[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 23]
[Senate]
[Pages 32161-32175]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. KERRY (for himself, Mr. Ensign, Ms. Stabenow, and Mr. 
        Martinez):
  S. 2408. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to 
require physician utilization of the Medicare electronic prescription 
drug program; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, seven thousand Americans die every year 
because of preventable adverse drug events. Tens of thousands of more 
are injured. Meanwhile, of the three billion prescriptions that are 
written each year, doctors report that nearly one billion of them 
required a followup for clarity, costing our health care system 
billions of dollars a year. That is why I am pleased to join my 
colleagues Senator Ensign, Senator Stabenow and Senator Martinez to 
introduce critical legislation to help bring our health care system 
into the 21st century through electronic prescribing, e-prescribing, of 
medications in the Medicare program.
  The benefits of e-prescribing are clear and compelling. When a doctor 
``writes'' an electronic prescription, a computer or handheld device 
warns of potentially dangerous interactions or allergies or informs a 
physician whether a particular drug is covered by a patient's 
insurance. It also tells the physician whether a chemically identical 
generic alternative is available at a fraction of the price. The path 
to a more modern, accountable health care

[[Page 32162]]

system starts with health information technology. The path to robust 
health information technology starts with e-prescribing.
  This legislation would provide permanent funding for physician 
payment bonuses in Medicare to help offset the costs of acquiring e-
prescribing systems and to incentivize the use of the technology. The 
bill would also require all physicians in Medicare to use e-prescribing 
starting in 2011--1 year later than the Institute of Medicine 
recommended in their recent study. We have talked long enough about 
using technology to stem perpetually rising health care costs and poor 
quality, and our legislation takes an important step to do something 
about it.
  I want to give particular credit to Mark Merritt and his team at 
Pharmaceutical Care Management Association, PCMA, for their hard work 
and leadership. PCMA is responsible for a seminal study in this field, 
which showed for the first time that broader adoption of e-prescribing 
will not only save lives, but will also save billions of dollars for 
patients, payers and taxpayers alike. Perhaps most importantly, PCMA 
created a strong and diverse coalition of health care stakeholders to 
advocate for this legislation, including business, labor, consumer 
advocates, physicians, health plans, pharmacists, and drug 
manufacturers. The PCMA-led coalition has worked diligently on Capitol 
Hill in support of this important issue. They have educated Congress on 
e-prescribing and are helping to make sure that we get the policy 
right.
  The Medicare E-MEDS Act gets it right. The standards and 
interoperability for e-prescribing are in place; the technology is 
affordable; and, most importantly, the dramatic benefits for patients 
and health care purchasers--especially the Federal Government--are 
overwhelmingly clear. This bill is a solid step towards addressing 
these important issues in the delivery of our Nation's health care. It 
is time that Congress act to save lives and increase efficiency in 
America's health care system.
  Mr. President, I ask for 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 the 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 2408

       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 ``Medicare Electronic 
     Medication and Safety Protection (E-MEDS) Act of 2007''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) Patient safety is an important issue and a priority 
     among patients, providers, insurers, businesses, and 
     government entities alike.
       (2) Adverse drug events are defined by the Institute of 
     Medicine as ``any injury due to medication''.
       (3) According to the Institute of Medicine, more then 1.5 
     million preventable adverse drug events occur every year in 
     the United States.
       (4) Studies indicate that at least 530,000 preventable 
     adverse drug events occur each year among the Medicare 
     population, and cost the Federal Government upwards of 
     $887,000,000, or $1,983 per person.
       (5) Electronic prescription drug programs, or e-
     prescribing, provide for the electronic transmittal of 
     prescription information from the prescribing health care 
     provider to the dispensing pharmacy and pharmacist.
       (6) Electronic prescribing provides formulary and coverage 
     information before a prescription is written to better inform 
     the patient and prescriber of lower cost options, including 
     generics.
       (7) E-prescribing can help to eliminate medical errors, 
     injuries, hospitalizations, and even death that can result 
     from illegible prescriptions and bad drug interactions, in 
     addition to reducing patient medication non-adherence.
       (8) The Institute of Medicine recommends that all 
     physicians create a plan to implement and use e-prescribing 
     technology by 2010.

     SEC. 3. INCENTIVES FOR USE OF E-PRESCRIBING UNDER MEDICARE.

       (a) Bonus Payments.--Section 1833 of the Social Security 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 1395l) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(v) Incentive Payments for Physician Use of E-
     Prescribing.--
       ``(1) One-time bonus for start-up costs.--
       ``(A) In general.--If the Secretary determines, based upon 
     coding in claims submitted under this part over a duration 
     specified by the Secretary, that a physician meets a 
     threshold volume or proportion (as specified by the 
     Secretary) of claims for physicians' services for individuals 
     enrolled under this part that--
       ``(i) are classified (under section 1848) as evaluation and 
     management services;
       ``(ii) include the making of a prescription that could 
     under law be made using the electronic prescription drug 
     program; and
       ``(iii) use the electronic prescription drug program for 
     such prescription,

     the Secretary shall make a payment to the physician, in 
     addition to any other payment under this part, of the amount 
     specified in subparagraph (B). Not more than one payment may 
     be made under this subsection with respect to any physician.
       ``(B) Amount.--The payment amount under subparagraph (A) 
     shall be, in the case of a physician that meets the 
     conditions of subparagraph (A) for a period that begins 
     during--
       ``(i) 2008 or 2009, $2,000;
       ``(ii) 2010 or 2011, $1,500; or
       ``(iii) 2012 or a subsequent year, $1,000.
       ``(2) On-going bonus for use of e-prescribing.--
       ``(A) In general.--If the Secretary determines, based upon 
     coding in claims submitted under this part over a period 
     specified by the Secretary, that a physician uses the 
     electronic prescription drug program for prescribing at least 
     a threshold volume or proportion (as specified by the 
     Secretary) of claims for physicians' services for individuals 
     enrolled under this part, in addition to the amount of 
     payment that would otherwise be made under this part for 
     physicians' services by the physician that are classified as 
     evaluation and management services under section 1848, there 
     also shall be paid to the physician an amount equal to 1 
     percent of the allowed charges for such services. In applying 
     the previous sentence, there shall not be taken into account 
     claims for prescriptions written for controlled substances 
     which may not under law be prescribed using the electronic 
     prescription drug program.
       ``(B) Application to physician shortage bonuses.--The 
     additional payment under this paragraph shall be taken into 
     account in applying subsections (m) and (u).
       ``(3) Auditing.--Provisions applicable to the auditing of 
     claims for payment and enforcement of false claims under this 
     part shall apply to claims for payment under this subsection.
       ``(4) Electronic prescription drug program defined.--In 
     this subsection, the term `electronic prescription drug 
     program' means the program established under section 1860D-
     4(e).''.
       (b) Requirement for Use of E-Prescribing.--Section 1848(a) 
     of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-8(a)) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(5) Adjustment in fee schedule for failure to use e-
     prescribing.--
       ``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), effective 
     for physicians' services furnished on or after January 1, 
     2011, in the case of such services--
       ``(i) that are classified as evaluation and management 
     services under this section; and
       ``(ii) in connection with which there was one or more 
     prescriptions made that could have been made, but were not 
     all made, under the electronic prescription drug program,

     the fee schedule amount otherwise applicable under this 
     section shall be reduced by 10 percent.
       ``(B) Waiver.--The Secretary may waive the application of 
     subparagraph (A) until January 1, 2012, or January 1, 2013, 
     as specified by the Secretary, in cases of demonstrated 
     hardship or unforeseen circumstances specified by the 
     Secretary.''.

     SEC. 4. REPORTS ON E-PRESCRIBING.

       (a) CMS Report.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Centers 
     for Medicare & Medicaid Services shall submit to Congress a 
     report on progress on implementing e-prescribing under the 
     Medicare electronic prescription drug program under section 
     1860D-4(e) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-
     104(e)).
       (2) Items included.--Such report shall include information 
     on--
       (A) the percentage of Medicare physicians that utilize the 
     electronic prescription drug program;
       (B) the estimated savings resulting from the use of e-
     prescribing; and
       (C) progress on reducing avoidable medical errors resulting 
     from the use of e-prescribing.
       (b) GAO Report.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the 
     United States shall submit to Congress a report on the impact 
     of implementation of such program on physicians.
       (2) Items included.--Such report shall include information 
     on--
       (A) factors influencing the adopting of e-prescribing by 
     physicians; and

[[Page 32163]]

       (B) the impact of this Act on physicians practicing in 
     individual or small group practices and on physicians 
     practicing in rural areas.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. WYDEN (for himself and Mr. Obama):
  S. 2411. A bill to require the establishment of a credit card safety 
star rating system for the benefit of consumers, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, And Urban Affairs.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, credit card debt is hitting American 
families like a wrecking ball, with our families already being hammered 
by skyrocketing fuel prices and the subprime mortgage mess. We have 
seen credit card debt go up almost 25 percent in the last 3 years. I 
have brought to the floor a typical credit card agreement that millions 
of our citizens enter into. It is 44 pages long. You can't see it from 
the chair, but it goes on and on and on with small print. It is very 
obvious to me that buried in all of this legalese, buried in all of 
this technical jargon, is a variety of sneaky terms that end up hurting 
consumers because it is not possible to understand what is in much of 
the key provisions of these agreements. For example, we understand 
folks in New Jersey, Oregon, or anywhere else pay a lot of attention to 
the interest rate provision. They pay a lot of attention to the annual 
fee provision. But they don't notice a lot of the little disclosures 
that end up hidden in the legalese that can end up making the real cost 
of credit significantly higher.
  Last week, I met with students across the State of Oregon. A lot of 
them, with the financial aid cutbacks, are now walking on an economic 
tightrope. They balance their food bills against their fuel bills and 
their fuel bills against their housing costs. They are on an economic 
tightrope. They are getting buried in credit card debt. Very often they 
find, for example, that if they have a credit card, and they are late 
on another payment with someone else, their credit card interest rate 
ends up going up as a result. There may be a small provision in their 
existing credit card agreement that allows it, but nobody, for the most 
part, knows about it.
  Students would say their interest rates would double almost overnight 
with virtually no notice. They would not be given any clear 
communication about what is going on. They would just find their costs 
would arbitrarily skyrocket, and they would again be unable to pay 
their bills.
  Now, I recognize in a free society folks have a constitutional right 
to be foolish, to rack up charges that would not be wise, but they can 
do so anyway in a free society. I do not think most people will do 
that, certainly not the students I met with in Oregon last week, if it 
is possible to understand the terms of these credit cards in 
straightforward, plain and simple English rather than see the key 
provisions buried in all kinds of legalese that you would have to be a 
wizard to sort out.
  So I am proposing today, with the support of our colleague, Senator 
Obama from Illinois, that the Federal Reserve, which has great 
expertise in this area, set up a safety rating system for credit 
cards--not one that evaluates credit card companies on provisions that 
are appropriately evaluated in the marketplace, but on safety matters--
for example, whether a credit card company gives the consumer adequate 
notice before they change terms; whether, for example, they highlight 
the key kinds of changes rather than bury them in the small print.
  I think the Federal Reserve, with the technical expertise they have 
and the independent judgment they bring to these financial questions, 
is the ideal place to develop and operate a safety rating system. Such 
a system has worked quite well for new cars. When you have a rating 
system for cars, people can understand how they would be protected in a 
crash. The legislation I am offering will tell people whether credit 
card companies are treating them fairly and disclosing the key 
provisions so that a free market can work.
  So under the rating system I propose today with Senator Obama, it 
would be required for credit card companies to put on the card itself, 
put on the various promotional materials they are using, stars which, 
in effect, would be granted on the basis of the Federal Reserve's 
independent judgment as to whether the key safety criteria are being 
met.
  I am very hopeful that at a time when our citizens are being pounded 
by powerful economic forces, particularly in the energy and housing 
field, there could at least be bipartisan agreement that the Senate 
could support transparency, disclosure, changes in the credit card 
business, so our consumers--and millions are using these credit cards 
during this holiday season--can understand the agreements they are 
getting into.
  The students I met with last week are taking steps now to better 
police what is going on in the credit card field. On several campuses 
in Oregon, they have moved the credit card companies off campus. Yet 
the credit card companies continue to flood the students with 
promotional material.
  I was told, for example, about one program where students were 
brought into a room where money was essentially floating in the air, 
where it was as if you would be going to a financial paradise if you 
just signed up for one of these credit card agreements.
  I am not proposing heavy-handed regulation. I am not proposing one-
size-fits-all government. I am proposing that an agency with the 
expertise to make sure there is disclosure, that the forms and 
agreements are printed in simple English--that that kind of information 
be rewarded in the marketplace. If companies are not willing to do it, 
the American people could find that out as well.
  That is the kind of simple, straightforward approach--with 
disclosure, transparency, in simple English--that makes sense for the 
digital age. With the Federal Reserve completing that first safety 
rating, all Americans could get that kind of information quickly and 
conveniently. That is what is in the interest of the American people 
with respect to this credit card debt issue at a critical time.
  I hope my colleagues will support the legislation I introduce today 
with Senator Obama.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself, Ms. Collins, Mr. Obama, Mr. Durbin, 
        Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Biden, Mr. Dodd, and Mr. Kerry):
  S. 2412. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reform 
the system of public financing for Presidential elections, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today I will reintroduce a bill to 
repair and strengthen the presidential public financing system. 
Bipartisan support is a key element of successful campaign finance 
reform efforts, and I am therefore delighted that the junior Senator 
from Maine, Sen. Collins, has agreed to be the principal cosponsor of 
the bill.
  The Presidential Funding Act of 2007 will ensure that this system 
will continue to fulfill its promise in the 21st century. The bill will 
take effect in January 2009, so it will first apply in the 2012 
presidential election.
  The presidential public financing system was put into place in the 
wake of the Watergate scandals as part of the Federal Election Campaign 
Act of 1974. It was held to be constitutional by the Supreme Court in 
Buckley v. Valeo. The system, of course, is voluntary, as the Supreme 
Court required in Buckley. Every major party nominee for President 
since 1976 has participated in the system for the general election and, 
prior to 2000, every major party nominee had participated in the system 
for the primary election as well.
  In the 2004 election, President Bush and two Democratic candidates, 
Howard Dean and the eventual nominee John Kerry, opted out of the 
system for the presidential primaries. President Bush and Senator Kerry 
elected to take the taxpayer-funded grant in the general election. 
President Bush also opted out of the system for the Republican 
primaries in 2000 but accepted the general election grant. Several of 
the leading candidates for President in the 2008 election are not 
participating

