[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 1]
[Senate]
[Pages 327-351]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. KOHL (for himself, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Reid, 
        Mr. Schumer, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Lautenberg, Mrs. Boxer, 
        Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Kerry, and Mr. Whitehouse):
  S. 167. A bill to amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets 
Act of 1968 to enhance the COPS ON THE BEAT grant program, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today with Senators Feinstein, Leahy,

[[Page 328]]

Reid, and others to introduce the COPS Improvement Act of 2009. This 
legislation would reauthorize one of the Department of Justice's most 
successful efforts to fight crime, the Community Oriented Policing 
Services, COPS, program.
  The success story of the COPS program has been told many times, but 
it is worth repeating. The goal in 1994 was to put an additional 
100,000 cops on the beat. Over the next 5 years, from 1995 to 1999, the 
COPS Universal Hiring Program distributed nearly $1 billion in grants 
to State and local law enforcement agencies to hire additional law 
enforcement officers, allowing us to achieve our goal of 100,000 new 
officers.
  Common sense told the American people that having more police walking 
the beat would lead to less crime, and our experience with the COPS 
program proved that to be true. This unprecedented effort to put more 
police officers in our communities coincided with significant 
reductions in crime during the 1990s. As the number of police rose, we 
saw 8 consecutive years of reductions in crime. Few programs can claim 
such a clear record of success.
  Unfortunately, the success of the COPS program led some to declare 
victory. Beginning in 2001, funding for the COPS program came under 
attack. President Bush proposed cuts to the COPS program in each of his 
budget requests, and his proposed cuts to State and local law 
enforcement programs has totaled well over $1 billion in recent years. 
Despite bipartisan efforts in Congress to prevent those cuts, State and 
local law enforcement funding has consistently declined. Ultimately, 
the administration succeeded in eliminating the COPS Hiring Program in 
2005.
  These cuts have been felt by the people who work every day to keep 
our communities safe, and the consequences have been real. Cities 
across the country have seen the size of their police force reduced. 
New York has lost thousands of police officers in recent years. Other 
cities have hundreds of vacancies on their forces. Years of decreases 
in funding have led to fewer cops on the beat and, unfortunately, 
increases in violent crime.
  Therefore, in order to restore the safety of our neighborhoods and 
communities, it is imperative that we commit ourselves to restoring 
funding for the COPS program. The COPS Improvement Act of 2009 would 
authorize $1.15 billion per year over 6 years for the COPS program. It 
would allocate $600 million per year to hire officers to engage in 
community policing and as school resource officers. It also authorizes 
$350 million per year for technology grants.
  The legislation would also provide some relief to local prosecutors, 
who have also seen their ranks reduced by the cuts in funding. 
Specifically, it includes $200 million per year to help local district 
attorneys hire community prosecutors.
  To be sure, some will argue that more than $1 billion is too large a 
price tag. It is hard to put a price tag on the security of our 
communities. Investing money in such a successful program with such an 
important goal is certainly worth the cost. We must also remember that 
preventing crime from occurring saves taxpayers from the costs 
associated with victim assistance and incarceration. For that reason, a 
recent report by the Brookings Institution found ``COPS . . . to be one 
of the most cost-effective options available for fighting crime.''
  It is also worth noting the assistance the COPS program can provide 
to our economy. Few government programs can claim such a direct 
connection to job creation. The COPS Hiring Program actually puts more 
people in this country to work. In addition to reducing crime, this 
investment can serve as a direct injection of money into the American 
economy.
  It is difficult to overstate the importance of passing the COPS 
Improvement Act. Because of the success of the program and the need for 
a renewed commitment to it, the bill has long had the support of every 
major law enforcement group in the Nation, including the International 
Association of Chiefs of Police, the National Association of Police 
Organizations, the National Sheriffs Association, the International 
Brotherhood of Police Organizations, the National Organization of Black 
Law Enforcement Officials, the International Union of Police 
Associations, and the Fraternal Order of Police. These law enforcement 
officers put their lives on the line every day to make our communities 
a safe place to live, and they deserve our full support.
  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. 167

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``COPS Improvements Act of 
     2009''.

     SEC. 2. COPS GRANT IMPROVEMENTS.

       (a) In General.--Section 1701 of the Omnibus Crime Control 
     and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796dd) is amended--
       (1) by amending subsection (a) to read as follows:
       ``(a) Grant Authorization.--The Attorney General shall 
     carry out grant programs under which the Attorney General 
     makes grants to States, units of local government, Indian 
     tribal governments, other public and private entities, multi-
     jurisdictional or regional consortia, and individuals for the 
     purposes described in subsections (b), (c), (d), and (e).'';
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by striking the subsection heading text and inserting 
     ``Community Policing and Crime Prevention Grants'';
       (B) in paragraph (3), by striking ``, to increase the 
     number of officers deployed in community-oriented policing'';
       (C) in paragraph (4), by inserting ``or train'' after ``pay 
     for'';
       (D) by inserting after paragraph (4) the following:
       ``(5) award grants to hire school resource officers and to 
     establish school-based partnerships between local law 
     enforcement agencies and local school systems to combat 
     crime, gangs, drug activities, and other problems in and 
     around elementary and secondary schools;'';
       (E) by striking paragraph (9);
       (F) by redesignating paragraphs (10) through (12) as 
     paragraphs (9) through (11), respectively;
       (G) by striking paragraph (13);
       (H) by redesignating paragraphs (14) through (17) as 
     paragraphs (12) through (15), respectively;
       (I) in paragraph (14), as so redesignated, by striking 
     ``and'' at the end;
       (J) in paragraph (15), as so redesignated, by striking the 
     period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and
       (K) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(16) establish and implement innovative programs to 
     reduce and prevent illegal drug manufacturing, distribution, 
     and use, including the manufacturing, distribution, and use 
     of methamphetamine; and
       ``(17) award enhancing community policing and crime 
     prevention grants that meet emerging law enforcement needs, 
     as warranted.'';
       (3) by striking subsection (c);
       (4) by striking subsections (h) and (i);
       (5) by redesignating subsections (d) through (g) as 
     subsections (f) through (i), respectively;
       (6) by inserting after subsection (b) the following:
       ``(c) Troops-to-Cops Programs.--
       ``(1) In general.--Grants made under subsection (a) may be 
     used to hire former members of the Armed Forces to serve as 
     career law enforcement officers for deployment in community-
     oriented policing, particularly in communities that are 
     adversely affected by a recent military base closing.
       ``(2) Definition.--In this subsection, `former member of 
     the Armed Forces' means a member of the Armed Forces of the 
     United States who is involuntarily separated from the Armed 
     Forces within the meaning of section 1141 of title 10, United 
     States Code.
       ``(d) Community Prosecutors Program.--The Attorney General 
     may make grants under subsection (a) to pay for additional 
     community prosecuting programs, including programs that 
     assign prosecutors to--
       ``(1) handle cases from specific geographic areas; and
       ``(2) address counter-terrorism problems, specific violent 
     crime problems (including intensive illegal gang, gun, and 
     drug enforcement and quality of life initiatives), and 
     localized violent and other crime problems based on needs 
     identified by local law enforcement agencies, community 
     organizations, and others.
       ``(e) Technology Grants.--The Attorney General may make 
     grants under subsection (a) to develop and use new 
     technologies (including interoperable communications 
     technologies, modernized criminal record technology, and 
     forensic technology) to assist State and local law 
     enforcement agencies in reorienting the emphasis of their 
     activities

[[Page 329]]

     from reacting to crime to preventing crime and to train law 
     enforcement officers to use such technologies.'';
       (7) in subsection (f), as so redesignated--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``to States, units of 
     local government, Indian tribal governments, and to other 
     public and private entities,'';
       (B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``define for State and 
     local governments, and other public and private entities,'' 
     and inserting ``establish'';
       (C) in the first sentence of paragraph (3), by inserting 
     ``(including regional community policing institutes)'' after 
     ``training centers or facilities''; and
       (D) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) Exclusivity.--The Office of Community Oriented 
     Policing Services shall be the exclusive component of the 
     Department of Justice to perform the functions and activities 
     specified in this paragraph.'';
       (8) in subsection (g), as so redesignated, by striking 
     ``may utilize any component'', and all that follows and 
     inserting ``shall use the Office of Community Oriented 
     Policing Services of the Department of Justice in carrying 
     out this part.'';
       (9) in subsection (h), as so redesignated--
       (A) by striking ``subsection (a)'' the first place that 
     term appears and inserting ``paragraphs (1) and (2) of 
     subsection (b)''; and
       (B) by striking ``in each fiscal year pursuant to 
     subsection (a)'' and inserting ``in each fiscal year for 
     purposes described in paragraph (1) and (2) of subsection 
     (b)'';
       (10) in subsection (i), as so redesignated, by striking the 
     second sentence; and
       (11) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(j) Retention of Additional Officer Positions.--For any 
     grant under paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (b) for hiring 
     or rehiring career law enforcement officers, a grant 
     recipient shall retain each additional law enforcement 
     officer position created under that grant for not less than 
     12 months after the end of the period of that grant, unless 
     the Attorney General waives, wholly or in part, the retention 
     requirement of a program, project, or activity.''.
       (b) Applications.--Section 1702 of the Omnibus Crime 
     Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796dd-1) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (c)--
       (A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by inserting ``, 
     unless waived by the Attorney General'' after ``under this 
     part shall'';
       (B) by striking paragraph (8); and
       (C) by redesignating paragraphs (9) through (11) as 
     paragraphs (8) through (10), respectively; and
       (2) by striking subsection (d).
       (c) Renewal of Grants.--Section 1703 of the Omnibus Crime 
     Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796dd-2) is 
     amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 1703. RENEWAL OF GRANTS.

       ``(a) In General.--A grant made under this part may be 
     renewed, without limitations on the duration of such renewal, 
     to provide additional funds, if the Attorney General 
     determines that the funds made available to the recipient 
     were used in a manner required under an approved application 
     and if the recipient can demonstrate significant progress in 
     achieving the objectives of the initial application.
       ``(b) No Cost Extensions.--Notwithstanding subsection (a), 
     the Attorney General may extend a grant period, without 
     limitations as to the duration of such extension, to provide 
     additional time to complete the objectives of the initial 
     grant award.''.
       (d) Limitation on Use of Funds.--Section 1704 of the 
     Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 
     3796dd-3) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``that would, in the 
     absence of Federal funds received under this part, be made 
     available from State or local sources'' and inserting ``that 
     the Attorney General determines would, in the absence of 
     Federal funds received under this part, be made available for 
     the purpose of the grant under this part from State or local 
     sources''; and
       (2) by striking subsection (c).
       (e) Enforcement Actions.--
       (1) In general.--Section 1706 of the Omnibus Crime Control 
     and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796dd-5) is 
     amended--
       (A) in the section heading, by striking ``REVOCATION OR 
     SUSPENSION OF FUNDING'' and inserting ``ENFORCEMENT 
     ACTIONS''; and
       (B) by striking ``revoke or suspend'' and all that follows 
     and inserting ``take any enforcement action available to the 
     Department of Justice.''.
       (2) Technical and conforming amendment.--The table of 
     contents of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe 
     Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3711) is amended by striking 
     the item relating to section 1706 and inserting the 
     following:

``Sec. 1706. Enforcement actions.''.

       (f) Definitions.--Section 1709(1) of the Omnibus Crime 
     Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796dd-8(1)) 
     is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``who is a sworn law enforcement officer'' 
     after ``permanent basis''; and
       (2) by inserting ``, including officers for the Amtrak 
     Police Department'' before the period at the end.
       (g) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 1001(11) of 
     the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 
     U.S.C. 3793(11)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``$1,047,119,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2006 through 2009'' and inserting 
     ``$1,150,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 through 
     2014''; and
       (2) in subparagraph (B)--
       (A) in the first sentence, by striking ``3 percent'' and 
     inserting ``5 percent''; and
       (B) by striking the second sentence and inserting the 
     following: ``Of the funds available for grants under part Q, 
     not less than $600,000,000 shall be used for grants for the 
     purposes specified in section 1701(b), not more than 
     $200,000,000 shall be used for grants under section 1701(d), 
     and not more than $350,000,000 shall be used for grants under 
     section 1701(e).''.
       (h) Purposes.--Section 10002 of the Public Safety 
     Partnership and Community Policing Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 
     3796dd note) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (4), by striking ``development'' and 
     inserting ``use''; and
       (2) in the matter following paragraph (4), by striking 
     ``for a period of 6 years''.
       (i) COPS Program Improvements.--
       (1) In general.--Section 109(b) of the Omnibus Crime 
     Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3712h(b)) is 
     amended--
       (A) by striking paragraph (1);
       (B) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs 
     (1) and (2), respectively; and
       (C) in paragraph (2), as so redesignated, by inserting ``, 
     except for the program under part Q of this title'' before 
     the period.
       (2) Law enforcement computer systems.--Section 107 of the 
     Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 
     3712f) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Exception.--This section shall not apply to any grant 
     made under part Q of this title.''.

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senators Kohl, 
Leahy, and others in introducing the COPS Improvement Act of 2009. I am 
honored to join them in introducing this important bill on an issue 
that has been so forcefully championed by Senator Biden for so many 
years.
  It is my sincere hope that we are entering the dawn of a new age in 
our approach to State and local law enforcement funding. For the last 8 
years, the Bush administration has steadily and drastically reduced the 
amount of funding and programming that the Federal Government provides 
to State and local law enforcement. This has been a huge mistake, with 
a corresponding spike in the rise of violent crime in our country.
  The need for additional funding for state and local law enforcement 
through the COPS program is clear. Over the last 5 years, our country 
has experienced an alarming increase in violent crime. In 2007, the 
Police Executive Research Forum reported that from 2004 to 2006, 
homicides increased overall by 10 percent, aggravated assaults with 
guns rose 10 percent, and robberies rose 12 percent.
  This survey mirrors the FBI's own statistics, which showed that 
violent crime rose by 1.8 percent between 2003 to 2007. And this surge 
in the violent crime rate isn't just limited to big cities. In February 
2008, in testimony before the House Judiciary Committee, Attorney 
General Mukasey acknowledged that violent crime was increasing across 
all of our communities.
  Let me put these numbers in human terms. The International 
Association of Chiefs of Police equates the rise of 2.5 percent to 
31,479 more victims of violent crimes in 2005. The 3.7 increase for all 
of 2006 means about 47,000 more Americans were victims of murder, 
robbery, assault, rape, or other violent crimes.
  Unfortunately, despite these disturbing numbers and the Justice 
Department's own acknowledgement that violent crime is increasing, over 
the last 8 years the Bush administration continually proposed drastic 
cuts in the Federal assistance traditionally available to state and 
local law enforcement.
  President Bush's proposed fiscal year 2009 budget slashed funding for 
State and local law enforcement at unprecedented rates. After 
repeatedly proposing to eliminate COPS hiring grants, President Bush 
finally zeroed out the entire COPS program for fiscal year 2009, 
replacing it with a mere $4 million for a new community policing grant. 
This is simply not acceptable and our communities are suffering because 
of it.
  During the 1990s and earlier years in this decade, the federal 
government

[[Page 330]]

vigorously funded grant programs for state and local law enforcement, 
including the COPS Program. We saw real results--violent crime went 
down year after year. It is no surprise that with the recent cuts, 
violent crime rates have ticked back up.
  This trend has to stop, and it is my hope that Congress and the 
incoming Obama administration will move to correct the huge damage that 
has been inflicted on state and local law enforcement in the last eight 
years. The bill Senator Kohl and I introduce today will go a long way 
to do that.
  We know what works and we can see the results of ignoring and 
underfunding proven programs. We also know that crime often rises in 
times of economic trouble. Now is not the time to continue the 
rollbacks in state and law enforcement funding initiated by the Bush 
administration.
  This bill will serve a dual purpose--creating thousands of jobs in 
the current economic downturn and providing state and local law 
enforcement with the resources they need to successfully fight crime.
  Specifically, the bill would authorize $1.15 billion per year for the 
next 6 years to fund the following:
  Police Hiring Grants: The bill authorizes $600 million per year to 
hire up to 50,000 officers to work in community policing efforts, and 
school resource officers to fight school violence. These funds will 
create jobs in a worsening economy, and can be used to retain officers, 
pay overtime costs, and reimburse officers for training costs.
  Law Enforcement Technology Grants: The bill authorizes $350 million 
per year for police departments to obtain new technology and equipment 
to analyze real-time crime data and incident reports to anticipate 
crime trends, map crime ``hot-spots'', examine DNA evidence, and 
purchasing badly needed technology upgrades for police on the street.
  Community Prosecutor Grants: The bill authorizes $200 million per 
year to help local district attorneys hire and train more prosecutors.
  Troops-to-Cops Program: The bill authorizes a troops-to-cops program 
to encourage local police agencies to hire former military personnel 
who are honorably discharged from military service or who are displaced 
by base closings to allow them to continue working and engaging in 
public service.
  The COPS Program is a time-tested program that has proven its 
effectiveness for years. It is one of the cornerstones in the State and 
local law enforcement efforts that have removed thousands of pounds of 
drugs and millions of dollars worth of drug proceeds from communities 
across the country.
  Money from the COPS Program provides law enforcement with the 
officers, prosecutors and technology that they need to keep our 
communities safe. All we have to do is look at the rising rates of 
violent crime that correspond to the staggering funding cuts to 
understand how important these programs are for our country.
  We must provide the necessary tools and funds to State and local law 
enforcement and act decisively to combat the nation's growing gang 
problem and violent crime. Enacting the COPS Improvement Act of 2009 
will be a step in the right direction. I hope my colleagues will join 
Senator Kohl and I in supporting this important legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
       By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Mr. Kyl, Mrs. Boxer, Mrs. 
        Hutchison, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Crapo, Mr. 
        Bingaman, Mr. Specter, Ms. Cantwell, and Mr. McCain):
  S. 168. A bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to 
provide for compensation to States incarcerating undocumented aliens 
charged with a felony or 2 or more misdemeanors; to the Committee on 
the Judiciary.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today the Senate Judiciary Committee 
held a hearing entitled ``Helping State and Local Law Enforcement 
During an Economic Downturn.'' Today Senator Kyl and I are introducing 
a bill that will do just that. The SCAAP Reimbursement Protection Act 
of 2009 will help to alleviate the costs of illegal immigration to 
State and local governments by broadening the State Criminal Alien 
Assistance Program, SCAAP, to ensure that States and localities are 
eligible for reimbursement of the costs associated with incarcerating 
criminal aliens.
  We are joined today by Senators Boxer, Hutchinson, Schumer, Cornyn, 
Durbin, Crapo, Bingaman, Specter, Cantwell, and McCain.
  The burden of incarcerating criminal aliens weighs heavily on States, 
especially during this time of economic uncertainty. California is home 
to approximately 32 percent of the Nation's illegal immigrants and 
spent over $950 million in 2008 alone to house these criminal aliens.
  Understanding the expenses that States and localities bear, Congress 
enacted SCAAP in 1994 to help reimburse States and localities for the 
costs of incarcerating criminal aliens. Prior to 2003, the Department 
of Justice interpreted the SCAAP statute to include reimbursement to 
States and localities that are incurring costs of incarcerating 
undocumented criminal aliens who have been accused or convicted of 
State and local offenses and have been incarcerated for a minimum of 72 
hours. After 2003, DOJ limited reimbursement to the amount States and 
localities spend incarcerating convicted criminal aliens for at least 4 
consecutive days.
  Reimbursing States and localities only for the costs when a criminal 
alien is convicted and incarcerated for 4 consecutive days 
significantly undermines the goal of SCAAP that States and localities 
should not bear the burden of a broken Federal immigration system. The 
actual costs of this failed Federal system begin when these aliens are 
charged with a crime, transported, and incarcerated for any length of 
time.
  This narrow interpretation is even more devastating because SCAAP is 
consistently under-funded. The President has zeroed out SCAAP funding 
in his budget proposals for the past 7 years. Through bipartisan 
support, Congress was only able to partially fund the program.
  As a result, SCAAP only reimburses States for a fraction of the costs 
of incarcerating criminal aliens. In 2008, the California State 
government will receive approximately $118 million in SCAAP funding. 
However, it is estimated to cost the State approximately $960 million 
each year for the incarceration of criminal aliens in California--$842 
million above the reimbursement amount. The State of California is 
therefore only being reimbursed for approximately 12 percent of its 
actual costs to incarcerate illegal criminal aliens.
  This cut has had a domino effect on public safety funding. For every 
dollar less that SCAAP reimburses States, a dollar less is available 
for critical public safety services. For example, after the SCAAP 
funding cuts in 2003, the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department 
implemented an ``early release'' policy for prisoners convicted of 
misdemeanors.
  I believe it is the Federal Government's responsibility to control 
illegal immigration. The funding cuts imposed by the Bush 
administration have let our local public safety services down, and have 
made our communities less safe.
  The SCAAP Reimbursement Protection Act of 2009 is good federal policy 
to fix a failed Federal one--so that States are reimbursed for the full 
costs of incarcerating aliens who are either charged with or convicted 
of a felony or two misdemeanors.
  This policy has the support of the National Sheriffs' Association, 
California State Association of Counties, the U.S./Mexico Border 
Counties Coalition, the Virginia Sheriffs' Association, the Los Angeles 
County Sheriff Lee Baca, and the Sheriffs' Association of Texas, who 
have all endorsed the bill I am reintroducing today.
  Our colleagues in the House unanimously passed this companion bill 
last Congress and I urge my colleagues in this chamber to join me in 
supporting this much needed amendment to the SCAAP statute.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.

