[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 9]
[Senate]
[Pages 12252-12258]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. STEVENS (for himself and Ms. Murkowski):
  S. 1368. A bill to amend the Denali Commission Act of 1998 to modify 
the authority of the Commission; to the Committee on Environment and 
Public Works.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I have come to the floor to introduce S. 
1368, a bill to reauthorize a Federal-State partnership known as the 
Denali Commission. This Commission plays a crucial role in the 
development of basic infrastructure for communities in rural Alaska.
  The Denali Commission was originally established by Congress in 1998. 
The unique structure of the Commission ensures the most efficient 
allocation of Federal funds, as it caps administrative expenses at 5 
percent and capitalizes on the use of strategic partnerships. Over the 
course of the past decade, the Commission has partnered with Federal 
and State agencies, tribal organizations, and local communities to 
address the unique challenges associated with living in Alaska. In just 
a short period of time, the Commission has improved the living 
conditions of rural Alaska by providing job training, teacher housing 
and funds to improve options for handling solid waste. The bulk fuel 
projects undertaken by the Commission have reduced the costs of rural 
energy. The health clinics have increased the availability of health 
services to rural villages that are isolated from metropolitan areas. 
There are 240 Alaska Native Villages, and over 100 communities have 
been served by the Denali Commission.
  Although the Denali Commission has made tremendous strides to ensure 
rural Alaska has basic living conditions, there still is work to be 
done. Many of the rural communities have no roads and their 
transportation infrastructure is deteriorating. Numerous villages can 
only be accessed by water, and the docks in the communities are in 
desperate need of repair. The projects conducted by the Denali 
Commission not only keep communities connected to mainstream Alaska, 
projects also foster economic growth. The unemployment rates in many 
villages remain above 50 percent. The high cost of basic needs, such as 
milk and oil, coupled with public infrastructure that is comparable to 
developing nations create difficult circumstance in rural Alaska. The 
Denali Commission is our best hope for properly addressing these issues 
and meeting the needs of Alaskans.
  The continuation of the Denali Commission's presence in rural Alaska 
is of critical importance to the future of rural Alaska. The bill I 
introduce today would reauthorize the Denali Commission for 5 years, 
through fiscal year 2014.
  Other provisions of this bill would also amend the Denali Commission 
Act of 1998 to make the Commission stronger and more efficient.
  Senator Murkowski is an original cosponsor of this legislation, and 
it is our hope the Senate will act quickly to reauthorize the Denali 
Commission.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. COLLINS (for herself, Mr. Kyl, and Mr. Lieberman):
  S. 1369. A bill to grant immunity from civil liability to any person 
who voluntarily notifies appropriate security personnel of suspicious 
activity believed to threaten transportation safety or security or 
takes reasonable action to mitigate such activity; to the Committee on 
the Judiciary.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation that 
would provide immunity to individuals who report suspicious activities 
that may reflect terrorist threats to our transportation system. I am 
very honored that Senators Kyl and Lieberman have joined me in 
introducing this important bill.
  The recent arrest in New Jersey of six men charged with conspiring to 
murder American soldiers at Fort Dix underscores the need for this 
bill. Law

[[Page 12253]]