[[Page 32164]]

in the primary system, and it remains to be seen whether either major 
party candidate will accept public funds in the general election.
  It is unfortunate that the matching funds system for the primaries 
has become less practicable. The system protects the integrity of the 
electoral process by allowing candidates to run viable campaigns 
without becoming overly dependent on private donors. The system has 
worked well in the past, and it is worth repairing so that it can work 
in the future. If we don't repair it, the pressures on candidates to 
opt out will increase until the system collapses from disuse.
  This bill makes changes to both the primary and general election 
public financing system to address the weaknesses and problems that 
have been identified by participants in the system, experts on the 
presidential election financing process, and an electorate that is 
increasingly dismayed by the influence of money in politics. First and 
most important, it eliminates the state-by-state primary spending 
limits in the current law and substantially increases the overall 
primary spending limit from the current limit of approximately $45 
million to $150 million, of which up to $100 million can be spent 
before April 1 of the election year. This should make the system much 
more viable for serious candidates facing opponents who are capable of 
raising significant sums outside the system. The bill also makes 
available substantially more public money for participating candidates 
by increasing the match of small contributions from 1:1 to 4:1.
  One very important provision of this bill ties the primary and 
general election systems together and requires candidates to make a 
single decision on whether to participate. Candidates who opt out of 
the primary system and decide to rely solely on private money cannot 
return to the system for the general election. Candidates must commit 
to participate in the system in the general election if they want to 
receive Federal matching funds in the primaries. The bill also 
increases the spending limits for participating candidates in the 
primaries who face a nonparticipating opponent if that opponent raises 
more than 20 percent more than the spending limit. This provides some 
protection against being far outspent by a nonparticipating opponent. 
Additional grants of public money are also available to participating 
candidates who face a nonparticipating candidate spending substantially 
more than the spending limit.
  The bill also sets the general election spending limit at $100 
million, indexed for inflation. If a general election candidate does 
not participate in the system and spends more than 20 percent more than 
the combined primary and general election spending limits, a 
participating opposing candidate will receive a grant equal to twice 
the general election spending limit.
  This bill also addresses what some have called the ``gap'' between 
the primary and general election seasons. Presumptive presidential 
nominees have emerged earlier in the election year over the life of the 
public financing system. This has led to some nominees being 
essentially out of money between the time that they nail down the 
nomination and the convention where they are formally nominated and 
become eligible for the general election grant. For a few cycles, soft 
money raised by the parties filled in that gap, but the Bipartisan 
Campaign Reform Act of 2002 fortunately has now closed that loophole. 
This bill allows candidates who are still in the primary race as of 
April 1 to spend an additional $50 million until funds for the general 
election are made available. In addition, the bill allows the political 
parties to spend up to $25 million between April 1 and the date that a 
candidate is nominated and an additional $25 million after the 
nomination. The total amount of $50 million is over three times the 
amount allowed under current law. This should allow the ``gap'' to be 
more than adequately filled.
  Obviously, these changes make this a more generous system. So the 
bill also makes the requirement for qualifying more difficult. To be 
eligible for matching funds, a candidate must raise $25,000 in 
matchable contributions--up to $200 for each donor--in at least 20 
States. That is five times the threshold under current law.
  The bill also makes a number of changes in the system to reflect the 
changes in our presidential races over the past several decades. For 
one thing, it makes matching funds available starting 6 months before 
the date of the first primary or caucus, that's approximately 6 months 
earlier than is currently the case. For another, it sets a single date 
for release of the public grants for the general election--the Friday 
before Labor Day. This addresses an inequity in the current system, 
under which the general election grants are released after each 
nominating convention, which can be several weeks apart.
  The bill also prohibits Federal elected officials and candidates from 
soliciting soft money for use in funding the party conventions and 
requires presidential candidates to disclose bundled contributions. The 
bundling provision builds on a provision contained in ethics and 
lobbying reform bill enacted earlier this year. It requires 
presidential candidates to disclose all bundlers of $50,000 or more.
  The purpose of this bill is to improve the campaign finance system, 
not to advance one party's interests. In fact, this is an excellent 
time to make changes in the Presidential public funding system. The 
2008 presidential campaign, which is already underway, will undoubtedly 
be the most expensive in history. A number of candidates from both 
parties have opted out of the primary matching funds system, and some 
experts predict that one or both major party nominees will even refuse 
public grants for the general election period. It is too late to make 
the changes needed to repair the system for the 2008 election. But if 
we act now, we can make sure that an updated and revised system is in 
place for the 2012 election. If we act now, I am certain that the 2008 
campaign cycle will confirm our foresight. If we do nothing, 2008 will 
continue and accelerate the slide of the current system into 
irrelevancy.
  Fixing the presidential public financing system will cost money, but 
our best calculations at the present time indicate that the changes to 
the system in this bill can be paid for by raising the income tax 
check-off on an individual return from $3 to just $10. The total cost 
of the changes to the system, based on data from the 2004 elections, is 
projected to be around $365 million over the 4-year election cycle. To 
offset that increased cost, this bill first amends the Energy Policy 
Act of 2005 to allow the Bureau of Land Management to implement new 
user fees for processing oil and gas permits. It also amends the 
Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 to increase the yearly maintenance fee and 
one-time location fee for holders of more than 10 mining claims on 
federal land to $150 and $50 per claim, respectively, and imposes a 4 
percent royalty on the gross income from mining on existing claims. 
Finally, it amends the Public Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978 to use 
a state's fee formula to establish the grazing fees for federal land in 
that state.
  Though the numbers are large, this is actually a very small 
investment to make to protect our democracy and preserve the integrity 
of our presidential elections. The American people do not want to see a 
return to the pre-Watergate days of unlimited spending on presidential 
elections and candidates entirely beholden to private donors. We must 
act to ensure the fairness of our elections and the confidence of our 
citizens in the process by repairing the cornerstone of the Watergate 
reforms.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and 
a section-by-section analysis be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                S. 2412

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

[[Page 32165]]



     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

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

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Revisions to system of Presidential primary matching payments.
Sec. 3. Requiring participation in primary payment system as condition 
              of eligibility for general election payments.
Sec. 4. Revisions to expenditure limits.
Sec. 5. Additional payments and increased expenditure limits for 
              candidates participating in public financing who face 
              certain nonparticipating opponents.
Sec. 6. Establishment of uniform date for release of payments from 
              Presidential Election Campaign Fund to eligible 
              candidates.
Sec. 7. Revisions to designation of income tax payments by individual 
              taxpayers.
Sec. 8. Amounts in Presidential Election Campaign Fund.
Sec. 9. Regulation of convention financing.
Sec. 10. Disclosure of bundled contributions to presidential campaigns.
Sec. 11. Repeal of priority in use of funds for political conventions.
Sec. 12. Offsets.
Sec. 13. Effective date.

     SEC. 2. REVISIONS TO SYSTEM OF PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY MATCHING 
                   PAYMENTS.

       (a) Increase in Matching Payments.--
       (1) In general.--Section 9034(a) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 is amended--
       (A) by striking ``an amount equal to the amount'' and 
     inserting ``an amount equal to 400 percent of the amount''; 
     and
       (B) by striking ``$250'' and inserting ``$200''.
       (2) Additional matching payments for candidates after march 
     31 of the election year.--Section 9034(b) of such Code is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(b) Additional Payments for Candidates After March 31 of 
     the Election Year.--In addition to any payment under 
     subsection (a), an individual who is a candidate after March 
     31 of the calendar year in which the presidential election is 
     held and who is eligible to receive payments under section 
     9033 shall be entitled to payments under section 9037 in an 
     amount equal to the amount of each contribution received by 
     such individual after March 31 of the calendar year in which 
     such presidential election is held, disregarding any amount 
     of contributions from any person to the extent that the total 
     of the amounts contributed by such person after such date 
     exceeds $200.''.
       (3) Conforming amendments.--Section 9034 of such Code, as 
     amended by paragraph (2), is amended--
       (A) by striking the last sentence of subsection (a); and
       (B) by inserting after subsection (b) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(c) Contribution Defined.--For purposes of this section 
     and section 9033(b), the term `contribution' means a gift of 
     money made by a written instrument which identifies the 
     person making the contribution by full name and mailing 
     address, but does not include a subscription, loan, advance, 
     or deposit of money, or anything of value or anything 
     described in subparagraph (B), (C), or (D) of section 
     9032(4).''.
       (b) Eligibility Requirements.--
       (1) Amount of aggregate contributions per state.--Section 
     9033(b)(3) of such Code is amended by striking ``$5,000'' and 
     inserting ``$25,000''.
       (2) Amount of individual contributions.--Section 9033(b)(4) 
     of such Code is amended by striking ``$250'' and inserting 
     ``$200''.
       (3) Participation in system for payments for general 
     election.--Section 9033(b) of such Code is amended--
       (A) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (3);
       (B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (4) and 
     inserting ``, and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(5) if the candidate is nominated by a political party 
     for election to the office of President, the candidate will 
     apply for and accept payments with respect to the general 
     election for such office in accordance with chapter 95, 
     including the requirement that the candidate and the 
     candidate's authorized committees will not incur qualified 
     campaign expenses in excess of the aggregate payments to 
     which they will be entitled under section 9004.''.
       (c) Period of Availability of Payments.--Section 9032(6) of 
     such Code is amended by striking ``the beginning of the 
     calendar year in which a general election for the office of 
     President of the United States will be held'' and inserting 
     ``the date that is 6 months prior to the date of the earliest 
     State primary election''.

     SEC. 3. REQUIRING PARTICIPATION IN PRIMARY PAYMENT SYSTEM AS 
                   CONDITION OF ELIGIBILITY FOR GENERAL ELECTION 
                   PAYMENTS.

       (a) Major Party Candidates.--Section 9003(b) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as paragraphs 
     (2) and (3); and
       (2) by inserting before paragraph (2) (as so redesignated) 
     the following new paragraph:
       ``(1) the candidate received payments under chapter 96 for 
     the campaign for nomination;''.
       (b) Minor Party Candidates.--Section 9003(c) of such Code 
     is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as paragraphs 
     (2) and (3); and
       (2) by inserting before paragraph (2) (as so redesignated) 
     the following new paragraph:
       ``(1) the candidate received payments under chapter 96 for 
     the campaign for nomination;''.

     SEC. 4. REVISIONS TO EXPENDITURE LIMITS.