[[Page 331]]

  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 168

       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 ``SCAAP Reimbursement 
     Protection Act of 2009''.

     SEC. 2. ASSISTANCE FOR STATES INCARCERATING UNDOCUMENTED 
                   ALIENS CHARGED WITH CERTAIN CRIMES.

       Section 241(i)(3)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
     (8 U.S.C. 1231(i)(3)(A)) is amended by inserting ``charged 
     with or'' before ``convicted''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE (for herself, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Inouye, Mr. 
        Rockefeller, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Kerry, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Reed, Ms. 
        Collins, and Mr. Nelson of Florida):
  S. 171. A bill to develop and maintain an integrated system of 
coastal and ocean observations for the Nation's coasts, oceans, and 
Great Lakes, to improve warnings of tsunami, hurricanes, El Nino 
events, and other natural hazards, to enhance homeland security, to 
support maritime operations, to improve management of coastal and 
marine resources, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Coastal and 
Ocean Observation System Act of 2009 and the NOAA Undersea Research 
Program Act of 2009. These bills will greatly enhance our nation's 
existing ocean observation and research capabilities and drastically 
improve our understanding of the marine environment.
  Oceans cover nearly three quarters of the Earth's surface, and have 
great influence over our lives. They shape our weather and climate 
systems, provide highways for international and domestic commerce, 
sustain rich living and non-living resources on which many of our 
livelihoods are based, and provide our nation over 95,000 miles of 
shoreline which is the backbone of tourist and recreational activities 
in many of our coastal states. Despite the constant, intricate 
interaction between our lives on land and the natural systems of the 
ocean, we know woefully little about the physical properties of the 
overwhelming majority of our planet. What lies over the horizon 
remains, by most accounts, a mystery.
  Yet, the effects of those mysterious systems can be devastating. In 
recent years, hurricanes, tsunamis, and other natural disasters have 
devastated regions of our nation, and other parts of the world. Today, 
we have the technology to monitor a wide range of ocean-based threats, 
from destructive storms to quieter dangers such as harmful algal blooms 
and man-made pollution. The purpose of the Coastal Ocean Observing 
System Act is to put that technology to work predicting these threats 
more accurately and, when possible, mitigating their impacts.
  This bipartisan, science-based bill would authorize the National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA, to coordinate an 
interagency network of ocean observing and communication systems around 
our nation's coastlines. This system would collect instantaneous data 
and information on ocean conditions--such as temperature, wave height, 
wind speed, currents, dissolved oxygen, salinity, contaminants, and 
other variables-- that are essential to marine science and resource 
management and can be used to improve maritime transportation, safety, 
and commerce. Such data would improve both short-term forecasting that 
can mitigate impacts of major disasters, and prediction and scientific 
analysis of long-term ocean and climate trends.
  My home State of Maine currently participates in an innovative 
partnership known as the Gulf of Maine Ocean Observing System, or 
GoMOOS. Launched in 2001, GoMOOS takes ocean and surface condition 
measurements on a hourly basis through a network of linked buoys. These 
data are subsequently made available via the GoMOOS website to 
scientists, students, vessel captains, fishermen, and anyone else with 
an interest in our oceans. The vast geographic range and frequency of 
measurements has led to unprecedented developments in scientific 
analysis of ocean conditions in the Gulf of Maine. It has also 
contributed invaluable information to our region's assessments of 
fisheries, weather conditions, and predictions of other ocean 
phenomena.
  Unfortunately, due to recent budget cuts within NOAA, in 2008 GoMOOS 
was forced to remove several buoys from the water, compromising the 
integrity of the system and reducing the quality of data available to 
system users. The funding levels authorized in this bill will ensure 
that this system, which has been shown to return $6 to the regional 
economy for every dollar invested, will continue to grow and provide 
its vital services to our maritime community.
  Of course, the need to access this type of information is not limited 
to the Gulf of Maine. In June 2006, the Joint Ocean Commission 
Initiative, made up of members from the Pew Ocean Commission and the 
U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, presented to Congress a list of the 
``top ten'' actions Congress should take to strengthen our ocean policy 
regime. One of those priorities was ``enact legislation to authorize 
and fund the Integrated Ocean Observing System.'' Ocean and coastal 
observations are a cornerstone of sound marine science, management, and 
commerce. This bill will save lives by allowing seafarers to better 
monitor ocean conditions and providing timelier and more accurate 
predictions of potentially catastrophic weather and seismic phenomena. 
It will save taxpayers' dollars by reducing the emergency spending that 
comes in the wake of unanticipated storms, and it will enhance the 
appreciation and understanding of our oceans and coastal regions to 
benefit all Americans.
  I am very proud to introduce this bill, and I would like to thank my 
cosponsors, Senators Cantwell, Inouye, Rockefeller, Landrieu, Kerry, 
Boxer, Reed, Collins, and Bill Nelson for contributing to this 
legislation and supporting this national initiative. Of course, our 
current and expanding ocean observation and communication system would 
not be possible without the work of dedicated professionals in the 
ocean and coastal science, management, and research communities--they 
have taken the initiative to develop the grassroots regional 
observation systems as well as contribute to this legislation. Thanks 
to their ongoing efforts, ocean observations will continue to provide a 
tremendous service to the American public.
  While my ocean observing legislation will greatly enhance our ability 
to analyze and disseminate oceanographic and meteorological data, we 
also face a shortfall in our Nation's ability to explore vast regions 
of our undersea territory. Nearly 3 years ago the U.S. Commission on 
Ocean Policy released its long-awaited report, which noted that 
approximately 95 percent of the ocean's floor remains uncharted 
territory. If past experience is any indication, fascinating 
discoveries await us in these vast unexplored areas. These regions are 
sure to include species of marine life that are currently unknown to 
science, archaeological and historical artifacts that can shed new 
light on our past, and marine resources that may support our ongoing 
quest for a sustainable future.
  In 2004 the U.S. Ocean Policy Commissioners called for enhanced, 
comprehensive national programs in ocean exploration, undersea 
research, and ocean and coastal mapping. The vision of the 
Commissioners, one that I share, is for well-funded and 
interdisciplinary programs. Such programs are being led by NOAA, with 
significant input from partners in other agencies, academia, and 
industry, but currently they lack formal Congressional authorization. 
This legislation would establish those programs, and provide a strong 
foundation upon which we can continue to expand the quest for knowledge 
to areas of the planet that have literally never been seen by human 
eyes. I look forward to seeing these efforts enhanced under this 
legislation.
  I am proud to introduce this legislation today as well, and I thank 
my cosponsors on this bill, Senators Inouye,

[[Page 332]]

and Rockefeller for their support. I would also like to acknowledge my 
support for three other oceans bills being introduced by my colleagues 
simultaneously with these two bills: the Federal Ocean Acidification 
Research and Monitoring Act, the Coastal and Estuarine Lands Protection 
Act, and the Ocean and Coastal Mapping and Integration Act. All will be 
integral to enhancing our nation's coasts and oceans and I am pleased 
to support my colleagues' efforts by offering my cosponsorship of these 
three pieces of 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. 171

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Coastal and Ocean 
     Observation System Act of 2009''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) The United States Commission on Ocean Policy recommends 
     a national commitment to a sustained and integrated coastal 
     and ocean observing system and to coordinated research 
     programs which would provide vital information to assist the 
     Nation and the world in understanding, monitoring, and 
     predicting changes to the ocean and coastal resources and the 
     global climate system, enhancing homeland security, improving 
     weather and climate forecasts, strengthening management and 
     sustainable use of coastal and ocean resources, improving the 
     safety and efficiency of maritime operations, and mitigating 
     the impacts of marine hazards.
       (2) The continuing and potentially devastating threat posed 
     by tsunami, hurricanes, storm surges, and other marine 
     hazards requires immediate implementation of strengthened 
     observation and communications, and data management systems 
     to provide timely detection, assessment, and warnings and to 
     support response strategies for the millions of people living 
     in coastal regions of the United States and throughout the 
     world.
       (3) Safeguarding homeland security, conducting search and 
     rescue operations, responding to natural and manmade coastal 
     hazards (such as oil spills and harmful algal blooms), and 
     managing fisheries and other coastal activities each require 
     improved understanding and monitoring of the Nation's waters, 
     coastlines, ecosystems, and resources, including the ability 
     to provide rapid response teams with real-time environmental 
     conditions necessary for their work.
       (4) The 95,000-mile coastline of the United States, 
     including the Great Lakes, is vital to the Nation's 
     prosperity, contributing over $117 billion to the national 
     economy in 2000, supporting jobs for more than 200 million 
     Americans, handling $700 billion in waterborne commerce, and 
     supporting commercial and sport fisheries valued at more than 
     $50 billion annually.
       (5) Ensuring the effective implementation of National and 
     State programs to protect unique coastal and ocean habitats, 
     such as wetlands and coral reefs, and living marine resources 
     requires a sustained program of research and monitoring to 
     understand these natural systems and detect changes that 
     could jeopardize their long term viability.
       (6) Many elements of a coastal and ocean observing system 
     are in place, but require national investment, consolidation, 
     completion, and integration among international, Federal, 
     regional, State, and local elements.
       (7) In 2003, the United States led more than 50 nations in 
     affirming the vital importance of timely, reliable, long-term 
     global observations as a basis for sound decision-making, 
     recognizing the contribution of observation systems to meet 
     national, regional, and global needs, and calling for 
     strengthened cooperation and coordination in establishing a 
     Global Earth Observation System of Systems, of which an 
     integrated coastal and ocean observing system is an essential 
     part.
       (8) Protocols and reporting for observations, measurements, 
     and other data collection for a coastal and ocean observing 
     system should be standardized to facilitate data use and 
     dissemination.
       (9) Key variables, including temperature, salinity, sea 
     level, surface currents, ocean color, nutrients, and 
     variables, such as acidity, that may indicate the occurrence 
     and impacts of ocean acidification, should be collected to 
     address a variety of informational needs.
       (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are to establish an 
     integrated national system of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes 
     observing systems to address regional and national needs for 
     ocean information and to provide for--
       (1) the planning, development, implementation, and 
     maintenance of an integrated coastal and ocean observing 
     system that provides data and information to sustain and 
     restore healthy marine, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems 
     and manage the resources they support, aid marine navigation 
     safety and national security, support economic development, 
     enable advances in scientific understanding of the oceans and 
     the Great Lakes, and strengthen science education and 
     communication;
       (2) implementation of research, development, education, and 
     outreach programs to improve understanding of the marine 
     environment and achieve the full national benefits of an 
     integrated coastal and ocean observing system;
       (3) implementation of a data, information management, and 
     modeling system required by all components of an integrated 
     coastal and ocean observing system and related research to 
     develop early warning systems to more effectively predict and 
     mitigate impacts of natural hazards, improve weather and 
     climate forecasts, conserve healthy and restore degraded 
     coastal ecosystems, and ensure usefulness of data and 
     information for users; and
       (4) establishment of a network of regional associations to 
     operate and maintain regional coastal and ocean observing 
     systems to ensure fulfillment of national objectives at 
     regional scales and to address State and local needs for 
     ocean information and data products.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means 
     Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
     Administration.
       (2) Council.--The term ``Council'' means the National Ocean 
     Research Leadership Council established by section 7902 of 
     title 10, United States Code.
       (3) Interagency ocean observation committee.--The term 
     ``Interagency Ocean Observation Committee'' means the 
     committee established under section 4(d).
       (4) National oceanographic partnership program.--The term 
     ``National Oceanographic Partnership Program'' means the 
     program established under section 7901 of title 10, United 
     States Code.
       (5) Observing system.--The term ``observing system'' means 
     the integrated coastal, ocean, and Great Lakes observing 
     system to be established by the Council under section 4(a).
       (6) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Commerce, acting through the National Oceanic and 
     Atmospheric Administration.

     SEC. 4. INTEGRATED COASTAL AND OCEAN OBSERVING SYSTEM.

       (a) Establishment.--The President, acting through the 
     Council, shall establish and maintain an integrated system of 
     coastal and ocean observations, data communication and 
     management, analysis, modeling, research, education, and 
     outreach designed to understand current conditions and 
     provide data and information for the timely detection and 
     prediction of changes occurring in the ocean, coastal and 
     Great Lakes environments that impact the Nation's social, 
     economic, and ecological systems. The observing system shall 
     provide for long-term, continuous and quality-controlled 
     observations of the Nation's coasts, oceans, and Great Lakes 
     in order to--
       (1) understand the effects of human activities and natural 
     variability on and improve the health of the Nation's coasts, 
     oceans, and Great Lakes;
       (2) monitor key variables including temperature, salinity, 
     sea level, surface currents, ocean color, nutrients, and 
     variables, such as acidity, that may indicate the occurrence 
     and impacts of ocean acidification;
       (3) measure, track, explain, and predict climatic and 
     environmental changes and protect human lives and livelihoods 
     from hazards such as tsunami, hurricanes, storm surges, 
     coastal erosion, levy breaches, and fluctuating water levels;
       (4) supply critical information to marine-related 
     businesses such as marine transportation, aquaculture, 
     fisheries, and offshore energy production and aid marine 
     navigation and safety;
       (5) support national defense and homeland security efforts;
       (6) support the sustainable use, conservation, management, 
     and enjoyment of healthy ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes 
     resources, better understand the interactions of ocean 
     processes within the coastal zone, and support implementation 
     and refinement of ecosystem-based management and restoration;
       (7) support the protection of critical coastal habitats, 
     such as coral reefs and wetlands, and unique ecosystems and 
     resources;
       (8) educate the public about the role and importance of the 
     oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes in daily life; and
       (9) support research and development to ensure improvement 
     to ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observation measurements 
     and to enhance understanding of the Nation's ocean, coastal, 
     and Great Lakes resources.
       (b) System Elements.--In order to fulfill the purposes of 
     this Act, the observing system shall consist of the following 
     program elements:
       (1) A national program to fulfill national and 
     international observation priorities.
       (2) A network of regional associations to manage the 
     regional coastal and ocean observing and information programs 
     that collect, measure, and disseminate data and information 
     products.
       (3) Data management, communication, and modeling systems 
     for the timely integration

[[Page 333]]

     and dissemination of data and information products from the 
     national and regional systems.
       (4) A research and development program conducted under the 
     guidance of the Council, including projects under the 
     National Oceanographic Partnership Program, consisting of the 
     following:
       (A) Basic research to advance knowledge of coastal and 
     ocean systems and ensure improvement of operational products, 
     including related infrastructure, observing technology, and 
     information technology.
       (B) Focused research and technology development projects to 
     improve understanding of the relationship between the coasts 
     and oceans and human activities.
       (C) Large scale computing resources and research to advance 
     modeling of coastal and ocean processes.
       (5) A coordinated outreach, education, and training program 
     that integrates and augments existing programs (such as the 
     National Sea Grant College Program, the Centers for Ocean 
     Sciences Education Excellence program, and the National 
     Estuarine Research Reserve System), to ensure the use of data 
     and information for improving public education and awareness 
     of the Nation's coastal and ocean environment and building 
     the technical expertise required to operate and improve the 
     observing system.
       (c) Council Functions.--The Council shall serve as the 
     oversight body for the design and implementation of all 
     aspects of the observing system. In carrying out its 
     responsibilities under this section, the Council shall--
       (1) adopt plans, budgets, and standards that are developed 
     and maintained by the Interagency Ocean Observation Committee 
     in consultation with the regional associations;
       (2) coordinate the observing system with other earth 
     observing activities including the Global Ocean Observing 
     System and the Global Earth Observing System of Systems;
       (3) coordinate and approve programs of intramural and 
     extramural research, technology development, education, and 
     outreach to support improvements to and the operation of an 
     integrated coastal and ocean observing system and to advance 
     the understanding of the oceans;
       (4) promote development of technology and methods for 
     improving the observing system;
       (5) support the development of institutional mechanisms and 
     financial instruments to further the goals of the program and 
     provide for the capitalization of the required 
     infrastructure;
       (6) provide, as appropriate, support for and representation 
     on United States delegations to international meetings on 
     coastal and ocean observing programs, including those under 
     the jurisdiction of the International Joint Commission 
     involving Canadian waters; and
       (7) in consultation with the Secretary of State, support 
     coordination of relevant Federal activities with those of 
     other nations.
       (d) Interagency Ocean Observation Committee.--
       (1) Establishment.--The Council shall establish an 
     Interagency Ocean Observation Committee.
       (2) Responsibilities.--The Interagency Ocean Observing 
     Committee shall be responsible for program planning and 
     coordination of the implementation of the observing system.
       (3) Duties.--The Interagency Ocean Observing Committee 
     shall report to the Council and shall--
       (A) prepare annual and long-term plans for consideration 
     and approval by the Council for the design and implementation 
     of the observing system that promote collaboration among 
     Federal agencies and regional associations in developing 
     global, national, and regional observing systems, including 
     identification and refinement of a core set of variables to 
     be measured by all systems;
       (B) coordinate the development of agency and regional 
     associations priorities and budgets to implement, operate, 
     and maintain the observing systems;
       (C) establish and refine standards and protocols for data 
     collection, management and communications, including quality 
     control standards, in consultation with participating Federal 
     agencies and regional associations;
       (D) establish a process for assuring compliance for all 
     participating entities with the standards and protocols for 
     data management and communications, including quality control 
     standards;
       (E) integrate, improve, and extend existing programs and 
     research projects, and ensure that regional associations are 
     integrated into the operational observation system on a 
     sustained basis;
       (F) provide for the migration of scientific and 
     technological advances from research and development to 
     operational deployment; and
       (G) perform such duties as the Council may delegate.
       (4) Implementation.--There is established an Interagency 
     Program Coordinating Office. The Office shall be--
       (A) located in, but is not an office of, the Department of 
     Commerce; and
       (B) staffed by employees of agencies represented on the 
     Interagency Ocean Observation Committee, to facilitate the 
     Interagency Ocean Observation Committee's responsibilities 
     for system implementation, budgeting, and administration.
       (e) Role of NOAA.--The National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
     Administration shall provide leadership for the 
     implementation and administration of the observing system, in 
     consultation with the Council, the Interagency Ocean 
     Observation Committee, other Federal agencies that maintain 
     portions of the observing system and the regional 
     associations, and shall--
       (1) establish an Integrated Ocean Observing Program Office 
     to facilitate action under the Administration's leadership;
       (2) implement a merit-based funding process to support the 
     activities of regional associations;
       (3) provide opportunities for competitive contracts and 
     grants to design, develop, integrate, deploy, and support 
     ocean observation system elements;
       (4) have the authority to enter into and perform such 
     contracts, leases, grants, or cooperative agreements as may 
     be necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act and on 
     such terms as the Administrator deems appropriate;
       (5) establish efficient and effective administrative 
     procedures for allocation of funds among contractors, 
     grantees, and regional associations in a timely manner, and 
     contingent on appropriations according to the budget adopted 
     by the Council;
       (6) develop and implement a process for the certification 
     and assimilation into the national ocean observations network 
     of the regional associations and their periodic review and 
     recertification and certify regional associations that meet 
     the requirements of subsection (f); and
       (7) develop a data management and communication system, in 
     accordance with the established standards and protocols, by 
     which all data collected by the observing system regarding 
     coastal waters of the United States are integrated and 
     available.
       (f) Regional Associations of Coastal and Ocean Observing 
     Systems.--
       (1) The Secretary shall initiate a rulemaking proceeding to 
     establish a process for the certification of regional 
     associations to be responsible for the development and 
     operation of regional coastal and ocean observing systems to 
     meet the information needs of user groups in the region while 
     adhering to national standards. To be certified a regional 
     association shall meet the certification standards developed 
     by the Interagency Ocean Observing Committee in conjunction 
     with the regional associations and approved by the Council 
     and shall--
       (A) demonstrate an organizational structure capable of 
     supporting and integrating all aspects of coastal and ocean 
     observing and information programs within a region and that 
     reflects broad representation from State and local 
     government, commercial interests, and other users and 
     beneficiaries of marine information;
       (B) operate under a strategic operations and business plan 
     that details the operation and support of regional coastal 
     and ocean observing systems pursuant to the standards 
     approved by the Council; and
       (C) work with governmental entities and programs at all 
     levels to identify and provide information products of the 
     observing system for multiple users in the region to advance 
     outreach and education, to improve coastal and fishery 
     management, safe and efficient marine navigation, weather and 
     climate prediction, to enhance preparation for hurricanes, 
     tsunami, and other natural hazards, and other appropriate 
     activities.
       (2) For the purposes of this Act, employees of Federal 
     agencies may participate in the functions of the regional 
     associations.
       (g) Civil Liability.--For purposes of section 1346(b)(1) 
     and chapter 171 of title 28, United States Code, the Suits in 
     Admiralty Act (46 U.S.C. App. 741 et seq.), and the Public 
     Vessels Act (46 U.S.C. App. 781 et seq.), any regional 
     coastal and ocean observing system that is a designated part 
     of a regional association certified under this section shall, 
     with respect to tort liability arising from the dissemination 
     and use of the data, in carrying out the purposes of this 
     Act, be deemed to be part of the National Oceanic and 
     Atmospheric Administration, and any employee of such system, 
     while operating within the scope of his or her employment in 
     carrying out such purposes, shall be deemed to be an employee 
     of the Government.