enforcement officials have noted that their investigation was triggered 
by the report of an alert store clerk who said a customer had brought 
in a video that showed men firing weapons and shouting in Arabic. This 
reminded the store clerk of the 9/11 terrorists.
  But for the report of this store clerk, it is unlikely this potential 
plot against Fort Dix--a plot that if executed would have caused the 
loss of lives--would have been uncovered. That store clerk's action may 
have saved literally hundreds of lives and represents a core truth of 
the dangerous times in which we live. Our safety depends on more than 
just police officers, intelligence analysts, and soldiers. It also 
depends on the alertness and civil responsibility of ordinary American 
citizens, including the peaceful and tolerant people who form the vast 
majority of America's Muslim communities.
  We must encourage average citizens to be watchful and report behavior 
that appears to be suspicious or threatening. That imperative is 
especially strong in the area of mass transportation, where there is 
the potential for mass casualties, where vehicles and aircraft can be 
used as weapons, and where there is often only a brief period of time 
for assessing and reacting to alarming behavior. That is why the slogan 
``See something, say something,'' is used in the New York subway.
  Unfortunately, we have seen that plaintiffs can misuse our legal 
system to chill the willingness of average citizens to come forward and 
report possible dangers. As was widely reported last fall, six Islamic 
clerics were removed from a USAirways flight after other passengers 
expressed concerns that some of the clerics had moved out of their 
assigned seats and had requested, but apparently were not using, 
seatbelt extenders that could possibly double as weapons.
  As a result of that incident, what happened? Well, the USAirways 
officials decided to remove these individuals from the plane so they 
could further investigate. What happened to the individuals who 
courageously came forward and reported this suspicious behavior? 
Unbelievably, they were sued for voicing their fears that the clerics 
could be rehearsing or preparing to execute a hijacking. These honestly 
concerned passengers found themselves as defendants in lawsuits that 
were filed in March.
  The existence of this lawsuit clearly illustrates how unfair it is to 
allow private citizens to possibly be intimidated into silence by the 
threat of litigation. Would that alert clerk in the store have come 
forward if he thought there was a chance he was going to be sued? Would 
the passengers have spoken up if they had anticipated there would be a 
lawsuit filed against them? Even if such suits fail, they can expose 
citizens to heavy costs in time and legal fees.
  Our bill would provide civil immunity in American courts for citizens 
acting in good faith who report threats to our transportation systems.
  The bill would encourage people to pass on information to appropriate 
transportation system officials and employees, to law enforcement or 
transportation security officials, or to the Departments of Homeland 
Security, Justice, or Transportation, without fear of being sued just 
for doing their civic duty.
  Only disclosures made to those responsible officials and employees 
would be protected by the legislation's grant of immunity. Once a 
report is received, those officials would be responsible for assessing 
its reasonableness and determining whether further action is required. 
If these officials take reasonable action to mitigate the reported 
threat, they, too, would be protected from lawsuits. Just as we should 
not discourage reporting suspicious incidents, we also should not 
discourage reasonable responses to them.
  Let me make very clear this bill does not offer any protection 
whatsoever if an individual makes a statement that he or she knows to 
be false. No one will be able to use this bill, should it become law, 
as I hope it will, as a cover for mischievous, vengeful, or biased 
falsehoods.
  Our laws and legal system must not be hijacked to intimidate people 
into silence or to prevent our officials from responding to terrorist 
threats. Protecting citizens who make good-faith reports--and that is 
an important qualification in this bill--protecting citizens who make 
good-faith reports of potentially lethal activities is essential to 
maintaining our homeland security.
  Our bill offers protection in a measured way, that discourages abuses 
from either side. I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Senator Lieberman and I have been holding a series of hearings, 
starting last year, in the Homeland Security Committee, to look at the 
threat of home-grown terrorists, domestic radicalization. We have 
learned a lot in the past 6 months. What we have learned has only 
strengthened my determination to push ahead with this bill.
  The fact is, each of us has an important responsibility. The fight 
against domestic terrorism--or, indeed, any kind of terrorism--requires 
the active involvement of the citizenry of this country. It is not a 
fight that can be left simply to law enforcement. We simply could never 
have a sufficient number of law enforcement or intelligence officials 
to take care of every threat. Indeed, the foiled threat at Fort Dix 
shows us how important citizen involvement is.
  I think this is a reasonable bill. It requires this immunity would be 
granted only for reports made in good faith. This would help encourage 
passengers on airlines and on trains to report suspicious activities. I 
think that is a necessary protection in this day and age.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. CANTWELL (for herself, Mr. Smith, and Mr. Kerry):
  S. 1370. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to ensure 
more investment and innovation in clean energy technologies; to the 
Committee on Finance.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
that I believe is an important component of comprehensive energy 
policy. In order to transition away from an overreliance on fossil 
fuels, we must promote investments in clean energy generation using 
renewable resources and reduce the growth in demand for energy by 
stressing efficiency.
  I think every Member of the Senate recognizes that while there is no 
single technological silver bullet for our energy problems, there are 
many emerging technologies that if adopted and deployed could go a long 
way in meeting our vexing energy security and climate challenges.
  We also know that Government can play a key role setting technology 
standards and clean energy goals, but shifting our Nation's and the 
world's energy system to clean energy alternatives will take 
substantial private sector investment. Here, too, the Government can 
play a key role by enabling the market conditions that will take the 
technology from the laboratory and turn it into fully operational 
energy producing facilities.
  A number of reports have suggested that private investment in energy 
technologies is on the rise. While estimates vary widely, New Energy 
Finance has reported that 1,246 private equity funds put more than $70 
billion into clean energy technologies in 2006--a 43-percent increase 
relative to 2005. Similarly, a survey conducted late last year by the 
National Venture Capital Association found that more than 90 percent of 
respondents expect to increase investment in the energy sector in 2007.
  This is a unique time. There is growing consensus that our Nation's 
energy demands need to be better and more smartly managed and, more 
importantly, consensus that those growing energy demands should be met 
using clean, renewable energy resources.
  The Clean Energy Investment Assurance Act of 2007, which I introduce 
along with my colleagues, Senators Gordon Smith and John Kerry, 
responds to the clear message that was delivered to both the Senate 
Energy and Senate Finance Committees by businesses that are on the 
cutting edge in this area. What we heard from the renewable energy 
community and the investment community is that what