       (a) Increase in Expenditure Limits for Participating 
     Candidates; Elimination of State-Specific Limits.--
       (1) In general.--Section 315(b)(1) of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(b)(1)) is amended by 
     striking ``may make expenditures in excess of'' and all that 
     follows and inserting ``may make expenditures--
       ``(A) with respect to a campaign for nomination for 
     election to such office--
       ``(i) in excess of $100,000,000 before April 1 of the 
     calendar year in which the presidential election is held; and
       ``(ii) in excess of $150,000,000 before the date described 
     in section 9006(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; and
       ``(B) with respect to a campaign for election to such 
     office, in excess of $100,000,000.''.
       (2) Clerical correction.--Section 9004(a)(1) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking 
     ``section 320(b)(1)(B) of the Federal Election Campaign Act 
     of 1971'' and inserting ``section 315(b)(1)(B) of the Federal 
     Election Campaign Act of 1971''.
       (b) Increase in Limit on Coordinated Party Expenditures.--
     Section 315(d)(2) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 
     1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(d)(2)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(2)(A) The national committee of a political party may 
     not make any expenditure in connection with the general 
     election campaign of any candidate for President of the 
     United States who is affiliated with such party which exceeds 
     $25,000,000.
       ``(B) Notwithstanding the limitation under subparagraph 
     (A), during the period beginning on April 1 of the year in 
     which a presidential election is held and ending on the date 
     described in section 9006(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986, the national committee of a political party may make 
     additional expenditures in connection with the general 
     election campaign of a candidate for President of the United 
     States who is affiliated with such party in an amount not to 
     exceed $25,000,000.
       ``(C)(i) Notwithstanding subparagraph (B) or the limitation 
     under subparagraph (A), if any nonparticipating primary 
     candidate (within the meaning of subsection (b)(3)) 
     affiliated with the national committee of a political party 
     receives contributions or makes expenditures with respect to 
     such candidate's campaign in an aggregate amount greater than 
     120 percent of the expenditure limitation in effect under 
     subsection (b)(1)(A)(ii), then, during the period described 
     in clause (ii), the national committee of any other political 
     party may make expenditures in connection with the general 
     election campaign of a candidate for President of the United 
     States who is affiliated with such other party without 
     limitation.
       ``(ii) The period described in this clause is the period--
       ``(I) beginning on the later of April 1 of the year in 
     which a presidential election is held or the date on which 
     such nonparticipating primary candidate first receives 
     contributions or makes expenditures in the aggregate amount 
     described in clause (i); and
       ``(II) ending on the earlier of the date such 
     nonparticipating primary candidate ceases to be a candidate 
     for nomination to the office of President of the United 
     States and is not a candidate for such office or the date 
     described in section 9006(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986.
       ``(iii) If the nonparticipating primary candidate described 
     in clause (i) ceases to be a candidate for nomination to the 
     office of President of the United States and is not a 
     candidate for such office, clause (i) shall not apply and the 
     limitations under subparagraphs (A) and (B) shall apply. It 
     shall not be considered to be a violation of this Act if the 
     application of the preceding sentence results in the national 
     committee of a political party violating the limitations 
     under subparagraphs (A) and (B) solely by reason of 
     expenditures made by such national committee during the 
     period in which clause (i) applied.
       ``(D) For purposes of this paragraph--
       ``(i) any expenditure made by or on behalf of a national 
     committee of a political party and in connection with a 
     presidential election shall be considered to be made in 
     connection with the general election campaign of a candidate 
     for President of the United States who is affiliated with 
     such party; and
       ``(ii) any communication made by or on behalf of such party 
     shall be considered to be made in connection with the general 
     election campaign of a candidate for President of the United 
     States who is affiliated with such party if any portion of 
     the communication is in connection with such election.
       ``(E) Any expenditure under this paragraph shall be in 
     addition to any expenditure by a

[[Page 32166]]

     national committee of a political party serving as the 
     principal campaign committee of a candidate for the office of 
     President of the United States.''.
       (c) Conforming Amendments Relating to Timing of Cost-of-
     Living Adjustment.--
       (1) In general.--Section 315(c)(1) of such Act (2 U.S.C. 
     441a(c)(1)) is amended--
       (A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``(b), (d),'' and 
     inserting ``(d)(3)''; and
       (B) by inserting at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(D) In any calendar year after 2008--
       ``(i) a limitation established by subsection (b) or (d)(2) 
     shall be increased by the percent difference determined under 
     subparagraph (A);
       ``(ii) each amount so increased shall remain in effect for 
     the calendar year; and
       ``(iii) if any amount after adjustment under clause (i) is 
     not a multiple of $100, such amount shall be rounded to the 
     nearest multiple of $100.''.
       (2) Base year.--Section 315(c)(2)(B) of such Act (2 U.S.C. 
     441a(c)(2)(B)) is amended--
       (A) in clause (i)--
       (i) by striking ``subsections (b) and (d)'' and inserting 
     ``subsection (d)(3)''; and
       (ii) by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (B) in clause (ii), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new clause:
       ``(iii) for purposes of subsection (b) and (d)(2), calendar 
     year 2007.''.
       (d) Repeal of Exclusion of Fundraising Costs From Treatment 
     as Expenditures.--Section 301(9)(B)(vi) of the Federal 
     Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431(9)(B)(vi)) is 
     amended by striking ``in excess of an amount equal to 20 
     percent of the expenditure limitation applicable to such 
     candidate under section 315(b)'' and inserting the following: 
     ``who is seeking nomination for election or election to the 
     office of President or Vice President of the United States''.

     SEC. 5. ADDITIONAL PAYMENTS AND INCREASED EXPENDITURE LIMITS 
                   FOR CANDIDATES PARTICIPATING IN PUBLIC 
                   FINANCING WHO FACE CERTAIN NONPARTICIPATING 
                   OPPONENTS.

       (a) Candidates in Primary Elections.--
       (1) Additional payments.--
       (A) In general.--Section 9034 of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986, as amended by section 2, is amended by redesignating 
     subsection (c) as subsection (d) and by inserting after 
     subsection (b) the following new subsection:
       ``(c) Additional Payments for Candidates Facing 
     Nonparticipating Opponents.--
       ``(1) In general.--In addition to any payments provided 
     under subsections (a) and (b), each candidate described in 
     paragraph (2) shall be entitled to--
       ``(A) a payment under section 9037 in an amount equal to 
     the amount of each contribution received by such candidate on 
     or after the beginning of the calendar year preceding the 
     calendar year of the presidential election with respect to 
     which such candidate is seeking nomination and before the 
     qualifying date, disregarding any amount of contributions 
     from any person to the extent that the total of the amounts 
     contributed by such person exceeds $200, and
       ``(B) payments under section 9037 in an amount equal to the 
     amount of each contribution received by such candidate on or 
     after the qualifying date, disregarding any amount of 
     contributions from any person to the extent that the total of 
     the amounts contributed by such person exceeds $200.
       ``(2) Candidates to whom this subsection applies.--A 
     candidate is described in this paragraph if such candidate--
       ``(A) is eligible to receive payments under section 9033, 
     and
       ``(B) is opposed by a nonparticipating primary candidate of 
     the same political party who receives contributions or makes 
     expenditures with respect to the campaign--
       ``(i) before April 1 of the year in which the presidential 
     election is held, in an aggregate amount greater than 120 
     percent of the expenditure limitation under section 
     315(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, 
     or
       ``(ii) before the date described in section 9006(b), in an 
     aggregate amount greater than 120 percent of the expenditure 
     limitation under section 315(b)(1)(A)(ii) of such Act.
       ``(3) Nonparticipating primary candidate.--In this 
     subsection, the term `nonparticipating primary candidate' 
     means a candidate for nomination for election for the office 
     of President who is not eligible under section 9033 to 
     receive payments from the Secretary under this chapter.
       ``(4) Qualifying date.--In this subsection, the term 
     `qualifying date' means the first date on which the 
     contributions received or expenditures made by the 
     nonparticipating primary candidate described in paragraph 
     (2)(B) exceed the amount described under either clause (i) or 
     clause (ii) of such paragraph.''.
       (B) Conforming amendment.--Section 9034(b) of such Code, as 
     amended by section 2, is amended by striking ``subsection 
     (a)'' and inserting ``subsections (a) and (c)''.
       (2) Increase in expenditure limit.--Section 315(b) of the 
     Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(b)) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3)(A) In the case of an eligible candidate, each of the 
     limitations under clause (i) and (ii) of paragraph (1)(A) 
     shall be increased--
       ``(i) by $50,000,000, if any nonparticipating primary 
     candidate of the same political party as such candidate 
     receives contributions or makes expenditures with respect to 
     the campaign in an aggregate amount greater than 120 percent 
     of the expenditure limitation applicable to eligible 
     candidates under clause (i) or (ii) of paragraph (1)(A) 
     (before the application of this clause), and
       ``(ii) by $100,000,000, if such nonparticipating primary 
     candidate receives contributions or makes expenditures with 
     respect to the campaign in an aggregate amount greater than 
     120 percent of the expenditure limitation applicable to 
     eligible candidates under clause (i) or (ii) of paragraph 
     (1)(A) after the application of clause (i).
       ``(B) Each dollar amount under subparagraph (A) shall be 
     considered a limitation under this subsection for purposes of 
     subsection (c).
       ``(C) In this paragraph, the term `eligible candidate' 
     means, with respect to any period, a candidate--
       ``(i) who is eligible to receive payments under section 
     9033 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986;
       ``(ii) who is opposed by a nonparticipating primary 
     candidate; and
       ``(iii) with respect to whom the Commission has given 
     notice under section 304(j)(1)(B)(i).
       ``(D) In this paragraph, the term `nonparticipating primary 
     candidate' means, with respect to any eligible candidate, a 
     candidate for nomination for election for the office of 
     President who is not eligible under section 9033 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to receive payments from the 
     Secretary of the Treasury under chapter 96 of such Code.''.
       (b) Candidates in General Elections.--
       (1) Additional payments.--
       (A) In general.--Section 9004(a)(1) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 is amended--
       (i) by striking ``(1) The eligible candidates'' and 
     inserting ``(1)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     the eligible candidates''; and
       (ii) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(B) In addition to the payments described in subparagraph 
     (A), each eligible candidate of a major party in a 
     presidential election with an opponent in the election who is 
     not eligible to receive payments under section 9006 and who 
     receives contributions or makes expenditures with respect to 
     the primary and general elections in an aggregate amount 
     greater than 120 percent of the combined expenditure 
     limitations applicable to eligible candidates under section 
     315(b)(1) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 shall 
     be entitled to an equal payment under section 9006 in an 
     amount equal to 100 percent of the expenditure limitation 
     applicable under such section with respect to a campaign for 
     election to the office of President.''.
       (B) Special rule for minor party candidates.--Section 
     9004(a)(2)(A) of such Code is amended--
       (i) by striking ``(A) The eligible candidates'' and 
     inserting ``(A)(i) Except as provided in clause (ii), the 
     eligible candidates''; and
       (ii) by adding at the end the following new clause:
       ``(ii) In addition to the payments described in clause (i), 
     each eligible candidate of a minor party in a presidential 
     election with an opponent in the election who is not eligible 
     to receive payments under section 9006 and who receives 
     contributions or makes expenditures with respect to the 
     primary and general elections in an aggregate amount greater 
     than 120 percent of the combined expenditure limitations 
     applicable to eligible candidates under section 315(b)(1) of 
     the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 shall be entitled 
     to an equal payment under section 9006 in an amount equal to 
     100 percent of the payment to which such candidate is 
     entitled under clause (i).''.
       (2) Exclusion of additional payment from determination of 
     expenditure limits.--Section 315(b) of the Federal Election 
     Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(b)), as amended by 
     subsection (a), is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(4) In the case of a candidate who is eligible to receive 
     payments under section 9004(a)(1)(B) or 9004(a)(2)(A)(ii) of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, the limitation under 
     paragraph (1)(B) shall be increased by the amount of such 
     payments received by the candidate.''.
       (c) Process for Determination of Eligibility for Additional 
     Payment and Increased Expenditure Limits.--Section 304 of the 
     Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 434) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(j) Reporting and Certification for Additional Public 
     Financing Payments for Candidates.--
       ``(1) Primary candidates.--
       ``(A) Notification of expenditures by ineligible 
     candidates.--
       ``(i) Expenditures in excess of 120 percent of limit.--If a 
     candidate for a nomination for election for the office of 
     President

[[Page 32167]]

     who is not eligible to receive payments under section 9033 of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 receives contributions or 
     makes expenditures with respect to the primary election in an 
     aggregate amount greater than 120 percent of the expenditure 
     limitation applicable to eligible candidates under clause (i) 
     or (ii) of section 315(b)(1)(A), the candidate shall notify 
     the Commission in writing that the candidate has received 
     aggregate contributions or made aggregate expenditures in 
     such an amount not later than 24 hours after first receiving 
     aggregate contributions or making aggregate expenditures in 
     such an amount.
       ``(ii) Expenditures in excess of 120 percent of increased 
     limit.--If a candidate for a nomination for election for the 
     office of President who is not eligible to receive payments 
     under section 9033 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
     receives contributions or makes expenditures with respect to 
     the primary election in an aggregate amount greater than 120 
     percent of the expenditure limitation applicable to eligible 
     candidates under section 315(b) after the application of 
     paragraph (3)(A)(i) thereof, the candidate shall notify the 
     Commission in writing that the candidate has received 
     aggregate contributions or made aggregate expenditures in 
     such an amount not later than 24 hours after first receiving 
     aggregate contributions or making aggregate expenditures in 
     such an amount.
       ``(B) Certification.--Not later than 24 hours after 
     receiving any written notice under subparagraph (A) from a 
     candidate, the Commission shall--
       ``(i) certify to the Secretary of the Treasury that 
     opponents of the candidate are eligible for additional 
     payments under section 9034(c) of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986;
       ``(ii) notify each opponent of the candidate who is 
     eligible to receive payments under section 9033 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 of the amount of the increased 
     limitation on expenditures which applies pursuant to section 
     315(b)(3); and
       ``(iii) in the case of a notice under subparagraph (A)(i), 
     notify the national committee of each political party (other 
     than the political party with which the candidate is 
     affiliated) of the inapplicability of expenditure limits 
     under section 315(d)(2) pursuant to subparagraph (C) thereof.
       ``(2) General election candidates.--
       ``(A) Notification of expenditures by ineligible 
     candidates.--If a candidate in a presidential election who is 
     not eligible to receive payments under section 9006 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 receives contributions or makes 
     expenditures with respect to the primary and general 
     elections in an aggregate amount greater than 120 percent of 
     the combined expenditure limitations applicable to eligible 
     candidates under section 315(b)(1), the candidate shall 
     notify the Commission in writing that the candidate has 
     received aggregate contributions or made aggregate 
     expenditures in such an amount not later than 24 hours after 
     first receiving aggregate contributions or making aggregate 
     expenditures in such an amount.
       ``(B) Certification.--Not later than 24 hours after 
     receiving a written notice under subparagraph (A), the 
     Commission shall certify to the Secretary of the Treasury for 
     payment to any eligible candidate who is entitled to an 
     additional payment under paragraph (1)(B) or (2)(A)(ii) of 
     section 9004(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that the 
     candidate is entitled to payment in full of the additional 
     payment under such section.''.