     SEC. 5. PROCESS FOR TRANSITION FROM RESEARCH TO OPERATION.

       The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, in 
     consultation with the Council, shall formulate a process by 
     which--
       (1) funding is made available for intramural and extramural 
     research on new technologies for collecting data regarding 
     coastal and ocean waters of the United States;
       (2) such technologies are tested including--
       (A) accelerated research into biological and chemical 
     sensing techniques and satellite sensors for collecting such 
     data; and
       (B) developing technologies to improve all aspects of the 
     observing system, especially the timeliness and accuracy of 
     its predictive models and the usefulness of its information 
     products; and
       (3) funding is made available and a plan is developed and 
     executed to transition technology that has been demonstrated 
     to be

[[Page 334]]

     useful for the observing system is incorporated into use by 
     the observing system.

     SEC. 6. INTERAGENCY FINANCING.

       The departments and agencies represented on the Council are 
     authorized to participate in interagency financing and share, 
     transfer, receive, obligate, and expend funds appropriated to 
     any member of the Council for the purposes of carrying out 
     any administrative or programmatic project or activity under 
     this Act or under the National Oceanographic Partnership 
     Program, including support for the Interagency Oceans 
     Observation Committee, a common infrastructure, and system 
     integration for a coastal and ocean observing system. Funds 
     may be transferred among such departments and agencies 
     through an appropriate instrument that specifies the goods, 
     services, or space being acquired from another Council member 
     and the costs of the same.

     SEC. 7. APPLICATION WITH OTHER LAWS.

       Nothing in this Act supersedes or limits the authority of 
     any agency to carry out its responsibilities and missions 
     under other laws.

     SEC. 8. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated to the National 
     Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for the implementation 
     of this Act, $150,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 
     through 2011 and $175,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2012 
     and 2013. At least 50 percent of these sums shall be 
     allocated to the regional associations certified under 
     section 4(f) for implementation of regional coastal and ocean 
     observing systems.

     SEC. 9. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.

       Not later than 12 months after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the Congress and the 
     Council a plan for implementation of this Act, including 
     for--
       (1) coordinating activities of the Secretary under this Act 
     with other Federal agencies; and
       (2) distributing, to regional associations, funds available 
     to carry out this Act.

     SEC. 10. REPORT TO CONGRESS.

       (a) Requirement.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act and every 2 years thereafter, the 
     Administrator shall prepare and the President acting through 
     the Council shall approve and transmit to the Congress a 
     report on progress made in implementing this Act.
       (b) Contents.--The report shall include the following:
       (1) A description of activities carried out under the 
     implementation plan and this Act.
       (2) An evaluation of the effectiveness of the observing 
     system.
       (3) Benefits of the program to users of data products 
     resulting from the observing system (including the general 
     public, industry, scientists, resource managers, emergency 
     responders, policy makers, and educators).
       (4) Recommendations concerning--
       (A) modifications to the observing system; and
       (B) funding levels for the observing system in subsequent 
     fiscal years.
       (5) The results of a periodic external independent 
     programmatic audit of the observing system.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE (for herself, Mr. Inouye, and Mr. Rockefeller):
  S. 172. A bill to establish a coordinated national ocean exploration 
program within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation.
  Ms. SNOWE. 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. 172

       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 ``NOAA Ocean Exploration and 
     Undersea Research Program Act of 2009''.

                       TITLE I--OCEAN EXPLORATION

     SEC. 101. PURPOSE.

       The purpose of this title is to establish the national 
     ocean exploration program and the national undersea research 
     program within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
     Administration.

     SEC. 102. PROGRAM ESTABLISHED.

       The Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
     Administration shall, in consultation with the National 
     Science Foundation and other appropriate Federal agencies, 
     establish a coordinated national ocean exploration program 
     within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 
     that promotes collaboration with other Federal ocean and 
     undersea research and exploration programs. To the extent 
     appropriate, the Administrator shall seek to facilitate 
     coordination of data and information management systems, 
     outreach and education programs to improve public 
     understanding of ocean and coastal resources, and development 
     and transfer of technologies to facilitate ocean and undersea 
     research and exploration.

     SEC. 103. POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE ADMINISTRATOR.

       (a) In General.--In carrying out the program authorized by 
     section 102, the Administrator of the National Oceanic and 
     Atmospheric Administration shall--
       (1) conduct interdisciplinary voyages or other scientific 
     activities in conjunction with other Federal agencies or 
     academic or educational institutions, to explore and survey 
     little known areas of the marine environment, inventory, 
     observe, and assess living and nonliving marine resources, 
     and report such findings;
       (2) give priority attention to deep ocean regions, with a 
     focus on deep water marine systems that hold potential for 
     important scientific discoveries, such as hydrothermal vent 
     communities and seamounts;
       (3) conduct scientific voyages to locate, define, and 
     document historic shipwrecks, submerged sites, and other 
     ocean exploration activities that combine archaeology and 
     oceanographic sciences;
       (4) develop and implement, in consultation with the 
     National Science Foundation, a transparent, competitive 
     process for merit-based peer-review and approval of proposals 
     for activities to be conducted under this program, taking 
     into consideration advice of the Board established under 
     section 105;
       (5) enhance the technical capability of the United States 
     marine science community by promoting the development of 
     improved oceanographic research, communication, navigation, 
     and data collection systems, as well as underwater platforms 
     and sensor and autonomous vehicles; and
       (6) establish an ocean exploration forum to encourage 
     partnerships and promote communication among experts and 
     other stakeholders in order to enhance the scientific and 
     technical expertise and relevance of the national program.
       (b) Donations.--The Administrator may accept donations of 
     property, data, and equipment to be applied for the purpose 
     of exploring the oceans or increasing knowledge of the 
     oceans.

     SEC. 104. OCEAN EXPLORATION AND UNDERSEA RESEARCH TECHNOLOGY 
                   AND INFRASTRUCTURE TASK FORCE.

       (a) In General.-- The Administrator of the National Oceanic 
     and Atmospheric Administration, in coordination with the 
     National Science Foundation, the National Aeronautics and 
     Space Administration, the United States Geological Survey, 
     the Department of the Navy, the Mineral Management Service, 
     and relevant governmental, non-governmental, academic, 
     industry, and other experts, shall convene an ocean 
     exploration and undersea research technology and 
     infrastructure task force to develop and implement a 
     strategy--
       (1) to facilitate transfer of new exploration and undersea 
     research technology to the programs authorized under this 
     Act;
       (2) to improve availability of communications 
     infrastructure, including satellite capabilities, to such 
     programs;
       (3) to develop an integrated, workable, and comprehensive 
     data management information processing system that will make 
     information on unique and significant features obtained by 
     such programs available for research and management purposes;
       (4) to conduct public outreach activities that improve the 
     public understanding of ocean science, resources, and 
     processes, in conjunction with relevant programs of the 
     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National 
     Science Foundation, and other agencies; and
       (5) to encourage cost-sharing partnerships with 
     governmental and nongovernmental entities that will assist in 
     transferring exploration and undersea research technology and 
     technical expertise to the programs.
       (b) Budget Coordination.--The task force shall coordinate 
     the development of agency budgets and identify the items in 
     their annual budget that support the activities identified in 
     the strategy developed under subsection (a).

     SEC. 105. OCEAN EXPLORATION ADVISORY BOARD.

       (a) Establishment.--The Administrator of the National 
     Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration shall appoint an Ocean 
     Exploration Advisory Board composed of experts in relevant 
     fields--
       (1) to advise the Administrator on priority areas for 
     survey and discovery;
       (2) to assist the program in the development of a 5-year 
     strategic plan for the fields of ocean, marine, and Great 
     Lakes science, exploration, and discovery;
       (3) to annually review the quality and effectiveness of the 
     proposal review process established under section 103(a)(4); 
     and
       (4) to provide other assistance and advice as requested by 
     the Administrator.
       (b) Federal Advisory Committee Act.--Section 14 of the 
     Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall not 
     apply to the Board appointed under subsection (a).
       (c) Application with Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act.--
     Nothing in this title supersedes, or limits the authority of 
     the Secretary of the Interior under the Outer Continental 
     Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.).

[[Page 335]]



     SEC. 106. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated to the National 
     Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to carry out this 
     title--
       (1) $33,550,000 for fiscal year 2009;
       (2) $36,905,000 for fiscal year 2010;
       (3) $40,596,000 for fiscal year 2011;
       (4) $44,655,000 for fiscal year 2012;
       (5) $49,121,000 for fiscal year 2013;
       (6) $54,033,000 for fiscal year 2014; and
       (7) $59,436,000 for fiscal year 2015.

                  TITLE II--UNDERSEA RESEARCH PROGRAM

     SEC. 201. PROGRAM ESTABLISHED.

       (a) In General.--The Administrator of the National Oceanic 
     and Atmospheric Administration shall establish and maintain 
     an undersea research program and shall designate a Director 
     of that program.
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of the program is to increase 
     scientific knowledge essential for the informed management, 
     use, and preservation of oceanic, marine, and coastal areas 
     and the Great Lakes.

     SEC. 202. POWERS OF PROGRAM DIRECTOR.

       The Director of the program, in carrying out the program, 
     shall--
       (1) cooperate with institutions of higher education and 
     other educational marine and ocean science organizations, and 
     shall make available undersea research facilities, equipment, 
     technologies, information, and expertise to support undersea 
     research efforts by these organizations;
       (2) enter into partnerships, as appropriate and using 
     existing authorities, with the private sector to achieve the 
     goals of the program and to promote technological advancement 
     of the marine industry; and
       (3) coordinate the development of agency budgets and 
     identify the items in their annual budget that support the 
     activities described in paragraphs (1) and (2).

     SEC. 203. ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE.

       (a) In General.--The program shall be conducted through a 
     national headquarters, a network of extramural regional 
     undersea research centers that represent all relevant 
     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration regions, and 
     the National Institute for Undersea Science and Technology.
       (b) Direction.--The Director shall develop the overall 
     direction of the program in coordination with a Council of 
     Center Directors comprised of the directors of the extramural 
     regional centers and the National Institute for Undersea 
     Science and Technology. The Director shall publish a draft 
     program direction document not later than 1 year after the 
     date of enactment of this Act in the Federal Register for a 
     public comment period of not less than 120 days. The Director 
     shall publish a final program direction, including responses 
     to the comments received during the public comment period, in 
     the Federal Register within 90 days after the close of the 
     comment period. The program director shall update the program 
     direction, with opportunity for public comment, at least 
     every 5 years.

     SEC. 204. RESEARCH, EXPLORATION, EDUCATION AND TECHNOLOGY 
                   PROGRAMS.

       (a) In General.--The following research, exploration, 
     education, and technology programs shall be conducted through 
     the network of regional centers and the National Institute 
     for Undersea Science and Technology:
       (1) Core research and exploration based on national and 
     regional undersea research priorities.
       (2) Advanced undersea technology development to support the 
     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's research 
     mission and programs.
       (3) Undersea science-based education and outreach programs 
     to enrich ocean science education and public awareness of the 
     oceans and Great Lakes.
       (4) Development, testing, and transition of advanced 
     undersea technology associated with ocean observatories, 
     submersibles, advanced diving technologies, remotely operated 
     vehicles, autonomous underwater vehicles, and new sampling 
     and sensing technologies.
       (5) Discovery, study, and development of natural resources 
     and products from ocean, coastal, and aquatic systems.
       (b) Operations.--The Director of the program, through 
     operation of the extramural regional centers and the National 
     Institute for Undersea Science and Technology, shall leverage 
     partnerships and cooperative research with academia and 
     private industry.

     SEC. 205. COMPETITIVENESS.

       (a) Discretionary Fund.--The Program shall allocate no more 
     than 10 percent of its annual budget to a discretionary fund 
     that may be used only for program administration and priority 
     undersea research projects identified by the Director but not 
     covered by funding available from centers.
       (b) Competitive Selection.--The Administrator shall conduct 
     an initial competition to select the regional centers that 
     will participate in the program 90 days after the publication 
     of the final program direction under section 203 and every 5 
     years thereafter. Funding for projects conducted through the 
     regional centers shall be awarded through a competitive, 
     merit-reviewed process on the basis of their relevance to the 
     goals of the program and their technical feasibility.

     SEC. 206. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated to the National 
     Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to carry out this 
     title--
       (1) for fiscal year 2009--
       (A) $13,750,000 for the regional centers, of which 50 
     percent shall be for West Coast regional centers and 50 
     percent shall be for East Coast regional centers; and
       (B) $5,500,000 for the National Technology Institute;
       (2) for fiscal year 2010--
       (A) $15,125,000 for the regional centers, of which 50 
     percent shall be for West Coast regional centers and 50 
     percent shall be for East Coast regional centers; and
       (B) $6,050,000 for the National Technology Institute;
       (3) for fiscal year 2011--
       (A) $16,638,000 for the regional centers, of which 50 
     percent shall be for West Coast regional centers and 50 
     percent shall be for East Coast regional centers; and
       (B) $6,655,000 for the National Technology Institute;
       (4) for fiscal year 2012--
       (A) $18,301,000 for the regional centers, of which 50 
     percent shall be for West Coast regional centers and 50 
     percent shall be for East Coast regional centers; and
       (B) $7,321,000 for the National Technology Institute;
       (5) for fiscal year 2013--
       (A) $20,131,000 for the regional centers, of which 50 
     percent shall be for West Coast regional centers and 50 
     percent shall be for East Coast regional centers; and
       (B) $8,053,000 for the National Technology Institute;
       (6) for fiscal year 2014--
       (A) $22,145,000 for the regional centers, of which 50 
     percent shall be for West Coast regional centers and 50 
     percent shall be for East Coast regional centers; and
       (B) $8,859,000 for the National Technology Institute; and
       (7) for fiscal year 2015--
       (A) $24,359,000 for the regional centers, of which 50 
     percent shall be for West Coast regional centers and 50 
     percent shall be for East Coast regional centers; and
       (B) $9,744,000 for the National Technology Institute.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. FEINGOLD:
  S. 175. A bill to evaluate certain skills certification programs, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
Pensions.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today I introduce a straight-forward 
bill that is a first step toward helping American workers and 
businesses. This bill is part of my E-4 Initiative, which focuses on 
issues affecting the economy, energy, education and employment. The 
Skills Standards Certification Evaluation Act will require the 
Secretaries of Labor, Education and Commerce to evaluate skills 
standards certification programs that have been developed with federal 
funding.
  Skills Standards Certifications have emerged over the past two 
decades in response to job growth in high-technology and varied 
industries. The training or classes usually take weeks or months, 
rather than years. Often, they are developed in response to the needs 
of one industry or even one company, though the skills are often 
applicable more widely.
  As the President-elect and Congress work to save and create jobs 
through additional funding for infrastructure, green jobs, and similar 
programs, among other things, it is even more critical that employers 
be able to find qualified workers for a variety of positions. Workers 
who can easily demonstrate their skills quickly and easily will be able 
to benefit from such investments early on.
  Over the past two decades, the Federal Government has taken 
conflicting approaches to skills standards certifications. That is why, 
as part of the Skills Standards Certification Evaluation Act, I require 
a recommendation from the Secretaries of Labor and Commerce on how 
Congress ought to move forward with funding for these certification 
programs. Both the national, top-down, and a local, bottom-up approach 
have been tried, and a thorough evaluation will make clear how we can 
move forward to get the most out of the funding the Federal Government 
provides.
  These certifications have a tremendous benefit for workers. First, 
because the training is often condensed into a few weeks with a 
flexible schedule, it allows people to complete certifications without 
leaving a current job and without the financial cost of attending a 
full-time program that lasts

