[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 15]
[Senate]
[Pages 20931-20980]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. WYDEN:
  S. 1588. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
the same tax treatment for both commercial and noncommercial investors 
in oil and natural gas and related commodities, and for other purposes; 
to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, businesses like airlines, trucking 
companies, and heating oil distributors buy and sell oil and futures 
contracts because they need to do so to run their day-to-day business 
and hedge their risk against wild swings in oil prices like consumers 
saw last year.
  But there are also buyers and sellers in the market--financial 
speculators--who are simply there to try to make a quick dollar on oil 
as an investment strategy. The explosion of speculators into the 
marketplace has distorted the oil and gas market and driven up the 
price of oil for everybody. When commercial businesses see fuel prices 
go up, they try to consume less. But when speculators see prices go up, 
they buy more and keep driving up demand. This distorts the normal 
supply-demand balance of the markets and digs a huge financial hole for 
average Americans.
  In 2000, speculative trading in the oil futures markets accounted for 
37 percent of crude oil trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange. By 
last summer when prices were approaching $150 a barrel, that number had 
grown to more than 70 percent. I do not think that is a coincidence.
  There are a lot of proposals around to fix the regulatory system to 
prevent trading abuses. Oregon's economy really suffered from abusive 
energy trading by Enron, and I am all for closing trading loopholes. 
But my bill is aimed at something different. It is aimed at the giant 
financial bubble that has been created by people who are simply chasing 
speculative profits in the commodities markets and creating artificial 
demand that is driving up prices.
  The legislation I am introducing today--Stop Tax-breaks for Oil 
Profiteering, STOP, Act of 2009--will let some of the air out of this 
speculative balloon and help create a level playing field among 
companies participating in the commodity markets.
  Under the tax code, commercial traders, those who truly need to buy, 
sell and hedge their purchases of oil, pay taxes on whatever profits 
they make on trading at the same rates as ordinary income. Speculators 
get a much better deal from the TAX CODE. Some, such as pension funds 
or endowments, do not pay any tax whatsoever when they profit on their 
oil or futures investments. Others, like hedge or index funds can get 
lower tax rates by treating some of their trading profits as capital 
gains. Clearly, the deck is stacked against the businesses who really 
buy and use oil. That means it is also stacked against the consumer who 
needs the services and products those businesses provide.
  My proposal removes incentives in the tax code that make such 
investments attractive to both tax-exempt and tax-paying investors. It 
also makes everyone in the United States who is buying and selling oil 
and gas or futures contracts play by essentially the same tax rules 
across the board. Tax-paying entities would lose the ability to treat 
any of these investments as capital gains and be subject to comparable 
tax treatment on oil and gas investments as airlines or trucking 
companies or fuel distributors or other businesses that truly need to 
be in these markets.
  Tax-exempt entities, like pension funds, would be required to pay 
``unrelated-business-income-tax'' on their oil and gas trading gains. 
UBTI already exists as a well-established tax obligation for income 
that is not directly related to the tax exempt purpose of the 
organization. UBTI was created precisely to keep tax exempt 
organizations from competing unfairly with taxpaying businesses, which 
is what they are doing when they enter the commodity markets solely for 
investment income purposes. The bill also includes provisions that 
would prevent tax exempt organizations from investing in off-shore 
funds to try to avoid the new UBTI tax.
  By focusing on tax fairness, my bill would realign the profit 
incentives that are currently attracting non-commercial actors to the 
markets. If speculators are truly in the markets and are wreaking havoc 
with oil and gas prices, this bill will do away with their tax 
subsidies and cause many to leave. It deflates the speculative balloon 
of artificially inflated profits that has made this investment arena so 
attractive.
  If speculators are not a problem, then this bill will help prove the 
theory that the wild swings in oil prices of the past year truly can be 
blamed on supply and demand.
  The bill would only cover the oil and natural gas markets, and 
related products like gasoline and diesel fuel, and be in effect for 
the next 4 years. However, after 3 years, it would require the Treasury 
Department to issue a report analyzing the impact of these changes on 
these markets, making recommendations on what changes to make.
  Other proposals on oil speculation focus on regulation of the market 
or

[[Page 20932]]

limiting the amounts of oil traders could purchase. These approaches 
are ``top down'' efforts to prevent trading abuses and financial 
investors from swamping the market. This bill approaches the problem 
from the bottom line up. Willy Sutton, the bank robber was asked why he 
robbed banks, to which he is said to have replied, ``It's where the 
money is.'' That is why this bill focuses on the flow of financial 
investment funds into the oil and gas markets, it's where the 
speculation is.
  In these tough economic times, I believe consumers need protection 
from people who try to game the system to pad their own pockets. By 
putting an end to the imbalances in the tax code that currently feed 
oil profiteers, the STOP Act will be good for American businesses and 
consumers. I hope my colleagues will join me in protecting our economy 
and leveling the playing field in the oil and gas markets by voting in 
favor of the STOP Act.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 1588

       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 ``Stop Tax-breaks for Oil 
     Profiteering Act'' or the ``STOP Act''.

     SEC. 2. CAPITAL GAIN OR LOSS FROM SALE OR EXCHANGE OF OIL OR 
                   NATURAL GAS AND RELATED COMMODITIES TREATED AS 
                   SHORT-TERM CAPITAL GAIN OR LOSS.

       (a) Gain or Loss on Applicable Commodities.--
       (1) In general.--Part IV of subchapter P of chapter 1 of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to special rules 
     for determining capital gains and losses) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 1261. CAPITAL GAIN OR LOSS FROM SALE OR EXCHANGE OF 
                   OIL OR NATURAL GAS AND RELATED COMMODITIES 
                   TREATED AS SHORT-TERM CAPITAL GAIN OR LOSS.

       ``(a) General Rule.--If a taxpayer has gain or loss from 
     the sale or exchange of any applicable commodity which, 
     without regard to this section, would be treated as long-term 
     capital gain or loss, such gain or loss shall, 
     notwithstanding any other provision of this title, be treated 
     as short-term capital gain or loss.
       ``(b) Applicable Commodity.--For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) In general.--The term `applicable commodity' means--
       ``(A) oil or natural gas (or any primary product of oil or 
     natural gas) which is actively traded (within the meaning of 
     section 1092(d)(1)),
       ``(B) a specified index (within the meaning of section 
     1221(b)(1)(B)(ii)) a substantial portion of which is, as of 
     the date the taxpayer acquires its position with respect to 
     such specified index, based on 1 or more commodities 
     described in subparagraph (A),
       ``(C) any notional principal contract with respect to any 
     commodity described in subparagraph (A) or (B), and
       ``(D) any evidence of an interest in, or a derivative 
     instrument in, any commodity described in subparagraph (A), 
     (B), or (C), including any option, forward contract, futures 
     contract, short position, and any similar instrument in such 
     a commodity.
       ``(2) Exception for certain section 1256 contracts.--Such 
     term shall not include a section 1256 contract (as defined in 
     section 1256(b)) which is required to be marked to market 
     under section 1256(a).
       ``(c) Special Rule for Certain Partnership Interests.--For 
     purposes of this section, if a taxpayer recognizes gain or 
     loss on the sale or exchange of any interest in a 
     partnership, the portion of such gain or loss which is 
     attributable to unrecognized gain or loss with respect to 1 
     or more applicable commodities shall be treated as short-term 
     capital gain or loss. The preceding sentence shall not apply 
     if the taxpayer is otherwise required to treat such portion 
     of gain or loss as ordinary income or loss.
       ``(d) Application.--This section shall apply to any 
     applicable commodity acquired after August 31, 2009, and 
     before January 1, 2014.''.
       (2) Conforming amendments.--
       (A) Section 1222 of such Code is amended by striking the 
     last sentence thereof.
       (B) The table of sections for part IV of subchapter P of 
     chapter 1 of such Code is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``Sec. 1261. Capital gain or loss from sale or exchange of oil or 
              natural gas and related commodities treated as short-term 
              capital gain or loss.''.
       (b) Application to Section 1256 Contracts.--
       (1) In general.--Section 1256(f) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 (relating to special rules) is amended by adding 
     at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(6) Special rules for certain commodity contracts.--
       ``(A) All gain or loss from commodity contracts treated as 
     short-term gain or loss.--In the case of a section 1256 
     contract which is an applicable commodity, subsection (a)(3) 
     shall be applied to any gain or loss with respect to such 
     contract--
       ``(i) by substituting `100 percent' for `40 percent' in 
     subparagraph (A) thereof, and
       ``(ii) without regard to subparagraph (B) thereof.
       ``(B) Treatment of mixed straddles.--A taxpayer may not 
     make an election under subsection (d), or an election under 
     the regulations prescribed pursuant to section 1092(b)(2), 
     with respect to any mixed straddle if any position forming a 
     part of such straddle is a section 1256 contract which is an 
     applicable commodity. For purposes of this subparagraph, if 
     any section 1256 contract which is part of a straddle is an 
     applicable commodity, any other section 1256 contract which 
     is part of such straddle shall be treated as an applicable 
     commodity.
       ``(C) Applicable commodity.--For purposes of this 
     paragraph, the term `applicable commodity' has the meaning 
     given such term by section 1261(b), except that such section 
     shall be applied without regard to paragraph (2) thereof.
       ``(D) Application.--This paragraph shall apply to any 
     applicable commodity acquired after August 31, 2009, and 
     before January 1, 2014.''.
       (2) Special rule for loss carrybacks.--Section 1212(c) of 
     such Code (relating to carryback of losses from section 1256 
     contracts to offset prior gains from such contracts) is 
     amended by redesignating paragraph (7) as paragraph (8) and 
     by inserting after paragraph (6) the following new paragraph:
       ``(7) Special rule for losses all of which are treated as 
     short-term.--If any portion of the net section 1256 contracts 
     loss for any taxable year is attributable to a net loss from 
     contracts to which section 1256(f)(6) applies--
       ``(A) this subsection shall be applied first to such 
     portion of such net section 1256 contracts loss and then to 
     the remainder of such loss, and
       ``(B) in applying this subsection to such portion--
       ``(i) notwithstanding paragraph (1)(B), all of the loss 
     attributable to such portion and allowed as a carryback shall 
     be treated as a short-term capital loss, and
       ``(ii) notwithstanding paragraph (6)(A), all of the loss 
     attributable to such portion and allowed as a carryback shall 
     be treated for purposes of applying paragraph (6) as a short-
     term capital gain for the loss year.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to applicable commodities acquired after August 
     31, 2009, in taxable years ending after such date.

     SEC. 3. GAINS AND LOSSES FROM OIL AND NATURAL GAS AND RELATED 
                   COMMODITIES TREATED AS UNRELATED BUSINESS 
                   TAXABLE INCOME.

       (a) In General.--Section 512(b) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 (relating to modifications to unrelated business 
     taxable income) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(20) Treatment of gains or losses from commodities.--
       ``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding paragraph (5) or any 
     other provision of this part--
       ``(i) income, gain, or loss of an organization with respect 
     to any applicable commodity shall not be excluded but shall 
     be taken into account as income, gain, or loss from an 
     unrelated trade or business, and
       ``(ii) all deductions directly connected with such income 
     or gain shall be allowed.
       ``(B) Exception for ordinary income and losses.--
     Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to any income, gain, or loss 
     of an organization which, if not excluded under this title 
     and without regard to subparagraph (A), would be treated as 
     ordinary income or loss.
       ``(C) Look-thru in the case of foreign corporations.--
       ``(i) In general.--If an organization owns directly or 
     indirectly stock in a foreign corporation, the organization's 
     pro rata share of any income, gain, or loss of such 
     corporation (and any deductions directly connected with such 
     income or gain) with respect to 1 or more applicable 
     commodities shall be taken into account under subparagraph 
     (A) in the same manner as if such commodities were held 
     directly by the organization. Any such item shall be taken 
     into account for the taxable year of the organization in 
     which the item arises without regard to whether there was an 
     actual distribution to the organization with respect to the 
     item. For purposes of this clause, the rule under section 
     1261(c) shall apply in determining the income, gain, or loss 
     of the foreign corporation with respect to applicable 
     commodities.
       ``(ii) Sale of interests in corporation.--If a taxpayer 
     recognizes gain or loss on the sale or exchange of any share 
     of stock in a foreign corporation, the portion of such gain 
     or loss which is attributable to unrecognized gain or loss 
     with respect to 1 or more applicable commodities shall be 
     taken into account under subparagraph (A) in the same

[[Page 20933]]

     manner as if such commodities were sold or exchanged directly 
     by the organization.
       ``(iii) No double counting.--The Secretary shall prescribe 
     such rules as are necessary to ensure that any item of 
     income, gain, loss, or deduction described in clause (i) or 
     (ii) is taken into account only once for purposes of this 
     paragraph.
       ``(D) Applicable commodity.--For purposes of this 
     paragraph, the term `applicable commodity' has the meaning 
     given such term by section 1261(b), except that such section 
     shall be applied without regard to paragraph (2) thereof.
       ``(E) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe such 
     regulations as are necessary to carry out the provisions of 
     this paragraph, including regulations--
       ``(i) to prevent the avoidance of the purposes of this 
     paragraph through the use of pass-thru entities or tiered 
     structures, and
       ``(ii) to provide that this paragraph shall not apply to 
     ownership interests of organizations in foreign corporations 
     in cases where the income or gain of the foreign corporation 
     from any applicable commodity is otherwise subject to tax 
     imposed by this chapter.
       ``(F) Application.--This paragraph shall apply to any 
     applicable commodity acquired after August 31, 2009, and 
     before January 1, 2014.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall apply to applicable commodities acquired after August 
     31, 2009, in taxable years ending after such date.

     SEC. 4. STUDY OF TAX TREATMENT OF COMMODITIES AND SECTION 
                   1256 CONTRACTS.