     SEC. 6. ESTABLISHMENT OF UNIFORM DATE FOR RELEASE OF PAYMENTS 
                   FROM PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN FUND TO 
                   ELIGIBLE CANDIDATES.

       (a) In General.--The first sentence of section 9006(b) of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as 
     follows: ``If the Secretary of the Treasury receives a 
     certification from the Commission under section 9005 for 
     payment to the eligible candidates of a political party, the 
     Secretary shall, on the last Friday occurring before the 
     first Monday in September, pay to such candidates of the fund 
     the amount certified by the Commission.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The first sentence of section 
     9006(c) of such Code is amended by striking ``the time of a 
     certification by the Comptroller General under section 9005 
     for payment'' and inserting ``the time of making a payment 
     under subsection (b)''.

     SEC. 7. REVISIONS TO DESIGNATION OF INCOME TAX PAYMENTS BY 
                   INDIVIDUAL TAXPAYERS.

       (a) Increase in Amount Designated.--Section 6096(a) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``$3'' each place it 
     appears and inserting ``$10''; and
       (2) in the second sentence--
       (A) by striking ``$6'' and inserting ``$20''; and
       (B) by striking ``$3'' and inserting ``$10''.
       (b) Indexing.--Section 6096 of such Code is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(d) Indexing of Amount Designated.--
       ``(1) In general.--With respect to each taxable year after 
     2008, each amount referred to in subsection (a) shall be 
     increased by the percent difference described in paragraph 
     (2), except that if any such amount after such an increase is 
     not a multiple of $1, such amount shall be rounded to the 
     nearest multiple of $1.
       ``(2) Percent difference described.--The percent difference 
     described in this paragraph with respect to a taxable year is 
     the percent difference determined under section 315(c)(1)(A) 
     of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 with respect to 
     the calendar year during which the taxable year begins, 
     except that the base year involved shall be 2008.''.
       (c) Ensuring Tax Preparation Software Does Not Provide 
     Automatic Response to Designation Question.--Section 6096 of 
     such Code, as amended by subsection (b), is amended by adding 
     at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(e) Ensuring Tax Preparation Software Does Not Provide 
     Automatic Response to Designation Question.--The Secretary 
     shall promulgate regulations to ensure that electronic 
     software used in the preparation or filing of individual 
     income tax returns does not automatically accept or decline a 
     designation of a payment under this section.''.
       (d) Public Information Program on Designation.--Section 
     6096 of such Code, as amended by subsections (b) and (c), is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(f) Public Information Program.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Federal Election Commission shall 
     conduct a program to inform and educate the public regarding 
     the purposes of the Presidential Election Campaign Fund, the 
     procedures for the designation of payments under this 
     section, and the effect of such a designation on the income 
     tax liability of taxpayers.
       ``(2) Use of funds for program.--Amounts in the 
     Presidential Election Campaign Fund shall be made available 
     to the Federal Election Commission to carry out the program 
     under this subsection, except that the amount made available 
     for this purpose may not exceed $10,000,000 with respect to 
     any Presidential election cycle. In this paragraph, a 
     `Presidential election cycle' is the 4-year period beginning 
     with January of the year following a Presidential 
     election.''.
       (e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 8. AMOUNTS IN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN FUND.

       (a) Determination of Amounts in Fund.--Section 9006(c) of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the 
     end the following new sentence: ``In making a determination 
     of whether there are insufficient moneys in the fund for 
     purposes of the previous sentence, the Secretary shall take 
     into account in determining the balance of the fund for a 
     Presidential election year the Secretary's best estimate of 
     the amount of moneys which will be deposited into the fund 
     during the year, except that the amount of the estimate may 
     not exceed the average of the annual amounts deposited in the 
     fund during the previous 3 years.''.
       (b) Special Rule for First Campaign Cycle Under This Act.--
       (1) In general.--Section 9006 of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(d) Special Authority To Borrow.--
       ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding subsection (c), there 
     are authorized to be appropriated to the fund, as repayable 
     advances, such sums as are necessary to carry out the 
     purposes of the fund during the period ending on the first 
     presidential election occurring after the date of the 
     enactment of this subsection.
       ``(2) Repayment of advances.--
       ``(A) In general.--Advances made to the fund shall be 
     repaid, and interest on such advances shall be paid, to the 
     general fund of the Treasury when the Secretary determines 
     that moneys are available for such purposes in the fund.
       ``(B) Rate of interest.--Interest on advances made to the 
     fund shall be at a rate determined by the Secretary of the 
     Treasury (as of the close of the calendar month preceding the 
     month in which the advance is made) to be equal to the 
     current average market yield on outstanding marketable 
     obligations of the United States with remaining periods to 
     maturity comparable to the anticipated period during which 
     the advance will be outstanding and shall be compounded 
     annually.''.
       (2) Effective date.--The amendment made by this subsection 
     shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 9. REGULATION OF CONVENTION FINANCING.

       Section 323 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 441i) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new subsection:
       ``(g) National Conventions.--Any person described in 
     subsection (e) shall not solicit, receive, direct, transfer, 
     or spend any funds in connection with a presidential 
     nominating convention of any political party, including funds 
     for a host committee, civic committee, municipality, or any 
     other person or entity spending funds in connection with such 
     a convention, unless such funds--
       ``(1) are not in excess of the amounts permitted with 
     respect to contributions to the political committee 
     established and maintained by a national political party 
     committee under section 315; and

[[Page 32168]]

       ``(2) are not from sources prohibited by this Act from 
     making contributions in connection with an election for 
     Federal office.''.

     SEC. 10. DISCLOSURE OF BUNDLED CONTRIBUTIONS TO PRESIDENTIAL 
                   CAMPAIGNS.

       (a) In General.--Paragraphs (1) through (3) of section 
     304(i) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 
     434(i)) are amended to read as follows:
       ``(1) In general.--
       ``(A) Disclosure of bundled contributions by lobbyists.--
     Each committee described in paragraph (6) shall include in 
     the first report required to be filed under this section 
     after each covered period (as defined in paragraph (2)) a 
     separate schedule setting forth the name, address, and 
     employer of each person reasonably known by the committee to 
     be a person described in paragraph (7) who provided 2 or more 
     bundled contributions to the committee in an aggregate amount 
     greater than the applicable threshold (as defined in 
     paragraph (3)) during the covered period, and the aggregate 
     amount of the bundled contributions provided by each such 
     person during the covered period.
       ``(B) Disclosure of bundled contributions to presidential 
     campaigns.--Each committee which is an authorized committee 
     of a candidate for the office of President or for nomination 
     to such office shall include in the first report required to 
     be filed under this section after each covered period (as 
     defined in paragraph (2)) a separate schedule setting forth 
     the name, address, and employer of each person who provided 2 
     or more bundled contributions to the committee in an 
     aggregate amount greater than the applicable threshold (as 
     defined in paragraph (3)) during the election cycle, and the 
     aggregate amount of the bundled contributions provided by 
     each such person during the covered period and such election 
     cycle. Such schedule shall include a separate listing of the 
     name, address, and employer of each person included on such 
     schedule who is reasonably known by the committee to be a 
     person described in paragraph (7), together with the 
     aggregate amount of bundled contributions provided by such 
     person during such period and such cycle.
       ``(2) Covered period.--In this subsection, a `covered 
     period' means--
       ``(A) with respect to a committee which is an authorized 
     committee of a candidate for the office of President or for 
     nomination to such office--
       ``(i) the 4-year election cycle ending with the date of the 
     election for the office of the President; and
       ``(ii) any reporting period applicable to the committee 
     under this section during which any person provided 2 or more 
     bundled contributions to the committee; and
       ``(B) with respect to any other committee--
       ``(i) the period beginning January 1 and ending June 30 of 
     each year;
       ``(ii) the period beginning July 1 and ending December 31 
     of each year; and
       ``(iii) any reporting period applicable to the committee 
     under this section during which any person described in 
     paragraph (7) provided 2 or more bundled contributions to the 
     committee in an aggregate amount greater than the applicable 
     threshold.
       ``(3) Applicable threshold.--
       ``(A) In general.--In this subsection, the `applicable 
     threshold' is--
       ``(i) $50,000 in the case of a committee which is an 
     authorized committee of a candidate for the office of 
     President or for nomination to such office; and
       ``(ii) $15,000 in the case of any other committee.

     In determining whether the amount of bundled contributions 
     provided to a committee by a person exceeds the applicable 
     threshold, there shall be excluded any contribution made to 
     the committee by the person or the person's spouse.
       ``(B) Indexing.--In any calendar year after 2007, section 
     315(c)(1)(B) shall apply to each amount applicable under 
     subparagraph (A) in the same manner as such section applies 
     to the limitations established under subsections (a)(1)(A), 
     (a)(1)(B), (a)(3), and (h) of such section, except that for 
     purposes of applying such section to the amount applicable 
     under subparagraph (A), the `base period' shall be 2006.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Subsection (i) of section 304 
     of such Act (2 U.S.C. 434) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (5), by striking ``described in paragraph 
     (7)'' each place it appears in subparagraphs (C) and (D);
       (2) in paragraph (6), by inserting ``(other than a 
     candidate for the office of President or for nomination to 
     such office)'' after ``candidate''; and
       (3) in paragraph (8)(A)--
       (A) by striking ``, with respect to a committee described 
     in paragraph (6) and a person described in paragraph (7),'' 
     and inserting ``, with respect to a committee described in 
     paragraph (6) or an authorized committee of a candidate for 
     the office of President or for nomination to such office,'';
       (B) by striking ``by the person'' in clause (i) thereof and 
     inserting ``by any person''; and
       (C) by striking ``the person'' each place it appears in 
     clause (ii) and inserting ``such person''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply with respect to reports filed under section 304 
     of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 after January 1, 
     2009.

     SEC. 11. REPEAL OF PRIORITY IN USE OF FUNDS FOR POLITICAL 
                   CONVENTIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 9008(a) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 is amended by striking the period at the end of 
     the second sentence and all that follows and inserting the 
     following: ``, except that the amount deposited may not 
     exceed the amount available after the Secretary determines 
     that amounts for payments under section 9006 and section 9037 
     are available for such payments.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The second sentence of section 
     9037(a) of such Code is amended by striking ``section 9006(c) 
     and for payments under section 9008(b)(3)'' and inserting 
     ``section 9006''.

     SEC. 12. OFFSETS.

       (a) Removal of Prohibition on Increasing Fees for 
     Permits.--Section 365 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 
     U.S.C. 15924) is amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (i); and
       (2) by redesignating subsection (j) as subsection (i).
       (b) Disposal of Moneys From Sales, Bonuses, Rentals, and 
     Royalties.--Section 20 of the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 
     (30 U.S.C. 1019) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 20. DISPOSAL OF MONEYS FROM SALES, BONUSES, RENTALS, 
                   AND ROYALTIES.

       ``Subject to section 35 of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 
     U.S.C. 192), all funds received from the sales, bonuses, 
     royalties, and rentals under this Act (including payments 
     referred to in section 6) shall be disposed of in the same 
     manner as funds received pursuant to section 6 of this Act or 
     section 35 of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 192), as the 
     case may be.''.
       (c) Royalty for Hardrock Mining.--The Revised Statutes are 
     amended by inserting after section 2352 (30 U.S.C. 76) the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 2353. RESERVATION OF ROYALTY.