[[Page 336]]

a year or more. In addition, these programs allow workers to clearly 
demonstrate a certain set of skills, and may open more doors for 
higher-paying employment. Because these programs can be completed 
without leaving work, they also allow workers to advance within a 
career or company to more skilled positions and better wages and 
benefits.
  For employers, Skills Standards Certifications can simplify the 
search for employees. I have heard from numerous Wisconsin employers, 
especially small businesses with limited resources, that it is hard to 
find employees with the skills they need, or who will be dedicated and 
loyal. Skills Standards Certifications clearly show the qualification 
of an individual, of course, but also tell the employer that he or she 
is dedicated enough to invest in the course to earn the certificate. 
Very few people will spend the time and money to enroll in such a 
program if they don't intend to use the certificate.
  Lastly, these programs can help state and local governments quantify 
their skilled workforce, which can be invaluable when marketing the 
area to businesses and investment.
  This bill is a small first step in what I hope can be a continuing 
effort to help hard-working Americans obtain and use high-demand work 
skills.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. FEINGOLD:
  S. 176. A bill to improve the job access and reverse commute program, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban 
Affairs.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today I reintroduce a piece of my E4 
initiative, so named because it is a collection of proposals that 
address issues important to the economy, education, employment and 
energy. This piece of the E4 legislation focuses on the important 
supporting role that transportation can play in economic development by 
creating an environment where employers and those seeking employment or 
better employment are connected together. Having such a system to 
overcome transportation hurdles can benefit both employers and 
employees, as well as the local economy and is all the more important 
in these difficult economic times.
  In more general terms, investing in our infrastructure like roads, 
bridges and transit systems can have direct job creation impacts. This 
is one reason I have fought hard with the rest of the delegation for a 
fair rate of return for Wisconsin from the highway bill. It is also why 
in a letter I sent to President-elect Obama and Senate leaders I 
included highway and transit projects as part of a variety of ready-to-
go infrastructure projects that should be included in the forthcoming 
economic recovery program.
  In addition to supporting transportation-related jobs, linking 
workers and businesses that need them can also be an important part of 
a more comprehensive job creation strategy. This can mean supporting a 
robust public transportation system or more specific programs designed 
to link low-income individuals with jobs. I have consistently done the 
former by supporting public transportation during consideration of the 
highway bill and Amtrak reauthorizations. But my specific proposal 
today focuses on the latter and improving the Job Access and Reverse 
Commute, JARC, program that links low-income workers with employers.
  I have heard good things about the JARC program and was glad that it 
was shifted away from earmarks and was made available as a combination 
formula and competitively awarded program in the last highway bill. The 
primary program goal is to locally assess the transportation needs of 
low-income workers and then plan and fund programs to help alleviate 
transportation-related barriers to employment or better employment. 
While initially this may have been viewed as a way to support reverse 
commute projects whereby transit routes were established to allow city 
center residents to access jobs in the suburbs, the program actually 
does much more than just this and provides reliable transportation to 
low-income urban, rural and suburban workers.
  In Wisconsin, the Federal JARC program is jointly administered by the 
State departments of transportation and workforce development as the 
Wisconsin Employment Transportation Assistance Program, WETAP. 
According to the Wisconsin Department of Transportation, transportation 
barriers can include a lack of a dependable vehicle or bus service in 
the area, an absence of local jobs, or childcare transportation 
problems. The State agencies in Wisconsin have found several different 
types of projects to be effective depending on the local circumstances. 
These projects have included the traditional public transit projects 
such as extending bus lines or supporting van-pooling, along with other 
programs such as providing cars or car repairs to low-income 
individuals. Wisconsin has even found that assisting with indirect 
barriers such as transportation of children to and from childcare 
facilities is critical in allowing some individuals to improve their 
job prospects.
  A recent University of Illinois Chicago, UIC, study found that the 
societal benefits from this program are $1.65 per dollar spent and 
estimates lifetime benefits to low income participants of $15 per 
dollar spent due to their ability to find and retain better paying 
jobs. While the goals of the Job Access and Reverse Commute program are 
important and the program has been found to be fairly effective, there 
are some details that have prevented the program from reaching its full 
potential. Working closely with transportation officials in Wisconsin 
and partially based on recommendations from the UIC study, I've come up 
with some specific ideas to improve the program.
  With a proven effective program and continuing unmet needs by 
employers and low-income individuals seeking employment, JARC could use 
a boost in funding. So that is why my proposal ramps up funding by $100 
million over 5 years from the current funding of $165 million to $265 
million in fiscal year 2014.
  My proposal would also allow the Federal share of projects to 
increase to 80 percent from the current 50 percent level for operating 
expenses. The 50 percent local and State match wasn't feasible for far 
too many local governments in Wisconsin and as a result Wisconsin has 
not been able to spend all its Federal funds. The higher Federal cost 
share will better balance the need to leverage Federal funds, while 
ensuring that these critical funds are fully utilized--millions of 
dollars in an account does nothing to link people to jobs.
  Besides the challenge in coming up with a 50 percent local cost 
share, the other main issue that has kept JARC from being as effective 
as it could be is the paperwork and reporting burden required by the 
program, especially for the small nonprofit groups that often have 
never dealt with Federal grant requirements before. My proposal directs 
the Federal Transit Agency, FTA, to examine the current reporting 
requirements to see if there are ways to streamline the amount of 
paperwork required while still ensuring that the program goals are met.
  My bill also includes a pilot program funded at $10 million a year 
for 5 years in order to test a few areas that seem very promising, but 
should be evaluated more fully before broader implementation. The first 
portion of the pilot program builds off the regulatory streamlining 
evaluation and allows the FTA to test streamlined reporting 
requirements to help get the balance between oversight and 
administrative burden right.
  The second part of the pilot program focuses on improving education- 
and employment-related transportation for teens and young adults. 
Enabling students and young people to reliably get between their high 
schools or neighborhoods and technical colleges, job training centers 
or apprenticeships can have a lifelong positive impact.
  The third section of the pilot program would allow experimentation 
with combining different transit programs and integrating JARC projects 
across local political boundaries to provide a more comprehensive local 
transportation system. Instead of having one transit program to assist 
the

[[Page 337]]

disabled, one targeted toward the elderly and another focused on jobs, 
this pilot program would encourage funding combined applications to 
meet these needs together with one comprehensive project. There is even 
the potential for the Department of Transportation to further 
coordinate with other departments such as Health and Human Services for 
healthcare-related transportation. Similarly, the needs of employers 
for employees do not recognize local political boundaries, so 
encouraging greater collaboration between local entities to make a more 
robust interconnected system should ultimately provide more efficient 
and effective service.
  While the FTA already provides some technical assistance for the JARC 
program, my proposal provides a small boost in funding and some 
additional areas of emphasis. For example, after hearing about the 
struggles that some small nonprofits have with the reporting 
requirements, in addition to looking for ways to streamline the 
requirements, my proposal would direct the FTA to also provide some 
technical assistance especially targeted to this need.
  The final element of my proposal is the offset. The new spending 
authorized in the proposal is fully offset by rescinding highway and 
bridge earmarks that have not had funds spent from them despite being 
authorized over a decade ago as part of the TEA-21 highway bill. 
Helping connect workers and employers is a much better use of these 
funds than letting them sit unused in some obscure DOT account.
  Providing reliable transportation to low-income individuals only goes 
so far--it is the companies and innovators creating the jobs and the 
individuals seeking to better their lot through education or more 
challenging employment, that are doing the heavy lifting. That being 
said, transportation can clearly be a challenge for companies and 
workers and in the case of the JARC program can play an important 
supporting role.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. FEINGOLD:
  S. 177. A bill to amend the Small Business Act to extend the Small 
Business Innovation Research and Small Business Technology Transfer 
programs, to increase the allocation of Federal agency grants for these 
programs, to add water, energy, transportation, and domestic security 
related research to the list of topics deserving special consideration, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Small Business and 
Entrepreneurship.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, we are all aware of the serious 
challenges our economy faces in the short term and the urgency of our 
need to promote job creation and economic development. I am committed 
to engaging in this broad effort with my colleagues on both sides of 
the aisle. But it is essential that our efforts not just be short term 
fixes--they must not only aim to create jobs and investment 
opportunities in the short term, they must be part of strategic efforts 
to strengthen our Nation's innovation capabilities and sustain long 
term economic development in a changing and competitive global 
environment. There is no better way to do this than by stimulating and 
supporting small business innovation, especially in areas of national 
priority. As part of this effort, today I am introducing the 
Strengthening Our Economy Through Small Business Innovation Act of 
2009.
  Job growth, innovation and economic development are driven by our 
small businesses. Small businesses also tend to be based in our cities 
and communities and so they are major contributors to our local 
economies. Half of our county's payroll jobs and most of our new job 
opportunities are provided by small businesses. Small businesses are 
proven innovators and drive commercialization of cutting edge 
technologies. Not only are small businesses our major source of 
employment, they employ about one third of our country's scientists and 
engineers and generate more patents on a per capita basis than large 
businesses and universities. They also are effective partners with 
universities to enhance product creation, develop university income and 
attract university graduates and faculty through increased innovative 
job opportunities.
  Over the last 25 years, through the Small Business Innovation and 
Research program, SBIR, and, more recently, the Small Business 
Technology Transfer program, STTR, up to 2.5 percent and 0.3 percent, 
respectively, of Federal R&D funds from 11 Federal agencies have been 
specifically allocated to our Nation's small businesses to fund 
innovation. These small business allocations are not sufficient. We 
must diversify and strengthen innovation capabilities and our economic 
base, and to accomplish this we must extend and increase R&D 
allocations to our Nation's innovative small businesses.
  My bill does 3 things. First, it extends the SBIR and STTR programs 
for a further 14 years so that small businesses, as well as 
universities and non-profit research organizations that collaborate 
with small businesses, can continue to leverage Federal research and 
development funding.
  Second, it significantly increases the allocation of funds and the 
awards from large Federal research and development budgets to small 
businesses through the SBIR and STTR programs. It would increase the 
SBIR allocation from its current 2.5 percent to 10 percent and the STTR 
allocation from 0.3 percent to 1.0 percent over a 3-year period. It 
would increase SBIR phase I awards from $100,000 to $300,000 and phase 
II awards from $750,000 to $2.2 million. Third, it identifies specific 
funding priorities for energy innovation; safe and secure water; 
domestic security; and transportation.
  The SBIR program is tested, successful and worthy of extension. In 
its comprehensive study of the SBIR program, the National Research 
Council found that the program ``is sound in concept and effective in 
practice''; was ``stimulating technological innovation''; ``linking 
universities to the public and private markets''; ``increasing private 
sector commercialization of innovations'' at an ``impressive'' rate; 
and ``providing widely distributed support for innovation activity.'' 
The study concluded that:

     [T]he program is proving effective in meeting Congressional 
     objectives. It is increasing innovation, encouraging 
     participation by small companies in R&D, providing support 
     for small firms owned by minorities and women, and resolving 
     research questions for mission agencies in a cost effective 
     manner. Should the Congress wish to provide additional funds 
     for the program in support of these objectives, those funds 
     could be employed effectively by the nation's SBIR.

  The NRC's study also found that universities and other non-profit 
research institutions would benefit significantly from the increase in 
both the SBIR and the STTR programs. In particular, the STTR allocation 
increase will directly benefit universities and efforts to bring 
university-based research into the commercial marketplace, as a 
partnership with a non-profit research institution, such as a 
university, is a requirement of all STTR award recipients. Many of the 
small businesses that receive SBIR funding are rooted in the university 
infrastructure so investigators and graduates from universities will 
have opportunities to be part of commercial developments. More than 
two-thirds of SBIR companies report that at least one founder was 
previously an academic. About one-third of SBIR company founders were 
most recently employed as academics before founding the company. Over a 
third of SBIR projects cite direct university involvement with 27 
percent of projects having university faculty as contractors on the 
project, 17 percent using universities themselves as subcontractors, 
and 15 percent employing graduate students.
  In its report accompanying reauthorization legislation, the Senate 
Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee recently concluded that:

     increases in the SBIR allocation will invest money in 
     research, contracting, internships, and other collaborative 
     activities done with universities, with the contracting and 
     patenting activities with SBIR companies being a sizable 
     source of revenue for universities as well. The university-
     industry partnerships that SBIR creates are crucial in that 
     they provide an applied research and commercialization focus 
     that otherwise likely would not be present in university 
     research. More

[[Page 338]]

     specifically, the partnerships are important in exposing 
     faculty and the next generation of scientists and engineers 
     to commercial research and development. SBIR businesses 
     provide graduate and undergraduate students with hands-on 
     experience and job opportunities that universities would be 
     unable to provide alone.

  Our country not only faces immediate economic and employment 
challenges, it faces major challenges in transportation, energy, 
domestic security and water quality and safety. Targeted research and 
development will be critical. Congress, with non-partisan expert 
guidance, has a role to play in guiding our national research and 
development priorities and, in this case, stimulating small business 
innovation and job creation in specific areas of critical national 
need. The National Academies of Science and other independent 
government research organizations provide us with carefully researched 
and considered recommendations on how we can address these priorities, 
so my bill draws on their recommendations to develop innovative energy 
technologies; enhance water quality and security; strengthen domestic 
security; and address transportation priorities. This is not only a 
good investment in short term job creation; it is an imperative 
investment in our Nation's long term innovation prospects and economic 
development.
  The costs of my bill would be fully offset by cancellation of the 
airborne laser program. CBO estimates that cancelling that program will 
produce savings of over $2.6 billion.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. FEINGOLD:
  S. 178. A bill to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
1965 to authorize a connecting education and emerging professions 
demonstration grant program; to the Committee on Health, Education, 
Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, as the 111th Congress begins, I am 
reintroducing a number of different bills designed to fuel job creation 
and spur economic development. My initiative, dubbed E4 because of its 
focus on economy, employment, education, and energy, seeks to respond 
to economic and job development needs both in my State of Wisconsin and 
around the country. These challenging economic times call for a 
comprehensive set of solutions including providing new job training 
opportunities for workers, fostering innovation among small businesses, 
protecting the existing family-supporting jobs in our nation, and 
boosting educational opportunities for young Americans. Today I am 
introducing the Connecting Education and Emerging Professions Act of 
2009, which provides competitive grants to States and local school 
districts to promote better collaboration between high schools and 
local businesses and workforce development groups. This E4 education 
initiative is designed to help prepare America's students for future 
success in the workforce and post-secondary education as well as 
enhance America's competitiveness in the global economy as we prepare 
to enter the second decade of the twenty-first century.
  Helping to ensure that all American students have access to a high-
quality education is critical to boosting America's competitiveness and 
helping to ensure that our country is better equipped to respond to the 
economic challenges currently before us. Investment in our young people 
now will pay off in the future when these individuals are better 
prepared to compete for the highly skilled jobs of tomorrow. If the 
United States is to remain competitive on an international stage and 
continue to lead the world in innovation and development, we need to 
make certain that our young people are well prepared to meet current 
and future economic challenges.
  Improving educational opportunities in the United States is going to 
require a comprehensive set of policy strategies and I look forward to 
working with my colleagues in Congress this year as we get to work on a 
variety of education issues including expanding access to education 
from pre-K through college. We also face the monumental task of 
reauthorizing and reforming the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 
ESEA, better known as No Child Left Behind, NCLB. As we consider the 
ESEA reauthorization, we should make substantial changes to the testing 
mandates that were imposed through NCLB and provide support to states 
that develop smarter accountability systems with enhanced assessments 
that measure higher-order thinking skills among students. We also need 
to look at ways to strengthen and reform our Nation's public secondary 
schools as part of the ESEA reauthorization. The legislation I am 
introducing today is designed to help support innovative changes that 
are taking place in some of our Nation's high schools and help even 
more States and local communities make improvements to their local high 
schools.
  My CEEP bill seeks to address a couple of interrelated issues related 
to secondary education. The first issue is the alarmingly high dropout 
rate in our nation's high schools. While numbers vary slightly, a 
growing body of research indicates that the United States has a 
graduation rate of approximately 70 percent and that about one-third of 
our country's high school students will not graduate on time. 
Graduation rates for minority and low-income students are even lower, 
in many cases, alarmingly lower. In addition, many of our nation's 
urban school districts report very high dropout rates, including the 
Milwaukee Public School District. According to the Cities in Crisis 
report released in 2008 by the Editorial Projects in Education Research 
Center, the Milwaukee Public Schools has a graduation rate of 46.1 
percent. Unfortunately, there are at least a dozen large urban 
districts that have even lower graduation rates than Milwaukee.
  One of our top education priorities as a Nation must be to address 
the low graduation rates nationwide in urban, suburban, and rural 
school districts. We must also work to close the huge opportunity gap 
that is created by the large disparity in graduation rates between our 
minority and non-minority students as well as between low-income and 
more affluent students. Solving this problem will require a broad, 
comprehensive solution involving the federal, state and local 
governments. It is my hope that when Congress finally reauthorizes the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act, we pay particular attention to 
the needs of our nation's high schools and our students.
  While many factors contribute to high dropout rates, disengagement 
from classroom instruction can contribute to a student's decision to 
drop out. Some students feel that high school is not relevant to their 
lives and do not see how completing high school will translate into 
future career and academic success. In this increasingly competitive 
twenty-first century where postsecondary education is now required for 
many entry-level jobs, it is up to us to show our nation's students why 
it is so important that they graduate from high school.
  Another issue that this bill seeks to address is the growing sense 
among employers and postsecondary institutions that our nation's high 
school students who do graduate are unprepared for success either in 
the workforce or in college. Employers in various economic sectors, 
including technology, manufacturing, health care, construction, and 
others, report difficulty in identifying qualified candidates for 
skilled positions. Recent surveys also indicate that many employers are 
dissatisfied with the overall preparation of secondary school 
graduates. In order for companies in the United States to be 
competitive in a global economy, we must have a highly skilled 
workforce. Adequate preparation at the high school level can help 
prepare students for entry into our rapidly changing global economy 
where new emerging industries are cropping up in Wisconsin and around 
the country.
  To address these two interrelated issues, my bill would provide 5-
year competitive education grants to states and school districts to 
foster collaboration and discussions between schools, businesses, and 
others about the emerging industry workforce needs and how to prepare 
our high school students to meet those needs, both academically and 
practically. States and

[[Page 339]]

local school districts must use this money to form partnerships with 
local or regional businesses, postsecondary institutions, workforce 
development boards, labor organizations, nonprofit organizations and 
others.
  These partnerships will have the responsibility of surveying local, 
regional, and statewide emerging industries and deciding what are the 
academic and work-based skills that our high school students need in 
order to be successful in these emerging industries. The partnerships 
will then work together to develop new and engaging curriculums and 
programs designed to teach the academic and work-based skills that are 
necessary to succeed in these new emerging industries. Once the 
partnership has designed a curriculum or program and received approval 
from the Federal Department of Education, the partnership will work to 
implement the program in qualifying schools.
  During the implementation phase, the partnership will come together 
to implement hands-on learning and work opportunities for students 
including internships, apprenticeships, job shadowing, and other career 
and technical education programs. These hands-on learning and work 
opportunities will be based on the emerging industry pathways 
curriculum or program that the eligible partnership has designed and 
will offer students practical academic experiences and skill-building 
lessons that they can use in the workplace or in postsecondary 
education.
  This legislation seeks to help schools, businesses, colleges, and the 
students who would be served by this legislation talk with each other 
to build new programs that would help boost student engagement in 
learning and student attendance and graduation rates while also 
preparing students for success in the workforce or in college after 
they graduate. There are a number of successful local and state 
programs around Wisconsin that this legislation would help support and 
that served as valuable examples as I developed this legislation.
  Wisconsin's Department of Public Instruction, Department of Workforce 
Development, and various local school districts have all been working 
to boost Wisconsin's career and technical education offerings and gear 
these offerings towards emerging industries. My bill seeks to help 
Wisconsin and other states build on these efforts and engage in 
additional conversations with interested stakeholders to design new 
curriculums and programs to prepare students for emerging industries.
  I look forward to moving this legislation forward this year as the 
new Congress begins to debate how best to boost educational 
opportunities for all of our Nation's children. We have a significant 
achievement gap and graduation gap in urban, rural, and suburban 
schools throughout the country and it is imperative that we work 
together to promote innovative ideas that will close these gaps. Some 
of our Nation's schools are experiencing high dropout rates in part 
because students aren't connecting with what they are being taught. At 
the same time, we're seeing an emergence of new industries, like those 
aiming to capitalize on alternative energies and energy efficiency, 
that need employers with skills and training in their field. If we help 
schools connect their students with businesses, workforce development 
boards, and colleges that offer career and academic opportunities in 
these new and exciting fields, we can help to lower the alarming 
dropout rates while helping these emerging industries thrive.
  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. 178

       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 ``Connecting Education and 
     Emerging Professions Act of 2009''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) The majority of secondary school students in the United 
     States receive some career-related instruction before 
     graduation, and about half of secondary school students have 
     a strong career-related component to their educational 
     programs.
       (2) A gap still remains between what students are learning 
     in school and the knowledge required to succeed in the 
     current labor market.
       (3) Employers in various economic sectors, including 
     technology, manufacturing, healthcare, construction, and 
     others, report difficulty in identifying qualified candidates 
     for skilled positions.
       (4) A survey of more than 400 employers nationwide found 
     that nearly half were dissatisfied with the overall 
     preparation of secondary school graduates.
       (5) Almost 40 percent of secondary school graduates report 
     feeling unprepared for the workplace or postsecondary 
     education.
       (6) In order for companies in the United States to be 
     competitive in a global economy, the United States must have 
     a highly skilled workforce.
       (7) Adequate preparation on the secondary school level can 
     help prepare students to enter high-demand fields in need of 
     skilled workers.
       (8) Collaboration between businesses, industries, and 
     education leaders can help determine how best to prepare 
     students for workforce success.
       (9) Career-related experiences during secondary education, 
     such as apprenticeships, are associated with positive labor 
     market outcomes for students.
       (10) The United States has a secondary school graduation 
     rate of 70 percent, and approximately one-third of students 
     entering secondary school will not graduate on time.
       (11) Minority and low socioeconomic status students have 
     significantly lower secondary school graduation rates.
       (12) Disengagement from classroom instruction contributes 
     to student decisions to drop out of school.
       (13) Studies indicate a link between career-oriented models 
     of secondary education, secondary school dropout rate 
     reduction, and higher earning potential for secondary school 
     graduates.
       (14) Studies suggest that academic lessons taught in a work 
     context or an applied manner can improve some students' 
     ability to comprehend and retain information.
       (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are to--
       (1) foster improved collaboration among secondary schools, 
     State, regional, and local businesses, institutions of higher 
     education, industry, workforce development organizations, 
     labor organizations, and other nonprofit community 
     organizations to identify emerging industry pathways, as well 
     as the academic skills necessary to improve student success 
     in the workforce or postsecondary education;
       (2) address industry and postsecondary education needs for 
     a prepared and skilled workforce;
       (3) improve the potential for economic and employment 
     growth in covered communities; and
       (4) help address the dropout crisis in the United States by 
     involving students in a collaborative curriculum or program 
     development process related to emerging industry pathways to 
     improve student engagement and attendance in secondary 
     school.

     SEC. 3. CONNECTING EDUCATION AND EMERGING PROFESSIONS 
                   DEMONSTRATION GRANT PROGRAM.