       (a) Study.--The Secretary of the Treasury, or the 
     Secretary's delegate, shall conduct a study of the Federal 
     income tax treatment of section 1256 contracts under section 
     1256 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and of applicable 
     commodities under sections 1261, 1256(f)(6), and 512(b)(20) 
     of such Code. Such study shall include an analysis of--
       (1) the average annual number of sales or exchanges of such 
     contracts and commodities, including the number of sales and 
     exchanges involving organizations exempt from Federal income 
     taxation under such Code,
       (2) whether the amendments made by this Act have had any 
     effect on the number or type of such sales and exchanges,
       (3) the effect of tax policy on the operation of the 
     commodities exchanges and on the demand for, and price of, 
     commodities, particularly with respect to oil and natural 
     gas, and
       (4) such other matters with respect to such tax treatment 
     as the Secretary determines appropriate.
       (b) Report.--The Secretary shall, not later than January 1, 
     2012, report the results of the study conducted under 
     subsection (a) to the Committee on Finance of the Senate and 
     the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of 
     Representatives, together with such legislative 
     recommendations as the Secretary determines appropriate with 
     respect to the Federal income tax treatment of section 1256 
     contracts and applicable commodities.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. CANTWELL (for herself and Mr. Grassley):
  S. 1589. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify 
the incentives for the production of biodiesel; to the Committee on 
Finance.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my colleague, 
Senator Grassley, and introduce an important piece of legislation that 
will modernize the tax incentive for domestic biodiesel production. The 
Biodiesel Tax Incentive Reform and Extension Act of 2009 will provide 
predictability to investors, to producers, and to researchers so we can 
move forward and continue to displace imported fossil fuels with low 
carbon, renewable biodiesel that is produced here in the United States.
  Last year, we all saw the devastating effects that $140 per barrel 
oil had on our economy and our constituents. For economic reasons, 
national security reasons, and environmental reasons, we cannot allow 
ourselves to remain dependent on foreign oil. We have to redouble our 
efforts to deploy alternative fuels that can be produced in the United 
States and that can help us address the growing crisis of climate 
change.
  Biodiesel is a diesel replacement fuel that is produced from 
vegetable oils, animal fats and waste oils. It is refined to meet a 
commercial fuel specification that is readily accepted in the 
marketplace. Typically biodiesel is blended with conventional diesel 
fuel, and it is not necessary to modify a vehicle's engine to use the 
fuel.
  There are compelling public policy benefits associated with the 
production and use of biodiesel. It is an extremely efficient fuel that 
can be produced domestically so we do not have to rely on imported 
fuel. Biodiesel creates 3.2 units of energy for every unit of fuel that 
is required to produce the fuel and the 690 million gallons of 
biodiesel produced in the U.S. in 2008 displaced 38.1 million barrels 
of petroleum.
  Replacing fossil fuel use with biodiesel also can play a constructive 
role in addressing the issue of climate change. When compared to 
conventional diesel fuel, pure biodiesel reduces direct carbon 
lifecycle emissions by 78 percent, which in 2008 was the equivalent of 
removing 980,000 passenger vehicles from the road.
  Congress first enacted a tax incentive for biodiesel in 2004 and 
since that time, this tax credit has helped encourage the production 
and use of this alternative fuel. U.S. production of biodiesel 
increased from 25 million gallons in 2004 to 690 million gallons last 
year, and the industry has built the commercial scale production 
capacity. There currently are 176 plants in operation with the capacity 
to produce more than 2.61 billion gallons of biodiesel.
  The 39 new plants that are either under construction or being 
expanded would add nearly 849.9 million gallons of production capacity. 
We have to be sure these plans for expansion go forward. Unfortunately, 
limited access to capital, uncertainty surrounding the Federal 
commitment to biodiesel, and the current state of the economy threaten 
to undermine the progress the U.S. biodiesel industry has made to build 
the production capacity and infrastructure needed to aggressively 
displace petroleum diesel fuel with renewable, low-carbon biodiesel. 
Right now, less than one-third of the industry's facilities are 
currently producing fuel.
  The 51,893 jobs that are currently supported by the U.S. biodiesel 
industry show there is real job growth potential in this industry. Much 
of that job growth and economic activity will happen in our rural 
communities who continue to be hard hit right now.
  The current law tax credit will expire at the end of this year and 
Congress must act or we will threaten the future of this promising 
domestic industry. The National Biodiesel Board estimates that if 
Congress does not provide some predictability to the industry, U.S. 
production will likely fall from 690 million gallons in 2008 to 300-350 
million gallons in 2009. This could cost the U.S. economy more than 
29,000 jobs. These are not jobs we can afford to lose.
  In addition to the looming expiration, the current structure of the 
tax credit has administrative problems and is subject to abuse that 
makes it difficult to ensure that that only qualified fuel benefits 
from the incentive. We owe it to taxpayers to make sure that we are 
getting the results we want from the tax incentives we enact so in 
addition to extending the tax credit we need to make the structural 
changes that Sen. Grassley and I are proposing today.
  The centerpiece of the bill is changing the incentive from a blender 
credit to a production tax credit so that we focus the benefits of the 
incentive on building the domestic production industry. Under current 
law, the credit was targeted at the blending of biodiesel with 
petroleum diesel. While this was helpful in getting us to the point we 
are now, it is time we move even farther in the direction of promoting 
the production of petroleum fuel alternatives.
  In addition, the legislation we are introducing today will simplify 
administration of the incentive for both taxpayers and the Internal 
Revenue Service, IRS, and will eliminate any remaining opportunity for 
abuse of the tax credit through schemes like ``splash and dash'' in 
which oil companies add a few drops of biodiesel to their petroleum 
diesel just to qualify for the tax credits.
  Under our bill, the $1 per gallon tax credit will be provided for the 
production of biodiesel, renewable diesel and aviation jet fuel that 
complies with established fuel standards and Clean Air Act 
requirements.
  For small producers, those with an annual production capacity of less 
than 60 million gallons, we increase the $1 to $1.10 for the first 15 
million gallons of biodiesel produced.
  We simplify the definition of biodiesel so that we encourage 
production

[[Page 20934]]

 from any biomass-based feedstock or recycled oils and fats. Hopefully 
this will unleash even more research and commercialization of 
alternative fuel sources.
  The bill also simplifies the coordination between the income tax 
credit and the excise tax liability to, again, tighten up compliance 
and reduce administrative burdens on taxpayers. Most importantly, our 
bill would extend this tax credit for 5 years, giving needed financial 
predictability to the industry.
  I thank Senator Grassley for joining with me on this bill and look 
forward to working with our colleagues on the Finance Committee to 
adopt this worthwhile, commonsense proposal that is consistent with 
sound energy and sound tax policy.
  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. 1589

       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 ``Biodiesel Tax Incentive 
     Reform and Extension Act of 2009''.

     SEC. 2. REFORM OF BIODIESEL INCOME TAX INCENTIVES.

       (a) In General.--Section 40A of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986 is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 40A. BIODIESEL PRODUCTION.

       ``(a) In General.--For purposes of section 38, the 
     biodiesel fuels credit determined under this section for the 
     taxable year is $1.00 for each gallon of biodiesel produced 
     by the taxpayer which during the taxable year--
       ``(1) is sold by such producer to another person--
       ``(A) for use by such other person's trade or business 
     (other than casual off-farm production),
       ``(B) for use by such other person as a fuel in a trade or 
     business, or
       ``(C) who sells such biodiesel at retail to another person 
     and places such biodiesel in the fuel tank of such other 
     person, or
       ``(2) is used or sold by such producer for any purpose 
     described in paragraph (1).
       ``(b) Increased Credit for Small Producers.--
       ``(1) In general.--In the case of any eligible small 
     biodiesel producer, subsection (a) shall be applied by 
     increasing the dollar amount contained therein by 10 cents.
       ``(2) Limitation.--Paragraph (1) shall only apply with 
     respect to the first 15,000,000 gallons of biodiesel produced 
     by any eligible small biodiesel producer during any taxable 
     year.
       ``(c) Coordination With Credit Against Excise Tax.--The 
     amount of the credit determined under this section with 
     respect to any biodiesel shall be reduced to take into 
     account any benefit provided with respect to such biodiesel 
     solely by reason of the application of section 6426 or 
     6427(e).
       ``(d) Definitions and Special Rules.--For purposes of this 
     section--
       ``(1) Biodiesel.--The term `biodiesel' means liquid fuel 
     derived from biomass which meets--
       ``(A) the registration requirements for fuels and fuel 
     additives established by the Environmental Protection Agency 
     under section 211 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7545), and
       ``(B) the requirements of the American Society of Testing 
     and Materials D6751.

     Such term shall not include any liquid with respect to which 
     a credit may be determined under section 40.
       ``(2) Biodiesel not used for a qualified purpose.--If--
       ``(A) any credit was determined with respect to any 
     biodiesel under this section, and
       ``(B) any person does not use such biodiesel for the 
     purpose described in subsection (a),

     then there is hereby imposed on such person a tax equal to 
     the product of the rate applicable under subsection (a) and 
     the number of gallons of such biodiesel.
       ``(3) Pass-thru in the case of estates and trusts.--Under 
     regulations prescribed by the Secretary, rules similar to the 
     rules of subsection (d) of section 52 shall apply.
       ``(4) Limitation to biodiesel produced in the united 
     states.--No credit shall be determined under this section 
     with respect to any biodiesel unless such biodiesel is 
     produced in the United States from raw feedstock. For 
     purposes of this paragraph, the term `United States' includes 
     any possession of the United States.
       ``(5) Biodiesel transfers from an irs registered biodiesel 
     production facility to an irs registered terminal or 
     refinery.--The credit allowed under subsection (a) shall be 
     allowed to the terminal or refinery referred to in section 
     4081(a)(1)(B)(i) in instances where section 
     4081(a)(1)(B)(iii) is applicable. The credit allowed under 
     subsection (a) cannot be claimed by a terminal or refinery on 
     fuel upon which the credit was previously claimed by a 
     biodiesel producer.
       ``(e) Definitions and Special Rules for Small Biodiesel 
     Producers.--
       ``(1) Eligible small biodiesel producer.--The term 
     `eligible small biodiesel producer' means a person who at all 
     times during the taxable year has a productive capacity for 
     biodiesel not in excess of 60,000,000 gallons.
       ``(2) Aggregation rule.--For purposes of the 15,000,000 
     gallon limitation under subsection (b)(2) and the 60,000,000 
     gallon limitation under paragraph (1), all members of the 
     same controlled group of corporations (within the meaning of 
     section 267(f)) and all persons under common control (within 
     the meaning of section 52(b) but determined by treating an 
     interest of more than 50 percent as a controlling interest) 
     shall be treated as 1 person.
       ``(3) Partnership, s corporation, and other pass-thru 
     entities.--In the case of a partnership, trust, S 
     corporation, or other pass-thru entity, the limitations 
     contained in subsection (b)(2) and paragraph (1) shall be 
     applied at the entity level and at the partner or similar 
     level.
       ``(4) Allocation.--For purposes of this subsection, in the 
     case of a facility in which more than 1 person has an 
     interest, productive capacity shall be allocated among such 
     persons in such manner as the Secretary may prescribe.
       ``(5) Regulations.--The Secretary may prescribe such 
     regulations as may be necessary--
       ``(A) to prevent the credit provided for in subsection (b) 
     from directly or indirectly benefitting any person with a 
     direct or indirect productive capacity of more than 
     60,000,000 gallons of biodiesel during the taxable year, or
       ``(B) to prevent any person from directly or indirectly 
     benefitting with respect to more than 15,000,000 gallons 
     during the taxable year.
       ``(6) Allocation of small biodiesel credit to patrons of 
     cooperative.--
       ``(A) Election to allocate.--
       ``(i) In general.--In the case of a cooperative 
     organization described in section 1381(a), any portion of the 
     increase determined under subsection (b) for the taxable year 
     may, at the election of the organization, be apportioned pro 
     rata among patrons of the organization on the basis of the 
     quantity or value of business done with or for such patrons 
     for the taxable year.
       ``(ii) Form and effect of election.--An election under 
     clause (i) for any taxable year shall be made on a timely 
     filed return for such year. Such election, once made, shall 
     be irrevocable for such taxable year. Such election shall not 
     take effect unless the organization designates the 
     apportionment as such in a written notice mailed to its 
     patrons during the payment period described in section 
     1382(d).
       ``(B) Treatment of organizations and patrons.--
       ``(i) Organizations.--The amount of the credit not 
     apportioned to patrons pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall be 
     included in the amount determined under subsection (b) for 
     the taxable year of the organization.
       ``(ii) Patrons.--The amount of the credit apportioned to 
     patrons pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall be included in the 
     amount determined under such subsection for the first taxable 
     year of each patron ending on or after the last day of the 
     payment period (as defined in section 1382(d)) for the 
     taxable year of the organization or, if earlier, for the 
     taxable year of each patron ending on or after the date on 
     which the patron receives notice from the cooperative of the 
     apportionment.
       ``(iii) Special rules for decrease in credits for taxable 
     year.--If the amount of the credit of the organization 
     determined under such subsection for a taxable year is less 
     than the amount of such credit shown on the return of the 
     organization for such year, an amount equal to the excess 
     of--

       ``(I) such reduction, over
       ``(II) the amount not apportioned to such patrons under 
     subparagraph (A) for the taxable year, shall be treated as an 
     increase in tax imposed by this chapter on the organization.

     Such increase shall not be treated as tax imposed by this 
     chapter for purposes of determining the amount of any credit 
     under this chapter or for purposes of section 55.
       ``(f) Renewable Diesel.--For purposes of this title--
       ``(1) Treatment in the same manner as biodiesel.--Renewable 
     diesel shall be treated in the same manner as biodiesel.
       ``(2) Renewable diesel defined.--The term `renewable 
     diesel' means liquid fuel derived from biomass which meets--
       ``(A) the registration requirements for fuels and fuel 
     additives established by the Environmental Protection Agency 
     under section 211 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7545), and
       ``(B) the requirements of the American Society of Testing 
     and Materials D975 or D396, or other equivalent standard 
     approved by the Secretary.

     Such term shall not include any liquid with respect to which 
     a credit may be determined under section 40. Such term does 
     not include any fuel derived from coprocessing biomass with a 
     feedstock which is not biomass. For

[[Page 20935]]

     purposes of this paragraph, the term `biomass' has the 
     meaning given such term by section 45K(c)(3).
       ``(3) Certain aviation fuel.--Except as provided in the 
     last 3 sentences of paragraph (2), the term `renewable 
     diesel' shall include fuel derived from biomass which meets 
     the requirements of a Department of Defense specification for 
     military jet fuel or an American Society of Testing and 
     Materials specification for aviation turbine fuel.
       ``(g) Termination.--This section shall not apply to any 
     sale or use after December 31, 2014.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for subpart 
     D of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of such Code is 
     amended by striking the item relating to section 40A and 
     inserting the following new item:

``Sec. 40A. Biodiesel production.''.

       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to biodiesel sold or used after December 31, 
     2009.

     SEC. 3. REFORM OF BIODIESEL EXCISE TAX INCENTIVES.

       (a) In General.--Subsection (c) of section 6426 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as follows:
       ``(c) Biodiesel Credit.--
       ``(1) In general.--For purposes of this section, the 
     biodiesel credit is $1.00 for each gallon of biodiesel 
     produced by the taxpayer and which--
       ``(A) is sold by such producer to another person--
       ``(i) for use by such other person's trade or business 
     (other than casual off-farm production),
       ``(ii) for use by such other person as a fuel in a trade or 
     business, or
       ``(iii) who sells such biodiesel at retail to another 
     person and places such biodiesel in the fuel tank of such 
     other person, or
       ``(B) is used or sold by such producer for any purpose 
     described in subparagraph (A).
       ``(2) Definitions.--Any term used in this subsection which 
     is also used in section 40A shall have the meaning given such 
     term by section 40A.
       ``(3) Biodiesel transfers from an irs registered biodiesel 
     production facility to an irs registered terminal.--The 
     credit allowed under this subsection can be claimed by a 
     registered terminal or refinery in instances where section 
     4081(a)(1)(B)(iii) is applicable. The credit allowed under 
     this subsection cannot be claimed by a terminal or refinery 
     on fuel upon which the credit was previously claimed by a 
     biodiesel producer.
       ``(4) Termination.--This subsection shall not apply to any 
     sale, use, or removal for any period after December 31, 
     2014.''.
       (b) Payment of Credit.--Subsection (e) of section 6427 of 
     such Code is amended--
       (1) by striking ``or the biodiesel mixture credit'' in 
     paragraph (1),
       (2) by redesignating paragraphs (3) through (6) as 
     paragraphs (4) through (7), respectively, and by inserting 
     after paragraph (2) the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) Biodiesel credit.--If any person produces biodiesel 
     and sells or uses such biodiesel as provided in section 
     6426(c), the Secretary shall pay (without interest) to such 
     person an amount equal to the biodiesel credit with respect 
     to such biodiesel.'',
       (3) by striking ``paragraph (1) or (2)'' each place it 
     appears in paragraphs (4) and (6), as redesignated by 
     paragraph (2), and inserting ``paragraph (1), (2), or (3)'',
       (4) by striking ``alternative fuel'' each place it appears 
     in paragraphs (4) and (6), as redesignated by paragraph (2), 
     and inserting ``fuel'', and
       (5) by striking ``biodiesel mixture (as defined in section 
     6426(c)(3))'' in paragraph (7)(B), as so redesignated, and 
     inserting ``biodiesel (within the meaning of section 40A)''.
       (c) Exemption for Biodiesel Transferred From a Registered 
     Producer to a Registered Terminal.--Subparagraph (B) of 
     section 4081(a)(1) of such Code is amended--
       (1) by striking ``clause (ii)'' in clause (i) and inserting 
     ``clauses (ii) and (iii)'', and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new clause:
       ``(iii) Exemptions for biodiesel transferred from a 
     registered producer to a registered terminal.--The tax 
     imposed by this paragraph shall not apply to any removal or 
     entry of biodiesel (as defined in section 40A(d)(1)) 
     transferred in bulk (without regard to the manner of such 
     transfer) to a terminal or refinery if--

       ``(I) such biodiesel was produced by a person who is 
     registered under section 4101 as a producer of biodiesel and 
     who provides reporting under the ExStars fuel reporting 
     system of the Internal Revenue Service, and
       ``(II) the operator of such terminal or refinery is 
     registered under section 4101.''.

       (d) Producer Registration Requirement.--Subsection (a) of 
     section 6426 of such Code is amended by striking 
     ``subsections (d) and (e)'' in the flush sentence at the end 
     and inserting ``subsections (c), (d), and (e)''.
       (e) Recapture.--Subsection (f) of section 6426 of such Code 
     is amended to read as follows:
       ``(f) Recapture.--
       ``(1) Alcohol fuel mixtures.--If--
       ``(A) any credit was determined under this section with 
     respect to alcohol used in the production of any alcohol fuel 
     mixture, and
       ``(B) any person--
       ``(i) separates the alcohol from the mixture, or
       ``(ii) without separation, uses the mixture other than as a 
     fuel,

     then there is hereby imposed on such person a tax equal to 
     the product of the applicable amount and the number of 
     gallons of such alcohol.
       ``(2) Biodiesel.--If any credit was determined under this 
     section with respect to the production of any biodiesel and 
     any person does not use such biodiesel for a purpose 
     described in subsection (c)(1), then there is hereby imposed 
     on such person a tax equal to $1 for each gallon of such 
     biodiesel.
       ``(3) Applicable laws.--All provisions of law, including 
     penalties, shall, insofar as applicable and not inconsistent 
     with this section, apply in respect of any tax imposed under 
     paragraph (1) or (2) as if such tax were imposed by section 
     4081 and not by this section.''.
       (f) Clerical Amendment.--The heading of section 6426 of 
     such Code (and the item relating to such section in the table 
     of sections for subchapter B of chapter 65 of such Code) is 
     amended by striking ``alcohol fuel, biodiesel, and 
     alternative fuel mixtures'' and inserting ``alcohol fuel 
     mixtures, biodiesel production, and alternative fuel 
     mixtures''.
       (g) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to biodiesel sold or used after December 31, 
     2009.