       ``(a) Definition of Locatable Mineral.--In this section:
       ``(1) In general.--The term `locatable mineral' means any 
     mineral, the legal and beneficial title to which remains in 
     the United States and that is not subject to disposition 
     under--
       ``(A) the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.);
       ``(B) the Act of August 7, 1947 (commonly known as the 
     `Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands') (30 U.S.C. 351 et 
     seq.);
       ``(C) the Act of July 31, 1947 (commonly known as the 
     `Materials Act of 1947') (30 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); or
       ``(D) the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 (30 U.S.C. 1001 et 
     seq.).
       ``(2) Exclusions.--The term `locatable mineral' does not 
     include any mineral that is subject to a restriction against 
     alienation imposed by the United States and is--
       ``(A) held in trust by the United States for any Indian or 
     Indian tribe (as defined in section 2 of the Indian Mineral 
     Development Act of 1982 (25 U.S.C. 2101)); or
       ``(B) owned by any Indian or Indian tribe (s defined in 
     section 2 of that Act).
       ``(b) Royalty.--Except as otherwise provided in this 
     section, production of all locatable minerals from any mining 
     claim located under the general mining laws, or mineral 
     concentrates or products derived from locatable minerals from 
     any such mining claim, as the case may be, shall be subject 
     to a royalty of 8 percent of the gross income from mining.
       ``(c) Liability for Payment.--The claim holder or any 
     operator to whom the claim holder has assigned the obligation 
     to make royalty payments under the claim, and any person who 
     controls the claim holder or operator, shall be liable for 
     payment of royalties under this section.
       ``(d) Royalty for Federal Land Subject to Existing 
     Permit.--The royalty under subsection (b) shall be 4 percent 
     in the case of any Federal land that--
       ``(1) is subject to an operations permit on the date of 
     enactment of this section; and
       ``(2) produces valuable locatable minerals in commercial 
     quantities on the date of enactment of this section.
       ``(e) Federal Land Added to Existing Operations Permit.--
     Any Federal land added through a plan modification to an 
     operations permit that is submitted after the date of 
     enactment of this section shall be subject to the royalty 
     that applies to Federal land under subsection (b).
       ``(f) Deposit.--Amounts received by the United States as 
     royalties under this section shall be deposited into the 
     general fund of the Treasury.''.
       (d) Hardrock Mining Claim Maintenance Fee.--
       (1) Fee.--
       (A) In general.--Except as provided in section 2511(e)(2) 
     of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (30 U.S.C. 242(e)(2)), for 
     each unpatented mining claim, mill, or tunnel site on 
     federally owned land, whether located before, on, or after 
     enactment of this Act, each claimant shall pay to the 
     Secretary, on or before August 31 of each year, a claim 
     maintenance fee of $150 per claim to hold the unpatented 
     mining claim, mill, or tunnel site for the assessment year 
     beginning at noon on September 1.

[[Page 32169]]

       (B) Relation to other law.--A claim maintenance fee 
     described in subparagraph (A) shall be in lieu of--
       (i) the assessment work requirement in section 2324 of the 
     Revised Statutes (30 U.S.C. 28); and
       (ii) the related filing requirements in subsections (a) and 
     (c) of section 314 of the Federal Land Policy and Management 
     Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1744).
       (C) Waiver.--
       (i) In general.--The claim maintenance fee required under 
     subparagraph (A) shall be waived for a claimant who certifies 
     in writing to the Secretary that on the date the payment was 
     due, the claimant and all related parties--

       (I) held not more than 10 mining claims, mill sites, or 
     tunnel sites, or any combination of mining claims, mill 
     sites, or tunnel sites, on public land; and
       (II) have performed assessment work required under section 
     2324 of the Revised Statutes (30 U.S.C. 28) to maintain the 
     mining claims held by the claimant and all related parties 
     for the assessment year ending on noon of September 1 of the 
     calendar year in which payment of the claim maintenance fee 
     was due.

       (ii) Definition of all related parties.--In clause (i), 
     with the respect to any claimant, the term ``all related 
     parties'' means--

       (I) the spouse and dependent children (as defined in 
     section 152 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986), of the 
     claimant; or
       (II) a person affiliated with the claimant, including--

       (aa) a person controlled by, controlling, or under common 
     control with the claimant; or
       (bb) a subsidiary or parent company or corporation of the 
     claimant.
       (D) Adjustment.--
       (i) In general.--Not less than 5 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, and every 5 years thereafter, or more 
     frequently if the Secretary determines an adjustment to be 
     reasonable, the Secretary shall adjust the claim maintenance 
     fee required under subparagraph (A) to reflect changes for 
     the 12-month period ending the preceding November 30 in the 
     Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the 
     Bureau of Labor Statistics of the Department of Labor.
       (ii) Notification.--Not later than July 1 of any year in 
     which an adjustment is made under clause (i), the Secretary 
     shall provide claimants notice of the adjustment.
       (iii) Application.--A fee adjustment under clause (i) shall 
     be effective beginning January 1 of the calendar year 
     following the calendar year in which the adjustment is made.
       (2) Location fee.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, for each unpatented mining claim, mill, or tunnel site 
     located during the period beginning on the date of enactment 
     of this Act and ending on September 30, 1998, the locator 
     shall, at the time the location notice is recorded with the 
     Bureau of Land Management, pay to the Secretary a location 
     fee, in addition to the fee required by paragraph (1), of $50 
     per claim.
       (3) Deposit.--Amounts received under paragraph (1) or (2) 
     that are not otherwise allocated for the administration of 
     the mining laws by the Department of the Interior shall be 
     deposited into the general fund of the Treasury.
       (4) Co-ownership.--The co-ownership provisions of section 
     2324 of the Revised Statutes (30 U.S.C. 28) shall remain in 
     effect except that the annual claim maintenance fee, if 
     applicable, shall replace applicable assessment requirements 
     and expenditures.
       (5) Failure to pay.--Failure to pay the claim maintenance 
     fee required by paragraph (1) shall conclusively constitute a 
     forfeiture of the unpatented mining claim, mill, or tunnel 
     site by the claimant and the claim shall be considered to be 
     null and void by operation of law.
       (6) Other requirements.--
       (A) Relation to other law.--Nothing in this section changes 
     or modifies the requirements of subsections (b) or (c) of 
     section 314(b) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act 
     of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1744).
       (B) Conforming amendment.--Section 2324 of the Revised 
     Statutes of the United States (30 U.S.C. 28) is amended by 
     inserting ``or section 12(d)(1) of the Presidential Funding 
     Act of 2007'' after ``Act of 1993,''.
       (e) Grazing Fees.--Section 6(a) of the Public Rangelands 
     Improvement Act of 1978 (43 U.S.C. 1905) is amended by 
     striking ``the $1.23 base'' and all that follows through 
     ``previous year's fee'' and inserting ``an amount determined 
     in the same manner as the State in which the land is located 
     determines the amount of fees charged for public grazing on 
     land owned by the State, as determined by the Secretary of 
     Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior, as 
     appropriate''.
       (f) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 13. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       Except as otherwise provided in this Act, the amendments 
     made by this Act shall apply with respect to elections 
     occurring after January 1, 2009.
                                  ____


                      Section-by-Section Analysis


                         Section 1: Short Title

    Section 2: Revisions to System of Presidential Primary Matching 
                                Payments

       (a) Matching Funds: Current law provides for a 1-to-1 
     match, where up to $250 of each individual's contributions 
     for the primaries is matched with $250 in public funds. Under 
     the new matching system, individual contributions of up to 
     $200 from each individual will be matched at a 4-to-1 ratio, 
     so $200 in individual contribution can be matched with $800 
     from public funds.
       Candidates who remain in the primary race can also receive 
     an additional 1-to-1 match of up to $200 of contributions 
     received after March 31 of a presidential election year. This 
     additional match applies both to an initial contribution made 
     after March 31 and to contributions from individuals who 
     already gave $200 or more prior to April 1.
       The bill defines ``contribution'' as ``a gift of money made 
     by a written instrument which identifies the person making 
     the contribution by full name and mailing address.''
       (b) Eligibility for matching funds: Current law requires 
     candidates to raise $5,000 in matchable contributions 
     (currently $250 or less) in 20 states. To be eligible for 
     matching funds under this bill, a candidate must raise 
     $25,000 of matchable contributions (up to $200 per individual 
     donor) in at least 20 states.
       In addition, to receive matching funds in the primary, 
     candidates must pledge to apply for public money in the 
     general election if nominated and to not exceed the general 
     election spending limits.
       (c) Timing of payments: Current law makes matching funds 
     available on January 1 of a presidential election year. The--
     bill makes such funds available six months prior to the first 
     state caucus or primary.


    Section 3: Requiring Participation in Primary Payment System as 
        Condition of Eligibility for General Elections Payments

       Currently, candidates can participate in either the primary 
     or the general election public financing system, or both. 
     Under the bill, a candidate must participate in the primary 
     matching system in order to be eligible to receive public 
     funds in the general election.


               Section 4: Revisions to Expenditure Limits

       (a) Spending limits for candidates: In 2004, under current 
     law, candidates participating in the public funding system 
     had to abide by a primary election spending limit of about 
     $45 million and a general election spending limit of about 
     $75 million (all of which was public money). The bill sets a 
     total primary spending ceiling for participating candidates 
     in 2008 of $150 million, of which only $100 million can be 
     spent before April 1. State by state spending limits are 
     eliminated. The general election limit, which the major party 
     candidates will receive in public funds, will be $100 
     million.
       (b) Spending limit for parties: Current law provides a 
     single coordinated spending limit for national party 
     committees based on population. In 2004 that limit was about 
     $15 million. The bill provides two limits of $25 million. The 
     first applies after April 1 until a candidate is nominated. 
     The second limit kicks in after the nomination. Any part of 
     the limit not spent before the nomination can be spent after. 
     In addition, the party coordinated spending limit is 
     eliminated entirely until the general election public funds 
     are released if there is an active candidate from the 
     opposing party who has exceeded the primary spending limits 
     by more than 20%.
       This will allow the party to support the presumptive 
     nominee during the so-called ``gap'' between the end of the 
     primaries and the conventions. The entire cost of a 
     coordinated party communication is subject to the limit if 
     any portion of that communication has to do with the 
     presidential election.
       (c) Inflation adjustment: Party and candidate spending 
     limits will be indexed for inflation, with 2008 as the base 
     year.
       (d) Fundraising expenses: Under the bill, all the costs of 
     fundraising by candidates are subject to their spending 
     limits.


 Section 5: Additional Payments and Increased Expenditures Limits for 
     Candidates Participating in Public Financing Who Face Certain 
                       Nonparticipating Opponents

       (a) Primary candidates: When a participating candidate is 
     opposed in a primary by a nonparticipating candidate who 
     spends more than 120 percent of the primary spending limit 
     ($100 million prior to April 1 and $150 million after April 
     1), the participating candidate will receive a 5-to-1 match, 
     instead of a 4-to-l match for contributions of less than $200 
     per donor. That additional match applies to all contributions 
     received by the participating candidate both before and after 
     the nonparticipating candidate crosses the 120 percent 
     threshold. In addition, the participating candidate's primary 
     spending limit is raised by $50 million when a 
     nonparticipating candidate spends more than the 120 percent 
     of either the $100 million (before April 1) or $150 million 
     (after April 1) limit. The limit is raised by another $50 
     million if the nonparticipating candidate spends more than 
     120 percent of the increased limit. Thus, the maximum 
     spending limit in the primary would be $250 million if an 
     opposing candidate has spent more than $240 million.
       (b) General election candidates: When a participating 
     candidate is opposed in a general election by a 
     nonparticipating candidate who spends more than 120 percent 
     of the combined primary and general election spending limits, 
     the participating candidate

[[Page 32170]]

     shall receive an additional grant of public money equal to 
     the amount provided for that election--$100 million in 2008. 
     Minor party candidates are also eligible for an additional 
     grant equal to the amount they otherwise receive (which is 
     based on the performance of that party in the previous 
     presidential election).
       (c) Reporting and Certification: In order to provide for 
     timely determination of a participating candidate's 
     eligibility for increased spending limits, matching funds, 
     and/or general election grants, non-participating candidates 
     must notify the FEC within 24 hours after receiving 
     contributions or making expenditures of greater than the 
     applicable 120 percent threshold. Within 24 hours of 
     receiving such a notice, the FEC will inform candidates 
     participating in the system of their increased expenditure 
     limits and will certify to the Secretary of the Treasury that 
     participating candidates are eligible to receive additional 
     payments.


 Section 6: Establishment of Uniform Date for Release of Payments from 
      Presidential Elections Campaign Funds to Eligible Candidates

       Under current law, candidates participating in the system 
     for the general election receive their grants of public money 
     immediately after receiving the nomination of their party, 
     meaning that the two major parties receive their grants on 
     different dates. Under the bill, all candidates eligible to 
     receive public money in the general election would receive 
     that money on the Friday before Labor Day, unless a 
     candidate's formal nomination occurs later.