       (a) Authorization.--Part D of title V of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7241 et seq.) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:

      ``Subpart 22--Connecting Education and Emerging Professions 
                      Demonstration Grant Program

     ``SEC. 5621. DEFINITIONS.

       ``In this subpart:
       ``(1) Covered community.--The term `covered community' 
     means a town, city, community, region, or State that has--
       ``(A) experienced a significant percentage job loss in the 
     5 years prior to the date of enactment of this subpart or is 
     projected to experience a significant percentage job loss 
     within 5 years after the date of enactment of this subpart; 
     or
       ``(B) an unemployment rate that has increased in the 12 
     months prior to the date of enactment of this subpart.
       ``(2) Eligible partnership.--The term `eligible 
     partnership' means a partnership that includes--
       ``(A) a State educational agency, a consortium of local 
     educational agencies, or a local educational agency that 
     collaborates with--
       ``(i) a State, regional, or local business, including a 
     small business, that serves a covered community in which a 
     qualifying school is located; or
       ``(ii) a regional workforce investment board that serves a 
     covered community in which a qualifying school is located; 
     and
       ``(B) at least 1 of the following entities:
       ``(i) An institution of higher education that provides a 4-
     year program of instruction.
       ``(ii) An accredited community college.
       ``(iii) An accredited career or technical school or 
     college.
       ``(iv) A tribal college or university.

[[Page 340]]

       ``(v) A nonprofit community organization.
       ``(vi) A labor organization.
       ``(3) Emerging industry pathways.--The term `emerging 
     industry pathways' means industry careers that--
       ``(A) are estimated to increase in the number of job 
     opportunities in a covered community within the 5 to 7 years 
     after the date of enactment of this subpart;
       ``(B) require new academic skill sets because of new 
     technology or innovation in the field;
       ``(C) are important to the growth of the State economy, 
     regional economy, or local area's economy; and
       ``(D) may include--
       ``(i) green industries;
       ``(ii) healthcare industries;
       ``(iii) advanced manufacturing industries; and
       ``(iv) programs of study, as described in section 
     122(c)(1)(A) of the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical 
     Education Act of 2006.
       ``(4) Qualifying school.--The term `qualifying school' 
     means a secondary school that--
       ``(A) serves students not less than 30 percent of whom are 
     eligible for the school lunch program under the Richard B. 
     Russell National School Lunch Act or meet an equivalent 
     indicator of poverty established by the Secretary;
       ``(B) has a graduation rate that is lower than the State 
     average; and
       ``(C) is located in a covered community.
       ``(5) School- and work-based curriculum or program.--The 
     term `school- and work-based curriculum or program' means a 
     curriculum or program that incorporates a combination of 
     school-based instruction and work-based learning 
     opportunities, including internships, work experience 
     programs, apprenticeships, service learning programs, 
     mentorship opportunities, job shadowing, and other career and 
     technical education programs, in an emerging industry 
     pathway.
       ``(6) Tribal college or university.--The term `tribal 
     college or university' means an educational institution that 
     is--
       ``(A) a tribal college or university, as defined in section 
     2(a) of the Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities 
     Assistance Act of 1978; or
       ``(B) one of the 1994 Institutions, as defined in section 
     532 of the Equity in Educational Land-Grant Status Act of 
     1994 (7 U.S.C. 301 note).

     ``SEC. 5622. PROGRAM AUTHORIZED.

       ``(a) In General.--From amounts appropriated under section 
     5626, the Secretary shall establish and carry out an emerging 
     professions and educational improvement demonstration 
     project, by awarding grants, on a competitive basis, to 
     eligible partnerships.
       ``(b) Program Periods.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall award grants under 
     this subpart for periods of not more than 5 years, of which 
     the eligible partnership shall use--
       ``(A) not more than 18 months for assessing emerging 
     industry pathways, assessing the academic skills needed for 
     success in such pathways, and designing a school- and work-
     based curriculum or program to teach such academic skills 
     necessary for success in an emerging industry pathway;
       ``(B) not more than 48 months for implementing the new 
     emerging industry pathways school- and work-based curriculum 
     or program in qualifying schools; and
       ``(C) not more than 12 months to disseminate best practices 
     to other State educational agencies, local educational 
     agencies, or schools.
       ``(2) Overlap.--Each eligible partnership receiving a grant 
     under this subpart may carry out subparagraphs (A), (B), or 
     (C) concurrently.
       ``(c) Priority.--In awarding grants under this subpart, the 
     Secretary shall give priority to eligible partnerships that--
       ``(1) serve qualifying schools in which 50 percent or more 
     of the students are eligible for the school lunch program 
     under the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act or 
     meet an equivalent indicator of poverty established by the 
     Secretary;
       ``(2) serve qualifying schools the majority of which have 
     secondary school dropout rates in the top 25 percent 
     statewide;
       ``(3) pledge to serve the students most at-risk of dropping 
     out of qualifying schools;
       ``(4) develop school- and work-based curricula or programs 
     serving green industries, health care industries, and 
     advanced manufacturing industries; or
       ``(5) have a demonstrated record of success in forming 
     collaborative partnerships with businesses, workforce 
     development boards, institutions of higher education, local 
     community and technical colleges, tribal colleges or 
     universities, labor organizations, and other nonprofit 
     community organizations.

     ``SEC. 5623. APPLICATIONS.

       ``An eligible partnership that desires to receive a grant 
     under this subpart shall submit to the Secretary an 
     application at such time, in such manner, and containing such 
     information as the Secretary may require, including--
       ``(1) a description of the eligible partnership, including 
     the responsibilities of each partner and how each partner 
     will meet its responsibilities;
       ``(2) a description of the statewide, regional, or local 
     emerging industry pathways and labor market needs to be 
     filled;
       ``(3) a description of how members of the eligible 
     partnership will collaborate with each other and interested 
     community stakeholders to assess the emerging industry 
     pathways in the State, region, or local area;
       ``(4) a description of how the eligible partnership will 
     engage students from qualifying schools to be served in the 
     design and implementation of the school- and work-based 
     curriculum or program;
       ``(5) a description of how the eligible partnership will 
     use the assessment of emerging industry pathways to establish 
     a school- and work-based curriculum or program to teach 
     academic and industry skills needed for success in such 
     emerging industries and how these skills will be aligned with 
     existing challenging State academic content standards;
       ``(6) a description of how teachers, parents or guardians, 
     and school guidance counselors will be consulted by the 
     eligible partnership in the development of the school- and 
     work-based curriculum or program developed under this 
     subpart;
       ``(7) a description of how the eligible partnership will 
     ensure that teachers and instructors have the necessary 
     training and preparation to teach the school- and work-based 
     curriculum or program developed under this subpart;
       ``(8) a description of how the school- and work-based 
     curriculum or program developed under this subpart will 
     improve the academic achievement, student attendance, and 
     secondary school completion of at-risk students and such 
     students' readiness to enter into a career in an emerging 
     industry or pursue postsecondary education;
       ``(9) a description of how the eligible partnership will 
     design a school- and work-based curriculum or program that 
     meets the unique academic and career development needs of 
     students to be served by the curriculum or program;
       ``(10) a description of how the school- and work-based 
     curriculum or program will support statewide, regional, or 
     local emerging industries;
       ``(11) a description of how the eligible partnership will 
     measure and report improvement in academic and student 
     engagement outcomes among students who participate in the 
     school- and work-based curriculum or program developed under 
     this subpart;
       ``(12) a description of how the eligible partnership will 
     seek to leverage other sources of Federal, State, and local 
     funding to support the development and implementation of the 
     school- and work-based curriculum or program;
       ``(13) a description of how the eligible partnership will 
     work to create, use, and evaluate individual learning plans 
     and career portfolios for students served under this subpart;
       ``(14) a description of how the eligible partnership will 
     coordinate such curriculum or program with programs funded 
     under the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act 
     of 2006; and
       ``(15) a description of how the eligible partnership plans 
     to sustain and expand such school- and work-based curriculum 
     or program after the Federal grant period ends.

     ``SEC. 5624. PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION.

       ``(a) Selection.--In awarding grants under this subpart, 
     the Secretary shall--
       ``(1) consider the information submitted by the eligible 
     partnerships under section 5623;
       ``(2) prioritize applications in accordance with section 
     5622(c); and
       ``(3) select eligible partnerships that submit applications 
     in compliance with section 5623.
       ``(b) Award Amounts.--
       ``(1) In general.--Subject to subsection (c), the Secretary 
     shall award each grant under this subpart in an amount of not 
     more than $5,000,000.
       ``(2) Use of funds.--An eligible partnership that receives 
     a grant under this subpart shall use--
       ``(A) not more than 35 percent of the grant funds for 
     designing the emerging industry pathways school- and work-
     based curriculum or program; and
       ``(B) not less than 65 percent of the grant funds for 
     implementing the emerging industry pathways school- and work-
     based curriculum or program in qualifying schools.
       ``(c) Funding To Implement Curricula or Programs.--The 
     Secretary may not award grant funds under subsection 
     (b)(2)(B) to implement the emerging industry pathways school- 
     and work-based curriculum or program until the Secretary 
     certifies that the eligible partnership is in compliance with 
     the following:
       ``(1) The eligible partnership has engaged in a 
     collaborative process involving educators and school 
     administrators, including curriculum experts, as well as 
     representatives from local businesses and industry to assess 
     emerging industry demands and the academic knowledge and 
     skills needed to meet those demands.
       ``(2) The school- and work-based curriculum or program 
     developed by the eligible partnership is aligned with 
     challenging State academic content standards.
       ``(3) The eligible partnership has consulted with and 
     involved students in qualifying schools in the collaboration 
     process and design of the school- and work-based curriculum 
     or program.

[[Page 341]]

       ``(4) The eligible partnership has received a commitment 
     from at least 1 qualifying school agreeing to implement the 
     school- and work-based curriculum or program in the 
     qualifying school.
       ``(5) The school- and work-based curriculum or program will 
     help prepare students for both direct entry into a career in 
     emerging industries and success in postsecondary education.
       ``(6) The eligible partnership has established a plan to 
     promote the school- and work-based curriculum or program 
     among qualifying schools, businesses, parental groups, and 
     community organizations.
       ``(d) Eligible Uses of Funds.--
       ``(1) Planning phase.--An eligible partnership that 
     receives a grant under this subpart shall use the grant funds 
     in the designing phase for the following:
       ``(A) Establishing collaborative working groups consisting 
     of educators, school administrators, representatives of local 
     or regional businesses, postsecondary education 
     representatives, representatives from labor organizations, 
     and representatives from nonprofit organizations.
       ``(B) Identifying emerging industry pathways at the State, 
     regional, or local level.
       ``(C) Identifying the academic and skill gaps that need to 
     be addressed to promote success in the emerging industry 
     pathways identified in subparagraph (B).
       ``(D) Developing a school- and work-based curriculum or 
     program to teach and integrate the academic and work-based 
     skills, including soft skills, that are needed for success in 
     emerging industry pathways and postsecondary education.
       ``(E) Creating a comprehensive set of academic and industry 
     skills to be taught across multiple emerging industry 
     pathways.
       ``(F) Aligning the school- and work-based curriculum or 
     program with challenging State academic content standards.
       ``(G) Establishing professional development opportunities 
     for educators, business partners, school counselors, and 
     others who will be implementing the school- and work-based 
     curriculum or program.
       ``(H) Collaborating with multistate regions to develop and 
     identify a school- and work-based curriculum or program that 
     addresses regional emerging industry pathways.
       ``(2) Implementing phase.--An eligible partnership that 
     receives a grant under this subpart shall use the grant funds 
     in the implementing phase for the following:
       ``(A) Integrating the emerging industry pathways school- 
     and work-based curriculum or program into classroom- or work-
     based instruction.
       ``(B) Providing professional development opportunities 
     designed around the school- and work-based curriculum or 
     program for educators, business partners, and others.
       ``(C) Identifying and creating school- and work-based 
     learning curricula or programs for students in such emerging 
     industry pathways.
       ``(D) Promoting the school- and work-based curriculum or 
     program among school guidance counselors.
       ``(E) Working with pupil services staff to develop 
     opportunities for career exploration among emerging industry 
     pathways business partners.
       ``(F) Conducting ongoing evaluations of the school- and 
     work-based curriculum or program, including assessing whether 
     participating students report increased engagement in 
     learning, increased school attendance, and improved success 
     upon entry into the workforce or postsecondary education.
       ``(G) Purchasing resources, including textbooks, reference 
     materials, assessments, labs, computers, and software, for 
     use in the school- and work-based curriculum or program.
       ``(3) Dissemination phase.--An eligible partnership that 
     receives a grant under this subpart shall use the grant funds 
     in the dissemination phase for the following:
       ``(A) Evaluating, cataloging, and disseminating best 
     practices from the school- and work-based curriculum or 
     program.
       ``(B) Disseminating the school- and work-based curriculum 
     or program to--
       ``(i) the National Research Center for Career and Technical 
     Education;
       ``(ii) State, regional, and local professional education 
     organizations; and
       ``(iii) institutions of higher education.
       ``(e) Matching Contributions.--An eligible partnership that 
     receives a grant under this subpart shall provide, from non-
     Federal sources, matching funds, which may be provided in 
     cash or in-kind, to carry out the activities supported by the 
     grant, in an amount equal to--
       ``(1) for the first year of the grant, 5 percent of the 
     amount of the grant for such year;
       ``(2) for the second year of the grant, 10 percent of the 
     amount of the grant for such year;
       ``(3) for the third year of the grant, 15 percent of the 
     amount of the grant for such year;
       ``(4) for the fourth year of the grant, 20 percent of the 
     amount of the grant for such year; and
       ``(5) for the fifth year of the grant, 25 percent of the 
     amount of the grant for such year.
       ``(f) Supplement, Not Supplant.--Grant funds awarded under 
     this subpart shall be used to supplement and not supplant 
     other Federal, State, and local funds available to implement 
     secondary school education programs or career and technical 
     education programs.

     ``SEC. 5625. EVALUATION AND REPORTS.

       ``(a) Annual Reports.--An eligible partnership that 
     receives a grant under this subpart shall submit an annual 
     report to the Secretary during the grant period detailing how 
     the eligible partnership is using the grant funds under this 
     subpart, including--
       ``(1) how the State educational agency or local educational 
     agency that is a member of the eligible partnership 
     collaborated with local businesses, workforce boards, 
     institutions of higher education, and community organizations 
     to assess emerging industry pathways;
       ``(2) how the eligible partnership has consulted with and 
     involved students in qualifying schools in the design and 
     implementation of the emerging industry pathways school- and 
     work-based curriculum or program;
       ``(3) the effectiveness of the school- and work-based 
     curriculum or program with respect to improving--
       ``(A) student engagement;
       ``(B) attendance;
       ``(C) secondary school graduation rates; and
       ``(D) preparation for and placement in a career in an 
     emerging industry or in postsecondary education;
       ``(4) how the eligible partnership has improved its 
     capacity to respond to new workforce development priorities 
     and create educational opportunities that address such new 
     workforce development priorities; and
       ``(5) any other information the Secretary may reasonably 
     require.
       ``(b) Final Reports.--
       ``(1) In general.--An eligible partnership that receives a 
     grant under this subpart shall, at the end of the grant 
     period, collect and prepare a report on the following 
     information:
       ``(A) The number and percentage of students served by the 
     eligible partnership who--
       ``(i) graduated from secondary school with a regular 
     secondary school diploma in the standard number of years;
       ``(ii) entered into a job in an emerging industry; and
       ``(iii) enrolled in a postsecondary institution.
       ``(B) The emerging industry pathways school- and work-based 
     curriculum or program and the--
       ``(i) successes of such curriculum or program, including 
     placement rates of students in work or postsecondary 
     education and trends in secondary school graduation rates in 
     qualifying schools utilizing the school- and work-based 
     curriculum or program;
       ``(ii) areas of improvement for the school- and work-based 
     curriculum or program;
       ``(iii) lessons learned from the implementation of the 
     school- and work-based curriculum or program in secondary 
     schools; and
       ``(iv) plans to replicate the school- and work-based 
     curriculum or program in other schools or examples of 
     successful replication of the curriculum or program.
       ``(2) Submission of reports.--A report prepared under 
     paragraph (1) shall be submitted to the Secretary and the 
     National Research Center for Career and Technical Education.
       ``(c) Federal Evaluation and Report.--Not later than 6 
     years after the date of enactment of this subpart, the 
     Secretary shall--
       ``(1) develop and execute a plan for evaluating the 
     emerging industry pathways school- and work-based curricula 
     or programs assisted under this subpart; and
       ``(2) submit a report to Congress--
       ``(A) detailing aggregate data on--
       ``(i) the categories of activities for which eligible 
     partnerships used grant funds under this subpart;
       ``(ii) the impact of the grants on--

       ``(I) student engagement, attendance, and completion of 
     secondary school; and
       ``(II) the postsecondary placement of students in high-
     quality emerging industry careers or postsecondary education; 
     and

       ``(iii) promising strategies for improving student 
     engagement, attendance, and completion of secondary school 
     through engaging curricula or programs; and
       ``(B) that includes any recommendations for improvements 
     that can be made to the grant program under this subpart.

     ``SEC. 5626. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``(a) In General.--From the amounts appropriated to and 
     available for Program Administration within the Departmental 
     Management account in the Department of Education for each of 
     fiscal years 2010 through 2013, there are authorized to be 
     appropriated $25,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2010 
     through 2013, respectively, to carry out this subpart.
       ``(b) Set Aside for Evaluation.--Of the amounts 
     appropriated under subsection (a) for a fiscal year, 2 
     percent shall be set aside for such fiscal year for the 
     Federal evaluation required under section 5625(c).''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents in section 2 
     of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 is 
     amended by

[[Page 342]]

     inserting after the item relating to section 5618 the 
     following:

      ``subpart 22--connecting education and emerging professions 
                      demonstration grant program