[[Page 12254]]

they need most is some certainty in the Tax Code.
  This type of Federal assistance will support the needed long-term 
investments that ultimately will drive down the costs of electricity 
from renewable sources. Once the market for these new technologies is 
up and running, such facilities will be economically self-sustaining 
and profitable.
  Our legislation adheres to the following principles:
  Certainty. We put the existing tax incentives in place long enough to 
drive investment dollars so these new technologies can be 
commercialized. The core of this bill is a 5-year extension and 
modification of the production tax credit. This tax credit is designed 
to help businesses and utilities diversify their sources of energy and 
promote energy production using biomass, wind power, hydropower, 
geothermal power, and other clean, renewable resources. In addition, we 
extend for 8 years the investment tax credit that is so important in 
encouraging the large upfront outlay of capital that is required for 
solar and fuel cell power plants.
  Technological neutrality. This bill levels the playing field by 
providing an incentive to both thermal energy production and 
electricity production that use renewable resources. It also modifies 
the tax credits to increase the incentive effect for all renewable 
technologies that can produce energy with zero carbon emissions.
  Parity between investor-owned utilities and consumer-owned public 
power utilities. The bill provides a powerful, complementary incentive 
through the Clean Renewable Energy Bond Program so that public power 
and consumer-owned utilities that cannot benefit from tax credits are 
not financially disadvantaged when they invest in renewable facilities. 
Public power utilities are required to meet State renewable portfolio 
standards in the same way as investor-owned utilities, and Government 
should provide comparable financial incentives so that ultimately the 
cost of electricity can be reduced for all customers.
  Importance of efficiency. This bill includes provisions that better 
utilize the incentives in the Tax Code to promote energy efficiency in 
manufacturing, construction of ``green buildings,'' and more efficient 
homes. These tax incentives help defray the additional costs associated 
with using new energy-efficient technologies, systems, and materials to 
construct and retrofit factories, commercial buildings, and houses in 
order to reduce energy demand. I know Senator Snowe has done a great 
deal of work in this area, and I look forward to working with her on 
these important provisions.
  Another key component in this regard is an inducement for customers 
and utilities to upgrade to ``smart meters.'' A ``smart meter'' is a 
device with an electronic circuit board containing computer chips and a 
digital communications device. It allows a customer to interact with a 
utility in real time. This interaction allows the utility to better 
forecast and manage energy load and the customer can manage his energy 
use to lower the cost.
  The electromechanical meter, the device that measures energy use with 
the little wheels turning inside it that is hooked up to almost every 
home and business in America, is almost the same as when it was 
invented in the 1930s, when FDR was President.
  Inefficient use of energy forces utilities to invest millions in 
building plants that operate only when energy demand peaks. As a 
result, the power these plants generate costs far more than power from 
other sources. This means more expensive power when demand is high.
  Our bill would allow a faster recovery period for the costs of 
installing these new ``smart meters,'' which will make it easier for 
consumers to reduce energy use during these peak periods and shift 
their energy use to low-demand, low-cost times of the day.
  We know that we don't have an unlimited pool of Federal resources, 
and I believe strongly that the Finance Committee should redirect 
subsidies that historically have propped up the oil and gas industry to 
now support this new direction in energy policy.
  Our tax policy here should be driven by our energy policy goals. We 
cannot make a long-term difference with start-and-stop tax policy. But 
we must be mindful that after a reasonable period all tax incentives 
should be reexamined to see whether we have gotten the results we 
anticipated and whether the marketplace is ready to function on its 
own.
  We should focus tax incentives where they will have the greatest 
impact in helping meet those goals. While this bill seeks to address 
renewable power and efficiency, I plan to continue working on 
legislation to effectively align the other incentives in the Tax Code 
that are designed to promote alternative fuels and vehicles.
  We all witnessed how innovation in information technologies served as 
a forceful driver of productivity and economic growth in the recent 
past.
  Energy technology innovations now have similar potential to fuel a 
new wave of economic growth and job creation.
  I would like to note that this bill has already received the support 
of the following organizations: American Forest Resource Council; 
American Public Power Association; Biomass Investment Group; Energy 
Northwest; Large Public Power Council; Northwest Public Power 
Association; Southern California Public Power Authority; Solar Energy 
Industries Association; USA Biomass Power Producers Alliance; Chelan 
County PUD, Snohomish County PUD, Tacoma Power, and Seattle City Light; 
Washington Public Utility Districts Association; Simpson Investment 
Company, Tacoma; National Hydropower Association; Seattle Steam; and 
TechNet.
  We have a tremendous opportunity in this Congress to set a new course 
in energy, environmental, and economic policy for the 21st century, and 
I hope we aggressively move forward and meet this challenge.
  I ask unanimous consent that a section-by-section summary of the 
Clean Energy Investment Assurance Act of 2007 be printed in the Record.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There being no objection, the material was 
ordered to be printed in the Record as follows:

           The Clean Energy Investment Assurance Act of 2007

       A bill to provide reliable Federal tax incentives to help 
     ensure more private sector led investment an innovation in 
     clean energy technologies.