     Section 7: Revisions to Designation of Income Tax Payments by 
                          Individual Taxpayers

       The tax check-off is increased from $3 (individual) and $6 
     (couple) to $10 and $20. The amount will be adjusted for 
     inflation, and rounded to the nearest dollar, beginning in 
     2009.
       The IRS shall require by regulation that electronic tax 
     preparation software does not automatically accept or decline 
     the tax checkoff. The FEC is required to inform and educate 
     the public about the purpose of the Presidential Election 
     Campaign Fund (``PECF'') and how to make a contribution. 
     Funding for this program of up to $10 million in a four year 
     presidential election cycle, will come from the PECF.


       Section 8: Amounts in Presidential Election Campaign Fund

       Under current law, in January of an election year if the 
     Treasury Department determines that there are insufficient 
     funds in the PECF to make the required payments to 
     participating primary candidates, the party conventions, and 
     the general election candidates, it must reduce the payments 
     available to participating primary candidates and it cannot 
     make up the shortfall from any other source until those funds 
     come in. Under the bill, in making that determination the 
     Department can include an estimate of the amount that will be 
     received by the PECF during that election year, but the 
     estimate cannot exceed the past three years' average 
     contribution to the fund. This will allow primary candidates 
     to receive their full payments as long as a reasonable 
     estimate of the funds that will come into the PECF that year 
     will cover the general election candidate payments. The bill 
     allows the Secretary of the Treasury to borrow the funds 
     necessary to carry out the purposes of the fund during the 
     first campaign cycle in which the bill is in effect.


             SECTION 9: REGULATION OF CONVENTION FINANCING

       Federal candidates and officeholders are prohibited from 
     raising or spending soft money in connection with a 
     nominating convention of any political party, including funds 
     for a host committee, civic committee, or municipality.


            SECTION 10: DISCLOSURE OF BUNDLED CONTRIBUTIONS

       This section builds on the bundling disclosure provision of 
     the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 
     (``HLOGA'') to require presidential campaigns to disclose the 
     name, address, and employer of all individuals or groups that 
     bundle contributions totaling more than $50,000 in the four 
     year election cycle. Individuals who are registered lobbyists 
     would have to be separately identified. HLOGA's definition of 
     bundling would apply to bundling disclosure by the 
     presidential candidates, and no change is made to the 
     requirements of HLOGA with respect to congressional 
     campaigns.


     SECTION 11: REPEAL OF PRIORITY IN USE OF FUNDS FOR POLITICAL 
                              CONVENTIONS

       Current law gives the political parties priority on 
     receiving the funds they are entitled to from the PECF. This 
     means that parties get money for their conventions even if 
     adequate funds are not available for participating 
     candidates. This section would make funds available for the 
     conventions only if all participating candidates have 
     received the funds to which they are entitled.


                           SECTION 12: OFFSET

       This section provides an offset for the increased cost of 
     the presidential public funding system. The total increased 
     cost is estimated to be $365 million over four years. The 
     bill (1) authorizes the Bureau of Land Management to 
     implement new user fees for processing oil and gas permits; 
     (2) increases the yearly maintenance fee and one-time 
     location fee for holders of more than 10 mining claims on 
     federal land to $150 and $50 per claim, respectively, and 
     imposes a 4% royalty on the gross income from mining on 
     existing claims; and (3) uses state formulas to set federal 
     grazing fees.


                       SECTION 13: EFFECTIVE DATE

       Provides that the amendments will apply to presidential 
     elections occurring after January 1, 2009.

  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President. I rise to join my friend from Wisconsin, 
Senator Feingold, in introducing the Presidential Funding Act of 2007.
  It was 100 years ago that the reformer President Theodore Roosevelt 
proposed ``a very radical measure'' in his State of the Union message 
to Congress. He envisioned a system of campaign financing that would 
include a congressional appropriation to support national campaigns so 
that, as he said, ``The need for collecting large campaign funds would 
vanish.''
  When the campaign financing reforms of the 1970s were enacted, it was 
hoped that we would draw closer to achieving Theodore Roosevelt's goal 
of funding the pursuit of our highest public office largely from public 
rather than private funds.
  Our Presidential-campaign finance system still suffers from serious 
defects, however, and current events are dramatically highlighting the 
need for continued reform and improvement.
  The current Presidential campaign is already shaping up as the most 
expensive election in history by far. Candidate after candidate has 
chosen to forego public funds due to fundamental flaws in the system. 
Fund-raising tallies have already shattered records. If a candidate 
decides to seek public funding, he or she risks running out of funds to 
counter candidates who can attract large amounts of private 
contributions.
  Current estimates are that the 2008 contest for the Presidency of the 
U.S. will cost more than $1 billion. Much of that cost will be incurred 
in delivering messages to the electorate through advertising and 
publications of all sorts.
  One billion dollars is a huge sum. Yet we cannot expect modern 
campaigns to be run on budgets that might have sufficed for William 
McKinley, whose successful 1896 campaign relied heavily on speeches 
from his front porch in Canton, Ohio, to admirers who came by train to 
hear him. This idyllic but limited approach to campaigning is long 
gone.
  Unless we wish to return to the cronyism, influence peddling, and 
restricted suffrage of the 19th century, large expenditures on 
broadcasting and other media are essential for any campaign that hopes 
to prevail. That financial fact obliges candidates to spend a great 
deal of time appearing at exclusive, big-ticket fundraisers.
  To allow candidates to spend less time raising money, Congress 
established a system of public funding for Presidential campaigns that 
started with the 1976 Presidential election. That system has not been 
substantially changed since 1984, and its limitations have only become 
more evident with time.
  The central problem is that the system does not provide enough public 
funds to permit a credible contest against well-bankrolled candidates 
who have opted out of the public-financing system.
  In November 2003, Governor Dean announced that he would opt out of 
public financing, saying ``floods of special-interest money have forced 
us to abandon a broken system.'' Senator Kerry also felt obliged to opt 
out so that he could lend his campaign $6 million rather than be 
restricted to the use of $50,000 in personal funds.
  Citing Senator Dole's campaign in 1996, Senator McCain's campaign in 
2000, and Senator Edwards's campaign in 2004, the League of Women 
Voters has spoken of the public system's ``devil's bargain'' for 
candidates: ``To get matching funds, they have to accept a spending 
limit that will leave them bankrupt if the contest continues into 
March. . . . With the underdogs boxed in by the limits, the 
frontrunners, and others who can afford it, have additional incentive 
to opt out.''
  The bill we introduce today would make a number of important changes.

[[Page 32171]]

  The key provisions of the Presidential Funding Act of 2007 would 
increase the public match for primary-season contributions, make funds 
available earlier in the contest, tie the availability of public 
funding during the general-election campaign to a candidate's using it 
during the primary season, provide additional funds if a non-publicly 
funded opponent spends heavily, and update spending limits to more 
realistic levels.
  All of these steps represent sensible and useful improvements in the 
campaign-finance system.
  I recognize that some of our colleagues and some members of the 
public are wary of taxpayer-supported funding for Presidential 
candidates. I can only respond that the alternative--a complete 
reliance on private contributions--is worse.
  I would also reassure doubters that this bill is no giveaway or an 
inducement to fringe candidates of narrow appeal. Its provisions are 
predicated upon matches for individual contributions, not absolute 
grants, and it requires achieving significant levels of individual 
contributions in at least 20 States.
  We all understand that the current system of public funding for 
campaigns has defects. The growing inclination of candidates to opt out 
of the system underscores that fact. The Presidential Funding Act of 
2007 would cure some serious problems and help restore the appeal of 
public funding.
  If enacted, this bill would take effect in January 2009. By moving 
toward virtually full realization of Theodore Roosevelt's ``very 
radical measure,'' we can take a big step toward making the financing, 
the conduct, and the outcome of the 2012 presidential campaign a 
genuine source of pride for American citizens of all political 
affiliations.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ENZI (for himself and Mrs. Feinstein):
  S. 2413. A bill to provide death and disability benefits for aerial 
firefighters who work on a contract basis for a public agency and 
suffer death or disability in the line of duty, and for other purposes; 
to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, the 2007 fire season was one of the worst in 
recent history. Millions of acres burned across America. The fires 
destroyed homes, and their damage is estimated in the hundreds of 
millions of dollars. These fires would have been worse, if not for the 
skill and bravery of the aerial firefighters who risked their lives to 
fight them.
  Aerial firefighters take on the dangerous tasks of maneuvering aerial 
vehicles in and out of fire zones. Each time they step in a plane, 
their life is at risk. Unfortunately, while we expect aerial 
firefighters to risk their lives to help control fires, we refuse to 
provide their families with the knowledge that they will be made 
financially whole if their husband or wife dies in the line of duty.
  This is because aerial firefighters do not qualify for death benefits 
under the Public Safety Officers' Benefit, PSOB, program, which 
provides financial and educational benefits to individuals serving a 
public safety agency in an official capacity, on a paid or volunteer 
basis. Currently, those receiving benefits include, but are not limited 
to, law enforcement officers, firefighters, emergency medical 
technicians, ambulance crew members, and corrections officers.
  Senator Feinstein and I say that these pilots do the same work and 
take on the same risks as other public safety officers. They should get 
the same benefits. That is the reason that we have introduced the 
Aerial Firefighter Relief Act of 2007. This important legislation will 
remedy this problem and makes aerial firefighters eligible for death 
benefits.
  The Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Assistance, BJA, the 
agency that administers the PSOB, has ruled that aerial pilots are 
ineligible because they are contractors and not employed directly by 
the federal and state agencies involved in wildland fire management and 
suppression. The 1980 official finding that prohibits the pilots and 
their families from receiving benefits states that pilots are not ``a 
`public safety officer' as this term is defined in the PSOB ACT because 
[they are] not serving a public agency in an official capacity . . . as 
a fireman.''
  Unfortunately, pilots also often do not receive benefits from their 
employers. Federal agencies outsource air tanker missions to the 
lowest-cost private operators who do not provide benefits to keep their 
costs down. Some companies do offer a minimal amount of life insurance. 
However, it is expensive, both for the pilot and the contractor. In the 
``low cost'' competitive bid situation they are in, the contractors 
cannot afford to add more expenses to the payroll or they reduce their 
chances of winning a fire suppression contract--and go out of business. 
Other forms of life insurance are also difficult to obtain because of 
the dangerous nature of aerial firefighting.
  It is common sense legislation that deserves the support of my 
colleagues, and I am pleased to have Senator Feinstein as an original 
cosponsor. In the coming months, I look forward to working with the 
appropriate committees to move this legislation forward so that our 
brave aerial firefighters can take to the skies knowing that their 
families will be taken care of if they pass away taking care of our 
country.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to cosponsor 
Senator Enzi's Aerial Firefighter Relief Act of 2007.
  On August 27, 2001, a California pilot named Larry Groff took off 
from Ukiah in State Air Tanker 87, doing what he loved, flying and 
fighting fires.
  Like thousands of contract firefighters hired by the Government, he 
figured that if anything ever happened to him, his family would be 
taken care of. But that day, while maneuvering above a north coast fire 
started by a couple of Hells Angels who had blown up their 
methamphetamine lab, Larry Groff died in a midair collision.
  Faced with the prospect of raising their 6 children alone, his widow, 
Christine Wells-Groff, filed a claim under the Public Safety Officers' 
Benefit Program. This PSOB Program provides a lump-sum payoff to 
survivors of any ``public safety officer,'' a term which can include 
not only actual government employees but also any volunteer or any 
person acting in a ``similar relationship of performing services as 
part of a public agency.''
  At the time of his death, Larry Groff had been flying a State-
operated air tanker. He was wearing a California Department of Forestry 
uniform. And after his death, the California agency for which he had 
worked issued an opinion stating that he was an officially recognized 
member of that agency. But he was also a contract employee.
  Because of that, Ms. Wells-Groff's PSOB claim was initially denied by 
the Bureau of Justice Affairs, based on its opinion that contract 
employees cannot qualify for PSOB benefits. Ms. Wells-Groff then 
appealed, and she later convinced a trial court that despite being a 
contract employee, her husband had held a ``similar relationship of 
performing services as part of a public agency,'' thereby qualifying 
him as a ``public safety officer'' entitled to PSOB benefits.
  Unfortunately, on July 3, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal 
Circuit reversed that decision. The appellate court agreed that Mr. 
Groff's facts might fall within the applicable regulation's key 
definition of a ``similar relationship'' but it said that the question 
of whether he had met this standard was not entirely clear and that it 
would defer to the Government's narrow interpretation of that language, 
absent further clarification from Congress.
  Following this decision, Ms. Wells-Groff petitioned the Supreme Court 
to take her case. However, it is unclear if the Court will hear the 
case, let alone decide in her favor. So today, I want to go on record 
to support the policy that these contract employees should be entitled 
to the same PSOB benefits as other injured firefighters and volunteers.
  The bill that Senator Enzi is introducing and that I am pleased to 
cosponsor will make it clear that survivors of aerial firefighters like 
Larry

[[Page 32172]]