``Sec. 5621. Definitions.
``Sec. 5622. Program authorized.
``Sec. 5623. Applications.
``Sec. 5624. Program administration.
``Sec. 5625. Evaluation and reports.
``Sec. 5626. Authorization of appropriations.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. STABENOW (for herself and Ms. Snowe).
  S. 179. A bill to improve quality in health care by providing 
incentives for adoption of modern information technology, to the 
Committee on Finance.
  Ms. STABENOW. I am very pleased to introduce the Health Information 
Technology Act with my friend and colleague from Maine, Senator Snowe. 
As co-chairs of the Senate Health Care Quality Improvement and 
Information Technology Caucus, we have seen first-hand the 
transformative power information technology has on the delivery of 
health care.
  Our legislation is a substantial down-payment in building up our 
Nation's health information network and an important step in reforming 
health care. In doing so, we will reduce costs for our businesses, 
improve the quality of care for patients, and ensure health providers 
have access to the most accurate information. And I am very excited 
that President-elect Obama identified health IT as an important part of 
investing in our Nation's economy.
  The result of using 19th century technology in a 21st century health 
care system is higher costs, increased errors, and decreased quality of 
care. Too often, care is duplicated or the best and most appropriate 
care isn't given. Our health care professionals can't possibly provide 
the best care if they don't have complete and accurate information 
about the patient sitting in front of them.
  Many studies have found that as much as $300 billion is spent each 
year on health care that does not improve patient outcomes on treatment 
that is unnecessary, inappropriate, inefficient, or ineffective. For 
example, in last year's series of health reform hearings in the Senate 
Finance Committee, we heard testimony from Elizabeth McGlynn of the 
RAND Corporation that we only receive 55 percent of recommended 
preventive care services, 54 percent of recommended care for acute 
health problems, and 56 percent of the care that doctors agree is 
necessary for people with chronic conditions when we seek medical 
treatment.
  It's long past time that we fully utilize technology to make health 
care accessible and affordable for every family and business. However, 
most of our Nation's health care providers don't have access to capital 
in order to purchase information technology and service updates. Too 
many providers, especially our safety-net providers, are having a hard 
enough time just keeping up with their daily costs, much less to invest 
in something new.
  A March 2001 Institute of Medicine study concluded that in order to 
improve quality, there must be a national commitment to building an 
information infrastructure. An October 2003 Government Accountability 
Office report found that the benefits of an electronic healthcare 
information system included improved quality of care, reduced costs 
associated with medication errors, more accurate and complete medical 
documentation, more accurate capture of codes and charges, and improved 
communication among providers enabling them to respond more quickly to 
patients' needs.
  By providing the most appropriate care at the most appropriate time 
in a safe, secure way, we can reap huge savings. A January 2005 Report 
by the Center for Information Technology Leadership found that moving 
to standardized health information exchange and interoperability would 
save nearly $80 billion annually in the United States.
  The benefits of adoption and use of health care information 
technologies, systems and services will be widespread: employers will 
realize cost savings, clinicians will gain new electronic support tools 
and patient information to help guide medical decisions, and patients 
will benefit from a more efficient health care system and from a safer 
health care system with fewer unnecessary treatments and more attention 
to preventive care.
  We know that adoption of health information technology can play a 
critical role in improving patient outcomes and at the same time 
greatly reduce costs. But it can't happen without the federal 
government playing a role. The members of the Health Information 
Technology Leadership Panel concurred that without federal leadership, 
neither their individual companies nor the industrial sector as a whole 
can achieve the breadth of HIT adoption that would be required to 
realize the needed transformation of health care.
  Our country must have a national commitment to building an 
information infrastructure, and the Federal Government needs to step up 
to the plate and provide much-needed funds to get the ball rolling. 
Without health IT, we are not going to be able to accomplish other 
reforms necessary to improve our health care system. That is why I am 
fighting for funding similar to the legislation we are introducing 
today, will be included in the economic recovery act we will soon be 
debated.
  The sooner we get them into our hospitals, physician offices, nursing 
homes, community health centers, community mental health centers, and 
other health care providers, the sooner our patients, providers, and 
pocketbooks will see the rewards.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, today I join my colleague, Senator Stabenow 
of Michigan, to introduce the Health Information Technology Act of 2009 
to improve the quality of health care through the implementation of 
information technology, IT, in hospitals, health centers and physician 
practices throughout the country. Our legislation will help us address 
two critical issues.
  The first is the serious patient safety problem facing our Nation. 
Indeed, if most Americans were told today that 98,000 lives were lost 
needlessly last year--and a cure was available--they would undoubtedly 
call for action. Yet the Institute of Medicine, IOM, has reported that 
medical errors inflict that terrible toll every year, even though the 
technology is at our disposal to dramatically reduce those deaths.
  A second major problem is the escalating cost of health care. Health 
spending now comprises over 16 percent of GNP--$2.2 trillion last 
year--and the price of a health plan has grown so high that 70 million 
Americans today are either underinsured or lack any coverage 
whatsoever. That group expands as unemployment rates increase and 
individuals and families lose health insurance tied to employment. A 
recent Urban Institute study found that for each 1 percentage point 
increase in unemployment 1 million Americans are added to the rolls of 
the uninsured. However, simply expanding government subsidies or 
entitlements alone is not the answer, because on our current 
trajectory, escalating costs will erode our ability to maintain such 
supports. It is clear that some fundamental changes must be made in 
health care to combat rising health care costs.
  Bold changes and innovations are necessary to address both medical 
errors and escalating costs. One of those changes must be the 
application of modern data technology. Most of us have been told at one 
time or another, ``we're waiting to get the test results mailed'' or 
``we're still waiting for your chart.'' Consider the savings we realize 
when a physician can locate information efficiently so that tests don't 
have to be repeated and data isn't delayed. A patient obtains faster, 
higher quality care when multiple practitioners can review diagnostic 
test results right at their desktops. The fact is the health care 
industry is one of the last sectors where information flows so slowly. 
Indeed, it is often easier to track the service history on one's 
automobile than to see your own health history. In an age where 
millions of Americans share family pictures over the Internet in 
seconds, isn't it long past time that a physician should be able to 
retrieve an x-ray just as easily?
  Today, the technological tools are at hand to dramatically reduce 
medical

[[Page 343]]

errors and save lives. Many of us have heard about how drug 
interactions can be avoided by software systems which check a patient's 
prescriptions for hazards, and there are so many other applications 
which can also improve health. For example, by reviewing and analyzing 
information, a health provider can help a patient better manage chronic 
diseases such as diabetes and heart disease to reduce avoidable adverse 
outcomes. The unfortunate reality is that the cost of new systems and a 
lack of standards have prevented us from reaping the benefits of new 
technologies.
  While the current economic crisis has surely put a focus on 
addressing the inefficiencies and high costs of health care, I have 
long shared a determination to modernize health information with my 
colleagues. In 2003, I joined with Senator Bob Graham to introduce the 
``Medication Errors Reduction Act of 2003'' to make grants of up to 
$750,000 available to hospitals and nursing facilities to aid in 
implementation of health IT infrastructure. In 2005, Senator Stabenow 
and I offered our bill to create a $4 billion competitive grant program 
and tax incentives to enable hospitals, skilled nursing facilities, 
community health centers and physicians to invest in health IT.
  The President-elect shares our recognition of the critical role which 
information technology must play in transforming health care. In his 
campaign, he acknowledged the critical need to make technology 
implementation a priority.
  A lack of standards to ensure interoperability has been a factor in 
slowing IT adoption by many health care providers. One must know that a 
system purchased will be compatible with others, and that--no matter 
what may happen in the future to a vendor--the investment one makes in 
building an electronic medical record won't be wasted. In other words, 
your system must be able to communicate with other systems, and your 
investment in building electronic medical records must be preserved. 
When a patient moves, their electronic ``chart'' should be able to move 
right along with them to prevent disruption in the continuity of their 
care--in other words ``we must have interoperability.''
  Yet standards alone are not sufficient, as there are fiscal hurdles 
to implementing health IT. Today, many providers are struggling to 
adopt new technology, and for those who serve beneficiaries of 
Medicare, Medicaid and SCHIP, it can be exceedingly difficult. Our 
physicians, for example, have seen recent Medicare payment updates 
which have not even kept pace with inflation--even as we expect them to 
make a major investment in health IT.
  We must also recognize there is a misalignment of fiscal incentives 
for health IT. The benefits to patients are evident--in fewer delays, 
in better outcomes, in lives saved. Modern information technology 
reduces costs as well, but primarily to those who pay for services--not 
for the healthcare providers who must bear the burden of 
implementation. Indeed, it has been estimated that 89 percent of cost 
savings accrue to those who pay for services. It should be obvious then 
that the federal government would invest in health IT to both improve 
health outcomes and to reduce its expenditures on Medicare, Medicaid 
and SCHIP.
  That is precisely the type of investment the Health Information 
Technology Act of 2009 would achieve. Because as we look to the many 
studies and reports on health IT, it is clear that annual cost savings 
can actually exceed the price of implementation. With that kind of 
return, it is indisputable that the federal government must employ 
health IT to see not only the savings in lives, but also better 
management of our health care spending.
  Our legislation spurs adoption by providing grants to physicians, 
hospitals, long term care facilities and both federally-qualified 
health centers and community mental health centers. These grants are 
targeted to help provide the health IT resources providers need to 
serve our federal beneficiaries. In fact, the size of an allowable 
grant for each provider is keyed to the proportion of the patient care 
which they deliver to federal beneficiaries. This will help providers 
deliver better care to those on Medicare, Medicaid and SCHIP while we 
also see costs reduced in those programs. That is simple common sense.
  The legislation supports reasonable expenditures for a variety of 
costs required to implement health care information technology. These 
include such components as computer hardware and software in 
combination with installation and training. In addition for a system to 
be suitable for support under this legislation, we require that it must 
meet the HHS Secretary's interoperability standards.
  Our new legislation even provides an alternative to those for-profit 
providers who do not wish to apply for a grant. Under this bill, such 
providers will be able to expense the cost of a qualified system. We 
will thus assure that every type of provider has a meaningful 
opportunity to invest in moving their health care practice into the new 
millennium. With the development of a 21st century health technology 
system, we will ensure that providers have the appropriate tools to 
effectively provide the best quality health care at reasonable cost.
  As the current Congress struggles with matters related to the ailing 
economy, many Americans are finding it exceedingly difficult to access 
health care which they find to be both expensive and inefficient. While 
it is clear that health IT alone will not reduce all excessive costs or 
address every inefficiency, one must understand that the only way to 
achieve either goal is to have access to the type of coordinated 
information that a fully integrated health care system would provide. 
In fact, the information we will obtain through health IT is essential 
to achieve such goals as improving quality and reforming provider 
payment. This is the foundation for our work on health reform.
  When the Medicare and Medicaid programs began, we could have only 
dreamed about computerized clinical information systems. Today, we have 
this technology at our disposal, and I strongly believe that we cannot 
afford to delay implementation. In fact, as we face challenges in the 
financing of these vital federal programs, this is exactly the sort of 
initiative which will enable us to achieve the fundamental improvements 
to make our health entitlements more fiscally secure.
  I hope my colleagues will join us in support of this legislation so 
we may soon achieve the goals of improving patient safety and reducing 
our escalating health care costs.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. MIKULSKI (for herself, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Leahy, 
        Mr. Reid, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Bingaman, Mrs. Murray, Mr. 
        Reed, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Brown, Mr. Byrd, Mr. 
        Inouye, Mr. Levin, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Kohl, Mr. 
        Lieberman, Mr. Akaka, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Dorgan, Mrs. Boxer, 
        Mr. Feingold, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Johnson, Ms. Landrieu, 
        Mr. Schumer, Mrs. Lincoln, Mr. Carper, Ms. Stabenow, Ms. 
        Cantwell, Mr. Nelson of Florida, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Salazar, 
        Mr. Menendez, Mr. Cardin, Mr. Webb, Mr. Casey, Ms. Klobuchar, 
        Mrs. McCaskill, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Tester, Mr. Udall of 
        Colorado, Mr. Udall of New Mexico, Mr. Warner, Mrs. Shaheen, 
        Mr. Merkley, Mrs. Hagan, Mr. Begich, and Mr. Pryor):
  S. 181. A bill to amend title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 
the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, and to modify the 
operation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the 
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, to clarify that a discriminatory 
compensation decision or other practice that is unlawful under such 
Acts occurs each time compensation is paid pursuant to the 
discriminatory compensation decision or other practice, and for other 
purposes; read the first time.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I'm proud to join Senator Mikulski in 
introducing this legislation. Equal pay

[[Page 344]]

for equal work is a fundamental civil right. Over the past 4 decades, 
America has made enormous progress toward ensuring that all its people 
have an equal chance to enjoy the benefits of this great Nation. 
Bipartisan civil rights bills have been enacted to expand and 
strengthen the law to ensure fair pay for all workers. Despite these 
advances, civil rights is still America's unfinished business. It is 
therefore fitting that we open the 111th Congress with introduction of 
the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.
  This bill will restore the basic right of all workers, regardless of 
their race, sex, religion, national origin, age, or disability, to be 
paid fairly, free from discrimination. It will restore workers' rights 
to challenge ongoing discrimination and hold unscrupulous employers 
accountable.
  This legislation is needed because the Supreme Court turned back our 
Nation's progress on equal pay with its Ledbetter decision, which 
undermined a core protection of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 
1964 and overturned decades of precedent that had established a fair, 
workable rule for challenging pay discrimination claims.
  This needed bill will restore the long-standing rule that each 
discriminatory paycheck is a separate wrong that may be challenged by 
workers within the required period after receiving the check. In the 
Ledbetter case, a jury had found that Lilly Ledbetter was paid less 
than her male coworkers because she was a woman. The jury awarded back 
pay to Ms. Ledbetter, but the Supreme Court reversed that award, 
holding that she had waited too long and should have filed her lawsuit 
within a short time after Goodyear first began discriminating against 
her. Never mind that the company discriminated against her for decades, 
and that the discrimination continued with each new paycheck she 
received.
  Far too often, workers like Lilly Ledbetter put in a fair day's work, 
but go home with less than a fair day's pay. Women, African-American, 
and Latino workers all earn a fraction of what white male workers make. 
Many qualified older workers and workers with disabilities also are 
paid less than their coworkers for reasons unrelated to their 
performance on the job.
  It's more important than ever that we attack the problem of pay 
discrimination and correct the injustice caused by the Ledbetter 
decision. In the current economic crisis, millions of American workers 
are struggling to make ends meet. Pay discrimination makes that 
struggle harder, and workers can't afford to lose more economic ground. 
To protect these workers, we must move quickly to pass the Lilly 
Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.
  I urge my colleagues, Republicans and Democrats alike, to do so, and 
to send a strong signal that this new Congress is dedicated to standing 
up for fairness and equality in the workplace. The Lilly Ledbetters of 
our Nation deserve no less.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senators Mikulski, 
Kennedy, Snowe and others in introducing the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay 
Restoration Act of 2009. This legislation is long overdue and I am 
pleased that the majority leader will try again to move this 
legislation in the opening days of this new Congress. The Supreme 
Court's divided decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire struck a severe 
blow to the rights of working families across our country. More than 40 
years ago, Congress acted to protect women and others against 
discrimination in the workplace. In the 21st century, equal pay for 
equal work should be a given in this country. Unfortunately, the 
reality is still far from this basic principle. American women still 
earn only 77 cents for every dollar earned by a male counterpart. That 
decreases to 62 cents on the dollar for African-American women and just 
53 cents on the dollar for Hispanic-American women.
  For nearly 20 years, Ms. Ledbetter was a manager at a Goodyear 
factory in Gadsden, Alabama. After decades of service, she learned 
through an anonymous note that her employer had been discriminating 
against her for years. She was the only woman among 16 employees at her 
management level, yet Ms. Ledbetter was paid between 15 and 40 percent 
less than all of her male colleagues, including several who had 
significantly less seniority. After filing a complaint with the Equal 
Employment Opportunity Commission, a Federal jury found that Ms. 
Ledbetter was owed almost $225,000 in back pay. However, 5 members of 
the Supreme Court overturned her jury verdict because she had filed her 
lawsuit more than 180 days after her employer's original discriminatory 
act.
  I was honored to invite Ms. Ledbetter to testify at a Judiciary 
Committee hearing I chaired in September to examine how the Supreme 
Court's recent decisions have affected the lives of ordinary Americans. 
Ms. Ledbetter's case is but one example of how the Supreme Court has 
dramatically misinterpreted the intent of Congress and offered a 
liability shield to corporate wrong-doers.
  This decision is yet another example of the Supreme Court's 
increasing willingness to overturn juries who hear the factual evidence 
and decide cases. A recent study revealed that in employment 
discrimination cases, Federal courts of appeal are 5 times more likely 
to overturn an employee's favorable trial verdict against an employer 
than they are to overturn a verdict in favor of the corporation. That 
is a startling disparity for those of us who expect employees and 
employers to be treated fairly by the judges sitting on our appellate 
courts.
  In the 110th Congress, the House passed the bipartisan Lilly 
Ledbetter Fair Pay Act by a vote of 225-199. In the Senate, despite the 
support of 57 Senators who urged its consideration, the majority of 
Republican Senators objected to even proceeding to consideration of 
this bipartisan measure. One Republican Senator who supported the 
filibuster introduced an alternative bill, claiming to offer a solution 
for victims of pay discrimination. In reality, that partisan 
alternative proposal would fail to correct the injustice created by the 
Ledbetter decision. At the Judiciary Committee hearing in September, 
Ms. Ledbetter confirmed that the alternative bill would not have 
remedied her case, but instead would have imposed additional burdens 
and increased the costs of her litigation.
  Congress passed Title VII of the Civil Rights Act to protect 
employees against discrimination with respect to compensation because 
of an individual's race, color, religion, sex or national origin--
however the Supreme Court's cramped interpretation of this important 
law contradicts Congress's intent to ensure equal pay for equal work.
  This Supreme Court decision goes against both the spirit and clear 
intent of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, and sends the message to 
employers that wage discrimination cannot be punished as long as it is 
kept under wraps. At a time when one-third of private sector employers 
have rules prohibiting employees from discussing their pay with each 
other, the Court's decision ignores a reality of the workplace--pay 
discrimination is often intentionally concealed by employers.
  Equal pay is not just a women's issue, it is a family issue. With a 
record 70.2 million women in the workforce, wage discrimination 
continues to hurt the majority of American families. As a working 
mother, the discrimination inflicted on Ms. Ledbetter affected her 
entire family and continues to affect her retirement benefits. As the 
economy continues to worsen, many Americans are struggling to put food 
on the table and money in their retirement funds. It is regrettable 
that recent decisions handed down by the Supreme Court and Federal 
appellate courts have contributed to the financial struggles of so many 
women and their families. In the next weeks, I hope we can act to 
overturn the wrongly-decided Ledbetter decision to prevent the 
devastating consequences of pay discrimination.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. UDALL of Colorado (for himself and Mr. Salazar:
  S. 187. A bill to provide for the construction of the Arkansas Valley 
Conduit in the State of Colorado; to the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources.

[[Page 345]]


  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, today I am introducing four 
bills, S. 187, S. 188, S. 189, S. 190, that will preserve and protect 
majestic public landscapes in Colorado and help provide needed water 
supplies to communities and farmers on Colorado's productive Eastern 
Plains. These bills were introduced in the last session of Congress, 
where they each had hearings and one passed the U.S. House of 
Representatives. I hope that we can work together to move these bills 
in this Congress and see them signed into law.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of all four bills be included 
in the Record and be printed alongside these remarks.
  The first bill is the Arkansas Valley Conduit Act of 2009. This bill 
will help protect the water supply for the Arkansas River Valley's 
communities and its productive agricultural lands by advancing the 
construction of the long-planned Arkansas Valley Conduit. The bill will 
restructure the cost-share provisions of the project and is similar to 
legislation introduced in the last Congress by Senators Wayne Allard 
and Ken Salazar and introduced yesterday in the U.S. House of 
Representatives by Reps. John Salazar and Betsy Markey. 
  The Arkansas Valley Conduit, a proposed 130-mile water delivery 
system from the Pueblo Dam to communities throughout the Arkansas River 
Valley, was originally authorized in 1962 as part of the Fryingpan-
Arkansas, Fry-Ark, project. Unfortunately, the authorization did not 
include a Federal-local cost-share provision necessary to cover the 
estimated $300 million in construction costs, and local communities--
especially those in southern Colorado--do not have the resources to 
shoulder all of the costs. The project has thus remained unfinished for 
over 4 years.
  The bill will provide for a 65-35 Federal-local cost-share for 
completion of the project, with revenues from so-called ``excess-
capacity'' contracts for water storage in other Fry-Ark project 
facilities being used to fund the majority of the local contribution. 
This approach is the result of close collaboration between community 
stakeholders and the Colorado congressional delegation and will ensure 
communities in the Arkansas River Valley can finance their portion of 
the project without incurring unbearable financial burdens.
  Moreover, the bill will allow the Bureau of Reclamation to move 
forward with the construction of the Conduit. The depressed economic 
status of southeastern Colorado made it a difficult financial 
undertaking for the region, a challenge that continues today. This bill 
will help see this facility become a reality and thereby help the 
farming and ranching communities in the valley continue to produce 
needed food and fiber for the state and Nation.
  The second bill I am introducing today is the Colorado Northern Front 
Range Mountain Backdrop Protection Study Act. I introduced similar 
bills in the U.S. House of Representatives in the 107th, 108th, 109th 
and 110th Congresses. In previous Congresses, the bill passed the House 
and the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee but did not 
receive final action.
  The bill is intended to help local communities identify ways to 
protect the Front Range Mountain Backdrop in the northern Denver-metro 
area and the region just west of Rocky Flats. The Arapaho-Roosevelt 
National Forest includes much of the land in this backdrop area, but 
there are other lands involved as well.
  Rising dramatically from the Great Plains, the Front Range of the 
Rocky Mountains provides a scenic mountain backdrop to many communities 
in the Denver metropolitan area and elsewhere in Colorado. The portion 
of the range within and adjacent to the Arapaho-Roosevelt National 
Forest also includes a diverse array of wildlife habitats and provides 
many opportunities for outdoor recreation. The open-space character of 
this mountain backdrop is an important aesthetic and economic asset for 
adjoining communities, making them attractive locations for homes and 
businesses. But rapid population growth in the northern Front Range 
area of Colorado is increasing recreational use of the Arapaho-
Roosevelt National Forest and is also increasing pressure for 
development of other lands within and adjacent to that national forest.
  We can see the effects of rapid population growth throughout Colorado 
and especially along the Front Range. Homes and shopping centers are 
sprawling through valleys and along highways that feed into the Front 
Range. This development then spreads out along the ridges and 
mountaintops that make up the backdrop. We are in danger of losing to 
development many of the qualities that have helped attract new 
residents to Colorado. So, it is important to better understand what 
steps might be taken to avoid or lessen that risk--and this bill is 
designed to help us do just that.
  Already, local governments and other entities have provided important 
protection for portions of this mountain backdrop, especially in the 
northern Denver-metro area. However, some portions of the backdrop in 
this part of Colorado remain unprotected and are at risk of losing 
their open-space qualities. This bill acknowledges the good work of the 
local communities in preserving open space along the backdrop and aims 
to assist further efforts along the same lines.
  The bill directs the U.S. Forest Service to study the ownership 
patterns of the lands comprising the Front Range mountain backdrop, 
identify areas that are at risk, and recommend to Congress how these 
lands might be protected and how the Federal Government could help 
local communities and residents to achieve that goal. Importantly, I 
note that the bill does not interfere with the power of local 
authorities regarding land use planning or infringe on private property 
rights. Instead, it will bring the land protection experience of the 
Forest Service to the table to assist local efforts to protect areas 
that comprise the backdrop. The bill envisions that to the extent the 
Forest Service should be involved with Federal lands, it will work in 
collaboration with local communities, the state and private parties.
  I strongly believe it is in the national interest for the Federal 
Government to assist local communities to identify ways to protect the 
mounatin backdrop in this part of Colorado. The backdrop beckoned 
settlers westward and presented an imposing impediment to their forward 
progress that suggested similar challenges ahead. This first exposure 
to the harshness and humbling majesty of the Rocky Mountain West helped 
define a region. The pioneers' independent spirit and respect for 
nature still lives with us to this day. We need to work to preserve it 
by protecting the mountain backdrop as a cultural and natural heritage 
for ourselves and generations to come.
  The third bill I am introducing today--the National Trails System 
Willing Seller Act--will allow people who want to sell land for 
inclusion in certain units of the National Trails System to do so. 
Current law prohibits people who own land associated with several units 
of the trail system from selling those lands to the Federal Government 
for inclusion in those units. This bill will allow such sales to 
happen.
  This legislation is identical to bills introduced in previous 
Congresses by my former Republican colleagues from Colorado, 
Representatives Beauprez and McInnis. The Trail System units covered by 
the bill are the Oregon National Historic Trail, the Mormon Pioneer 
National Historic Trail, the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail, 
the Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail, the Iditarod National 
Historic Trail, the North County National Scenic Trail, the Ice Age 
National Scenic Trail, the Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail, and 
the Nez Perce National Historic Trail.
  Our national trails are a national treasure, and we should allow 
people who own land along these trails to sell that land to the Federal 
Government to be part of our public lands legacy. But it is important 
to make clear that these land sales are from willing sellers, which is 
what this bill will do. This bill makes a small but important 
adjustment to current law, and I think it deserves the support of all 
Members of the Senate.