                       Section-by-Section Summary

     Sec. 1. Short Title.
     Sec. 2. Expansion and modification of renewable electricity 
         production credit (IRC Section 45).
       Under current law, a qualified facility must be placed in 
     service by December 31, 2008, in order to claim a tax credit 
     for electricity that is produced. The bill extends the placed 
     in service date until December 31, 2013, in order to provide 
     an adequate incentive to have more facilities placed in 
     service. Investors willing to bear the risks of new energy 
     technologies should not be subject to the economic risks of 
     start-and-stop tax policy.
       The tax credit would be expanded to allow a credit for 
     either the production of thermal energy--heat, in the form 
     hot water or steam, or cooling in the form of chilled water, 
     ice or other media--or the production of electricity. This 
     would provide an incentive to invest in facilities that use 
     renewable energy sources to create useful and valuable 
     thermal energy, without generating electricity. Such district 
     energy facilities can provide significant efficiency gains 
     for heating and cooling buildings, displacing peak 
     electricity demands on the local grid and enhancing fuel 
     flexibility.
       All qualifying facilities would be eligible to receive the 
     full rate of credit, as adjusted for inflation. Current law 
     reduces the credit by half for open-loop biomass, small 
     irrigation power, landfill gas, trash combustion, and 
     hydropower facilities.
       New and existing facilities would be able to claim the 
     credit for a period of 10 years, beginning on the date the 
     facility is placed in service.
       The goal of the credit is to encourage deployment of 
     facilities that can produce energy from renewable sources. In 
     order to enable new and emerging technologies to benefit from 
     the credit, the bill grants authority to the Treasury 
     Department to allow a facility placed in service before 
     January 1, 2014, to qualify for the Section 45 credit even 
     though it produces thermal energy or electricity using a 
     renewable resource that is not enumerated in Section 45 
     provided that the facility produces energy with zero carbon 
     emissions. The determination of whether a facility meets the 
     zero carbon emissions requirement would be made in 
     consultation

[[Page 12255]]

     with the Energy Department. New and emerging technologies 
     that achieve the underlying goal of the incentive will not be 
     disadvantaged by having to come through the lengthy 
     legislative process in order to qualify.
       The bill attempts to clarify existing Treasury guidance in 
     order to facilitate electricity purchased by a co-located 
     host facility (e.g. lumber mill) even in the case that both 
     facilities are owned by the same taxpayer. Treasury/IRS 
     Notice 2006-88 includes the concept of ``simultaneous sale 
     and purchase'' that is being viewed as an impediment for some 
     open-loop biomass facilities to claim the section 45 credit. 
     This broad concept appears to require netting of electricity 
     sold to, and purchased from, unrelated parties in order for a 
     facility to qualify. Our proposal seeks to reverse the effect 
     of this netting rule to allow qualified biomass facilities to 
     obtain the PTC for gross electricity sold to the grid without 
     any requirement to ``net'' electricity sold to and purchased 
     from an unrelated party.
       The bill modifies the definition of closed-loop biomass in 
     Section 45(c)(2) to indicate that power producers that use 
     part or the dedicated crop to produce some other type of 
     renewable energy, for example: ethanol, etc., in addition to 
     making electricity, are not disqualified from obtaining the 
     closed-loop tax biomass tax credit for the electricity. Under 
     current law, if any part of the dedicated energy material is 
     used for any purpose other than producing electricity, the 
     electricity produced is not eligible for the closed loop 
     credit. Advances in energy science have led scientists and 
     investors toward the creation of ``energy plantations'' that 
     grow a dedicated crop for electricity production that also 
     can provide a source of cellulosic ethanol. The bill would 
     remove a disincentive to bringing such multiuse green 
     facilities online.
       Under current law, for only closed-loop biomass facilities 
     modified to co-fire with coal, to co-fire with other biomass, 
     or to co-fire with coal and other biomass, there is no 
     reduction in credit by reason of grants, tax-exempt bonds, 
     subsidized energy financing, and other credits while there is 
     a reduction in the credit of up to 50 percent for other 
     qualified facilities in cases where a facility benefited from 
     grants, used proceeds from tax-exempt bonds, or was 
     subsidized under a Federal, State or local program. Our 
     proposal would equalize the treatment of all types of 
     facilities by repealing this limitation in current law 
     Section 45B(3). This will encourage States and localities to 
     partner with private industry as part of a multi-faceted 
     energy and environmental strategy.
       Clarifies the statute to reflect additional work that may 
     be needed to retrofit potential non-hydropower dams and make 
     a technical correction related to incremental hydropower.
     Sec. 3. Extension and expansion of credit to holders of clean 
         renewable energy bonds (IRC Sec. 54).
       Under current law, the full financial incentives provided 
     under the tax credits are not available to certain entities 
     such as consumer-owned utilities, yet these utilities also 
     need to increase their investments in renewable energy 
     sources to meet their growing demands. The Clean Renewable 
     Energy Bond, CREB, program, enacted as part of the Energy 