Groff who make the ultimate sacrifice should qualify for PSOB benefits. 
In addition, this legislation will clarify that the district court was 
right in the Wells-Groff case. Brave firefighters like Larry Groff, who 
regularly put their lives on the line in officially sanctioned aerial 
firefighting activities to protect us, do this country a great service.
  This bill will clarify that when actually up in the air carrying out 
official firefighting missions, contract employees will be deemed to 
hold a ``similar relationship of performing services as part of a 
public agency''--and meet the regulatory standard already in place--so 
that they are covered by the PSOB laws, and their survivors can receive 
the benefits they need and deserve.
  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. REID (for Mrs. Clinton):
  S. 2415. A bill to require the President and the Office of the Global 
AIDS Coordinator to establish a comprehensive and integrated HIV 
prevention strategy to address the vulnerabilities of women and girls 
in countries for which the United States provides assistance to combat 
HIV/AIDS, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Foreign 
Relations.
  Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce the Protection 
Against Transmission of HIV for Women and Youth, PATHWAY, Act of 2007, 
legislation that is a companion to the bill introduced by 
Representative Barbara Lee.
  Women and girls account for about half of the 33 million infections 
worldwide. But in the places that are hardest hit by epidemic, AIDS has 
a disproportionate impact upon women. In sub-Saharan Africa, women 
account for more than 60 percent of those living with HIV/AIDS. Young 
women account for 3 out of every 4 new HIV infections among sub-Saharan 
youth. Our prevention messages are not reaching youth--in studies 
completed in 17 countries in 2003, more than 75 percent of the young 
women surveyed could not identify ways to protect themselves against 
HIV infection.
  Clearly, we need to do more to stem the rising tide of HIV infection 
in women, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa. But what doing more 
requires is an examination of the factors that contribute to women's 
vulnerability to HIV infection. There are links between gender-based 
violence and increased risk for HIV infection, links between lack of 
education and economic opportunity and increased risk for HIV 
infection, links between human trafficking and sexual exploitation and 
increased risk for HIV infection.
  Unfortunately, our current policies do not allow us to take these 
factors into account. The law governing funding of the President's 
Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, PEPFAR, requires \1/3\ of all 
prevention funding to be spent on abstinence-until-marriage programs. 
In addition, a 2005 guidance from the Office of the Global AIDS 
Coordinator found that countries were directed to spend half of their 
prevention funds on sexual transmission prevention, with a full \2/3\ 
of that funding to be spent on ``abstinence and be faithful'' programs, 
rather than comprehensive HIV prevention education efforts.
  More than 40 percent of women in Africa and South Asia are married 
before the age of 18. Directing funding to abstinence-until-marriage 
programs fails to address their needs. Exhorting them to ``be 
faithful'' in relationships where they may not have control over their 
partners' behavior is short-sighted. Making it the official policy of 
the U.S. Government to restrict funding for efforts that could help 
these women learn about female-controlled prevention methods is 
unconscionable.
  In 2003, President Bush pledged to prevent 7 million new HIV 
infections through PEPFAR. But we cannot let that promise go unmet due 
to ideology.
  The legislation I am introducing today will lift restrictions on 
funding for our prevention efforts. It will also require the President 
to develop and implement a coordinated, comprehensive HIV strategy to 
address gender disparities in HIV infection, with a focus on the stigma 
surrounding HIV, the links between gender-based violence and HIV 
infection, the ways in which increasing educational and economic 
opportunities for women can prevent HIV infection, and ways in which to 
improve access to female-controlled prevention methods. This strategy 
is a step forward--one that can ensure that the disproportionate risks 
faced by too many women are taken into account in our global AIDS 
efforts.
  I look forward to working with my colleagues to ensure that women's 
vulnerability to HIV infection is addressed as we work to reauthorize 
PEPFAR.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CASEY (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mrs. Feinstein):
  S. 2418. A bill to ensure the safety of imported food products for 
the citizens of the United States, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the EAT SAFE Act 
of 2007. I am pleased to be joined by my colleague on the Agriculture 
Committee, Senator Grassley, to introduce this important piece of food 
safety legislation.
  As we have all seen this past year, in the wake of massive recalls of 
pet food manufactured using contaminated Chinese gluten and consumer 
warnings about the safety of various imported food products, ensuring 
the safety of food products and food ingredients being brought into 
this country from other nations has taken on a greater urgency.
  A report issued in September by the President's Interagency Working 
Group on Import Safety acknowledged that ``aspects of our present 
import system must be strengthened to promote security, safety, and 
trade for the benefit of American consumers.'' The EAT SAFE Act that we 
are introducing today is designed to address one of those critical 
aspects of the food and agricultural import system that, in the face of 
the mounting imported food safety crisis, has received little public 
focus. That issue is food and other agricultural products that are 
being smuggled into the U.S.
  When many people think of food smuggling, they likely think of it as 
something that occurs when travelers attempt to bring small amounts of 
foreign food or agricultural products into the U.S. by concealing it in 
their vehicles, luggage, or other personal affects. While this type of 
smuggling is unquestionably a problem that U.S. authorities must and do 
address, the larger threat of smuggled food and agricultural products 
comes from the companies, importers, and individuals who circumvent 
U.S. inspection requirements or restrictions on imports of certain 
products from a particular country.
  The ways in which these companies, importers, and individuals 
circumvent the system can happen in any number of ways. Many times 
smuggled products are intentionally mislabeled and bear the 
identification of a product that can legally enter the country. Other 
times, smuggled products gain import entry through falsifying the 
products' countries of origin. And, many times, products that have 
previously been denied entry are later ``shopped around,'' that is, 
presented to another U.S. port of entry in the effort to gain 
importation undetected.
  Just some examples of prohibited products discovered in commerce in 
the United States in recent years include duck parts from Vietnam and 
poultry products from China, both nations with confirmed human cases of 
avian influenza; unpasteurized raw cheeses from Mexico containing a 
bacterium that causes tuberculosis; strawberries from Mexico 
contaminated with hepatitis A; and mislabeled puffer fish from China 
containing a potentially deadly toxin. These smuggled food and 
agriculture products present safety risks to our food, plants, and 
animals, and pose a threat to our Nation's health, economy, and 
security.
  The EAT SAFE Act addresses these serious risks by applying 
commonsense measures to protect our food and agricultural supply. This 
legislation authorizes funding for the U.S. Department of Agriculture 
and the Food and Drug Administration to bolster their

[[Page 32173]]

efforts by hiring additional personnel to detect and track smuggled 
products. It also authorizes funding to provide food safety cross 
training for Homeland Security Agricultural Specialists and 
agricultural cross training for Customs' Border Patrol Agents to ensure 
that those men and women working on the front lines are knowledgeable 
about these serious food and agricultural threats.
  In addition to focusing on increased personal and training, the EAT 
SAFE Act also seeks to increase importer accountability. The 
legislation requires private laboratories conducting tests on FDA-
regulated products on behalf of importers to apply for and be certified 
by FDA. It also imposes civil penalties for laboratories or importers 
who knowingly or conspire to falsify imported product laboratory 
sampling and for importers who circumvent the USDA import reinspection 
system.
  Finally, the EAT SAFE Act will also ensure increased public awareness 
of smuggled products, as well as recalled food products, by requiring 
the USDA and FDA to provide this information to the public in a timely 
and easily searchable manner.
  These commonsense measures are an important first step towards 
safeguarding Americans' food and agricultural supply and ensuring our 
Nation's health, economy, and security.
  I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation.
  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. 2418

       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 ``Ending 
     Agricultural Threats: Safeguarding America's Food for 
     Everyone (EAT SAFE) Act of 2007''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Findings.
Sec. 3. Definitions.
Sec. 4. Food safety training, personnel, and coordination.
Sec. 5. Reporting of smuggled food products.
Sec. 6. Civil penalties relating to illegally imported meat and poultry 
              products.
Sec. 7. Certification of food safety labs.
Sec. 8. Data sharing.
Sec. 9. Public notice regarding recalled food products.
Sec. 10. Foodborne illness education and outreach competitive grants 
              program.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) the safety of the food supply of the United States is 
     vital to--
       (A) the health of the citizens of the United States;
       (B) the preservation of the confidence of those citizens in 
     the food supply of the United States; and
       (C) the success of the food sector of the United States 
     economy;
       (2) the United States has the safest food supply in the 
     world, and maintaining a secure domestic food supply is 
     imperative for the national security of the United States;
       (3) in a report published by the Government Accountability 
     Office in January 2007, the Comptroller General of the United 
     States described food safety oversight as 1 of the 29 high-
     risk program areas of the Federal Government; and
       (4) the task of preserving the safety of the food supply of 
     the United States is complicated by pressures relating to--
       (A) food products that are smuggled or imported into the 
     United States without being screened, monitored, or inspected 
     as required by law; and
       (B) the need to improve the enforcement of the United 
     States in reducing the quantity of food products that are--
       (i) smuggled into the United States; and
       (ii) imported into the United States without being 
     screened, monitored, or inspected as required by law.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Administration.--The term ``Administration'' means the 
     Food and Drug Administration.
       (2) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the 
     Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection 
     Service.
       (3) Department.--The term ``Department'' means the 
     Department of Agriculture.
       (4) Food defense threat.--The term ``food defense threat'' 
     means any intentional contamination, including any disease, 
     pest, or poisonous agent, that could adversely affect the 
     safety of human or animal food products.
       (5) Smuggled food product.--The term ``smuggled food 
     product'' means a prohibited human or animal food product 
     that a person fraudulently brings into the United States.
       (6) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Agriculture.

     SEC. 4. FOOD SAFETY TRAINING, PERSONNEL, AND COORDINATION.

       (a) Department.--
       (1) Training programs.--
       (A) Agricultural specialists.--
       (i) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish training 
     programs to educate each Federal employee who is employed in 
     a position described in section 421(g) of the Homeland 
     Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 231(g)) on issues relating to 
     food safety and agroterrorism.
       (ii) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this subparagraph $1,700,000.
       (B) Cross-training of employees of united states customs 
     and border protection.--
       (i) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish training 
     programs to educate border patrol agents employed by the 
     United States Customs and Border Protection of the Department 
     of Homeland Security about identifying human, animal, and 
     plant health threats and referring the threats to the 
     appropriate agencies.
       (ii) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this subparagraph $4,800,000.
       (2) Illegal import detection personnel.--Subtitle G of the 
     Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 (7 
     U.S.C. 6981 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 263. FOOD SAFETY PERSONNEL AND TRAINING.

       ``(a) Additional Employees.--Not later than 2 years after 
     the date of enactment of the Ending Agricultural Threats: 
     Safeguarding America's Food for Everyone (EAT SAFE) Act of 
     2007, the Secretary shall hire a sufficient number of 
     employees to increase the number of full-time field 
     investigators, import surveillance officers, support staff, 
     analysts, and compliance and enforcement experts employed by 
     the Food Safety and Inspection Service as of October 1, 2007, 
     by 100 employees, in order to--
       ``(1) provide additional detection of food defense threats;
       ``(2) detect, track, and remove smuggled human food 
     products from commerce; and
       ``(3) impose penalties on persons or organizations that 
     threaten the food supply.
       ``(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $10,000,000.''.
       (b) Administration.--Chapter IV of the Federal Food, Drug, 
     and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 341 et seq.) is amended by adding 
     at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 417. FOOD SAFETY PERSONNEL AND TRAINING.

       ``(a) In General.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of the Ending Agricultural Threats: Safeguarding 
     America's Food for Everyone (EAT SAFE) Act of 2007, the 
     Administration shall hire a sufficient number of employees to 
     increase the number of full-time field investigators, import 
     surveillance officers, support staff, analysts, and 
     compliance and enforcement experts employed by the 
     Administration as of October 1, 2007, by 150 employees, in 
     order to--
       ``(1) provide additional detection of food defense threats;
       ``(2) detect, track, and remove smuggled food products from 
     commerce; and
       ``(3) impose penalties on persons or organizations that 
     threaten the food supply.
       ``(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $15,000,000.''.
       (c) Coordination of Federal Agencies.--Section 411(b) of 
     the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 211(b)) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) Coordination of federal agencies.--The Commissioner 
     of United States Customs and Border Protection, in 
     coordination with the Secretary of Agriculture and the 
     Commissioner of Food and Drugs, shall conduct activities to 
     target, track, and inspect shipments that--
       ``(A) contain human and animal food products; and
       ``(B) are imported into the United States.''.

     SEC. 5. REPORTING OF SMUGGLED FOOD PRODUCTS.