     SEC. 4. BIODIESEL TREATED AS TAXABLE FUEL.

       (a) Biodiesel Treated as Taxable Fuel.--Clause (i) of 
     section 4083(a)(3)(A) of such Code is amended by inserting 
     ``, including biodiesel (as defined in section 6426(c)(3)),'' 
     after ``(other than gasoline)''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall apply to biodiesel removed, entered, or sold after the 
     date which is 6 months after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act.
                                 F_____
                                 
      By Mrs. MURRAY (for herself and Mr. Durbin):
  S. 1591. A bill to amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, to 
establish the Health Technology Program in the United States Agency for 
International Development to research and develop technologies to 
improve global health, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Foreign Relations.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, for a child in a developing country, very 
simple tools, like safe injection technologies for vaccination, can 
mean the difference between life and death. But the fact is that many 
countries are simply unable to afford such critical health 
technologies. Research has given us many promising early-stage 
technologies that could make a difference, but tragically, in many 
cases the promise of such technologies goes unrealized.
  I know that it is sometimes tempting to think of global health as a 
distant goal, far removed from the lives of everyday Americans. But, as 
the emergence of new pandemic threats such as H1N1 flu reminds us, 
global health is public health--and it affects Americans right here at 
home. It is impossible to pick up a paper today, watch TV, or use the 
internet without realizing that we are more connected than ever before 
to people around the world.
  As I speak with scientists and leaders in my State, they are excited 
about finding new ways to tackle tough global health problems. I hear 
the same enthusiasm when I speak with young people who are passionate 
about helping others. Of course, this growing support for global health 
can be seen not only in my home state, but throughout our country, in 
our universities and in community organizations. I know that many of my 
colleagues in the Senate are dedicated, tireless advocates for global 
health. Last year, the Congress demonstrated its strong commitment by 
reauthorizing the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, PEPFAR, a 
huge victory for global health and a strong foundation for future 
efforts.
  In May, President Obama announced a new, comprehensive global health 
strategy, renewing the longstanding U.S. commitment to global health 
and building on the successes of programs begun during the Bush 
administration like PEPFAR and the President's Malaria Initiative, 
programs that have saved countless lives. President Obama has called 
for us to continue these efforts and to focus on improving the health 
of mothers and children and strengthening health systems in developing 
countries.
  Developing countries urgently need technologies that will work for 
their health care systems, technologies that are easy-to-use, 
culturally appropriate, and above all affordable.
  Today I am introducing the 21st Century Global Health Technology Act 
to

[[Page 20936]]

support these goals by applying our country's traditional strengths in 
research, innovation, and entrepreneurship to global health. My bill 
will encourage the development of appropriate global health 
technologies by authorizing efforts at the US Agency for International 
Development, USAID, to make sure that promising health technologies are 
not left to sit on the shelf, but instead are developed and delivered 
to those in need.
  Developing global health technologies is not easy or glamorous and 
the financial incentives for business are few. But for many years, the 
USAID has supported global health technology development through an 
innovative model that encourages the public, non-profit, and private 
sectors to work together.
  I urge my colleagues to support this bill because the USAID has a 
long and inspiring track record of success in technology development. 
For example, the USAID's HealthTech program meets a wide range of needs 
from developing tools to rapidly diagnose infectious diseases to 
designing safe delivery kits that keep mothers and newborns healthy. 
Working with non-profit and commercial-sector partners, HealthTech has 
investigated over 100 technologies, licensed or transferred 21 life-
saving technologies designed for use in low-resource settings, and 
moved 10 technologies into global use.
  The HealthTech program helps the USAID leverage Federal money to 
encourage the private sector to become involved in the fight to improve 
global health. In an average year, HealthTech matches the USAID's 
funding with cash and in-kind contributions from the private sector. 
The average ratio of private sector investment to USAID funding in 
HealthTech-developed technologies that have reached commercialization 
is about 9 to 1. It's a win-win model that increases the number of 
affordable global health technologies and provides new opportunities 
for U.S. companies.
  Technology development at the USAID is a smart investment. However, 
the agency's technology development efforts currently are not 
authorized, so funding is often uncertain. That uncertainty prevents 
the USAID from pursuing many promising technologies. My bill will 
provide $5 million per year over 5 years to support technology 
development at the USAID--a small, but steady source of funding that 
will bring greater stability to technology development efforts and 
encourage more private sector partners to get involved.
  Investing in global health technology is the right thing for the 
U.S., for our companies, for our bright young people who are pursuing 
careers in global health, and for our security since our well-being is 
linked to our ability to prevent global pandemics and to reach out to 
people around the world. But, most importantly, investing in global 
health and in affordable health technologies will save millions of 
lives. It is simply the right thing to do.
  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. 1591

       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 ``21st Century Global Health 
     Technology Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The United States has committed to the United Nations 
     Millennium Development Goals of--
       (A) reducing child mortality;
       (B) improving maternal health; and
       (C) combating HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases.
       (2) The goals described in paragraph (1) cannot be reached 
     without health technologies and devices to diagnose 
     infectious diseases and reduce disease transmission.
       (3) The development, advancement, and introduction of 
     affordable and appropriate technologies are essential to 
     efforts by the United States to reduce deaths among the 
     world's most vulnerable populations, particularly children 
     and women in the developing world.
       (4) A recent report by the Institute of Medicine on the 
     commitment of the United States to global health--
       (A) recommends that United States institutions share 
     existing knowledge to address prevalent health problems in 
     low- and middle-income countries;
       (B) recommends continued support for partnerships between 
     the public and private sectors to develop and deliver health 
     products in low- and middle-income countries; and
       (C) urges the United States Government to continue its 
     support for innovative research models to address unmet 
     health needs in poor countries.
       (5) Investments by the United States in affordable, 
     appropriate health technologies, such as medical devices for 
     maternal and child care, vaccine delivery tools, safe 
     injection devices, diagnostic tests for infectious diseases, 
     and innovative disease prevention strategies--
       (A) reduce the risk of disease transmission; and
       (B) accelerate access to life-saving global health 
     interventions for the world's poor.
       (6) Through a cooperative agreement, known as the 
     Technologies for Health program (referred to in this section 
     as ``HealthTech''), USAID supports the development of 
     technologies that--
       (A) maximize the limited resources available for global 
     health; and
       (B) ensure that products and medicines developed for use in 
     low-resource settings reach the people that need such 
     products and medicines.
       (7) The HealthTech cooperative agreement--
       (A) facilitates public-private collaboration in the 
     development of global health technologies;
       (B) leverages public sector support for early stage 
     research and development of health technologies to encourage 
     private sector investment in late-stage technology 
     development and product introduction in developing countries;
       (C) benefits the United States economy by investing in the 
     growing United States global health technology sector, 
     which--
       (i) provides skilled jobs for American workers; and
       (ii) enhances United States competitiveness in the 
     increasingly technological and knowledge-based global 
     economy; and
       (D) enhances United States national security by--
       (i) reducing the risk of pandemic disease; and
       (ii) contributing to economic development and stability in 
     developing countries.

     SEC. 3. PURPOSE.

       The purpose of this Act is to authorize a health technology 
     development program that supports coordinated, long-term 
     research and development of appropriate global health 
     technologies--
       (1) to improve global health;
       (2) to reduce maternal and child mortality rates; and
       (3) to reverse the incidence of HIV/AIDS, malaria, and 
     other diseases.

     SEC. 4. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE HEALTH TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM.

       Section 107 the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 
     2151e) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Health Technology Program.--(1) There is established 
     in the United States Agency for International Development 
     (referred to in this section as `USAID') the Health 
     Technology Program, which shall--
       ``(A) coordinate and lead research and development efforts;
       ``(B) be funded by USAID on a competitive basis; and
       ``(C) serve as a national laboratory and technology 
     development program for global health.
       ``(2) The Health Technology Program shall develop, advance, 
     and introduce affordable, available, and appropriate 
     technologies specifically designed--
       ``(A) to improve the health and nutrition of developing 
     country populations;
       ``(B) to reduce maternal and child mortality; and
       ``(C) to improve the diagnosis, prevention and reduction of 
     disease, especially HIV/AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis, and 
     other major diseases.
       ``(3) The Health Technology Program shall be located at an 
     institution with a successful record of--
       ``(A) advancing the technologies described in paragraph 
     (2); and
       ``(B) integrating practical field experience into the 
     research and development process in order to introduce the 
     most appropriate technologies.
       ``(4) The Administrator of USAID, in collaboration with the 
     Health Technology Program, shall submit an annual report to 
     Congress and all relevant Federal agencies that describes--
       ``(A) the relevant activities of the Health Technology 
     Program that are in the incubation phase;
       ``(B) the progress made on such activities and on other 
     projects carried out through the Health Technology Program; 
     and
       ``(C) the outlook for future health technology efforts 
     evaluated by the Health Technology Program to have 
     significant growth potential.
       ``(5) There are authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 
     for each of the fiscal years

[[Page 20937]]

     2010 through 2014 to carry out the Health Technology Program 
     under this subsection.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE (for herself and Mr. Cardin):
  S. 1592. A bill to establish a Federal Board of Certification to 
enhance the transparency, credibility, and stability of financial 
markets, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, 
and Urban Affairs.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce legislation 
that will increase the trustworthiness of our Nation's mortgage 
security market by creating the Federal Board of Certification for 
mortgage securities. I would like to thank Senator Cardin for 
cosponsoring this vital measure.
  The necessity of enacting last fall's Troubled Asset Relief Program, 
along with the collapse of Lehman Brothers, and the bailouts of 
American International Group, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Bear 
Stearns, combined with the huge losses suffered throughout the 
financial industry, demonstrates a catastrophic failure to accurately 
assess the dangers of imprudently made subprime mortgages to the 
American public and our financial markets. In hindsight, it appears 
that it was the inability to gauge risk in mortgage-backed securities 
that caused much of this financial turmoil. For markets to operate 
properly, it is imperative that they have effective metrics for 
calculating the level of risk securities pose to investors.
  The secondary mortgage market has been a largely unregulated 
playground where poorly underwritten, low-quality loans were sold as 
high-quality investment products. Although mortgage-backed securities 
can be a positive market force, which increases the available pool of 
credit for borrowers, without an accurate picture of the risk involved 
in each mortgage security, buyers have no idea whether they are 
purchasing a high-risk investment or a safe, secure investment. The 
legislation that I am reintroducing today would work to curb the 
excesses of the secondary market, combat future attempts at deception, 
and protect investors by making scrutinized mortgage investments more 
reliable and trustworthy.
  The inability of major corporations to properly assess the risk of 
the mortgage securities they were trading is a problem whose effects 
have not been confined to Wall Street. To put it simply: when big banks 
sneeze, the rest of America gets a cold. This year, more than $1 
trillion of the subprime mortgages originated during the housing boom 
will reset to higher interest rates.
  In my home State of Maine, we are struggling with falling home prices 
and a record number of foreclosures. During the first half of 2009 
alone, there were 1,696 filings in Maine, a number putting the State on 
pace to surpass the 2,851 foreclosure filings registered in 2008. 
Moreover, some Maine borrowers, with rising monthly payments, are 
unable to refinance out of their predatory loans. Small business 
owners, many already hurt by the economic downturn, are also finding 
credit tight. Finally, despite gains in recent weeks, the poor economic 
climate caused by the subprime credit crunch has also roiled the stock 
market, causing Americans to lose billions in their IRAs and retirement 
funds.
  We must address crisis and make sure it never happens again. Turning 
to specifics, my bill creates the Federal Board of Certification, which 
would certify that the mortgages within a security instrument meet the 
underlying standards they claim in regards to documentation, loan to 
value ratios, debt service to income ratios, and borrowers' credit 
standards. The purpose of the certification process is to increase the 
transparency, predictability, and reliability of securitized mortgage 
products. Certification would aid in creating settled investor 
expectations and increase transparency by ensuring that the mortgages 
within a mortgage security conform to the claims made by the mortgage 
product's sellers.
  The proposed Federal Board of Certification would not override any 
current regulations and would not in any way stifle any attempts by 
private business to rate mortgage securities. This legislation would, 
however, create incentives for improving industry rating practices. 
Open publication of the Board's certification criteria would augment 
the efforts of private ratings agencies by providing incentives for 
increased transparency in the ratings process. The Board's 
certification would also serve as a check on the industry to ensure 
that ratings agencies carefully scrutinize the content of mortgage 
products before issuing evaluations of mortgage backed securities.
  Significantly, the Federal Board of Certification would also be 
voluntary and funded by an excise tax. Users could choose to pay the 
costs for the Board to rate their security, or they could elect not to 
submit their product to the Board.
  We must quickly restore confidence in mortgage securities if we are 
to stabilize our housing markets. To do so, we must certify the quality 
and content of our mortgage securities to enable housing markets to 
generate liquidity and spur lending. This is why it is urgent to create 
the Federal Board of Certification for mortgage securities. This 
legislation would create a ``good housekeeping seal of approval'' for 
the mortgage security industry and certify that the mortgage products 
are in fact what they claim to be. Accordingly, I call on Congress to 
take up and pass this commonsense legislation as expeditiously as 
possible, particularly as part of a comprehensive overhaul of our 
financial markets that Congress must consider in short order to ensure 
that the calamitous events of the past year are never again repeated.
  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. 1592

       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 ``Federal Board of 
     Certification Act of 2009''.

     SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

       It is the purpose of this Act to establish a Federal Board 
     of Certification, which shall certify that the mortgages 
     within a security instrument meet the underlying standards 
     they claim to meet with regards to mortgage characteristics 
     including but not limited to: documentation, loan to value 
     ratios, debt service to income ratios, and borrower credit 
     standards and geographic concentration. The purpose of this 
     certification process is to increase the transparency, 
     predictability and reliability of securitized mortgage 
     products.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       As used in this Act--
       (1) the term ``Board'' means the Federal Board of 
     Certification established under this Act;
       (2) the term ``mortgage security'' means an investment 
     instrument that represents ownership of an undivided interest 
     in a group of mortgages;
       (3) the term ``insured depository institution'' has the 
     same meaning as in section 3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance 
     Act (12 U.S.C. 1803); and
       (4) the term ``Federal financial institutions regulatory 
     agency'' has the same meaning as in section 1003 of the 
     Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council Act of 
     1978 (12 U.S.C. 3302).

     SEC. 4. VOLUNTARY PARTICIPATION.

       Market participants, including firms that package mortgage 
     loans into mortgage securities, may elect to have their 
     mortgage securities evaluated by the Board.

     SEC. 5. STANDARDS.

       The Board is authorized to promulgate regulations 
     establishing enumerated security standards which the Board 
     shall use to certify mortgage securities. The Board shall 
     promulgate standards which shall certify that the mortgages 
     within a security instrument meet the underlying standards 
     they claim to meet with regards to documentation, loan to 
     value ratios, debt service to income rations and borrower 
     credit standards. The standards should protect settled 
     investor expectations, and increase the transparency, 
     predictability and reliability of securitized mortgage 
     products.

     SEC. 6. COMPOSITION.

       (a) Establishment; Composition.--There is established the 
     Federal Board of Certification, which shall consist of--
       (1) the Comptroller of the Currency;
       (2) the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development;
       (3) a Governor of the Board of Governors of the Federal 
     Reserve System designated by the Chairman of the Board;
       (4) the Undersecretary of the Treasury for Domestic 
     Finance; and

[[Page 20938]]

       (5) the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
       (b) Chairperson.--The members of the Board shall select the 
     first chairperson of the Board. Thereafter the position of 
     chairperson shall rotate among the members of the Board.
       (c) Term of Office.--The term of each chairperson of the 
     Board shall be 2 years.
       (d) Designation of Officers and Employees.--The members of 
     the Board may, from time to time, designate other officers or 
     employees of their respective agencies to carry out their 
     duties on the Board.
       (e) Compensation and Expenses.--Each member of the Board 
     shall serve without additional compensation, but shall be 
     entitled to reasonable expenses incurred in carrying out 
     official duties as such a member.

     SEC. 7. EXPENSES.

       The costs and expenses of the Board, including the salaries 
     of its employees, shall be paid for by excise fees collected 
     from applicants for security certification from the Board, 
     according to fee scales set by the Board.