     Policy Act of 2005, was crafted to provide a comparable 
     financial incentive for consumer-owned utilities to invest in 
     new renewable electricity generation facilities. CREBs 
     provide public power systems with interest free borrowing for 
     qualified projects. State and local governments, U.S. 
     territories and possessions, the District of Columbia, Indian 
     tribal governments, CoBank, the National Rural Utilities 
     Cooperative Finance Corporation, mutual or cooperative 
     electric companies described in Internal Revenue Code Section 
     501(c)(12) or 1381(a)(2)(c), and a not-for-profit electric 
     utility that has received a loan or loan guarantee under the 
     Rural Electrification Act are all eligible to issue CREBs. 
     Unfortunately, the 2-year authorization, the cumulative 
     volume limit, and the smallest-to-largest project allocation 
     of this limited authority have made it difficult for these 
     bonds to be an effective large-scale investment incentive. 
     Our proposal would extend the program to December 31, 2013 
     and convert the cumulative volume cap into an annual cap. 
     Thus, the limitation in bonds issued would be $5 billion in 
     each calendar year. It is intended that the higher volume cap 
     will encourage broader allocation of the bonds to large-scale 
     projects.
     Sec. 4. Extension and modification of residential energy 
         efficient property credit (Section 25D)
       The bill extends until 2017 a 30 percent investment tax 
     credit for the purchase of residential solar water heating 
     and fuel cell property. In addition, the solar credit would 
     be based on system power rather than cost and would provide 
     $1,500 for each half-kilowatt of capacity for solar PV 
     equipment and $1,000 for each kilowatt of capacity for fuel 
     cells. Credits would be permitted against the alternative 
     minimum tax to expand the incentive effect of the tax credit.
       The bill allows the same credit for purchases of 
     ``qualified energy storage air conditioner property,'' which 
     increases the value of intermittent energy sources, such as 
     wind and solar, by creating, storing, and supplying cooling 
     energy.
     Sec. 5. Extension and modification of energy credit (Section 
         48).
       The bill extends until 2017 a 30 percent business credit, 
     for the purchase of fuel cell power plants, solar energy 
     property, and fiber optic property used to illuminate the 
     inside of a structure. The bill changes the maximum credit to 
     $1,500 for each half-kilowatt of capacity for solar PV 
     equipment and eliminates the cap on fuel cell power plant 
     property. The bill allows credits to be taken against the 
     alternative minimum tax.
       The bill also allows the credit for purchases of 
     ``qualified energy storage air conditioner property,'' which 
     increases the value of intermittent energy sources, such as 
     wind and solar, by creating, storing, and supplying cooling 
     energy.
     Sec. 6. Extension and modification of nonbusiness energy 
         property credit (Section 25C).
       The bill extends would extend through 2012 the 10 percent 
     investment tax credit for expenditures with respect to 
     building envelopes using qualified energy efficient property, 
     including qualified advanced main air circulating fans, 
     natural gas, propane, oil furnaces or hot water boilers. The 
     bill also would expand the deduction by removing the lifetime 
     limit and modifies the law so that the incentives are based 
     on performance rather than cost.
     Sec. 7. Extension of new energy efficient home credit 
         (Section 45L).
       Our proposal would extend through the end of 2012 the tax 
     credit to eligible contractors for the construction of 
     qualified new energy-efficient homes.
     Sec. 8. Extension and modification of energy efficient 
         commercial buildings deduction (Section 179D).
       Our proposal would extend through 2013 the deduction for 
     investments in commercial buildings that reduce annual energy 
     and power consumption. The bill also increases the amount of 
     the deduction to $2.25 per square foot, and modifies the 
     measurement of energy savings under the law.
     Sec. 9. Five-year applicable recovery period for depreciation 
         of qualified energy management devices (Section 168(e)).
       The bill would treat qualified ``smart meters'' as 
     qualified technological property eligible for 5 year cost 
     recovery; This will ease the financial burdens that are 
     hampering the deployment of this energy efficient technology 
     and reflect the more appropriate tax treatment of this next 
     generation meter technology. Under current law, smart meters 
     are treated the same ways as electromagnetic meters with a 20 
     year cost recovery period. This has been a serious 
     disincentive for taxpayers to upgrade their meters and 
     realize the energy savings that will result.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CASEY:
  S. 1374. A bill to assist States in making voluntary high quality 
full-day prekindergarten programs available and economically affordable 
for the families of all children for at least 1 year preceding 
kindergarten; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
Pensions.
  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I rise today to offer my Prepare All Kids 
Act of 2007, a bill that represents one of my highest priorities, high 
quality prekindergarten education for all children, and particularly 
those from low income families for whom the cost of prekindergarten may 
be prohibitive. Investing in high quality early childhood development 
programs should be a national priority for our country. I look forward 
to speaking at length on the floor early next week about what my bill 
will accomplish for children and working families. 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. 1374