[[Page 346]]

  The final bill I am introducing today is the Rocky Mountain National 
Park Wilderness and Indian Peaks Wilderness Expansion Act, which will 
designate nearly 250,000 acres of Rocky Mountain National Park as 
wilderness. I introduced this bill in the 110th Congress as a member of 
the House of Representatives. It was cosponsored in the Senate by my 
colleague Senator Ken Salazar, and eventually by the Colorado 
Congressional delegation. Over a period of months, we worked together 
to develop this bipartisan legislation that will provide important 
protection and management direction for some truly remarkable country. 
This is a public lands policy goal that goes back to the 1960s, and is 
long overdue.
  This bill is consistent with the Colorado Congressional delegation's 
efforts in the last Congress to strike a balance in protecting the park 
and the water users who rely on the Grand River Ditch. This carefully 
negotiated language met the needs of those users, but questions have 
been raised about the particular way that liability and water use 
issues were addressed in the delegation bill. Specifically, there have 
been questions about how these provisions work in the context of the 
Park Resources Protection Act. While I am confident that my bill 
addresses these liability concerns, I appreciate the recent efforts by 
Senator Salazar to offer a slightly different approach that provides a 
path to a widely-shared goal that has broad support in Colorado.
  The wilderness designation in this bill for the park will cover some 
94 percent of the park, including Longs Peaks and other major mountains 
along the Great Continental Divide, glacial cirques and snow fields, 
broad expanses of alpine tundra and wet meadows, old-growth forests, 
and hundreds of lakes and streams, all untrammeled by human structures 
or passage. Indeed, examples of all the natural ecosystems that make up 
the splendor of the park are included in the wilderness that will be 
designated by this bill. At the same time, the wilderness boundaries 
have been drawn so as to allow continued access for use of existing 
roadways, buildings and developed areas, privately owned land, and 
areas where additional facilities and roadwork will improve park 
management and visitor services. In addition, specific provisions are 
included to ensure that there will be no adverse effects on continued 
use of existing water facilities.
  The lands designated as wilderness will become part of the National 
Wilderness Preservation System that was established by the Wilderness 
Act and will be managed in accordance with that Act and the provisions 
of the bill. The bill's provisions amplify this by specifying that--no 
new reclamation projects will be allowed in the wilderness area; 
nothing in the bill will create a ``buffer zone'' around the wilderness 
and non-wilderness activities visible or audible from within the 
wilderness will not be prohibited; the National Park Service can act to 
control fire, insects, and diseases, including use of mechanical tools 
within the wilderness; and nothing in the bill will reduce or restrict 
the current authority of the National Park Service to manage the Park's 
lands and resources.
  The bill is similar to measures previously introduced by my 
predecessor in the House of Representatives, Representative David 
Skaggs, as well as other bills introduced before that, and legislation 
I introduced in the 107th, 108th, and 109th Congresses. However, it 
does include a number of adjustments and refinements that reflect 
discussion within the Colorado delegation in Congress and with 
interested parties in Colorado.
  Like H.R. 2334 of the 110th Congress, the new bill includes 
wilderness designation of more than 700 acres in the Twin Sisters area 
south of Estes Park. These lands were acquired by the United States and 
made part of the park after submission to Congress of the original 
wilderness recommendation for the park in the 1970s, and so were not 
included in that recommendation. They are lands of a wilderness 
character, and their designation will not conflict with any current 
uses. On the west side, the town of Grand Lake and Grand County 
requested that about 650 acres inward from the park boundary around the 
town be omitted from the wilderness designation in order to allow the 
park to respond to potential forest fire threats. As was the case 
previously, this bill accommodates that request.
  Also like that previous measure, the bill responds to the request of 
the Town of Grand Lake, Grand County and the Headwaters Trails 
Alliance, a group composed of local communities in Grand County that 
seeks to establish opportunities for mountain biking, and the 
International Mountain Bicycling Association to omit from wilderness 
designation an area along the western park boundary, running south 
along Lake Granby from the town to the park's southern boundary. This 
will allow the National Park Service to retain the option of 
authorizing construction of a possible future mountain bike route 
within this part of the park. Similarly, the bill expands the Indian 
Peaks Wilderness Area by 1,000 acres in the area south of the park and 
north of Lake Granby. The lands involved are currently managed as part 
of the Arapaho National Recreation Area, which is accordingly reduced 
by about 1,000 acres.
  As did the previous bill, this bill includes a section that 
authorizes the National Park Service to lease an 11-acre property, the 
Leiffer tract, that was donated to the National Park Service in 1977. 
Located outside the park's boundaries, it has two buildings, including 
a house that is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The 
Park Service would like to have the option of leasing it, but current 
law allows leasing only for ``property administered . . . as part of 
the National Park System,'' and this property does not qualify. The 
bill allows the Park Service to lease the property as if it were 
located inside or contiguous to the park.
  Also like previous measures, the bill addresses the question of 
possible impacts on water rights--something that can be a primary point 
of contention in Congressional debates over designating wilderness 
areas. It reflects the legal reality that it has long been recognized 
under the laws of the United States and Colorado, including a decision 
of the Colorado Supreme Court, that Rocky Mountain National Park 
already has extensive Federal reserved water rights arising from the 
creation of the national park itself. And it reflects the geographic 
reality that the park sits astride the continental divide, meaning 
there is no higher land around from which streams flow into the park, 
and thus there is no possibility of any diversion of water occurring 
upstream from the park. In recognition of these legal and practical 
realities, the bill includes a finding that because the park already 
has these extensive reserved rights to water, there is no need for any 
additional reservation or appropriation of such right, and an explicit 
disclaimer that the bill effects any such reservation.
  As I mentioned, there are also provisions in this bill that deal with 
the Grand River Ditch, created before Rocky Mountain National Park was 
established and partly located within the park. The owners of the ditch 
are currently working to conclude an agreement with the National Park 
Service with respect to operation and maintenance of the portion of the 
ditch within the park, and the bill provides that after conclusion of 
this agreement the strict liability standard of the Park Resources 
Protection Act which now applies to any damage to park resources will 
not apply so long as the ditch is operated and maintained in accordance 
with the agreement. The owners of the ditch remain liable for damage to 
park resources caused by negligence or intentional acts, and the bill 
specifies that it will not limit or otherwise affect the liability of 
any individual or entity for damages to, loss of, or injury to any park 
resource resulting from any cause of event occurring before the bill's 
enactment. In addition, the bill specifies that its enactment will not 
restrict or otherwise affect any activity relating to the monitoring, 
operation, maintenance, repair, replacement, or use of the ditch that 
was authorized or approved by the National Park Service as of the date 
of

[[Page 347]]

the bill's enactment. The bill also provides that use of water 
transported by the ditch for a main purpose or main purposes other than 
irrigation will not terminate or adversely affect the ditch's right-of-
way.
  The matters dealt with in this bill have a long history. The 
wilderness designations are based on National Park Service 
recommendations presented to Congress by President Richard Nixon. That 
they have not been acted on before this reflects the difficult history 
of wilderness legislation. One Colorado statewide wilderness bill was 
enacted in 1980, but it took more than a decade before the Colorado 
delegation and the Congress were finally able, in 1993, to pass a 
second statewide national forest wilderness bill. Since then, action 
has been completed on bills designating wilderness in the Spanish Peaks 
area of the San Isabel National Forest as well as in the Black Canyon 
of the Gunnison National Park, the Gunnison Gorge, the Black Ridge 
portion of the Colorado Canyons National Conservation Area, and the 
James Peak area of the Arapaho-Roosevelt National Forests.
  We now need to continue making progress by providing wilderness 
designations for other deserving lands in Colorado, including lands 
that are managed by the Bureau of Land Management. And the time is ripe 
for finally resolving the status of the lands within Rocky Mountain 
National Park that are dealt with in this bill.
  Lands covered by the bill are currently being managed to protect 
their wilderness character. Formal wilderness designation will no 
longer leave this question to the discretion of the Park Service, but 
will make it clear that within the designated areas, there will never 
be roads, visitor facilities, or other manmade features that interfere 
with the spectacular natural beauty and wildness of the mountains. This 
is especially important for a park like Rocky Mountain, which is 
relatively small by western standards. As nearby land development and 
alteration has accelerated in recent years, the pristine nature of the 
park's backcountry becomes an increasingly rare feature of Colorado's 
landscape. Further, the park's popularity demands definitive and 
permanent protection for wild areas against possible pressures for 
development within the park. While only about one tenth the size of 
Yellowstone National Park, Rocky Mountain National Park sees nearly the 
same number of visitors each year. At the same time, designating these 
carefully selected portions of Rocky Mountain as wilderness will make 
other areas, now restricted under interim wilderness protection 
management, available for overdue improvements to park roads and 
visitor facilities.
  In summary, the Rocky Mountain National Park Wilderness and Indian 
Peaks Wilderness Expansion Act will protect some of our Nation's finest 
wild lands. It will protect existing rights. It will not limit any 
existing opportunity for new water development. It is bipartisan and 
will affirm the commitment of all Coloradans to preserving the features 
that make our State such a remarkable place to live. So, I think it 
deserves prompt enactment.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of each bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bills was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 187

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Arkansas Valley Conduit Act 
     of 2009''.

     SEC. 2. ARKANSAS VALLEY CONDUIT, COLORADO.

       (a) Cost Share.--The first section of Public Law 87-590 (76 
     Stat. 389) is amended in the second sentence of subsection 
     (c) by inserting after ``cost thereof,'' the following: ``or 
     in the case of the Arkansas Valley Conduit, payment in an 
     amount equal to 35 percent of the cost of the conduit that is 
     comprised of revenue generated by payments pursuant to a 
     repayment contract and revenue that may be derived from 
     contracts for the use of Fryingpan-Arkansas project excess 
     capacity or exchange contracts using Fryingpan-Arkansas 
     project facilities,''.
       (b) Rates.--Section 2(b) of Public Law 87-590 (76 Stat. 
     390) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``(b) Rates'' and inserting the following:
       ``(b) Rates.--
       ``(1) In general.--Rates''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Ruedi dam and reservoir, fountain valley pipeline, 
     and south outlet works at pueblo dam and reservoir.--
       ``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding the reclamation laws, 
     until the date on which the payments for the Arkansas Valley 
     Conduit under paragraph (3) begin, any revenue that may be 
     derived from contracts for the use of Fryingpan-Arkansas 
     project excess capacity or exchange contracts using 
     Fryingpan-Arkansas project facilities shall be credited 
     towards payment of the actual cost of Ruedi Dam and 
     Reservoir, the Fountain Valley Pipeline, and the South Outlet 
     Works at Pueblo Dam and Reservoir plus interest in an amount 
     determined in accordance with this section.
       ``(B) Effect.--Nothing in the Federal reclamation law (the 
     Act of June 17, 1902 (32 Stat. 388, chapter 1093), and Acts 
     supplemental to and amendatory of that Act (43 U.S.C. 371 et 
     seq.)) prohibits the concurrent crediting of revenue (with 
     interest as provided under this section) towards payment of 
     the Arkansas Valley Conduit as provided under this paragraph.
       ``(3) Arkansas valley conduit.--
       ``(A) Use of revenue.--Notwithstanding the reclamation 
     laws, any revenue derived from contracts for the use of 
     Fryingpan-Arkansas project excess capacity or exchange 
     contracts using Fryingpan-Arkansas project facilities shall 
     be credited towards payment of the actual cost of the 
     Arkansas Valley Conduit plus interest in an amount determined 
     in accordance with this section.
       ``(B) Adjustment of rates.--Any rates charged under this 
     section for water for municipal, domestic, or industrial use 
     or for the use of facilities for the storage or delivery of 
     water shall be adjusted to reflect the estimated revenue 
     derived from contracts for the use of Fryingpan-Arkansas 
     project excess capacity or exchange contracts using 
     Fryingpan-Arkansas project facilities.''.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 7 of Public 
     Law 87-590 (76 Stat. 393) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``Sec. 7. There is hereby'' and inserting 
     the following:

     ``SEC. 7. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``(a) In General.--There is''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(b) Arkansas Valley Conduit.--
       ``(1) In general.--Subject to annual appropriations and 
     paragraph (2), there are authorized to be appropriated such 
     sums as are necessary for the construction of the Arkansas 
     Valley Conduit.
       ``(2) Limitation.--Amounts made available under paragraph 
     (1) shall not be used for the operation or maintenance of the 
     Arkansas Valley Conduit.''.
                                  ____


                                 S. 188

       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 ``Colorado Northern Front 
     Range Mountain Backdrop Protection Study Act''.

     SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

       The purpose of this Act is to identify options that may be 
     available to assist in maintaining the open space 
     characteristics of land that is part of the mountain backdrop 
     of communities in the northern section of the Front Range 
     area of Colorado.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Agriculture, acting through the Chief of the Forest 
     Service.
       (2) State.--The term ``State'' means the State of Colorado.
       (3) Study area.--
       (A) In general.--The term ``study area'' means the land in 
     southern Boulder, northern Jefferson, and northern Gilpin 
     Counties, Colorado, that is located west of Colorado State 
     Highway 93, south and east of Colorado State Highway 119, and 
     north of Colorado State Highway 46, as generally depicted on 
     the map entitled ``Colorado Northern Front Range Mountain 
     Backdrop Protection Study Act: Study Area'' and dated August 
     27, 2008.
       (B) Exclusions.--The term ``study area'' does not include 
     land within the city limits of the cities of Arvada, Boulder, 
     or Golden, Colorado.
       (4) Undeveloped land.--The term ``undeveloped land'' means 
     land--
       (A) that is located within the study area;
       (B) that is free or primarily free of structures; and
       (C) the development of which is likely to affect adversely 
     the scenic, wildlife, or recreational value of the study 
     area.

     SEC. 4. COLORADO NORTHERN FRONT RANGE MOUNTAIN BACKDROP 
                   STUDY.

       (a) Study; Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act and except as provided in subsection 
     (c), the Secretary shall--
       (1) conduct a study of the land within the study area; and
       (2) complete a report that--
       (A) identifies the present ownership of the land within the 
     study area;

[[Page 348]]

       (B) identifies any undeveloped land that may be at risk of 
     development; and
       (C) describes any actions that could be taken by the United 
     States, the State, a political subdivision of the State, or 
     any other parties to preserve the open and undeveloped 
     character of the land within the study area.
       (b) Requirements.--The Secretary shall conduct the study 
     and develop the report under subsection (a) with the support 
     and participation of 1 or more of the following State and 
     local entities:
       (1) The Colorado Department of Natural Resources.
       (2) Colorado State Forest Service.
       (3) Colorado State Conservation Board.
       (4) Great Outdoors Colorado.
       (5) Boulder, Jefferson, and Gilpin Counties, Colorado.
       (c) Limitation.--If the State and local entities specified 
     in subsection (b) do not support and participate in the 
     conduct of the study and the development of the report under 
     this section, the Secretary may--
       (1) decrease the area covered by the study area, as 
     appropriate; or
       (2)(A) opt not to conduct the study or develop the report; 
     and
       (B) submit to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 
     of the Senate and the Committee on Natural Resources of the 
     House of Representatives notice of the decision not to 
     conduct the study or develop the report.
       (d) Effect.--Nothing in this Act authorizes the Secretary 
     to take any action that would affect the use of any land not 
     owned by the United States.
                                  ____


                                 S. 189

       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 ``National Trails System Willing 
     Seller Act''.

     SEC. 2. AUTHORITY TO ACQUIRE LAND FROM WILLING SELLERS FOR 
                   CERTAIN TRAILS.

       (a) Oregon National Historic Trail.--Section 5(a)(3) of the 
     National Trails System Act (16 U.S.C. 1244(a)(3)) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following: ``No land or interest in 
     land outside the exterior boundaries of any federally 
     administered area may be acquired by the Federal Government 
     for the trail except with the consent of the owner of the 
     land or interest in land. The authority of the Federal 
     Government to acquire fee title under this paragraph shall be 
     limited to an average of not more than \1/4\ mile on either 
     side of the trail.''.
       (b) Mormon Pioneer National Historic Trail.--Section 
     5(a)(4) of the National Trails System Act (16 U.S.C. 
     1244(a)(4)) is amended by adding at the end the following: 
     ``No land or interest in land outside the exterior boundaries 
     of any federally administered area may be acquired by the 
     Federal Government for the trail except with the consent of 
     the owner of the land or interest in land. The authority of 
     the Federal Government to acquire fee title under this 
     paragraph shall be limited to an average of not more than \1/
     4\ mile on either side of the trail.''.
       (c) Continental Divide National Scenic Trail.--Section 
     5(a)(5) of the National Trails System Act (16 U.S.C. 
     1244(a)(5)) is amended by adding at the end the following: 
     ``No land or interest in land outside the exterior boundaries 
     of any federally administered area may be acquired by the 
     Federal Government for the trail except with the consent of 
     the owner of the land or interest in land. The authority of 
     the Federal Government to acquire fee title under this 
     paragraph shall be limited to an average of not more than \1/
     4\ mile on either side of the trail.''.
       (d) Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail.--Section 
     5(a)(6) of the National Trails System Act (16 U.S.C. 
     1244(a)(6)) is amended by adding at the end the following: 
     ``No land or interest in land outside the exterior boundaries 
     of any federally administered area may be acquired by the 
     Federal Government for the trail except with the consent of 
     the owner of the land or interest in land. The authority of 
     the Federal Government to acquire fee title under this 
     paragraph shall be limited to an average of not more than \1/
     4\ mile on either side of the trail.''.
       (e) Iditarod National Historic Trail.--Section 5(a)(7) of 
     the National Trails System Act (16 U.S.C. 1244(a)(7)) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following: ``No land or 
     interest in land outside the exterior boundaries of any 
     federally administered area may be acquired by the Federal 
     Government for the trail except with the consent of the owner 
     of the land or interest in land. The authority of the Federal 
     government to acquire fee title under this paragraph shall be 
     limited to an average of not more than \1/4\ mile on either 
     side of the trail.''.
       (f) North Country National Scenic Trail.--Section 5(a)(8) 
     of the National Trails System Act (16 U.S.C. 1244(a)(8)) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following: ``No land or 
     interest in land outside the exterior boundaries of any 
     federally administered area may be acquired by the Federal 
     Government for the trail except with the consent of the owner 
     of the land or interest in land.''.
       (g) Ice Age National Scenic Trail.--Section 5(a)(10) of the 
     National Trails System Act (16 U.S.C. 1244(a)(10)) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following: ``No land or interest in 
     land outside the exterior boundaries of any federally 
     administered area may be acquired by the Federal Government 
     for the trail except with the consent of the owner of the 
     land or interest in land.''.
       (h) Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail.--Section 
     5(a)(11) of the National Trails System Act (16 U.S.C. 
     1244(a)(11)) is amended--
       (1) by striking the fourth and fifth sentences; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following: ``No land or 
     interest in land outside the exterior boundaries of any 
     federally administered area may be acquired by the Federal 
     Government for the trail except with the consent of the owner 
     of the land or interest in land.''.
       (i) Nez Perce National Historic Trail.--Section 5(a)(14) of 
     the National Trails System Act (16 U.S.C. 1244(a)(14)) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking the fourth and fifth sentences; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following: ``No land or 
     interest in land outside the exterior boundaries of any 
     federally administered area may be acquired by the Federal 
     Government for the trail except with the consent of the owner 
     of the land or interest in land. The authority of the Federal 
     Government to acquire fee title under this paragraph shall be 
     limited to an average of not more than \1/4\ mile on either 
     side of the trail.''.