     SEC. 8. BOARD RESPONSIBILITIES.

       (a) Establishment of Principles and Standards.--The Board 
     shall establish, by rule, uniform principles and standards 
     and report forms for the regular examination of mortgage 
     securities.
       (b) Development of Uniform Reporting System.--The Board 
     shall develop uniform reporting systems for use by the Board 
     in ascertaining mortgage security risk. The Board shall 
     assess, and publicly publish, how it evaluates and certifies 
     the composition of mortgage securities.
       (c) Affect on Federal Regulatory Agency Research and 
     Development of New Financial Institutions Supervisory 
     Agencies.--Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit or 
     discourage Federal regulatory agency research and development 
     of new financial institutions supervisory methods and tools, 
     nor to preclude the field testing of any innovation devised 
     by any Federal regulatory agency.
       (d) Annual Report.--Not later than April 1 of each year, 
     the Board shall prepare and submit to Congress an annual 
     report covering its activities during the preceding year.
       (e) Reporting Schedule.--The Board shall determine whether 
     it wants to evaluate mortgage securities at issuance, on a 
     regular basis, or upon request.

     SEC. 9. BOARD AUTHORITY.

       (a) Authority of Chairperson.--The chairperson of the Board 
     is authorized to carry out and to delegate the authority to 
     carry out the internal administration of the Board, including 
     the appointment and supervision of employees and the 
     distribution of business among members, employees, and 
     administrative units.
       (b) Use of Personnel, Services, and Facilities of Federal 
     Financial Institutions Regulatory Agencies, and Federal 
     Reserve Banks.--In addition to any other authority conferred 
     upon it by this Act, in carrying out its functions under this 
     Act, the Board may utilize, with their consent and to the 
     extent practical, the personnel, services, and facilities of 
     the Federal financial institutions regulatory agencies, and 
     Federal Reserve banks, with or without reimbursement 
     therefor.
       (c) Compensation, Authority, and Duties of Officers and 
     Employees; Experts and Consultants.--The Board may--
       (1) subject to the provisions of title 5, United States 
     Code, relating to the competitive service, classification, 
     and General Schedule pay rates, appoint and fix the 
     compensation of such officers and employees as are necessary 
     to carry out the provisions of this Act, and to prescribe the 
     authority and duties of such officers and employees; and
       (2) obtain the services of such experts and consultants as 
     are necessary to carry out this Act.

     SEC. 10. BOARD ACCESS TO INFORMATION.

       For the purpose of carrying out this Act, the Board shall 
     have access to all books, accounts, records, reports, files, 
     memorandums, papers, things, and property belonging to or in 
     use by Federal financial institutions regulatory agencies, 
     including reports of examination of financial institutions, 
     their holding companies, or mortgage lending entities from 
     whatever source, together with work papers and correspondence 
     files related to such reports, whether or not a part of the 
     report, and all without any deletions.

     SEC. 11. REGULATORY REVIEW.

       (a) In General.--Not less frequently than once every 10 
     years, the Board shall conduct a review of all regulations 
     prescribed by the Board, in order to identify outdated or 
     otherwise unnecessary regulatory requirements imposed on 
     insured depository institutions.
       (b) Process.--In conducting the review under subsection 
     (a), the Board shall--
       (1) categorize the regulations described in subsection (a) 
     by type; and
       (2) at regular intervals, provide notice and solicit public 
     comment on a particular category or categories of 
     regulations, requesting commentators to identify areas of the 
     regulations that are outdated, unnecessary, or unduly 
     burdensome.
       (c) Complete Review.--The Board shall ensure that the 
     notice and comment period described in subsection (b)(2) is 
     conducted with respect to all regulations described in 
     subsection (a), not less frequently than once every 10 years.
       (d) Regulatory Response.--The Board shall--
       (1) publish in the Federal Register a summary of the 
     comments received under this section, identifying significant 
     issues raised and providing comment on such issues; and
       (2) eliminate unnecessary regulations to the extent that 
     such action is appropriate.
       (e) Report to Congress.--Not later than 30 days after 
     carrying out subsection (d)(1) of this section, the Board 
     shall submit to the Congress a report, which shall include a 
     summary of any significant issues raised by public comments 
     received by the Board under this section and the relative 
     merits of such issues.

     SEC. 12. LIABILITY.

       Any publication, transmission, or webpage containing an 
     advertisement for or invitation to buy a mortgage security 
     shall include the following notice, in conspicuous type: 
     ``Certification by the Federal Board of Certification can in 
     no way be considered a guarantee of the mortgage security. 
     Certification is merely a judgment by the Federal Board of 
     Certification of the degree of risk offered by the security 
     in question. The Federal Board of Certification is not liable 
     for any actions taken in reliance on such judgment of 
     risk.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. MERKLEY:
  S. 1595. A bill to amend the Truth in Lending Act to prohibit the 
distribution of any check or other negotiable instrument as part of a 
solicitation by a creditor for an extension of credit, to limit the 
liability of consumers in conjunction with such solicitations, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban 
Affairs.
  Mr. MERKLEY. Mr. President, in recent years, consumer credit has gone 
from providing convenience and short-term financing to a game of tricks 
and traps that strips families of hard earned resources and locks the 
middle class into a vicious cycle of debt. Today, I introduce 
legislation to end one of those deceptive practices--the unsolicited 
mailing of ``live'' loan checks.
  Deceptive loan checks have afflicted consumers, especially seniors, 
for far too long. In these schemes, financial institutions send 
unsuspecting customers checks made out to them for some amount. 
Customers often assume that their financial institutions have sent 
refunds or some other business-related sum and unknowingly deposit the 
checks. However, fine print on these checks actually makes them high-
cost loans.
  Bank regulators have failed for years to rein in these deceptive 
products. In Oregon, one of my elderly constituents--a veteran of the 
Korean war--ended up in a subprime mortgage because he unknowingly 
deposited a deceptive loan check that he never requested. Sadly, 
instead of being able to cancel the loan, he was pushed into rolling 
this unwanted loan into his mortgage, which was then transformed from a 
safe, fixed rate mortgage that had nearly been paid off, into a brand 
new, subprime mortgage. As this case shows, deceptive products and 
practices lead our consumers into dangerous, high cost debt. If 
individuals wish to take out high cost loans, they should have every 
right to do so, but financial institutions should make those 
transactions plain and straightforward, not tricky and deceptive.
  To address this situation, I am introducing the Deceptive Loan Check 
Elimination Act. Under the act, financial institutions would be 
prohibited from sending a ``live'' loan check unless the consumer 
requested such a check in writing. Consumers would not be liable for 
any debt incurred in violation of the act. This common sense solution 
protects consumers without constricting credit for those who want it. 
The legislation is endorsed by Consumer Action, Consumers Federation of 
America, Consumers Union, the National Consumer Law Center, on behalf 
of its low income clients, and the U.S. Public Interest Research Group.
  I am hopeful that the Senate will act quickly to address this 
problem. In addition, the next step in restoring a fair playing field 
for working families is to move ahead quickly to create the Consumer 
Financial Protection Agency, a body with the authority to review and 
regulate financial tricks and traps like ``live'' loan checks.

[[Page 20939]]

  I urge my colleagues to join me in this and future efforts to restore 
honesty and plain dealing to our consumer credit markets.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. BOXER:
  S. 1596. A bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to acquire 
the Gold Hill Ranch in Coloma, California; to the Committee on Energy 
and Natural Resources.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I rise to discuss the Gold Hill-Wakamatsu 
Preservation Act. This legislation would authorize the Bureau of Land 
Management to acquire and manage the Gold Hill Ranch near Coloma, 
California. This site was the location of the Wakamatsu Tea and Silk 
Colony from 1869 to 1871, recognized by the State of California and 
Japanese American Citizens League as the first Japanese settlement in 
the United States.
  After Commodore William Perry opened Japanese ports to U.S. trade, 
the weakness of Japan's shoguns was exposed, leading to a revolution 
and return to imperial rule under the Meiji emperor. In 1869, seven 
Japanese individuals and a European expatriate fled the turmoil in 
Japan and sailed across the Pacific to San Francisco aboard a side 
wheeler called the ``China.'' The group made their way eastwards and 
purchased land in Gold Hill. Within 2 years, the colony grew to 22 
Japanese settlers and began producing traditional Japanese crops such 
as tea, silk, rice, and bamboo. The Japanese colonists and surrounding 
community learned about each others' culture and agricultural 
techniques. Local and San Francisco newspapers wrote about the colony, 
and the settlers began to receive acceptance in American society.
  Unfortunately, the colony was short-lived--drought and financial 
problems forced the group to disperse and settle throughout California 
beginning in 1871. The Veerkamp family, which owned neighboring lands, 
purchased the property in 1875. Despite the short history of the 
colony, it was an important milestone that helped bridge Japanese and 
American cultures and paved the way for large-scale emigration of 
Japanese settlers to the United States. It also contributed to major 
Japanese influences on the agricultural economy of California.
  Many of the original structures on the site remain intact, including 
a farmhouse, the grave of a young girl named Okei, numerous artifacts, 
and agricultural plantings. Japanese-Americans and other visitors come 
to see the site and place offerings on Okei's grave. As a testament to 
the cultural exchanges that occurred at this site, the Gold Trail 
Middle School, located on an in-holding carved out of this site, now 
maintains an exchange program with a sister school in Wakamatsu, Japan. 
Governor Reagan recognized the property as a State historic site in 
1969, and the site is currently being considered for listing on the 
National Register of Historic Places.
  The 272-acre ranch encompassing the original colony site has been 
passed down for generations through the Veerkamp family. Thanks to the 
hard work of the American River Conservancy and Wakamatsu Gold Hill 
Colony Foundation as well as the generous accommodation of the Veerkamp 
family, the site has been preserved for visitors to come and learn 
about the history of the Wakamatsu colonists and Japanese-American 
culture. The site provides multiple other benefits, including wildlife 
habitat, open space with hiking trails and picnic areas, and grazing 
and pastureland. The family and non-profit partners agree that federal 
acquisition would help guarantee that the site's cultural history, 
agricultural character, and open space are permanently preserved for 
generations to come. The Bureau of Land Management is well-suited to 
manage this site since it has an excellent relationship with the local 
community and manages several other sites nearby.
  This project is supported by the Japanese American Citizens League, 
the National Japanese American Historical Society, the Consul General 
of Japan, the Governor of Fukishima Prefecture and the Mayor of 
Wakamatsu in Japan, People-to-People International, the El Dorado 
County Board of Supervisors, the El Dorado County Chamber of Commerce, 
numerous elected officials including Assemblyman Ted Gaines, who 
represents this district, and numerous other members of the local 
community.
  The significance of this site for Japanese Americans has been 
compared to the significance of the Mayflower journey and Plymouth Rock 
landing for European Americans. This site is testament to Japanese 
history, California's agricultural economy, and the American tradition 
of bringing together people of diverse cultures in the common pursuit 
of freedom and prosperity. I look forward to working with my Senate 
colleagues to move this legislation and preserve the story of the 
Wakamatsu colonists for future generations.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Mr. Chambliss, and Mr. Pryor):
  S. 1599. A bill to amend title 36, United States Code, to include in 
the Federal charter of the Reserve Officers Association leadership 
positions newly added in its constitution and bylaws; to the Committee 
on Armed Services.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, today, I am pleased to introduce the 
Reserve Officers Association Modernization Act of 2009. I want to thank 
Senators Chambliss and Pryor for joining me to introduce this 
legislation. As the cochairs of the United States Senate Reserve 
Caucus, Senators Chambliss and Pryor have worked hard for the brave men 
and women of the United States Reserves.
  Over the past decade, our country has relied on the National Guard 
and Reserves more than at any other time in recent history. The Guard 
and Reserves provide an invaluable contribution to our Nation's 
military, our national security, and disaster relief efforts. In recent 
years the National Guard and Reserves have demonstrated their position 
as a keystone to our military operations, particularly in Iraq and 
Afghanistan, and stepped forward repeatedly to answer the call-to-duty 
at a tempo not seen in decades. At the same time, the support from the 
Guard and Reserves for homeland duties has been at an all time high. 
The Guard and Reserves have provided crucial support to our Governors 
and States during natural disasters such as the aftermath of Hurricane 
Katrina. In addition, they have assumed additional roles in homeland 
security as our country has adopted new policies following the attacks 
of September 11, 2001. This new era for the Guard and Reserves prompted 
Congress and the Department of Defense to review many existing and but 
outdated policies.
  The 95-member U.S. Senate National Guard Caucus, which I cochair 
along with Senator Bond, plays an integral role in the review and 
implementation of new policies. I have worked closely with groups like 
the Reserve Officers Association, ROA, to ensure that the National 
Guard and Reserves have access to more affordable health care, a 
greater influence in the military, adequate training facilities and 
supplies, and shorter troop deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan.
  Since its founding in 1922, the ROA has worked on behalf of the 
National Guard and Reserves and their families. For over 85 years, ROA 
has remained committed to its original mission, to ``support and 
promote the development and execution of a military policy for the 
United States that will provide adequate National security.'' The 
Reserve Officers Association represents the Reserve Components officers 
for the Army, Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, the Air and 
Army National Guard, Public Health Service, and the officers of the 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
  This legislation would update the Reserve Officers Association's 
Federal Charter to reflect two recent changes in the organization. 
First, it would add the position of ``president elect'' to its 
constitution and bylaws. Second, it would expand the ROA from only 
three national executive committee members to include three 
representatives from each of the seven branches of the uniformed 
services. The Reserve Officers Association's charter has not been 
modified since 1998 and this legislation would update it to correctly 
reflect the

[[Page 20940]]

current operation of the organization and enable ROA to continue its 
good work.
  The Reserve Officers Association has provided a voice to the men and 
women that serve our country in the National Guard and Reserves. I urge 
Senators on both sides of the aisle to show their support for the brave 
members of the National Guard and Reserves by enacting this legislation 
swiftly.
  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. 1599

       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 ``Reserve Officers Association 
     Modernization Act of 2009''.

     SEC. 2. INCLUSION OF NEW LEADERSHIP POSITIONS IN THE FEDERAL 
                   CHARTER OF THE RESERVE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION.