       (a) Department.--
       (1) Public notification.--
       (A) In general.--Not later than 3 days after the date on 
     which the Department identifies a smuggled food product, the 
     Secretary shall provide to the public notification describing 
     the food product identified by the Department and, if 
     available, the individual or entity that smuggled the food 
     product.
       (B) Required forms of notification.--The Secretary shall 
     provide public notification under subparagraph (A) through--
       (i) a news release of the Department for each smuggled food 
     product identified by the Department;
       (ii) a description of each smuggled food product on the 
     website of the Department;
       (iii) the management of a periodically updated list that 
     contains a description of each individual or entity that 
     smuggled the food product identified by the Secretary under 
     subparagraph (A); and

[[Page 32174]]

       (iv) any other appropriate means, as determined by the 
     Secretary.
       (2) Notification to department of homeland security.--Not 
     later than 30 days after the date on which the Department 
     identifies a smuggled food product, the Secretary shall 
     provide to the Department of Homeland Security notification 
     of the smuggled food product.
       (b) Administration.--
       (1) Public notification.--
       (A) In general.--Not later than 3 days after the date on 
     which the Administration identifies a smuggled food product, 
     the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall provide to 
     the public notification describing the smuggled food product 
     identified by the Administration and, if available, the 
     individual or entity that smuggled the food product.
       (B) Required forms of notification.--The Secretary of 
     Health and Human Services shall provide public notification 
     under subparagraph (A) through--
       (i) a press release of the Administration for each smuggled 
     food product identified by the Administration;
       (ii) a description of each smuggled food product on the 
     website of the Administration;
       (iii) the management of a periodically updated list that 
     contains a description of each individual or entity that 
     smuggled the food product identified by the Secretary of 
     Health and Human Services under subparagraph (A); and
       (iv) any other appropriate means, as determined by the 
     Secretary of Health and Human Services.
       (2) Notification to department of homeland security.--Not 
     later than 30 days after the date on which the Administration 
     identifies a smuggled food product, the Secretary of Health 
     and Human Services shall provide to the Department of 
     Homeland Security notification of the smuggled food product.

     SEC. 6. CIVIL PENALTIES RELATING TO ILLEGALLY IMPORTED MEAT 
                   AND POULTRY PRODUCTS.

       (a) Meat Products.--Section 20(b) of the Federal Meat 
     Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 620(b)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``(b) The Secretary'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(b) Destruction; Civil Penalties.--
       ``(1) Destruction.--The Secretary''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Civil penalties.--Each individual or entity that 
     fails to present each meat article that is the subject of the 
     importation of the individual or entity to an inspection 
     facility approved by the Secretary shall be liable for a 
     civil penalty assessed by the Secretary in an amount not to 
     exceed $25,000 for each meat article that the individual or 
     entity fails to present to the inspection facility.''.
       (b) Poultry Products.--Section 12 of the Poultry Products 
     Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 461) is amended--
       (1) by striking the section heading and all that follows 
     through ``(a) Any person'' and inserting the following:

     ``SEC. 12. PENALTIES.

       ``(a) Penalties Relating to the Violation of Certain 
     Sections.--
       ``(1) In general.--Any person''; and
       (2) in subsection (a) (as amended by paragraph (1)), by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Failure to present poultry products at designated 
     inspection facilities.--Each individual or entity that fails 
     to present each poultry product that is the subject of the 
     importation of the individual or entity to an inspection 
     facility approved by the Secretary shall be liable for a 
     civil penalty assessed by the Secretary in an amount not to 
     exceed $25,000 for each poultry product that the individual 
     or entity fails to present to the inspection facility.''.
       (c) Egg Products.--Section 12 of the Egg Products 
     Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 1041) is amended--
       (1) by striking the section heading and all that follows 
     through ``(a) Any person'' and inserting the following:

     ``SEC. 12. PENALTIES.

       ``(a) Penalties Relating to the Violation of Certain 
     Prohibited Actions.--
       ``(1) In general.--Any person''; and
       (2) in subsection (a) (as amended by paragraph (1)), by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Failure to present egg products at designated 
     inspection facilities.--Each individual or entity that fails 
     to present each egg product that is the subject of the 
     importation of the individual or entity to an inspection 
     facility approved by the Secretary shall be liable for a 
     civil penalty assessed by the Secretary in an amount not to 
     exceed $25,000 for each egg product that the individual or 
     entity fails to present to the inspection facility.''.

     SEC. 7. CERTIFICATION OF FOOD SAFETY LABS; SUBMISSION OF TEST 
                   RESULTS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter IV of the Federal Food, Drug, and 
     Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 341 et seq.), as amended by section 
     4(b), is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 418. CERTIFICATION OF FOOD SAFETY LABS; SUBMISSION OF 
                   TEST RESULTS.

       ``(a) Definition of Food Safety Lab.--In this section, the 
     term `food safety lab' means an establishment that conducts 
     testing, on behalf of an importer through a contract or other 
     arrangement, to ensure the safety of articles of food.
       ``(b) Certification Requirement.--
       ``(1) In general.--A food safety lab shall submit to the 
     Secretary an application for certification. Upon review, the 
     Secretary may grant or deny certification to the food safety 
     lab.
       ``(2) Certification standards.--The Secretary shall 
     establish criteria and methodologies for the evaluation of 
     applications for certification submitted under paragraph (1). 
     Such criteria shall include the requirements that a food 
     safety lab--
       ``(A) be accredited as being in compliance with standards 
     set by the International Organization for Standardization;
       ``(B) agree to permit the Secretary to conduct an 
     inspection of the facilities of the food safety lab and the 
     procedures of such lab before making a certification 
     determination;
       ``(C) agree to permit the Secretary to conduct routine 
     audits of the facilities of the food safety lab to ensure 
     ongoing compliance with accreditation and certification 
     requirements;
       ``(D) submit with such application a fee established by the 
     Secretary in an amount sufficient to cover the cost of 
     application review, including inspection under subparagraph 
     (B); and
       ``(E) agree to submit to the Secretary, in accordance with 
     the process established under subsection (c), the results of 
     tests conducted by such food safety lab on behalf of an 
     importer.
       ``(c) Submission of Test Results.--The Secretary shall 
     establish a process by which a food safety lab certified 
     under this section shall submit to the Secretary the results 
     of all tests conducted by such food safety lab on behalf of 
     an importer.''.
       (b) Enforcement.--Section 303(f) of the Federal Food, Drug, 
     and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 333(f)) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (3), (4), and (5) as 
     paragraphs (5), (6), and (7), respectively;
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
       ``(3) An importer (as defined in section 418) shall be 
     subject to a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed $25,000 
     if such importer knowingly engages in the falsification of 
     test results submitted to the Secretary by a food safety lab 
     certified under section 418.
       ``(4) A food safety lab certified under section 418 shall 
     be subject to a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed 
     $25,000 for knowingly submitting to the Secretary false test 
     results under section 418.'';
       (3) in paragraph (2)(C), by striking ``paragraph (3)(A)'' 
     and inserting ``paragraph (5)(A)'';
       (4) in paragraph (4), as so redesignated, by striking 
     ``paragraph (1) or (2)'' each place it appears and inserting 
     ``paragraph (1), (2), (3), or (4)''; and
       (5) in paragraph (6), as so redesignated, by striking 
     ``paragraph (4)'' each place it appears and inserting 
     ``paragraph (6)''.

     SEC. 8. DATA SHARING.

       (a) Department of Agriculture Memoranda of Understanding.--
     The Secretary shall ensure that the agencies within the 
     Department of Agriculture, including the Food Safety and 
     Inspection Service, the Agricultural Research Service, and 
     the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, enter into a 
     memorandum of understanding to ensure the timely and 
     efficient sharing of all information collected by such 
     agencies related to foodborne pathogens, contaminants, and 
     illnesses.
       (b) Interagency Memorandum of Understanding.--The 
     Secretary, in collaboration with the Secretary of Health and 
     Human Services, shall enter into a memorandum of 
     understanding between the agencies within the Department of 
     Agriculture, including those described in subsection (a), and 
     the agencies within the Department of Health and Human 
     Services, including the Centers for Disease Control and 
     Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration, to ensure 
     the timely and efficient sharing of all information collected 
     by such agencies related to foodborne pathogens, 
     contaminants, and illnesses.

     SEC. 9. PUBLIC NOTICE REGARDING RECALLED FOOD PRODUCTS.

       (a) Department.--
       (1) News releases regarding recalled food products.--
       (A) In general.--On the date on which a human or animal 
     food product regulated by the Department is voluntarily 
     recalled, the Secretary shall provide to the public a news 
     release describing the human or animal food product.
       (B) Contents.--Each news release described in subparagraph 
     (A) shall contain a comprehensive list of each human and 
     animal food product regulated by the Department that is 
     voluntarily recalled.
       (2) Website.--The Secretary shall modify the website of the 
     Department to contain--
       (A) not later than 1 business day after the date on which a 
     human or animal food product regulated by the Department is 
     voluntarily recalled, a news release describing the human or 
     animal food product;
       (B) if available, an image of each human and animal food 
     product that is the subject

[[Page 32175]]

     of a news release described in subparagraph (A); and
       (C) not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, a search engine that--
       (i) is consumer-friendly, as determined by the Secretary; 
     and
       (ii) provides a means by which an individual could locate 
     each human and animal food product regulated by the 
     Department that is voluntarily recalled.
       (3) State-issued and industry press releases.--To meet the 
     requirement under paragraph (1)(A), the Secretary--
       (A) may provide to the public a press release issued by a 
     State; and
       (B) shall not provide to the public a press release issued 
     by a private industry entity in lieu of a press release 
     issued by the Federal Government or a State.
       (4) Prohibition on delegation of duty.--The Secretary may 
     not delegate, by contract or otherwise, the duty of the 
     Secretary--
       (A) to provide to the public a news release under paragraph 
     (1); and
       (B) to make any required modification to the website of the 
     Department under paragraph (2).
       (b) Administration.--
       (1) Press releases regarding recalled food products.--
       (A) In general.--On the date on which a human or animal 
     food product regulated by the Administration is voluntarily 
     recalled, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall 
     provide to the public a press release describing the human or 
     animal food product.
       (B) Contents.--Each press release described in subparagraph 
     (A) shall contain a comprehensive list of each human and 
     animal food product regulated by the Administration that is 
     voluntarily recalled.
       (2) Website.--The Secretary of Health and Human Services 
     shall modify the website of the Administration to contain--
       (A) not later than 1 business day after the date on which a 
     human or animal food product regulated by the Administration 
     is voluntarily recalled a press release describing the human 
     or animal food product;
       (B) if available, an image of each human and animal food 
     product that is the subject of a press release described in 
     subparagraph (A); and
       (C) not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, a search engine that--
       (i) is consumer-friendly, as determined by the Secretary of 
     Health and Human Services; and
       (ii) provides a means by which an individual could locate 
     each human and animal food product regulated by the 
     Administration that is voluntarily recalled.
       (3) State-issued and industry press releases.--For purposes 
     of meeting the requirement under paragraph (1)(A), the 
     Secretary of Health and Human Services--
       (A) may provide to the public a press release issued by a 
     State; and
       (B) may not provide to the public a press release issued by 
     a private industry entity in lieu of a press release issued 
     by a State or the Federal Government.
       (4) Prohibition on delegation of duty.--The Secretary of 
     Health and Human Services may not delegate, by contract or 
     otherwise, the duty of the Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services--
       (A) to provide to the public a press release under 
     paragraph (1); and
       (B) to make any required modification to the website of the 
     Administration under paragraph (2).

     SEC. 10. FOODBORNE ILLNESS EDUCATION AND OUTREACH COMPETITIVE 
                   GRANTS PROGRAM.

       Title IV of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and 
     Education Reform Act of 1998 (7 U.S.C. 7621 et seq.) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 412. FOODBORNE ILLNESS EDUCATION AND OUTREACH 
                   COMPETITIVE GRANTS PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Administrator.--The term `Administrator' means the 
     Administrator of the Food Safety and Inspection Service.
       ``(2) Commissioner.--The term `Commissioner' means the 
     Commissioner of Food and Drugs.
       ``(3) Eligible entity.--The term `eligible entity' means--
       ``(A) the government of a State (including a political 
     subdivision of a State);
       ``(B) an educational institution;
       ``(C) a private for-profit organization;
       ``(D) a private non-profit organization; and
       ``(E) any other appropriate individual or entity, as 
     determined by the Secretary.
       ``(b) Establishment.--The Secretary (acting through the 
     Administrator of the Cooperative State Research, Education, 
     and Extension Service), in consultation with the 
     Administrator and the Commissioner, shall establish and 
     administer a competitive grant program to provide grants to 
     eligible entities to enable the eligible entities to carry 
     out educational outreach partnerships and programs to provide 
     to health providers, patients, and consumers information to 
     enable those individuals and entities--
       ``(1) to recognize--
       ``(A) foodborne illness as a serious public health issue; 
     and
       ``(B) each symptom of foodborne illness to ensure the 
     proper treatment of foodborne illness;
       ``(2) to understand--
       ``(A) the potential for contamination of human and animal 
     food products during each phase of the production of human 
     and animal food products; and
       ``(B) the importance of using techniques that help ensure 
     the safe handling of human and animal food products; and
       ``(3) to assess the risk of foodborne illness to ensure the 
     proper selection by consumers of human and animal food 
     products.
       ``(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $3,500,000 for 
     fiscal year 2008 and each fiscal year thereafter.''.

                          ____________________