of the act, event, or default from which the 
     designated period of time begins to run not be included; and
       ``(B) the last day after such act, event, or default be 
     included, unless--
       ``(i) such last day is a Saturday, a Sunday, or a legal 
     holiday; or
       ``(ii) in the case of a filing of a paper at the 
     Administration or another Federal agency, such last day is a 
     day on which weather or other conditions cause the closing of 
     the Administration or other Federal agency, in which event 
     the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday 
     shall be included.
       ``(3) Electronic filing.--The Administrator may prescribe 
     procedures for the electronic filing and dissemination of 
     documents and information required under this section. In 
     prescribing such procedures, the Administrator shall consider 
     the ability of all parties to achieve electronic access to 
     such documents and records.
       ``(e) Enforcement.--The Administrator may use any authority 
     available under this Act or any other provision of law to 
     verify assertions made by parties in protests under this 
     section.
       ``(f) Regulations.--The Administrator may issue regulations 
     regarding the use of the protest authority to consider small 
     business size or status challenges under this section in 
     matters involving any other program for small business 
     concerns.''.

     SEC. 504. TRAINING FOR CONTRACTING AND ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 270 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the head of each appropriate Federal 
     agency or entity shall, in consultation with the 
     Administrator or the Inspector General of the Administration, 
     as appropriate, develop courses concerning proper 
     classification of business concerns and small business size 
     and status for purposes of Federal contracts, subcontracts, 
     grants, cooperative agreements, and cooperative research and 
     development agreements.
       (b) Policy on Prosecutions of Small Business Size and 
     Status Fraud.--Section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 
     632), as amended by this Act, is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:
       ``(u) Policy on Prosecutions of Small Business Size and 
     Status Fraud.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of this subsection, the head of each relevant 
     Federal agency and the Inspector General of the 
     Administration shall issue a Governmentwide policy on 
     prosecution of small business size and status fraud.''.

[[Page 29131]]



     SEC. 505. UPDATED SIZE STANDARDS.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall--
       (1) conduct a detailed review of the size standards for 
     small business concerns established under section 3(a)(2) of 
     the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632(a)(2)); and
       (2) if determined appropriate by the Administrator, 
     promulgate revised size standards under that section.
       (b) Publication.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall make 
     publically available information regarding--
       (1) the factors evaluated as part of the review conducted 
     under subsection (a)(1); and
       (2) the criteria used for any revised size standards 
     promulgated under subsection (a)(2).

     SEC. 506. SMALL BUSINESS SIZE AND STATUS FOR PURPOSE OF 
                   MULTIPLE AWARD CONTRACTS.

       Section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632), as 
     amended by this Act, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(w) Small Business Size and Status for Purpose of 
     Multiple Award Contracts.--
       ``(1) In general.--A business concern that enters a 
     multiple award contract of any kind with the Federal 
     Government shall in any year in which such a contract is in 
     effect, submit an annual statement at the end of its fiscal 
     year recertifying its small business size and status to the 
     Federal agency which awarded the contract.
       ``(2) Relation to other laws.--Compliance with paragraph 
     (1) shall not affect the obligation of a business concern to 
     comply with other provisions of law concerning small business 
     size or status.''.

  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, as Ranking Member of the Senate Committee 
on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I rise today to introduce, with 
Chairman Kerry, the Small Business Contracting Revitalization Act of 
2007. This critical legislation is a product of consensus-building and 
compromise over the past few years and truly reflects the bipartisan 
nature of our Committee. Thank you, Chairman Kerry, for working to make 
this a truly bipartisan bill.
  This legislation addresses the numerous barriers facing small 
businesses in securing their fair share of Federal contracting dollars. 
Currently, small businesses are eligible for $340 billion in Federal 
contracting dollars, yet receive only $77 billion. Regrettably, the 
Federal Government consistently fails to satisfy its 23 percent small 
business goal resulting in small businesses losing billions of dollars 
in contracting opportunities.
  I am dismayed by the myriad ways that Government agencies have time 
and again egregiously failed to achieve most of their small business 
statutory ``goaling'' requirements. For example, in fiscal year 2006, 
the Historically Underutilized Business Zone, HUBZone, program met only 
2.1 percent of its three percent goal, while our Nation's service-
disabled, veteran-owned small businesses received a Government-wide, 
paltry total of only 0.9 percent of its three percent small business 
goal. This longstanding area of concern is coupled with a litany of 
deficiencies that include ``contract bundling,'' sub-contracting 
misrepresentations, inaccurate small business size determinations, 
flawed reporting data, and under-utilization of key small business 
contracting programs.
  As the Chairman is well aware, these problems are not new, and our 
Committee has held countless hearings on various contracting concerns 
throughout the years. Business opportunities through Federal contracts 
provide vital economic benefits for small businesses, which is why last 
year, my Small Business Administration Reauthorization Bill, which 
passed our Committee unanimously, contained a robust package of small 
business contracting initiatives.
  Our legislation builds on the contracting provisions of that bill, by 
improving all of the small business contracting programs--including the 
HUBZone, small disadvantaged business, women-owned small business, and 
service-disabled veteran-owned small business programs. It equips the 
SBA with additional tools to meet the demands of an ever-changing 21st 
century contracting environment.
  This bipartisan measure also includes several other priorities that I 
have long championed--most notably, enhancing the HUBZone program. In 
my home state of Maine, only 118 of 41,026 small businesses are 
qualified HUBZone businesses. HUBZones represent a tremendous tool for 
replacing lost jobs for our Nation's declining manufacturing and 
industrial sectors--clearly, this program should be better utilized.
  I look forward to working with my colleagues in the Senate to pass 
this bipartisan small business contracting legislation to ensure that 
all small business ``goals'' are not only met--but exceeded.

                          ____________________