       (a) National Executive Committee.--Section 190104(b)(2) of 
     title 36, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``the president elect,'' after ``the 
     president,'';
       (2) by inserting ``a minimum of'' before ``3 national 
     executive committee members,''; and
       (3) by striking ``except the executive director,'' and 
     inserting ``except the president elect and the executive 
     director,''.
       (b) Officers.--Section 190104(c) of such title is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) by inserting ``a president elect,'' after ``a 
     president,'';
       (B) by inserting ``a minimum of'' before ``3 national 
     executive committee members,'';
       (C) by striking ``a surgeon, a chaplain, a historian, a 
     public relations officer,''; and
       (D) by striking ``as decided at the national convention'' 
     and inserting ``specified in the constitution of the 
     corporation''; and
       (2) in paragraph (2)--
       (A) by inserting ``and take office'' after ``be elected'' ; 
     and
       (B) by striking ``and the national public relations 
     officer,'' and inserting ``the judge advocate, and any other 
     national officers specified in the constitution of the 
     corporation,''.
       (c) Vacancies.--Section 190104(d)(1) of such title is 
     amended by striking ``president and last past president,'' 
     and inserting ``president, president elect, and last past 
     president,''.
       (d) Records and Inspection.--Section 190109(a)(2) of such 
     title is amended by striking ``national council;'' and 
     inserting ``other national entities of the corporation;''.
                                 ______
                                 
      Mr. UDALL of Colorado:
  S. 1601. A bill to provide for the release of water from the 
marketable yield pool of water stored in the Ruedi Reservoir for the 
benefit of endangered fish habitat in the Colorado River, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, today I am introducing along 
with my friend and colleague, Senator Bennet, the Ruedi Reservoir Water 
Allocation for Recovery of Endangered Fish Act. This bill will help 
address endangered fish issues in the Colorado River on Colorado's 
western slope by allowing the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to release the 
remaining un-marketed water in Ruedi Reservoir for recovery purposes.
  The Ruedi Reservoir is a component of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, 
a U.S. Bureau of Reclamation project, located on the Fryingpan River in 
western Colorado. The primary purposes of Ruedi are to provide storage 
of replacement water that allows out-of-priority diversions by the 
project to Colorado's east slope, and to provide marketable water for 
Colorado's west slope uses. A little more than one-third of Ruedi's 
marketable yield is currently under contract with limited prospects for 
foreseeable future contracting.
  In 1999, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS, issued a 
programmatic biological opinion, PBO, for a critical reach of the 
Colorado River in Colorado related to recovery efforts for four fish 
species listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act, ESA. The 
PBO provides ESA compliance for five Reclamation projects: the 
Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, including Ruedi Reservoir, the Colorado-Big 
Thompson Project, the Colbran Project, the Grand Valley Project, and 
the Silt Project.
  The PBO also provides ESA compliance for all existing non-federal 
water projects and water users of the Colorado River upstream of the 
Gunnison River depleting approximately 1 million acre-feet per year and 
for 120,000 acre-feet per year of new depletions. As part of the PBO, 
Colorado water users agreed to provide 10,825 acre-feet per year for 
fish recovery from interim water sources until 2010, by which time 
permanent sources of water must be identified and agreements completed 
between water users and the FWS to provide the permanent source or 
sources of water.
  Water users have identified the required permanent sources of water 
for endangered fish. Half of the 10,825 acre-feet per year requirement 
will be met from converting a historical agricultural water right and 
half from uncontracted, unobligated Ruedi Reservoir water. Reclamation 
has initiated NEPA compliance on Federal actions related to providing 
10,825 acre-feet per year for endangered fish. This bill provides that 
the NEPA process be completed before authorizing Reclamation to apply 
the marketable yield to ESA benefits.
  In regards to costs, the reimbursable capital costs for the Ruedi 
Reservoir were assigned separately in the authorizing legislation to 
east and west slope beneficiaries of the project. The east slope's 
obligation of $7.6 million was assigned to Southeastern Colorado Water 
Conservancy District under a conventional Reclamation master contract 
for the 28,000 acre-feet replacement pool. The obligation to repay 
Ruedi Reservoir's $9.3 million cost was assigned to the marketable 
yield for the west slope's benefit, and this was to be re-paid by water 
contracts from this pool for west slope uses. There is no traditional, 
master contract with a west slope project ``sponsor'' for this portion 
of the project's cost recovery. A little more than one-third of the 
available marketable yield pool is currently under contract. Given that 
there are limited prospects for foreseeable future contracting, 
permanent assignment of 5,412.5 acre-feet of water for endangered fish 
recovery is prudent and appropriate.
  To effectuate this new arrangement, the bill would amend Public Law 
106-392 to permanently assign 5,412.5 acre-feet of water in Ruedi 
Reservoir from the west slope's marketable yield pool to endangered 
fish recovery and associated cost reallocation to non-reimbursable 
purposes. In so doing, the bill would accomplish a number of goals such 
as ensure continued ESA compliance for all east and west slope Colorado 
River main stem water users upstream of the Gunnison River, provide 
water from Ruedi Reservoir at affordable rates for potential future 
contracting, and provide consistency with long-standing Congressional 
policy and Reclamation law that water dedicated to fish and wildlife 
purposes from Reclamation projects is a non-reimbursable cost. The bill 
would also ensure compliance with Colorado law regarding the purposes 
of Ruedi Reservoir, namely that the marketable yield pool is available 
for the benefit of west slope water users by providing ESA compliance 
for uses of this water.
  As with most issues related to water in the west, and especially in 
Colorado, one facility like the Ruedi Reservoir can affect many 
interests and values. This bill would provide mutual benefits to water 
users throughout the Colorado River. It is an example where we can 
reach consensus to continue to provide needed water to communities 
while also preserving fish species.
  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. 1601

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

     SECTION 1. ENDANGERED FISH RECOVERY IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS.

       (a) Definitions.--Section 2 of Public Law 106-392 (114 
     Stat. 1602) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(11) Marketable yield pool.--The term `marketable yield 
     pool' means the portion of the regulatory capacity that, as 
     of the date of enactment of this paragraph, is dedicated to 
     marketing purposes.
       ``(12) Regulatory capacity.--The term `regulatory capacity' 
     has the meaning given

[[Page 20941]]

     the term in the publication entitled `Operating Principles, 
     Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, Adopted by the State of Colorado, 
     April 30, 1959 (as amended December 30, 1959, and December 9, 
     1960)', as printed as House Document No. 130 in accordance 
     with House Resolution 91, 87th Congress, agreed to March 15, 
     1961.
       ``(13) Ruedi reservoir.--The term `Ruedi Reservoir' means 
     the component of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project of the Bureau 
     of Land Management that is located--
       ``(A) on the Fryingpan River; and
       ``(B) in western Colorado.''.
       (b) Authorization to Fund Recovery Programs.--Section 3 of 
     Public Law 106-392 (114 Stat. 1603) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (e) through (h) as 
     subsections (f) through (i), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (d) the following:
       ``(e) Allocation of Ruedi Reservoir Marketable Yield 
     Pool.--
       ``(1) Release of water.--For fiscal year 2013, and each 
     fiscal year thereafter, at the request of the Director of the 
     United States Fish and Wildlife Service (referred to in this 
     subsection as the `Director'), 5,412.5 acre-feet of water 
     shall be released from the marketable yield pool of water 
     stored in the Ruedi Reservoir for the benefit of endangered 
     fish habitat in the Colorado River.
       ``(2) Timing of release.--To the maximum extent 
     practicable, and unless otherwise requested by the Director, 
     the release of water under paragraph (1) shall occur during 
     the late summer months to enhance low water flows in areas 
     that comprise the endangered fish habitat in the Colorado 
     River.
       ``(3) No requirement for contract or other agreement.--The 
     release of water under paragraph (1) may be carried out 
     without the formation or execution of any contract or other 
     agreement.
       ``(4) Reimbursement.--The capital, operational, 
     maintenance, and replacement costs that arise from the 
     release of water under paragraph (1) shall not be 
     reimbursable.
       ``(5) Effect.--The release of water under paragraph (1) 
     shall satisfy 50 percent of the obligation of certain water 
     users to provide 10,825 acre-feet of water, as described in 
     the document--
       ``(A) entitled `Final Programmatic Biological Opinion for 
     Bureau of Reclamation's Operations and Depletions, Other 
     Depletions, and Funding and Implementation of Recovery 
     Program Actions in the Upper Colorado River above the 
     Confluence with the Gunnison River'; and
       ``(B) published by the Director on December 20, 1999.
       ``(6) Effective date.--This subsection shall take effect on 
     the date on which the Secretary complies with the National 
     Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) 
     regarding the release of water under paragraph (1).''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. UDALL, of Colorado (for himself and Mr. Bennet):
  S. 1602. A bill to amend title 10, United States Code, to ensure that 
excess oil and gas lease revenues are distributed in accordance with 
the Mineral Leasing Act, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Armed Services.
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, today I am introducing a 
revised version of the Naval Oil Shale Reserve Mineral Royalty Revenue 
Allocation Act that I previously introduced on August 4, 2009. This 
bill is the same as the one I previously introduced, but it corrects an 
error regarding the allocation of outstanding mineral royalties to four 
counties in Colorado instead of two--those four counties being 
Garfield, Rio Blanco, Mesa and Moffat. This revised version also makes 
it clear that the mineral royalty allocated to these four counties 
would not affect the normal allocations to those counties under the 
``payment in lieu of taxes'' program. In all other respects, the bill 
and its purposes remain the same. It is a bill designed to release 
mineral royalty receipts to Colorado where the receipts were generated 
from gas development within this reserve on the western slope near 
Rifle, Colorado.
  By way of background, in 1997, Congress transferred the federal Naval 
Oil Shale Reserve lands in western Colorado from the U.S. Department of 
Energy, DOE, to the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, BLM, and directed 
the BLM to begin leasing the oil and gas resources under these lands. 
The Transfer Act also directed that the royalties recouped from this 
leasing program be set aside and the state portion not disbursed to 
Colorado until the Interior Department and the DOE certified that 
enough money from the royalty receipts accrued to satisfy two purposes.
  The first was to provide funding to clean up the Anvil Points site on 
these lands. Anvil Points was an oil shale research facility that 
operated within the Naval Oil Shale Reserve for about 40 years. The 
facility was operated by DOE at one point, and private industry 
performed research there under contract. Waste material was produced at 
this facility from oil shale mining and processing. That waste 
accumulated in a pile of about 300,000 cubic yards of spent oil shale 
and other material--including arsenic and other heavy metals--which 
rests on slopes below the facility.
  The second purpose was for the reimbursement of certain costs related 
to the transfer.
  Following the transfer to the BLM, this area experienced significant 
natural gas leasing and, as a result, significant royalty revenue was 
generated.
  On August 8, 2008, the DOI and DOE certified that adequate funds had 
accrued to accomplish the goals of cleanup and cost reimbursement and 
subsequently allocated all royalty revenue generated after this date 
according to the Mineral Leasing Act, which establishes that Colorado 
receive a proportionate share.
  However, considerably more revenue accrued than was necessary to 
accomplish the cleanup and cost reimbursement goals. This bill would 
direct that this additional royalty revenue be allocated to Colorado 
according to the formulas and processes established for the 
disbursement of federal mineral royalties under the Mineral Leasing 
Act.
  The bill also directs that the Colorado share of this remaining 
royalty revenue be allocated to the four Counties directly impacted by 
oil and gas leasing on the Naval Oil Shale Reserve lands--specifically, 
Garfield, Rio Blanco, Mesa, and Moffat Counties. Finally, this bill 
makes it clear that these royalty payments shall not affect the funds 
that these Counties normally receive under the ``payment in lieu of 
taxes''--or PILT--program.
  Based on figures provided by the BLM, there remains approximately $17 
million in these accounts for Colorado's royalty revenue share. This 
bill would make Colorado whole and provide it with its rightful share 
of the remaining royalty revenue to address critical local needs and 
impacts from the very leasing that produced the royalty revenue.
  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. 1602

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

     SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF OIL SHALE RESERVE RECEIPTS.

       Section 7439(f) of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3)(A) The moneys deposited in the Treasury under 
     paragraph (1) that exceed the amounts described in 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (2) shall be 
     transferred by the Secretary of the Treasury in accordance 
     with section 35 of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 191) to 
     the State of Colorado for use in accordance with subparagraph 
     (B).
       ``(B)(i) Of the amounts to be distributed under 
     subparagraph (A), the Secretary of the Treasury shall 
     transfer--
       ``(I) 40 percent to Garfield County, Colorado;
       ``(II) 40 percent to Rio Blanco County, Colorado;
       ``(III) 10 percent to Moffat County, Colorado; and
       ``(IV) 10 percent to Mesa County, Colorado.
       ``(ii) The amounts provided to the counties under clause 
     (i) shall be used by the counties, or any cities or political 
     subdivisions within the counties to which the funds are 
     transferred by the counties, to mitigate the effects of oil 
     and gas development activities within the affected counties, 
     cities, or political subdivisions.
       ``(iii) Amounts provided to the counties under clause (i) 
     shall not be considered for the purpose of calculating 
     payments for the counties under chapter 69 of title 31, 
     United States Code.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. WHITEHOUSE (for himself, Mr. Durbin, and Mr. Sessions):
  S. 1606. A bill to require foreign manufacturers of products imported 
into the United States to establish registered agents in the United 
States who

[[Page 20942]]

are authorized to accept service of process against such manufacturers, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. I rise to speak in support of the Foreign 
Manufacturers Legal Accountability Act of 2009, which I am introducing 
today with the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, Senator 
Sessions, and Senator Durbin. This bipartisan bill is an important step 
in protecting American consumers and businesses from injuries caused by 
defective products manufactured outside the United States. Those 
products hurt American consumers--they lead to serious injuries, and 
even death--and they hurt the American businesses that must deal with 
angry customers, product recalls, and unusable inventory.
  The list of recent examples of Americans injured by defective foreign 
products is shocking. Last year, a contaminated blood thinner from a 
foreign manufacturer caused severe medical reactions and contributed to 
numerous deaths. In 2006, a foreign-made, lead-tainted charm bracelet 
claimed the life of a 4-year-old. The autopsy demonstrated that the 
charm was 99 percent lead, 1,650 times more than the 0.06 percent lead 
limit specified in enforcement guidelines for children's jewelry. 
Imported food products from seafood to honey have been contaminated 
with unthinkable chemicals, including veterinary drugs banned in 
domestic production, potentially harmful antibiotics, and unapproved 
food additives. Sixty million packages of pet food contaminated with 
tainted wheat gluten have been recalled in the last two years. 
Substandard tires have failed, leading to fatalities. Most recently, 
defective drywall imported from China has been found to contain 
excessively high levels of sulfur, causing houses to smell like rotten 
eggs, corroding copper wiring, and making expensive appliances fail. 
Thousands of homes may be affected.
  At a hearing that I chaired in May, the Subcommittee on 
Administrative Oversight and the Courts explored the legal hurdles 
facing consumers who are injured by defective foreign products and by 
businesses that find that their foreign partners refuse to honor their 
contracts. These hurdles allow foreign manufacturers to continue to 
injure American businesses and consumers, and also put American 
manufacturers at a competitive disadvantage since they allow foreign 
manufacturers to offer cheaper products that do not comply with 
American safety requirements. Two major hurdles to proper 
accountability are the inability to serve process on the foreign 
manufacturer and the ability of that foreign manufacturer, even if 
served, to evade the jurisdiction of American courts. As the witnesses 
testified at the hearing, legislation that addresses these issues is 
necessary and appropriate. The Foreign Manufacturers Legal 
Accountability Act addresses both concerns.
  The first problem, the inability to serve process on a manufacturer, 
essentially means that it is difficult for an American to give a 
foreign manufacturer the documents necessary to give it the legally 
required notice that it is the subject of a lawsuit. This sounds like a 
simple step, and it should be. Unfortunately, however, it is very hard 
to serve process on foreign companies abroad. As witnesses explained at 
the hearing in May, service abroad is complicated by the Hague 
Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extra Judicial 
Documents in Civil and Commercial Matters, to which the United States 
is a signatory. Under that convention, a complaint must be translated 
into the foreign language, transmitted to the Central Authority in the 
foreign country, and then delivered according to the rules of service 
in the home country of the defendant. This can cause months and even 
years of delay, not to mention great expense for Americans.
  The Foreign Manufacturers Legal Accountability Act will allow 
Americans to overcome that procedural hurdle by serving legal papers 
inside the United States on registered agents of foreign manufacturers. 
The bill requires the heads of federal government agencies such as the 
Food and Drug Administration to pass regulations requiring that foreign 
manufacturers of products regulated by their agencies register an agent 
who will accept service of process. It allows regulators to exclude 
manufacturers who only import a minimal amount of products into the 
United States. It imposes a minimal burden on foreign manufacturers, 
since they would only have to appoint one agent to accept service of 
process for all state and federal regulatory and civil actions anywhere 
in the United States. The bill allows the manufacturer to choose any 
location for that agent with a ``substantial connection to the 
importation, distribution, or sale of the products of such foreign 
manufacturer or producer.'' This clear and straightforward system will 
allow Americans to commence their lawsuits fairly and promptly, and 
ensure that foreign manufacturers have proper and fair notice of the 
proceedings brought against them. It will not conflict with American 
obligations under the Hague convention, since that convention applies 
to service of process on foreign manufacturers in their home countries, 
not in the United States.
  The second hurdle, the inability to establish personal jurisdiction 
over foreign manufacturers, can end a lawsuit against a foreign 
manufacturer before it even begins. Think about how unfair this is. A 
foreign manufacturer sells its defective products in the United States, 
injures American consumers and businesses, and then argues that it is 
not subject to the courts in the state where the American was injured--
in legal parlance, that the courts do not have personal jurisdiction 
over it. As witnesses explained at the hearing, foreign manufacturers 
raise this technical legal defense to avoid liability even when serious 
injuries or even death have been caused by their products--their 
defective tires, fireworks, exercise equipment, bikes, and toys.
  The Foreign Manufacturers Legal Accountability Act will enable 
injured Americans to surmount this hurdle. It will make clear to 
foreign manufacturers that by importing their products into the United 
States and by registering an agent in the United States, they are 
consenting to the jurisdiction of the courts in the state where their 
agent is located. By consenting to jurisdiction, the manufacturers will 
avert unnecessary and expensive legislation about technical legal 
issues and allow courts to settle the merits of disputes. This approach 
is fair to foreign manufacturers since all American manufacturers are 
subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of at least one state. This 
bill therefore complies with the trade principle that we should not 
subject foreign manufacturers to burdens not already imposed on 
domestic manufacturers.
  Indeed, the Foreign Manufacturers Legal Accountability Act is 
ultimately about fairness. We all know American manufacturers comply 
with regulations that ensure the safety of American consumers and 
businesses. When they fail to do so, they must answer to regulators and 
are held accountable through the American tort system. Unfortunately, 
however, foreign manufacturers are not being held to the same 
standards--injuring American consumers and businesses, and putting 
American manufacturers at a competitive disadvantage. We must level the 
playing field for all manufacturers and provide justice for American 
consumers and businesses. The Foreign Manufacturers Legal 
Accountability Act will allow us to make a major step in that 
direction. It covers major product categories including consumer goods, 
drugs, cosmetics, and chemicals, and it requires relevant agencies to 
study workable approaches to ensure that foreign food producers also 
are brought within the ambit of the American legal system.
  Protecting Americans and holding foreign manufacturers accountable 
when their products harm American consumers and businesses is a 
bipartisan issue. Everyone agrees that we should do what we can to keep 
Americans safe from defective products. So too, I think, do we all 
agree that American companies should not be at a competitive 
disadvantage to their foreign counterparts. The Foreign Manufacturers 
Legal Accountability Act builds on