       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 ``Prepare All Kids Act of 
     2007''.

     SEC. 2. HIGH QUALITY FULL-DAY PREKINDERGARTEN PROGRAMS.

       Chapter 8 of subtitle A of title VI of the Omnibus Budget 
     Reconciliation Act of 1981 (Public Law 97-35; 95 Stat. 357) 
     is amended by inserting after subchapter C the following:

     ``Subchapter D--High Quality Full-Day Prekindergarten Programs

     ``SEC. 661. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

       ``(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       ``(1) Investments in children and early education should be 
     a national priority.
       ``(2) The cost of high quality preschool is prohibitive for 
     poor families and is a significant financial strain for many 
     working- and middle-class families.

[[Page 12256]]

       ``(3) State-funded preschool is the most rapidly expanding 
     segment of the United States educational system, but in many 
     States a lack of stable funding poses an enormous threat to 
     the provision or continuation of high quality preschool.
       ``(4) The provision of high quality prekindergarten is a 
     cost-effective investment for children and for the Nation. 
     Research shows that for every $1 invested in high quality 
     early childhood programs, taxpayers save more than $17 in 
     crime, welfare, education, and other costs.
       ``(5) Fewer than half the Nation's poor preschool-age 
     children attend preschool. The result is a significant 
     preparation gap between poor and middle-class children and 
     between minority and white children.
       ``(6) High quality early education increases academic 
     success for schoolchildren who received that education by--
       ``(A) increasing high school graduation rates;
       ``(B) improving children's performance on standardized 
     tests;
       ``(C) reducing grade repetition; and
       ``(D) reducing the number of children placed in special 
     education.
       ``(7) High quality early education promotes responsible 
     behavior by teens and adults who received that education by--
       ``(A) reducing crime, delinquency, and unhealthy behaviors 
     such as smoking and drug use;
       ``(B) lowering rates of teen pregnancy;
       ``(C) leading to greater employment and higher wages for 
     adults; and
       ``(D) contributing to more stable families.
       ``(b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to assist States 
     in--
       ``(1) making voluntary high quality full-day 
     prekindergarten programs available and economically 
     affordable for the families of all children for at least 1 
     year preceding kindergarten; and
       ``(2) making the prekindergarten programs available to a 
     target population of children from families with incomes at 
     or below 200 percent of the poverty line, for whom the 
     prekindergarten programs will be free of charge.

     ``SEC. 662. DEFINITIONS.

       ``(a) In this Act:
       ``(1) Full-day.--The term `full-day', used with respect to 
     a program, means a program with a minimum of a 6-hour 
     schedule per day.
       ``(2) Poverty line.--The term `poverty line' has the 
     meaning given the term in section 673(2) of the Community 
     Services Block Grant Act (42 U.S.C. 9902(2)) and includes any 
     revision required by that section.
       ``(3) Prekindergarten.--The term `prekindergarten' means a 
     program that--
       ``(A) serves children who are ages 3 through 5;
       ``(B) supports children's cognitive, social, emotional, and 
     physical development and approaches to learning; and
       ``(C) helps prepare children for a successful transition to 
     kindergarten.
       ``(4) Prekindergarten teacher.--The term `prekindergarten 
     teacher' means an individual who
       ``(A) has a bachelor of arts degree with a specialization 
     in early childhood education or early childhood development; 
     or
       ``(B) during the 6-year period following the first date on 
     which the individual is employed as such a teacher under this 
     Act, is working toward that degree.
       ``(5) Qualified prekindergarten provider.--The term 
     `qualified prekindergarten provider' includes a provider of a 
     prekindergarten program, a Head Start agency, a provider of a 
     child care program, a school, and a for-profit or nonprofit 
     organization that--
       ``(A) is in existence on the date of the qualification 
     determination; and
       ``(B) has met applicable requirements under State or local 
     law that are designed to protect the health and safety of 
     children and that are applicable to child care providers.
       ``(6) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the Secretary 
     of Health and Human Services.

     ``SEC. 663. PROGRAM AUTHORIZATION.

       ``(a) Prekindergarten Incentive Fund.--The Secretary, in 
     collaboration and consultation with the Secretary of 
     Education, shall create a Prekindergarten Incentive Fund, to 
     be administered by the Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services.
       ``(b) Grants.--In administering the Fund, the Secretary 
     shall award grants to eligible States, to pay for the Federal 
     share of the cost of awarding subgrants to qualified 
     prekindergarten providers to establish, expand, or enhance 
     voluntary high quality full-day prekindergarten programs.

     ``SEC. 664. STATE APPLICATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS.

       ``(a) Designated State Agency.--To be eligible to receive a 
     grant under this Act, a State shall designate a State agency 
     to administer the State program of assistance for 
     prekindergarten programs funded through the grant, including 
     receiving and administering funds and monitoring the 
     programs.
       ``(b) State Application.--In order for a State to be 
     eligible to receive a grant under this Act, the designated 
     State agency shall submit an application to the Secretary at 
     such time, in such manner, and containing such information as 
     the Secretary may reasonably require, including--
       ``(1) an assurance that, for prekindergarten programs 
     funded through the grant, the State will ensure that the 
     qualified prekindergarten providers target children from 
     families with incomes at or below 200 percent of the poverty 
     line, and provide prekindergarten programs to children from 
     those families free of charge;
       ``(2) an assurance that the State will award subgrants for 
     prekindergarten programs that are sufficient to provide a 
     high quality prekindergarten experience;
       ``(3) an assurance that not less than 25 percent of the 
     qualified prekindergarten providers receiving such subgrants 
     will be providers of community-based programs;
       ``(4) a description of the number of children in the State 
     who are eligible for the prekindergarten programs and the 
     needs that will be served through the prekindergarten 
     programs;
       ``(5) a description of how the State will ensure that the 
     subgrants are awarded to a wide range of types of qualified 
     prekindergarten providers;
       ``(6) a description of how the designated State agency will 
     collaborate and coordinate activities with State-funded 
     providers of prekindergarten programs, providers of federally 
     funded programs such as Head Start agencies, local 
     educational agencies, and child care providers;
       ``(7) a description of how the State will ensure, through a 
     monitoring process, that qualified prekindergarten providers 
     receiving the subgrants continue to place priority on the 
     target population of children described in paragraph (1), 
     provide programs that meet the standards of high quality 
     early education, and use funds appropriately;
       ``(8) a description of how the State will meet the needs of 
     working parents; and
       ``(9) a description of how the State will assist in 
     providing professional development assistance to 
     prekindergarten teachers and teacher aides.
       ``(c) Federal Share.--The Federal share of the cost 
     described in section 663(b) shall be 50 percent. The State 
     shall provide the non-Federal share of the cost in cash.
       ``(d) Supplementary Federal Funding.--Funds made available 
     under this Act may be used only to supplement and not 
     supplant other Federal, State, local, or private funds that 
     would, in the absence of the funds made available under this 
     Act, be made available for early childhood programs.
       ``(e) Maintenance of Effort.--A State that receives a grant 
     under this Act for a fiscal year shall maintain the 
     expenditures of the State for early childhood programs at a 
     level not less than the level of such expenditures of the 
     State for the preceding fiscal year.