     SEC. 3. CONFORMING AMENDMENT.

       Section 10 of the National Trails System Act (16 U.S.C. 
     1249 is amended by striking subsection (c) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this 
     Act, there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are 
     necessary to implement the provisions of this Act relating to 
     the trails designated by section 5(a).
       ``(2) Natchez trace national scenic trail.--
       ``(A) In general.--With respect to the Natchez Trace 
     National Scenic Trail (referred to in this paragraph as the 
     `trail') designated by section 5(a)(12)--
       ``(i) not more than $500,000 shall be appropriated for the 
     acquisition of land or interests in land for the trail; and
       ``(ii) not more than $2,000,000 shall be appropriated for 
     the development of the trail.
       ``(B) Participation by volunteer trail groups.--The 
     administering agency for the trail shall encourage volunteer 
     trail groups to participate in the development of the 
     trail.''.
                                  ____


                                 S. 190

       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 ``Rocky Mountain National Park 
     Wilderness and Indian Peaks Wilderness Expansion Act''.

     SEC. 2. PURPOSES.

       The purposes of this Act are--
       (1) to include in the National Wilderness Preservation 
     System certain land within the Rocky Mountain National Park, 
     Colorado, to protect--
       (A) the enduring scenic and historic wilderness character 
     and unique wildlife values of the land; and
       (B) the scientific, educational, inspirational, and 
     recreational resources, values, and opportunities of the 
     land; and
       (2) to adjust the boundaries of the Indian Peaks Wilderness 
     and Arapaho National Recreation Area of the Arapaho National 
     Forest.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Map.--The term ``Map'' means the map entitled ``Rocky 
     Mountain National Park, Colorado Wilderness Boundaries'' and 
     dated September 2006.
       (2) Park.--The term ``Park'' means the Rocky Mountain 
     National Park in the State.
       (3) Potential wilderness land.--The term ``potential 
     wilderness land'' means--
       (A) the land identified on the Map as potential wilderness; 
     and
       (B) any land acquired by the United States on or after the 
     date of enactment of this Act that is--
       (i) located within the boundaries of the Park; and
       (ii) contiguous with any land designated as wilderness by 
     section 4(a).
       (4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.
       (5) State.--The term ``State'' means the State of Colorado.
       (6) Trail.--The term ``Trail'' means the East Shore Trail 
     established under section 5(a).
       (7) Wilderness.--The term ``Wilderness'' means the Rocky 
     Mountain National Park Wilderness designated by section 4(a).

     SEC. 4. ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARK WILDERNESS.

       (a) Designation.--In furtherance of the purposes of the 
     Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.), there is designated 
     as wilderness and as a component of the National Wilderness 
     Preservation System approximately 249,339 acres of land in 
     the Park, as generally depicted on the Map, which shall be 
     known as the ``Rocky Mountain National Park Wilderness''.
       (b) Map and Boundary Description.--
       (1) In general.--As soon as practicable after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the

[[Page 349]]

     Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Resources of the 
     House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and 
     Natural Resources of the Senate a map and boundary 
     description of the Wilderness.
       (2) Availability.--The map and boundary description 
     submitted under paragraph (1) shall be on file and available 
     for public inspection in the Office of the Director of the 
     National Park Service.
       (3) Corrections.--The Secretary may correct clerical and 
     typographical errors in the map and boundary description 
     submitted under paragraph (1).
       (4) Effect.--The map and boundary description submitted 
     under paragraph (1) shall have the same force and effect as 
     if included in this Act.
       (c) Inclusion of Potential Wilderness Land.--
       (1) In general.--On publication in the Federal Register of 
     a notice by the Secretary that all uses of a parcel of 
     potential wilderness land inconsistent with the Wilderness 
     Act (16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.) have ceased, the parcel shall 
     be--
       (A) included in the Wilderness; and
       (B) managed in accordance with this section.
       (2) Map and boundary description.--The Secretary shall 
     modify the map and boundary description prepared under 
     subsection (b) to reflect the inclusion of the parcel in the 
     Wilderness.
       (d) Exclusion of Certain Land.--The boundaries of the 
     Wilderness shall specifically exclude:
       (1) The Grand River Ditch (including the main canal of the 
     Grand River Ditch and a branch of the main canal known as the 
     ``Specimen Ditch''), the right-of-way for the Grand River 
     Ditch, land 200 feet on each side of the marginal limits of 
     the Ditch, and any associated appurtenances, structures, 
     buildings, camps, and work sites in existence as of June 1, 
     1998.
       (2) Land owned by the St. Vrain & Left Hand Water 
     Conservancy District, including Copeland Reservoir and the 
     Inlet Ditch to the Reservoir from the North St. Vrain Creek, 
     comprising approximately 35.38 acres.
       (3) Lands owned by the Wincentsen-Harms Trust, comprising 
     approximately 2.75 acres.
       (4) Land within the area depicted as the ``East Shore Trail 
     Area'' on the map prepared under subsection (b)(1).
       (e) Administration.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to valid existing rights, any land 
     designated as wilderness under subsection (a) or added to the 
     Wilderness after the date of enactment of this Act under 
     subsection (c) shall be administered by the Secretary in 
     accordance with--
       (A) the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.); and
       (B) this Act.
       (2) Effective date of wilderness act.--With respect to the 
     land designated as Wilderness by subsection (a) or added to 
     the Wilderness after the date of enactment of this Act under 
     subsection (c), any reference in the Wilderness Act (16 
     U.S.C. 1131 et seq.) to the effective date of the Wilderness 
     Act shall be deemed to be a reference to the date of 
     enactment of this Act or the date of enactment of the Act 
     adding the land to the Wilderness, respectively.
       (3) Water rights.--
       (A) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (i) according to decisions of the State courts, the United 
     States has existing rights to water within the Park;
       (ii) the existing water rights are sufficient for the 
     purposes of the Wilderness; and
       (iii) based on the findings described in clauses (i) and 
     (ii), there is no need for the United States to reserve or 
     appropriate any additional water rights to fulfill the 
     purposes of the Wilderness.
       (B) No reservation of water rights.--Nothing in this Act or 
     any action carried out pursuant to this Act shall constitute 
     an express or implied reservation by the United States of 
     water or water rights for any purpose.
       (4) Grand river ditch.--
       (A) Liability.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     or any stipulation or applicable agreement, during any period 
     in which the Water Supply and Storage Company (or any 
     successor in interest to the Water Supply and Storage Company 
     with respect to the Grand River Ditch) operates and maintains 
     the portion of the Grand River Ditch within the Park in 
     compliance with an operations and maintenance agreement 
     between the Water Supply and Storage Company and the National 
     Park Service entered into on ____________, no individual or 
     entity who owns, controls, or operates the Grand River Ditch 
     shall be liable for any response costs or for any damages to, 
     loss of, or injury to the resources of the Park resulting 
     from any cause or event (including, but not limited to, water 
     escaping from any part of the Grand River Ditch by overflow 
     or as a result of a breach, failure, or partial failure of 
     any portion of the Grand River Ditch, including the portion 
     of the ditch located outside the Park), unless the damages 
     to, loss of, or injury to the resources are proximately 
     caused by the negligence or an intentional act of the 
     individual or entity.
       (B) Limitation.--Nothing in this section limits or 
     otherwise affects any liability of any individual or entity 
     for damages to, loss of, or injury to any resource of the 
     Park resulting from any cause or event that occurred before 
     the date of enactment of this Act.
       (C) Existing activities.--Nothing in this Act, including 
     the designation of the Wilderness under this section, shall 
     restrict or otherwise affect any activity (including an 
     activity carried out in response to an emergency or 
     catastrophic event) on, under, or affecting the Wilderness or 
     land excluded under subsection (d)(1) relating to the 
     monitoring, operation, maintenance, repair, replacement, or 
     use of the Grand River Ditch that was authorized or approved 
     by the Secretary as of the date of enactment of this Act.
       (D) No effect.--Notwithstanding any other provision of any 
     previous or existing law, any stipulation, or any agreement, 
     or interpretation thereof, use of water transported by the 
     Grand River Ditch for a main purpose or main purposes other 
     than irrigation shall not terminate or adversely affect the 
     right-of-way of the Grand River Ditch, and such right-of-way 
     shall not be deemed relinquished, forfeited, or lost, solely 
     because such water is used for a main purpose or main 
     purposes other than irrigation.
       (5) Colorado-big thompson project and windy gap project.--
       (A) Existing activities.--Activities (including activities 
     that are necessary because of emergencies or catastrophic 
     events) on, under, or affecting the Wilderness relating to 
     the monitoring, operation, maintenance, repair, replacement, 
     or use of the Alva B. Adams Tunnel at its designed capacity 
     and all other Colorado-Big Thompson Project facilities 
     located within the Park that were allowed as of the date of 
     enactment of this Act under the Act of January 26, 1915 (16 
     U.S.C. 191)--
       (i) shall be allowed to continue; and
       (ii) shall not be affected by the designation of the 
     Wilderness under this section.
       (B) Effect.--Nothing in this Act or the designation of the 
     Wilderness shall prohibit or restrict the conveyance of any 
     water through the Alva B. Adams Tunnel for any purpose.
       (C) New reclamation projects.--Nothing in the first section 
     of the Act of January 26, 1915 (16 U.S.C. 191), shall be 
     construed to allow development in the Wilderness of any 
     reclamation project not in existence as of the date of 
     enactment of this Act.
       (6) No buffer zone.--
       (A) In general.--Nothing in this Act creates a protective 
     perimeter or buffer zone around the Wilderness.
       (B) Activities outside wilderness.--The fact that a 
     nonwilderness activity or use can be seen or heard from 
     within the Wilderness shall not preclude the conduct of the 
     activity or use outside the boundary of the Wilderness.
       (7) Fire, insect, and disease control.--In accordance with 
     section 4(d)(1) of the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1133(d)(1)), 
     the Secretary may take such measures in the Wilderness as are 
     necessary to control fire, insects, and diseases, including 
     the use of mechanized tools, subject to such conditions as 
     the Secretary determines to be desirable.
       (8) Management authority.--Nothing in this Act shall be 
     construed as reducing or restricting the authority of the 
     Secretary to manage the lands and other resources within the 
     Park pursuant to the Act of January 26, 1915 (16 U.S.C. 191), 
     and other laws applicable to the Park as of the date of 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 5. EAST SHORE TRAIL AREA IN ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL 
                   PARK.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall establish within 
     the East Shore Trail Area in Rocky Mountain National Park an 
     alignment line for a trail, to be known as the ``East Shore 
     Trail'', to maximize the opportunity for sustained use of the 
     Trail without causing--
       (1) harm to affected resources; or
       (2) conflicts among users.
       (b) Boundaries.--
       (1) In general.--After establishing the alignment line for 
     the Trail under subsection (a), the Secretary shall--
       (A) identify the boundaries of the Trail, which shall not 
     extend more than 25 feet east of the alignment line or be 
     located within the wilderness area; and
       (B) modify the map of the Wilderness prepared under section 
     4(b)(1) so that the western boundary of the Wilderness is 50 
     feet east of the alignment line.
       (2) Adjustments.--To the extent necessary to protect 
     National Park System resources, the Secretary may adjust the 
     boundaries of the Trail, if the adjustment does not place any 
     portion of the Trail within the boundary of the Wilderness.
       (c) Inclusion in Wilderness.--On completion of the 
     construction of the Trail, as authorized by the Secretary--
       (1) any portion of the East Shore Trail Area that is not 
     traversed by the Trail, that is not west of the Trail, and 
     that is not within 50 feet of the centerline of the Trail 
     shall be--
       (A) included in the Wilderness; and
       (B) managed as part of the Wilderness in accordance with 
     section 4; and

[[Page 350]]

       (2) the Secretary shall modify the map and boundary 
     description of the wilderness prepared under section 4(b)(1) 
     to reflect the inclusion of the East Shore Trail Area land in 
     the Wilderness.
       (d) Effect.--Nothing in this section--
       (1) requires the construction of the Trail along the 
     alignment line established under subsection (a); or
       (2) limits the extent to which any otherwise applicable law 
     or policy applies to any decision with respect to the 
     construction of the Trail.
       (e) Relation to Land Outside Wilderness.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in this subsection, 
     nothing in this Act shall affect the management or use of any 
     land not included within the boundaries of the Wilderness or 
     the potential wilderness land.
       (2) Motorized vehicles and machinery.--No use of motorized 
     vehicles or other motorized machinery that was not permitted 
     on March 1, 2006, shall be allowed in the East Shore Trail 
     Area except as the Secretary determines to be necessary for 
     use in--
       (A) constructing the Trail, if the construction is 
     authorized by the Secretary; or
       (B) maintaining the Trail.
       (3) Management of land before inclusion.--Until the 
     Secretary authorizes the construction of the Trail and the 
     use of the Trail for non-motorized bicycles, the East Shore 
     Trail Area shall be managed--
       (A) to protect any wilderness characteristics of the East 
     Shore Trail Area; and
       (B) to maintain the suitability of the East Shore Trail 
     Area for inclusion in the Wilderness.

     SEC. 6. INDIAN PEAKS WILDERNESS AND ARAPAHO NATIONAL 
                   RECREATION AREA BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT.

       (a) Indian Peaks Wilderness Boundary Adjustment.--Section 
     3(a) of the Indian Peaks Wilderness Area, the Arapaho 
     National Recreation Area and the Oregon Islands Wilderness 
     Area Act (16 U.S.C. 1132 note; Public Law 95-450) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``seventy thousand acres'' and inserting 
     ``74,195 acres''; and
       (2) by striking ``dated July 1978'' and inserting ``dated 
     May 2007''.
       (b) Arapaho National Recreation Area Boundary Adjustment.--
     Section 4(a) of the Indian Peaks Wilderness Area, the Arapaho 
     National Recreation Area and the Oregon Islands Wilderness 
     Area Act (16 U.S.C. 460jj(a)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``thirty-six thousand two hundred thirty-
     five acres'' and inserting ``35,235 acres''; and
       (2) by striking ``dated July 1978'' and inserting ``dated 
     May 2007''.

     SEC. 7. AUTHORITY TO LEASE LEIFFER TRACT.

       (a) In General.--Section 3(k) of Public Law 91-383 (16 
     U.S.C. 1a-2(k)) shall apply to the parcel of land described 
     in subsection (b).
       (b) Description of the Land.--The parcel of land referred 
     to in subsection (a) is the parcel of land known as the 
     ``Leiffer tract'' that is--
       (1) located near the eastern boundary of Rocky Mountain 
     National Park in Larimer County, Colorado; and
       (2) administered by the National Park Service.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. NELSON of Florida:
  S.J. Res. 4. A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the 
Constitution of the United States to abolish the electoral college and 
to provide for the direct popular election of the President and Vice 
President of the United States; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, earlier today, the Congress met 
in a joint session, as it does every 4 years in early January, to 
conduct the official count of the electoral ballots from the States. 
Most Americans pay no attention to this ritual, believing that 
presidential elections in this country get decided on Election Day. But 
it is the votes of the Electoral College, presented by each State to 
the Congress, that determine who our next President and Vice President 
are going to be. We are the beacon of democracy in the world, and yet, 
voters in this country do not have the opportunity to elect their 
leaders directly.
  Today, I am introducing a constitutional amendment to abolish the 
Electoral College to allow direct election of the President by popular 
vote. If the principle of one person, one vote is to mean anything, it 
is that the candidate who wins a majority of the votes wins the 
Presidency, and votes for every candidate from every State should 
count.
  On only a few occasions in our history, the candidate who lost the 
popular vote won the Electoral College and became president. In 2000, 
George W. Bush actually lost the nationwide popular election to Al Gore 
by nearly 544,000 votes, yet won the presidency in a Supreme Court 
showdown over Florida's Electoral College votes that hinged on far 
fewer disputed State ballots. That dispute undermined Americans' 
confidence in our democracy and should not be allowed to happen again.
  In addition, the Electoral College skews the way candidates for 
president campaign, causing them to focus only on contested 
``battleground States''. As the Miami Herald recognized in an editorial 
published the day after the 2008 election, the Electoral College is a 
``horse-and-buggy-era political contraption,'' which effectively shuts 
out the majority of Americans--those who don't live in one of the key 
battleground States--from any meaningful participation in the selection 
of our President.
  A recently released study by FairVote, the Center for Voting and 
Democracy, documents just how lopsided the Electoral College has made 
presidential elections: more than 98 percent of all campaign events and 
more than 98 percent of all campaign spending occurred in 15 large and 
small battleground States representing 36.6 percent of the Nation's 
eligible voter population. Of the 300 campaign events by the major 
presidential candidates held between September 5 and November 4, 2008, 
fully 57 percent of these events took place in four States--Ohio, 
Florida, Pennsylvania, and Virginia--representing just 17 percent of 
the Nation's eligible voters. Voter turnout was 67 percent in the 15 
battleground States and only 61 percent in the remaining 35 States.
  The simple and straightforward constitutional amendment simply 
provides for the direct election of the President and Vice President, 
based on the national popular vote from the 50 States, the U.S. 
territories, and the District of Columbia.
  The proposed amendment also confirms--consistent with the vision of 
the Framers--that it is within Congress's power to set the time, place 
and manner--as well as other key criteria--for holding Federal 
elections. Unlike some proposed constitutional amendments that have 
been introduced in the past, my proposal does not delve into additional 
detail by specifying the qualifications for voters or by imposing a 
majority requirement for an election, leaving those issues for the 
Congress to address through the legislative process. Rather, the 
amendment keeps the focus where it belongs--on enshrining in our 
Constitution the principle of one person, one vote, in the election of 
our President.
  I first introduced this constitutional amendment during the previous 
Congress, as part of a broader package of reforms that also included 
measures to make it easier to vote, for example, by encouraging early 
voting or no-fault absentee voting; to ensure that there is a 
verifiable paper ballot so that every vote cast gets counted; and to 
allow voters, not party bosses, to select presidential candidates. I 
plan to file these other election reforms early in this Congress.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the joint 
resolution be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the joint resolution was 
ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:

                              S.J. Res. 4

       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 
     following article is proposed as an amendment to the 
     Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to 
     all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
     ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several 
     States within seven years after the date of its submission by 
     the Congress:

                              ``Article--

       ``Section 1. The President and Vice President shall be 
     jointly elected by the direct vote of the qualified electors 
     of the several States and territories and the District 
     constituting the seat of Government of the United States. The 
     electors in each State, territory, and the District 
     constituting the seat of Government of the United States 
     shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the 
     most numerous branch of the legislative body where they 
     reside.
       ``Section 2. Congress may determine the time, place, and 
     manner of holding the election, the entitlement to inclusion 
     on the ballot, and the manner in which the results of the 
     election shall be ascertained and declared.''.

[[Page 351]]



                          ____________________