[[Page 20943]]

those fundamental agreements. I am grateful to my colleagues Senator 
Sessions and Senator Durbin for their hard work on this bill and look 
forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to see 
it passed into law.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, Senator Whitehouse's legislation would 
help American consumers bring civil claims against foreign 
manufacturers who produce faulty goods and send them into the U.S. 
market. Currently, it is nearly impossible for harmed American 
consumers to bring a tort action against foreign manufacturers of 
products that are flawed or even dangerous. Foreign manufacturers are 
often difficult to identify or locate and even if found, the process of 
seeking damages against them is extremely costly and burdensome. 
Without the threat of litigation, foreign manufacturers have little to 
no accountability to their American consumers, resulting in lower 
quality and often defective products. Furthermore, American companies 
who unknowingly buy shoddy products from foreign manufacturers and then 
resell them to consumers become the sole defendant in tort cases filed 
against them when foreign defendants cannot be located. According to 
the Consumer Product Safety Commission, Chinese manufacturers were 
responsible for 69 percent of all product recalls in 2007 and 53 
percent in 2008. These numbers demonstrate the need for Congress to 
take action to protect American consumers. Senator Whitehouse's 
proposal is a positive step in the right direction.
  I have witnessed the effects of this problem firsthand in my State. 
Mr. Chuck Stefan from Alabama testified before the Subcommittee on 
Administrative Oversight and the Courts, which Senator Whitehouse 
chairs and I serve as ranking member, about the hardships his business 
has faced in seeking damages against a foreign manufacturer. Mr. Stefan 
is a Senior Executive Vice President at the The Mitchell Company, a 
homebuilder in Alabama, Florida, and Mississippi. Forty-five of the 
houses he built have been identified as containing a defective type of 
Chinese sheetrock, which produces corrosive gases. These gases are not 
merely unpleasant. They damage the copper found in piping and wiring 
systems. When the problem was first discovered, The Mitchell Company 
could not even determine who manufactured the drywall as it was only 
stamped ``made in China.'' When the manufacturing parties were finally 
identified as both Chinese and German-based, it was a substantial and 
costly burden to serve them properly even though the companies had 
extensive operations in the United States. Mr. Stefan emphasized the 
fact that when foreign manufacturers cannot be held accountable, it 
hurts his company's bottom line and harms U.S. consumers.
  Stores such as Mr. Stefan's are becoming all too common and it is 
incumbent upon Congress to work towards ameliorating the burdens that 
U.S. businesses and consumers face when seeking damages against foreign 
manufacturers. This issue is one that affects consumers nationwide. I 
am grateful to Senator Whitehouse for taking the initiative to ensure 
that Congress does its part in solving this problem.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. CANTWELL (for herself, Mrs. Murray, Ms. Murkowski, and Mr. 
        Begich):
  S. 1609. A bill to authorize a single fisheries cooperative for the 
Bering Sea Aleutian Islands longline catcher processor subsector, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, today I introduce the Longline Catcher 
Processor Subsector Single Cooperative Act.
  In Washington State, our history is based on a rich maritime 
tradition that contributes billions of dollars to the state's economy 
each year. There are 3,000 vessels in Washington's fishing fleet that 
employ 10,000 fishermen. Seafood processors employ another 3,800 
Washingtonians. And fish wholesalers employ an additional 1,000 people.
  For many communities along this nation's coastlines, the economy 
literally ebbs and flows with the tide. It is important to remember 
that the ocean resources these communities depend on are a public trust 
and a resource to be both treasured and protected.
  As guardians of the ocean and its plentiful resources, it is 
necessary that we examine all issues of ``ownership'' with care, 
transparency, and fairness. The issue of fishery cooperatives has 
proved to be an issue that demands nothing less.
  In July of 2008, I chaired a hearing in the Commerce Committee's 
Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries and Coast Guard, 
examining the impact of fishery management regimes on fishing safety 
and conservation. Following that hearing and numerous meetings with 
stakeholders to discuss the policy, safety, economic, and environmental 
implications of fishing cooperatives, I am here today to introduce the 
Longline Catcher Processor Subsector Single Cooperative Act, 
legislation that would allow for the formation of a single fishing 
cooperative in the Pacific cod catcher processor fleet.
  Instead of fishermen racing against each other and the elements to 
catch as much as they can, this bill would allow the fishermen to bring 
some sanity back to their livelihoods. Under this legislation, the 
Pacific cod catcher processor fishery can allocate the catch among 
their members, putting an end to the very dangerous ``race for fish.''
  The cooperative would empower commercial fishermen with the framework 
and incentives to police themselves while still preserving the crucial 
regulatory and oversight responsibilities of the federal government and 
the North Pacific Fishery Management Council.
  By adopting this bill, we can improve fishing safety in the Pacific 
cod catcher processor fishery by putting an end to the ``race for 
fish.'' Doing so would lessen the fishery's environmental footprint, 
and give these fishermen the financial certainty that has worked for 
others across this Nation.
  Fishing safety is a real concern that must be addressed at the 
federal level. In 2006, the Coast Guard reported that in the decade 
from 1994 to 2004, 1,398 fishing vessels were lost tragic--reminders of 
what can go wrong at sea.
  Most of these fishing-related fatalities occur in the North Pacific, 
where the fishermen from my home state of Washington make their living. 
The difficult waters equate to the highest casualty rates in the 
nation, and highest rates of fatality and injury among fisherman.
  But the North Pacific's rough waters are not the only factor these 
fishermen have to cope with.
  It is a tough business--tough for those who work the boats and those 
who make the business-end decisions. It's a business that is driven by 
incentives and dangerous conditions that work in tandem to place 
countless numbers of fishermen at risk.
  When things go wrong, it is usually because of failures at multiple 
levels. You see, it's not always about vessels. Nor is it all about 
inspections, safety equipment, or training. Fishing safety is closely 
related to how fisheries are managed and the very foundation fishing 
has come to be built upon: competition.
  Without legislation such as this, the fisheries will continue to 
operate on a foundation of destructive competition, or a ``race for 
fish.'' And this race for fish is a very dangerous race.
  According to Lieutenant Christopher Woodley, the former fishing 
Vessel Safety Coordinator of the 13th U.S. Coast Guard District based 
in Seattle:

       This race encourages fishermen to operate in all weather 
     and sea conditions, to operate without rest, and encourages 
     risk-taking behaviors.

  But we can change that.
  By instituting a cooperative style of fishery management through this 
legislation, we dramatically change the incentives. And by changing the 
incentives to put a new premium on safety, we can change the way people 
fish and hopefully prevent future tragedies at sea.
  Safety is not the only goal of this legislation. This legislation 
aims to make environmental and economic improvements to the process of 
fishing.

[[Page 20944]]

  By eliminating the ``race for fish,'' as I mentioned before, we 
effectively slow the pace of fishing meaning commercial fishermen can 
optimize onboard processing facilities. The result is an increase in 
the product recovery rate per pound of fish caught, meaning they can 
use more parts of the fish and make wiser and more efficient use of our 
precious ocean resources. A slower pace also decreases bycatch and 
promotes ownership of the fishery, which will facilitate a conservation 
mindset in the fishermen.
  We have once again shifted the incentive from reckless speed to doing 
things slower, better, smarter, and more environmentally conscious.
  Furthermore, the Longline Catcher Processor Subsector Fisheries 
Cooperative Act means greater job stability for the Pacific cod freezer 
longliner fleet's workers.
  When fishermen no longer race, the fishing season lasts longer. This 
means more stability and predictability for crew members, and 
eliminates the boom and bust cycle that often prevails today.
  I want to be clear that this bill is not yet a finished product. I 
welcome comments, suggestions, and criticisms to help make this bill 
good public policy for everyone involved.
  As we discuss issues like safety of our fisherman and environmental 
implications to our oceans, it's imperative that we commit to an open 
and transparent process that shines the light of accountability.
  Both in fisheries management, fishing safety, and those areas where 
the two intersect, transparency must be the rule.
  We owe it to our coastal communities, our fisherman, and the American 
public collectively as stewards of one of our greatest public 
resources--our oceans.
  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. 1609

       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 ``Longline Catcher Processor 
     Subsector Single Fishery Cooperative Act''.

     SEC. 2. AUTHORITY TO APPROVE AND IMPLEMENT A SINGLE FISHERY 
                   COOPERATIVE FOR THE LONGLINE CATCHER PROCESSOR 
                   SUBSECTOR IN THE BSAI.

       (a) In General.--Upon the request of eligible members of 
     the longline catcher processor subsector holding at least 80 
     percent of the licenses issued for that subsector, the 
     Secretary is authorized to approve a single fishery 
     cooperative for the longline catcher processor subsector in 
     the BSAI.
       (b) Limitation.--A single fishery cooperative approved 
     under this section shall include a limitation prohibiting any 
     eligible member from harvesting a total of more than 20 
     percent of the Pacific cod available to be harvested in the 
     longline catcher processor subsector, the violation of which 
     is subject to the penalties, sanctions, and forfeitures under 
     section 308 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1858), 
     except that such limitation shall not apply to harvest 
     amounts from quota assigned explicitly to a CDQ group as part 
     of a CDQ allocation to an entity established by section 
     305(i) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1855(i)).
       (c) Contract Submission and Review.--The longline catcher 
     processor subsector shall submit to the Secretary--
       (1) not later than November 1 of each year, a contract to 
     implement a single fishery cooperative approved under this 
     section for the following calendar year; and
       (2) not later than 60 days prior to the commencement of 
     fishing under the single fishery cooperative, any interim 
     modifications to the contract submitted under paragraph (1).
       (d) Department of Justice Review.--Not later than November 
     1 before the first year of fishing under a single fishery 
     cooperative approved under this section, the longline catcher 
     processor sector shall submit to the Secretary a copy of a 
     letter from a party to the contract under subsection (c)(1) 
     requesting a business review letter from the Attorney General 
     and any response to such request.
       (e) Implementation.--The Secretary shall implement a single 
     fishery cooperative approved under this section not later 
     than 2 years after receiving a request under subsection (a).
       (f) Status Quo Fishery.--If the longline catcher processor 
     subsector does not submit a contract to the Secretary under 
     subsection (c) then the longline catcher processor subsector 
     in the BSAI shall operate as a limited access fishery for the 
     following year subject to the license limitation program in 
     effect for the longline catcher processor subsector on the 
     date of enactment of this Act or any subsequent modifications 
     to the license limitation program recommended by the Council 
     and approved by the Secretary.

     SEC. 3. HARVEST AND PROHIBITED SPECIES ALLOCATIONS TO A 
                   SINGLE FISHERY COOPERATIVE FOR THE LONGLINE 
                   CATCHER PROCESSOR SUBSECTOR IN THE BSAI.

       A single fishery cooperative approved under section 2 may, 
     on an annual basis, collectively--
       (1) harvest the total amount of BSAI Pacific cod total 
     allowable catch, less any amount allocated to the longline 
     catcher processor subsector non-cooperative limited access 
     fishery;
       (2) utilize the total amount of BSAI Pacific cod prohibited 
     species catch allocation, less any amount allocated to a 
     longline catcher processor subsector non-cooperative limited 
     access fishery; and
       (3) harvest any reallocation of Pacific cod to the longline 
     catcher processor subsector during a fishing year by the 
     Secretary.

     SEC. 4. LONGLINE CATCHER PROCESSOR SUBSECTOR NON-COOPERATIVE 
                   LIMITED ACCESS FISHERY.

       (a) In General.--An eligible member that elects not to 
     participate in a single fishery cooperative approved under 
     section 2 shall operate in a non-cooperative limited access 
     fishery subject to the license limitation program in effect 
     for the longline catcher processor subsector on the date of 
     enactment of this Act or any subsequent modifications to the 
     license limitation program recommended by the Council and 
     approved by the Secretary.
       (b) Harvest and Prohibited Species Allocations.--Eligible 
     members operating in a non-cooperative limited access fishery 
     under this section may collectively--
       (1) harvest the percentage of BSAI Pacific cod total 
     allowable catch equal to the combined average percentage of 
     the BSAI Pacific cod harvest allocated to the longline 
     catcher processor sector and retained by the vessel or 
     vessels designated on the eligible members license limitation 
     program license or licenses for 2006, 2007, and 2008, 
     according to the catch accounting system data used to 
     establish total catch; and
       (2) utilize the percentage of BSAI Pacific cod prohibited 
     species catch allocation equal to the percentage calculated 
     under paragraph (1).

     SEC. 5. AUTHORITY OF THE NORTH PACIFIC FISHERY MANAGEMENT 
                   COUNCIL.

       (a) In General.--Nothing in this Act shall supersede the 
     authority of the Council to recommend for approval by the 
     Secretary such conservation and management measures, in 
     accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et 
     seq.) as it considers necessary to ensure that this Act does 
     not diminish the effectiveness of fishery management in the 
     BSAI or the Gulf of Alaska Pacific cod fishery.
       (b) Limitations.--
       (1) Notwithstanding the authority provided to the Council 
     under this section, the Council is prohibited from altering 
     or otherwise modifying--
       (A) the methodology established under section 3 for 
     allocating the BSAI Pacific cod total allowable catch and 
     BSAI Pacific cod prohibited species catch allocation to a 
     single fishery cooperative approved under this Act; or
       (B) the methodology established under section 4 of this Act 
     for allocating the BSAI Pacific cod total allowable catch and 
     BSAI Pacific cod prohibited species catch allocation to the 
     non-cooperative limited access fishery.
       (2) No sooner than 7 years after approval of a single 
     fisheries cooperative under section 2 of this Act, the 
     Council may modify the harvest limitation established under 
     section 2(b) if such modification does not negatively impact 
     any eligible member of the longline catcher processor 
     subsector.
       (c) Protections for the Gulf of Alaska Pacific Cod 
     Fishery.--The Council may recommend for approval by the 
     Secretary such harvest limitations of Pacific cod by the 
     longline catcher processor subsector in the Western Gulf of 
     Alaska and the Central Gulf of Alaska as may be necessary to 
     protect coastal communities and other Gulf of Alaska 
     participants from potential competitive advantages provided 
     to the longline catcher processor subsector by this Act.

     SEC. 6. RELATIONSHIP TO THE MAGNUSON-STEVENS ACT.

       (a) In General.--Consistent with section 301(a) of the 
     Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1851(a)), a single fishery 
     cooperative approved under section 2 of this Act is intended 
     to enhance conservation and sustainable fishery management, 
     reduce and minimize bycatch, promote social and economic 
     benefits, and improve the vessel safety of the longline 
     catcher processor subsector in the BSAI.
       (b) Transition Rule.--A single fishery cooperative approved 
     under section 2 of this Act is deemed to meet the 
     requirements of section 303A(i) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act 
     (16 U.S.C. 1853a(i)) as if it had been approved

[[Page 20945]]

     by the Secretary within 6 months after the date of enactment 
     of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management 
     Reauthorization Act of 2006, unless the Secretary makes a 
     determination, within 30 days after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, that application of section 303A(i) of the 
     Magnuson-Stevens Act to the cooperative approved under 
     section 2 of this Act would be inconsistent with the purposes 
     for which section 303A was added to the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
       (c) Cost Recovery.--Consistent with section 304(d)(2) of 
     the Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1854(d)(2)), the 
     Secretary is authorized to recover reasonable costs to 
     administer a single fishery cooperative approved under 
     section 2 of this Act.

     SEC. 7. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT QUOTA PROGRAM.

       Nothing in this Act shall affect the western Alaska 
     community development program established by section 305(i) 
     of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1855(i)), including 
     the allocation of fishery resources in the directed Pacific 
     cod fishery.