     ``SEC. 665. STATE SET ASIDES AND EXPENDITURES.

       ``(a) Infant and Toddler Set Aside.--Notwithstanding 
     sections 662 and 663, a State shall set aside not less than 
     10 percent of the funds made available through a grant 
     awarded under this Act for the purpose of funding high 
     quality early childhood development programs for children who 
     are ages 0 through 3. Funds made available under this 
     subsection may also be used for professional development for 
     teachers and teacher aides in classrooms for children who are 
     ages 0 through 3.
       ``(b) Extended Day and Extended Year Set Aside.--
     Notwithstanding section 663, a State shall set aside not less 
     than 10 percent of the funds made available through a grant 
     awarded under this Act for the purpose of extending the hours 
     of early childhood programs to create extended day and 
     extended year programs.
       ``(c) Administrative Expenses.--Not more than 5 percent of 
     the funds made available through such a grant may be used for 
     administrative expenses, including monitoring.

     ``SEC. 666. LOCAL APPLICATIONS.

       ``To be eligible to receive a subgrant under this Act, a 
     qualified prekindergarten provider shall submit an 
     application to the designated State agency at such time, in 
     such manner, and containing such information as the agency 
     may reasonably require, including--
       ``(1) a description of how the qualified prekindergarten 
     provider will meet the diverse needs of children in the 
     community to be served, including children with disabilities, 
     whose native language is not English, or with other special 
     needs, children in the State foster care system, and homeless 
     children;
       ``(2) a description of how the qualified prekindergarten 
     provider will serve eligible children who are not served 
     through similar services or programs;
       ``(3) a description of a plan for involving families in the 
     prekindergarten program;
       ``(4) a description of how children in the prekindergarten 
     program, and their parents and families, will receive 
     assistance through supportive services provided within the 
     community;
       ``(5) a description of how the qualified prekindergarten 
     provider collaborates with providers of other programs 
     serving children and families, including Head Start agencies, 
     providers of child care programs, and local educational 
     agencies, to meet the needs of children, families, and 
     working families, as appropriate; and
       ``(6) a description of how the qualified prekindergarten 
     provider will collaborate with

[[Page 12257]]

     local educational agencies to ensure a smooth transition for 
     participating students from the prekindergarten program to 
     kindergarten and early elementary education.

     ``SEC. 667. LOCAL PREKINDERGARTEN PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS.

       ``(a) Mandatory Uses of Funds.--A qualified prekindergarten 
     provider that receives a subgrant under this Act shall use 
     funds received through the grant to establish, expand, or 
     enhance prekindergarten programs for children who are ages 3 
     through 5, including--
       ``(1) providing a prekindergarten program that supports 
     children's cognitive, social, emotional, and physical 
     development and approaches to learning, and helps prepare 
     children for a successful transition to kindergarten;
       ``(2) purchasing educational equipment, including 
     educational materials, necessary to provide a high quality 
     prekindergarten program; and
       ``(3) extending part-day prekindergarten programs to full-
     day prekindergarten programs.
       ``(b) Permissible Use of Funds.--A qualified 
     prekindergarten provider that receives a subgrant under this 
     Act may use funds received through the grant to--
       ``(1) pay for transporting students to and from a 
     prekindergarten program; and
       ``(2) provide professional development assistance to 
     prekindergarten teachers and teacher aides.
       ``(c) Program Requirements.--A qualified prekindergarten 
     provider that receives a subgrant under this Act shall carry 
     out a high quality prekindergarten program by--
       ``(1) maintaining a maximum class size of 20 children, with 
     at least 1 prekindergarten teacher per classroom;
       ``(2) ensuring that the ratio of children to 
     prekindergarten teachers and teacher aides shall not exceed 
     10 to 1;
       ``(3) utilizing a prekindergarten curriculum that is 
     research- and evidence-based, developmentally appropriate, 
     and designed to support children's cognitive, social, 
     emotional, and physical development, and approaches to 
     learning;
       ``(4) providing a program with a minimum of a 6-hour 
     schedule per day; and
       ``(5) ensuring that prekindergarten teachers meet the 
     requirements of this Act.

     ``SEC. 668. REPORTING.

       ``(a) Qualified Prekindergarten Provider Reports.--Each 
     qualified prekindergarten provider that receives a subgrant 
     from a State under this Act shall submit an annual report, to 
     the designated State agency, that reviews the effectiveness 
     of the prekindergarten program provided. Such annual report 
     shall include--
       ``(1) data specifying the number and ages of enrolled 
     children, and the family income, race, gender, disability, 
     and native language of such children;
       ``(2) a description of--
       ``(A) the curriculum used by the program;
       ``(B) how the curriculum supports children's cognitive, 
     social, emotional, and physical development and approaches to 
     learning; and
       ``(C) how the curriculum is appropriate for children of the 
     culture, language, and ages of the children served; and
       ``(3) a statement of all sources of funding received by the 
     program, including Federal, State, local, and private funds.
       ``(b) State Reports.--Each State that receives a grant 
     under this Act shall submit an annual report to the Secretary 
     detailing the effectiveness of all prekindergarten programs 
     funded under this Act in the State.
       ``(c) Report to Congress.--The Secretary shall submit an 
     annual report to Congress that describes the State programs 
     of assistance for prekindergarten programs funded under this 
     Act.

     ``SEC. 669. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
     Act--
       ``(1) $5,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
       ``(2) $6,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2009;
       ``(3) $7,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2010;
       ``(4) $8,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2011; and
       ``(5) $9,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2012.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. MENENDEZ (for himself, Mr. Durbin, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Brown, 
        Mr. Dodd, and Mr. Lautenberg):
  S. 1375. A bill to ensure that new mothers and their families are 
educated about postpartum depression, screened for symptoms, and 
provided with essential services, and to increase research at the 
National Institutes of Health on postpartum depression; to the 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I rise today with my friends Senators 
Durbin and Snowe to reintroduce the Mom's Opportunity to Access Help, 
Education, Research, and Support for Postpartum Depression, MOTHERS, 
Act.
  Senator Durbin has been and continues to be a leader on this issue 
and I am grateful for the opportunity to work with him on this 
important legislation. I would also like to recognize Representative 
Rush, who has been a champion for women battling postpartum depression, 
PPD, in the House for many years. I am proud to say that his bill, The 
Melanie Stokes Postpartum Depression Research and Care Act, shares the 
same goals as the MOTHERS Act.
  Mr. President, in the United States, 10 to 20 percent of women suffer 
from a disabling and often undiagnosed condition known as postpartum 
depression. Unfortunately, many women are unaware of this condition and 
often do not receive the treatment they need. That is why I am 
introducing the MOTHERS Act, so that women no longer have to suffer in 
silence and feel alone when faced with this difficult condition.
  Last year, the great State of New Jersey passed a first of its kind 
law requiring doctors and nurses to educate expectant mothers and their 
families about postpartum depression. This bill was introduced in the 
State legislature by State Senate President Richard Codey. The 
attention of Senator Codey and his wife, Mary Jo Codey, who personally 
battled postpartum depression, have brought to the issue is remarkable. 
Brooke Shields, a graduate of Princeton University, has also shared her 
struggle with postpartum depression publicly and should be commended 
for her efforts to bring awareness to this condition. Postpartum 
depression affects women all across the country, not just in New 
Jersey, and that is why I believe the MOTHERS Act is so important.
  In America, 80 percent of women experience some level of depression 
after childbirth. This is what people often refer to as the ``baby 
blues.'' However, each year, there are between 400,000 and 800,000 
women across America who suffer from postpartum depression, a much more 
serious condition. These mothers often experience signs of depression 
and may lose interest in friends and family, feel overwhelming sadness 
or even have thoughts of harming their baby or harming themselves. 
People often assume that these feelings are simply the ``baby blues'', 
but the reality is much worse. Postpartum depression is a serious and 
disabling condition and new mothers deserve to be given information and 
resources on this condition so, if needed, they can get the appropriate 
help.
  The good news is that treatment is available. Many women have 
successfully recovered from postpartum depression with the help of 
therapy, medication, and support groups. However, mothers and their 
families must be educated so that they understand what might occur 
after the birth of their child and when to get help. This legislation 
will require doctors and nurses to educate every new mother and their 
families about postpartum depression before they leave the hospital and 
offer the opportunity for new mothers to be screened for postpartum 
depression symptoms during the first year of postnatal check up visits. 
It also provides social services to new mothers and their families who 
are suffering and struggling with postpartum depression. By increasing 
education and early treatment of postpartum depression, mothers, 
husbands, and families, will be able to recognize the symptoms of this 
condition and help new mothers get the treatment they need and deserve.
  The MOTHERS Act has another important component. While we continue to 
educate and help the mothers of today, we must also be prepared to help 
future moms. By increasing funding for research on postpartum 
conditions at the National Institutes of Health, we can begin to 
unravel the mystery behind this difficult to understand illness. The 
more we know about the causes and etiology of postpartum depression, 
the more tools we have to treat and prevent this heartbreaking 
condition.
  We must attack postpartum depression on all fronts with education, 
screening, support, and research so that new moms can feel supported 
and safe rather than scared and alone. Many new mothers sacrifice 
anything and everything to provide feelings of security and safety to 
their innocent, newborn child. It is our duty to provide the same level 
of security, safety and support to new mothers in need.

[[Page 12258]]



                          ____________________