     SEC. 8. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) BSAI.--The term ``BSAI'' has the meaning given that 
     term in section 219(a)(2) of the Department of Commerce and 
     Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2005 (Public Law 108-
     447; 118 Stat. 2886).
       (2) BSAI pacific cod total allowable catch.--The term 
     ``BSAI Pacific cod total allowable catch'' means the Pacific 
     cod total allowable catch for the directed longline catcher 
     processor subsector in the BSAI as established on an annual 
     basis by the Council and approved by the Secretary.
       (3) BSAI pacific cod prohibited species catch allocation.--
     The term ``BSAI Pacific cod prohibited species catch 
     allocation'' means the prohibited species catch allocation 
     for the directed longline catcher processor subsector in the 
     BSAI as established on an annual basis by the Council and 
     approved by the Secretary.
       (4) Council.--The term ``Council'' means the North Pacific 
     Fishery Management Council established under section 
     302(a)(1)(G) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 
     1852(a)(1)(G)).
       (5) Eligible member.--The term ``eligible member'' means a 
     holder of a license limitation program license, or licenses, 
     eligible to participate in the longline catcher processor 
     subsector.
       (6) Gulf of Alaska.--The term ``Gulf of Alaska'' means that 
     portion of the Exclusive Economic Zone contained in 
     Statistical Areas 610, 620, and 630.
       (7) Longline catcher processor subsector.--The term 
     ``longline catcher processor subsector'' has the meaning 
     given that term in section 219(a)(6) of the Department of 
     Commerce and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2005 
     (Public Law 108-447; 118 Stat. 2886).
       (8) Magnuson-Stevens Act.--The term ``Magnuson-Stevens 
     Act'' means the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and 
     Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.).
       (9) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Commerce.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. CANTWELL (for herself, Mr. Vitter, Ms. Landrieu, Mrs. 
        Murray, and Mr. Martinez):
  S. 1610. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal 
the shipping investment withdrawal rules in section 955 and to provide 
an incentive to reinvest foreign shipping earnings in the United 
States; to the Committee on Finance.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my colleagues 
Senators Vitter, Landrieu, Murray, and Martinez and introduce the 
American Shipping Reinvestment Act of 2009. This legislation will build 
on work Congress started in 2004 to strengthen the U.S. merchant 
marine, create needed jobs in U.S. ship building, and stimulate 
economic activity in our maritime sector.
  Since our Nation's founding, the maritime sector has been integral to 
U.S. national security and economic security. American companies own 
and operate both U.S. flag ships and a significant number of vessels 
under international registries. The U.S. flag fleets of these companies 
generally are built in the United States and are manned with U.S. 
seafarers. These U.S. flag fleets support not only the shipbuilding 
industrial base in this country and the pool of qualified seafarers, 
but they also create the shipping assets that are needed for military 
sealift in time of war or national emergency.
  Most people understand commercial shipping and understand that we 
maintain a fleet of ships for military purposes. What may not be as 
well known is that the international ships of some American-owned 
companies are part of what is called the effective U.S.-controlled 
fleet, EUSC fleet. The EUSC is the fleet of merchant vessels registered 
in certain foreign nations that are available for requisition, use, or 
charter by the U.S. Government in the event of war or national 
emergency.
  For example, U.S. flag commercial vessels and their American crews 
transported the majority of the cargo--more than 25 million measurement 
tons of cargo--in support of Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi 
Freedom during the period of 2002-2008.
  What people also may not know is that the EUSC fleet has been in 
decline for the past quarter century, largely because of U.S. tax 
policy. Following enactment of certain 1986 tax law changes, there was 
a precipitous decline in American-owned international shipping. To 
remain competitive, many American-owned shipping companies either 
became foreign companies or simply divested themselves of their foreign 
assets.
  A 2002 study commissioned by the Department of Defense and performed 
by professors at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that 
the EUSC fleet dropped by 38 percent in terms of numbers of ships and 
nearly 55 percent in terms of deadweight tonnage between 1986 and 2000. 
Perhaps more importantly, these declines have been largely experienced 
in militarily-useful vessel types. For example, the results of a 2002 
DOD study found that if the EUSC fleet continues its present decline, 
DOD's ability to support U.S. military tanker requirements will 
diminish over time.
  Fortunately, Congress recognized this problem in 2004 and addressed 
it by enacting the tonnage tax regime as part of the American Jobs 
Creation Act. Our legislation today builds on that policy by correcting 
an oversight in the 2004 act that has continued to stymie the ability 
of U.S. shipbuilding companies to invest in new ships in the United 
States.
  We have very strong economic and national security reasons to support 
U.S. owned shipowning companies and to maintain a vibrant maritime 
industry in this country. We also have to continue to support needed 
changes in our tax code so that we provide operators of U.S. flag 
vessels in international trade the opportunity to be competitive with 
their tax-advantaged foreign competitors.
  Notwithstanding the significant competitive disadvantages between 
1986 and 2004 for American companies operating international ships, 
there continues to be several U.S. owned shipping companies with 
foreign operations, and our legislation is directed as helping them 
sustain and grow their U.S. flag fleets and to maintain their EUSC 
fleets. This bill will help these companies make needed investment in 
the U.S. economy, and create jobs in a way that also will enhance 
national security.
  Specifically, The American Shipping Reinvestment Act of 2009 would 
repeal an outdated section of the Internal Revenue Code and allow U.S. 
shipping companies with foreign income earned prior to 1986 to reinvest 
it into the U.S. for the purpose of growing their U.S. flag operations.
  Congress first included foreign shipping income in Subpart F in 1975, 
which meant that all shipping income was taxable at the full U.S. 
corporate tax rate no matter whether it was invested abroad or in the 
United States. However, a temporary rule, applicable to foreign 
shipping income earned from 1975 to 1986, continued to allow for 
deferral in cases where this income was reinvested in qualifying 
shipping activities. Section 955 of the Internal Revenue Code provided 
that this income would be included in gross income, i.e., taxed, 
immediately under Subpart F in the event of any net decrease in 
qualified shipping investments.
  The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 restored for shipping income 
the normal tax rule under which non-Subpart F income of foreign 
subsidiaries is not taxed by the United States until it is repatriated, 
generally as a dividend. In restoring the potential for deferral for 
certain shipping income, Congress in 2004 returned the treatment of 
shipping income to where it was prior to 1975.

[[Page 20946]]

  Unfortunately, Congress did not address the rules under IRC Section 
955 that apply to income earned between 1975 and 1986, thus creating a 
situation that this income is permanently stranded offshore. Our bill 
would repeal IRC Section 955 and will allow these stranded assets to be 
reinvested in the United States under the favorable tax terms that were 
in effect for other companies and industries in 2004. Specifically, the 
legislation provides a one-time opportunity for American-owned shipping 
companies to bring foreign source income back into the United States at 
a discounted tax rate for the purpose of expanding and growing our 
domestic maritime industry. Without the commonsense change in our 
legislation, these old, stranded assets will never return to the United 
States and never be subject to U.S. taxation.
  The bill is guaranteed to create jobs for American workers with the 
funds being brought back into the U.S. economy--on the ships, in the 
shipyards building the ships, and in supporting businesses. The bill 
contains a provision that would recapture any tax benefits if a 
shipping company reduces its full-time U.S. employment levels.
  This bill also would enhance U.S. national security interests by 
supporting shipyards that are vital to our defense industrial base, by 
enabling new U.S. flag tanker capacity to transport our Nation's energy 
products, and by providing DOD with critical assets--manpower and 
ships--necessary to help sustain military sealift.
  The bill is strongly supported by maritime labor, shipyards, and ship 
owners and operators and can provide a boost to the U.S. maritime 
industry at a time when the U.S. is struggling to find its economic 
footing. The jobs created by this legislation are well-paying, long-
term jobs in a crucial sector of our Nation's economy. I urge my 
colleagues to join me and my other original cosponsors in supporting 
this bill.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 1610

       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 ``American Shipping 
     Reinvestment Act of 2009''.

     SEC. 2. REPEAL OF QUALIFIED SHIPPING INVESTMENT WITHDRAWAL 
                   RULES.

       (a) In General.--Section 955 of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986 (relating to withdrawal of previously excluded 
     subpart F income from qualified investment) is hereby 
     repealed.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 951(a)(1)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986 is amended by adding ``and'' at the end of clause (i) 
     and by striking clause (iii).
       (2) Section 951(a)(1)(A)(ii) is amended by striking ``, 
     and'' at the end and inserting ``, except that in applying 
     this clause amounts invested in less developed country 
     corporations described in section 955(c)(2) (as so in effect) 
     shall not be treated as investments in less developed 
     countries.''.
       (3) Section 951(a)(3) of such Code (relating to the 
     limitation on pro rata share of previously excluded subpart F 
     income withdrawn from investment) is hereby repealed.
       (4) Section 964(b) of such Code is amended by striking ``, 
     955,''.
       (5) The table of sections for subpart F of part III of 
     subchapter N of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by striking 
     the item relating to section 955.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years of controlled foreign 
     corporations ending on or after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, and to taxable years of United States shareholders 
     in which or with which such taxable years of controlled 
     foreign corporations end.

     SEC. 3. ONE-TIME TEMPORARY DIVIDENDS RECEIVED DEDUCTION FOR 
                   PREVIOUSLY UNTAXED FOREIGN BASE COMPANY 
                   SHIPPING INCOME.

       (a) In General.--In the case of a corporation which is a 
     United States shareholder and for which an election under 
     this section is made for the taxable year, for purposes of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, there shall be allowed as 
     a deduction in computing taxable income under section 63 of 
     such Code an amount equal to 85 percent of the cash 
     distributions which are received during such taxable year by 
     such shareholder from controlled foreign corporations to the 
     extent that the distributions are attributable to income--
       (1) which was derived by the controlled foreign corporation 
     in taxable years beginning before January 1, 2005, and
       (2) which would, without regard to the year earned, be 
     described in section 954(f) (as in effect before the 
     enactment of the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004).
       (b) Indirect Dividends.--A rule similar to the rule of 
     section 965(a)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall 
     apply, determined by treating cash distributions which are so 
     attributable as cash dividends.
       (c) Limitation.--The amount of dividends taken into account 
     under this section shall not exceed the amount permitted to 
     be taken into account under paragraphs (1), (3) (determined 
     by substituting ``December 31, 2008'' for ``October 3, 
     2004''), and (4) of section 965(b) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986, determined as if such paragraphs applied to 
     this section.
       (d) Taxpayer Election and Designation.--For purposes of 
     subsection (a), a taxpayer may, on its return for the taxable 
     year to which this section applies--
       (1) elect to apply paragraph (3) of section 959(c) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 before paragraphs (1) and (2) 
     thereof, and
       (2) designate the extent, if any, to which a cash 
     distribution reduces a controlled foreign corporation's 
     earnings and profits attributable to--
       (A) foreign base company shipping income (determined under 
     section 954(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as in 
     effect before the enactment of the American Jobs Creation Act 
     of 2004), or
       (B) other earnings and profits.
       (e) Election.--
       (1) In general.--The taxpayer may elect to apply this 
     section to--
       (A) the taxpayer's last taxable year which begins before 
     the date of the enactment of this Act, or
       (B) the taxpayer's first taxable year which begins during 
     the 1-year period beginning on such date.
       (2) Timing of election and one-time election.--Such 
     election may be made for a taxable year--
       (A) only if made on or before the due date (including 
     extensions) for filing the return of tax for such taxable 
     year, and
       (B) only if no election has been made under this section or 
     section 965 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 with respect 
     to the same distribution for any other taxable year of the 
     taxpayer.
       (f) Reduction in Benefits for Failure To Maintain 
     Employment Levels.--
       (1) In general.--If, during the period consisting of the 
     calendar month in which the taxpayer first receives a 
     distribution described in subsection (a) and the succeeding 
     23 calendar months, the taxpayer does not maintain an average 
     employment level at least equal to the taxpayer's prior 
     average employment, an additional amount equal to $25,000 
     multiplied by the number of employees by which the taxpayer's 
     average employment level during such period falls below the 
     prior average employment (but not exceeding the aggregate 
     amount allowed as a deduction pursuant to subsection (a)) 
     shall be taken into account as income by the taxpayer during 
     the taxable year that includes the final day of such period.
       (2) Prior average employment.--For purposes of this 
     paragraph, the taxpayer's ``prior average employment'' shall 
     be the average number of full time equivalent employees of 
     the taxpayer during the period consisting of the 24 calendar 
     months immediately preceding the calendar month in which the 
     taxpayer first receives a distribution described in 
     subsection (a).
       (3) Aggregation rules.--In determining the taxpayer's 
     average employment level and prior average employment, all 
     domestic members of a controlled group (as defined in section 
     264(e)(5)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986) shall be 
     treated as a single taxpayer.
       (g) Special Rules.--Rules similar to the rules of 
     subsections (d) and (e) and paragraphs (3), (4), and (5) of 
     subsection (c) of section 965 of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986 shall apply for purposes of this section.
       (h) Effective Date.--This section shall apply to taxable 
     years ending on or after the date of the enactment of this 
     Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. GREGG (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, Ms. Collins, Mr. Dodd, 
        Mr. Martinez, Mr. Harkin, Ms. Snowe, and Ms. Mikulski):
  S. 1611. A bill to provide collective bargaining rights for public 
safety officers employed by States or their political subdivisions; to 
the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, this morning, 660,000 police officers and 
300,000 firefighters across the country will get up and go to work to 
protect our homes, our families, and our communities. They will go into 
burning buildings, patrol our streets, and put their lives on the line, 
because they believe in the importance of what they are doing.

[[Page 20947]]

  These dedicated workers are in the trenches every day making life-or-
death decisions, and their experiences give them tremendous knowledge 
about how to protect our country. We need to listen to their 
recommendations and consider their advice. Unfortunately, however, all 
too often, our first responders have no voice in the decisions that 
affect their lives and their livelihoods. Their input is disregarded 
because they don't have the same rights as other workers.
  Workers in the private sector who want a voice on the job have the 
right to form and join a union. They can fight for a safer, fairer 
workplace. But 300,000 police and 70,000 firefighters live in States in 
which their State governments deny them the fundamental right to a 
voice on the job. Even if these workers overwhelmingly agree that they 
want to form and join a union, their State government says they can't 
have one.
  That is not fair. We are asking these workers to do so much for their 
communities--the least we can do in return is give them a voice at the 
table in the life-and-death discussions and decisions that affect their 
families and their futures. They deserve the opportunity to choose for 
themselves whether they want the advantages that unions bring.
  That is why it is an honor to join Senator Gregg and Senator Dodd in 
sponsoring the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act to 
guarantee that our first responders will have a path they can use to 
decide if they want a union. If the workers don't want a union, they 
don't have to follow that path. But the State has to make it available 
and let the workers choose.
  It won't be difficult for States to create this path. All they have 
to do is provide four basic rights: the right to form and join a union; 
the right to sit down at the table and talk; the right to sign a 
contract if both parties agree; and the right to go to a neutral third 
party when there are disputes.
  Apart from these four rights, all the other details of the collective 
bargaining system are left up to the States. They have the flexibility 
to decide whether to exempt small communities. They decide how workers 
can select a union. They can also decide how workers and employers 
should resolve disputes--through arbitration, mediation, factfinding, 
or some other mechanism.
  This bipartisan bill has been carefully drafted to preserve a balance 
between the interests of State and local governments and the rights of 
the workers they employ. It has been the product of years of careful 
negotiations, including a hearing and two markups in the HELP 
Committee. It was passed by the House of Representatives in the last 
Congress with an overwhelming bipartisan margin, including 98 
Republican votes. No it is time to get it across the finish line and 
give our dedicated first responders the fair treatment they deserve. It 
is a matter of fundamental fairness and an urgent matter of public 
safety.
  I commend Senator Gregg for his leadership on this very important 
issue, and I urge my colleagues to show these heroes the respect they 
deserve by supporting the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation 
Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BENNET:
  S. 1613. A bill to reduce the Federal budget deficit in a responsible 
manner; to the Committee on the Budget.
  Mr. BENNET. Mr. President, I cannot tell you how much I appreciated 
your remarks--I was sitting in the chair--and those of Chairman Dodd as 
well. The hour is late. The idea that you would be here at that hour to 
talk about something as important as health care is appreciated, I 
know, by the people in your State, but also by the people in my State 
as well. So I say thank you for that.
  I also want to talk about health care. I want to talk about health 
care in the context of fiscal discipline in this country. As you know, 
our Nation's annual deficits are staggering, and our national debt is 
absolutely unsustainable. For the future of our country and for our 
children's sake, as we recover from this devastating blow to our 
economy, we have to stand together and begin to start the difficult, 
but essential, work of putting our fiscal house in order.
  Health care reform must help solve this Nation's fiscal problems, not 
make them worse. To accomplish this, effective reform must bend the 
cost curve in health care spending both in the private and public 
sectors.
  In part because of years of neglect and inaction, this Congress has 
reached a defining moment of reckoning. Rising health care costs, 
especially Medicare costs, are now the largest driver of our deficits. 
Our Nation's health care spending, as you were just saying, is 17 
percent of our Nation's gross domestic product and is expected to grow 
to over 20 percent of GDP in 10 years, on its way, as you said, to 35 
percent.
  Health care alone--just health care--will soon account for one-fifth 
of our economy. This represents a greater share of the GDP than our 
manufacturing, agricultural, forestry, mining, and construction 
industries combined.
  As we emerge from this terrible recession, the worst since the Great 
Depression, we cannot commit one-fifth of our economy to health care 
and expect to compete effectively in the global marketplace.
  Adding to the urgency of the problem, this recession has made 
rocketing health care costs even more painful for families and 
businesses in the last 15 months. Both large businesses and small 
businesses have cut some 5.1 million jobs, and 2.4 million of these 
newly unemployed workers have lost the health coverage their jobs once 
provided. Now the same people must try to find insurance in the 
individual market where they can be rejected by private insurance 
companies for preexisting conditions such as asthma, diabetes, or even 
cancer.
  Health care costs are strangling opportunities for working families 
and small businesses all over my State and the country. As health care 
costs rise, families are forced to make choices no one should have to 
make between insuring their families or their employees and sending 
their kids to college, taking lower paying jobs with less 
responsibility just for the medical benefits and defaulting on their 
mortgage payments to pay for their medical bills.
  Every one of these examples springs from the experiences of people in 
my State. And it is no mystery why people are having to make these 
terrible choices. Middle-class wages are not even close to keeping up 
with these rising insurance costs. While median family income in this 
country fell by $300 during the last decade--staggering, by the way; 
over a decade in real dollars, median family income in the United 
States actually declined by $300--health care costs increased over the 
same period by 80 percent.
  The cost of health insurance is eating into family budgets faster and 
faster. Over the past decades, premiums for Colorado families, as this 
chart shows us, have more than doubled, growing four times faster than 
wage increases. The cost of premiums for a Colorado family is over 
$13,000 today. If we do nothing, by 2016, Colorado families will be 
spending over $25,000 on their premiums, a 90-percent increase. We have 
come out of a period with an 85-percent increase, and if we do nothing, 
we are going to end up in a period with a 90-percent increase, with no 
real increase in wages.
  Left unaddressed, this imbalance, which is the creation of our 
catastrophically inefficient health care system, will destroy the 
middle class in this country. If we do nothing, if we continue on with 
the status quo, by 2016, just 7 years from now--and I believe these 
numbers are very similar to the ones you quoted for Rhode Island--by 
2016, 40 cents of every dollar a typical Colorado family earns will be 
eaten up by health care costs, leaving just 60 cents for everything 
else.
  Think about it. That is almost half an average family's income. Money 
spent not to educate their children, not to feed them or house them, 
but just to cover the cost of the family health care plan. And that is 
just paying for coverage. Never mind if you actually get sick.
  In 2007, 62 percent of the personal bankruptcies in this country were 
due

[[Page 20948]]

to medical costs. Traditionally, most people's employers help pay for 
cost increases. That has been the case for over many years. But I heard 
from employers all over Colorado having to make tough choices--cutting 
back on benefits and laying off more costs to their employees.
  In the coming years, copays for Coloradans will go up double digits. 
More Coloradans are being forced into health plans with higher 
deductibles, and more employers are getting out of the business of 
providing health insurance for their employees altogether.
  Mr. President, we won't be able to completely flatten the health care 
cost curve in the short run, and we should be careful not to 
overpromise, but we have to make the rising cost of health care 
something our economy can plausibly absorb.
  Part of the solution is reducing waste and curbing overpayments to 
insurance companies, and part of the answer is encouraging patients to 
seek preventive care. Small businesses may not see health costs go down 
immediately, but we sure can slow their rise. And we have to work hard 
to make sure they do not rise this quickly. Reforming our health care 
system could save over 100,000 small business jobs in the coming years 
that would otherwise be lost if we do nothing.
  I agree with bipartisan voices saying that our first health care goal 
has to be to drive down costs, and we must start with Medicare. As I 
travel throughout Colorado, I have met countless physicians, nurses, 
and hospital workers who tell me about the perverse incentives in 
Medicare. Instead of being paid to spend time with patients and produce 
better quality care, doctors and nurses are paid for the number of 
patients they see in the shortest amount of time and the number of 
procedures they perform. This is no way to produce patient-centered 
care, and it is no way to reduce cost.
  Medicare doesn't just influence, as you know, the care of the elderly 
and disabled. As the largest health care program in the United States, 
Medicare influences every level of health care. Private insurance and 
employer-based health care look to Medicare as they make decisions on 
what to pay doctors, nurses, and hospitals. Owing to the perverse 
incentives in Medicare, however, since 1970--since 1970--every year for 
almost 40 years, year-in and year-out, Medicare spending per person has 
risen by over 8 percent each year, and private insurance spending per 
person has risen by over 9 percent each year.
  If we expect reform to begin to gain any traction, we must drive cost 
down at the Federal level first. We can start by paying doctors and 
nurses to actually do what they are supposed to do and what they want 
to do--be focused on patients. We have to reform the system so that we 
are paying for quality and not volume. We must improve care, produce 
savings, and slow down cost growth by bundling payments, paying for 
performance and outcomes, and providing better coordinated care for 
patients and providers.
  The burden is on us to meet the public expectation that we will drive 
down costs in the health care system and make it more efficient, that 
we will make the health care marketplace more competitive, and that we 
will provide affordable, stable health care coverage to the American 
people that can't be taken away because they lose a job, have a 
preexisting condition, or have reached some arbitrary cap.
  Controlling health care costs would help our fiscal situation a great 
deal, and that is one of the fundamental reasons health care reform is 
needed. But this alone will not be enough to fill the deepening hole of 
national debt that threatens America's prosperity. The fiscal decisions 
we make today matter so much because they will dictate the well-being 
and range of choices of the generations that follow us.
  Sometimes, with the daily hail of press clippings, these issues may 
seem overly complex, but I like to use a pretty simple analogy. The way 
we run our government is not different than if you or I were to buy a 
house--probably a bigger one than we reasonably could afford--and then 
we tell the bank to please send the mortgage documents to our kids. 
Imagine how that burden--paying for mom and dad's house--would 
constrain our children's choices. What dreams would they have to defer 
because their first obligation was a debt they didn't even incur.
  My three daughters, ages 9, 8 and 5, have never had an economics 
class, but I can tell you that as much as they love their mom and dad, 
if asked, they would never do that deal--especially my 5-year-old, 
Anne. Whether we are taking her blanket away or telling her to stop 
sucking her thumb or putting a mountain of debt on her, she knows a raw 
deal when she sees one.
  We in Congress owe the next generation much more than this, as the 
chairman, Senator Dodd, was saying. We ought to be able to build on our 
roles as parents and community leaders to respect our children, come 
together, and plan America's way back to fiscal health. The longer we 
wait, the more difficult the choices become. If we wait 10 years, we 
will face a massive gap between our spending and the revenue the 
government collects. If we wait 10 years to take action, we would have 
to increase individual income taxes by almost 90 percent to keep pace. 
That is an unacceptable outcome for Colorado's families. If you don't 
like tax increases, fine, then we would have to slash Federal spending 
by almost one-half. That would mean massive cuts to Medicare, our 
Nation's defense, and other critical initiatives that keep our country 
strong. No one wants to be put in a position to make those kinds of 
choices either. These outcomes are unacceptable, yet we can see them 
coming. That is why inaction is so unacceptable on health care and also 
on returning to policies of fiscal discipline. It is long past time to 
put in place the policies that will reverse this condition. And as with 
any deep hole, the first order of business is to stop digging.
  The good news is that we have a tried-and-true way to stop making 
matters worse. In the 1990s, we had Pay-Go, which effectively forced 
the shovel from Congress's hands and made Congress stop digging. Pay-Go 
means that before Congress can create new spending on permanent 
programs, it needs to figure out how to pay for that new spending, just 
as every family in the States we represent.
  Pay-Go helped turn 1980s deficits into 1990s surpluses, and we 
actually began to pay down our debt. Pay-Go is commonsense budgeting. 
It is not any different, as I just said, than what a family does when 
its spending gets out of hand. When that bad credit card statements 
comes in the mail, a parent knows it is time to sit down at the kitchen 
table and plan how to stop the spending. Pay-Go is what Congress and 
President Clinton did to respond to Washington's bad credit card bill.
  Pay-Go was smart lawmaking because it imposed a culture of fiscal 
responsibility--and I would say discipline--on the Congress. Yet, for 
some reason, early in this decade a new administration let Pay-Go 
expire. That played a part in how these surpluses all of a sudden 
turned back into big annual deficits. This is how America incurred 
years of new debt.
  The frustrating reality is that we are not getting enough out of 
borrowing all this money in the end--fighting an expensive war with 
tremendous unseen long-term costs to follow, ignoring the staggering 
costs of our health care system and entitlements, paying huge interest 
costs on our debt, in large part to foreign countries. These are hardly 
worthy uses of deficit spending.
  In 2003, the Bush administration and Congress passed a new 
entitlement program called Medicare Part D. It is very popular, but we 
never paid a dime for it. They also chose two tax cuts for people who 
needed them least over fiscal discipline. They ignored skyrocketing 
mandatory spending. They created a brandnew bureaucracy and just 
saddled all of this heavy new weight on America's national debt.
  In short, Washington was unwilling to ask the American people to pay 
for any of its investments--they put it on our children's shoulders 
instead.
  And the tragedy of this incredible mismanagement is, it didn't work. 
Our economy plunged into its deepest hole since the Great Depression.

[[Page 20949]]


  Fortunately, earlier this year, the House rightly passed new 
statutory Pay-Go. The Senate should pass Pay-Go too. That's why today, 
Senator McCaskill and I introduced Pay-Go. We believe that Pay-Go is 
one important way to make sure that our fiscal situation doesn't get 
any worse. Pay-Go is not a magic bullet, but it is part of the answer 
to our fiscal woes.
  Once Pay-Go is in place though, we cannot stop there. Pay-Go will 
help us stop digging. But we also need to budget for the future, stop 
running large deficits and fill this fiscal hole completely. I am 
optimistic that this can be done, and it will take bipartisan 
commitment and discipline.
  One place to start is with the growth of our yearly spending. Like 
Pay-Go, the yearly spending of Congress has also been done before, and 
it has worked.
  That is why today I am introducing separate legislation, the Deficit 
Reduction Act of 2009, that would create yearly limits on discretionary 
spending. By pairing these discretionary spending limits with Pay-Go, 
we can start to make a substantial change in how Washington does 
business.
  But it is not enough just to limit new spending across the board. 
Much of the reason that we are running such large deficits, is that we 
have made long-term spending commitments, called mandatory spending. To 
truly reverse the totality of our disastrous fiscal course, we must be 
willing to address rapidly expanding mandatory commitments too.
  The best way--you know, it is funny, when you use the word 
``mandatory.'' It is the word that should be used to express what this 
debt burden is we are putting on our kids. It will be mandatory that 
they pay that back before they make decisions about how to educate 
their own children; before they make decisions about how to provide 
individual health care in this country or make other kinds of 
investments all across the United States, in transportation or in new 
economies. What will be mandatory as we fall farther and farther behind 
in this global economy--what will be mandatory for them is to pay the 
bill left behind by their mothers and fathers.
  The best way to get Congress to take a hard look at mandatory 
spending, is to place a flexible cap on our annual deficits. That's the 
other main component of what my new legislation would do. The cap in 
the Deficit Reduction Act is realistic--it would impose limits that are 
consistent with what economists believe we can sustain. This deficit 
limit is flexible--providing an exception when we are in a recession.
  Here is how the deficit limit would work. Whatever the gross domestic 
product is in a given year, Congress must limit the deficit to 3 
percent of the GDP or less. Economists tell us that this 3 percent 
number is sustainable over time, and that is a reasonably healthy 
ceiling. Now of course we should push to do better than running a 
deficit that is 3 percent of GDP. But this is a good starting point at 
setting and adhering to a budget. We would all clap if the deficits of 
today--12 or 13 percent of GDP--were 3 percent, and no one would clap 
louder than our children.
  Under my legislation, if Congress failed to meet these deficit 
control requirements, the government would have to impose an across the 
board cut called a sequestration. Certain programs such as Social 
Security and veterans programs would not be subject to cuts. Yet most 
of the government's functions would be. The goal, of course, is to 
avoid this drastic measure by forcing Congress to plan ahead, and 
forcing Congress to pay attention to the deficit when it makes its 
spending choices.
  Deficit limits make perfect sense during most years. But, as we have 
learned during this recession, an infusion of public funds can jolt a 
frozen economy and help turn that economy around. Running temporary 
deficits can kickstart a stagnant economy. But this only works if 
during healthy economic times, you also reduce government spending. The 
deficit limits I am proposing in this legislation would put Congress on 
a gradual track back to solid fiscal footing.
  We should immediately enact budget reform proposals like Pay-Go 
discretionary spending limits and deficit limits. The CBO has concluded 
that after 2019, the rate at which we accumulate debt will continue to 
accelerate due to the aging of the population and increased health care 
costs. As angry as we all are with the excessive leverage in the 
private marketplace over the past decade that contributed to the market 
crashing, it is also obvious that Washington set a very bad example.
  Let's put an end to these unsound fiscal practices. Let's not put our 
kids in the kind of situation we have inherited. Let's not make matters 
even worse, and the policy decisions regarding the national debt even 
harder for our kids.
  What we need now is leadership and cooperation; not more shifting 
costs to our kids. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that if we 
remain on our current course, the total debt owed by the public will 
stand at over $17 trillion by the end of fiscal year 2019--only 10 
years from today.
  The point is that linked with our growing debt are the dreams and the 
plans of millions of American families. There is nothing fun about 
tightening our belt and cutting popular programs. I don't like it any 
more than anyone else who is here. Yet there are plenty of encouraging 
signs that this Congress and this President can stand together and do 
exactly that. Recently, just a couple of weeks ago, the Senate stood 
with the President for fiscal discipline and slashed nearly $2 billion 
from an outdated weapons system. That is a good start that I gladly 
supported. But so much more is left to do.
  Coloradans already know we are in a bad way. People in my State are 
well aware that the excesses in recent years are catching up to us, and 
they know that Congress and the President have to make hard fiscal 
choices, reform health care before it eats up our entire budget, and 
pay for our reform efforts.
  This challenging outlook may be just what it takes to bring both 
political parties to the negotiating table. Paired with Pay-Go, it is 
my hope that this new legislation can be a real starting point for 
meaningful fiscal negotiations. It is time we come up with an 
intelligent framework of fiscal management, that keeps Congress 
thinking ahead each time it makes a decision, and each time it puts 
together an annual budget, and each time it is faced with America's 
long-term fiscal trajectory.
  Washington's fiscal mess was created over many years, and we won't 
solve the problem overnight. But this bill would give Congress and the 
President a guidepost to make the decisions necessary to get our budget 
under control. It would set a strong and binding standard for us to act 
responsibly.
  We must start with what unites us. When I worry about what type of 
country we will leave my daughters and all of our young people, I know 
that others who vote differently than I do have the same worries. We 
owe more to our kids than to leave them a huge national debt and no 
plan to get out of it.
  If we don't start making difficult decisions soon, we will be 
limiting our children's ability to make our country a better place, 
before they even get started. We will be limiting their ability to 
invest in education, life-saving scientific research, or new 
technologies that form the foundation of economic growth. We will be 
limiting their ability to defend the Nation during future times of war 
that we can't even think of today. And we will be limiting their 
chances of having a quality of life even better than what our parents 
and grandparents left to us.
  If we fail to confront the tough issues so we can control the cost of 
health care, we will have squandered this narrow window of opportunity. 
If we fail to step up to the plate and pass a fiscally sound health 
care reform bill, this Congress will be remembered for years to come as 
having let down the country. If we fail--not just to stop digging this 
deep fiscal hole, but to put a process in place for climbing back up to 
solid fiscal footing--we will have failed to perform as the stewards of 
our children's dreams.
  Let's stand together, with our President and with American families. 
Let's

[[Page 20950]]

get health care reform done responsibly, let's take action to reduce 
the deficit and debt, and let's put this economy back on track.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE:
  S. 1615. A bill to amend the Small Business Act and the Small 
Business Investment Act of 1958 to stop the small business credit 
crunch, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Small Business and 
Entrepreneurship.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, the state of small business lending in the 
United States is still dire, as was shown during CIT's recent close 
brush with bankruptcy. One area of lending which has historically 
helped small firms has been Small Business Administration backed 
lending, but while the SBA traditionally guarantees $20 billion in 
loans annually, before the passage of the stimulus, new lending this 
year was on track to fall below $10 billion. In fact, in the first 
quarter of fiscal year 2009, the number of SBA 7(a) loans dropped by 57 
percent when compared with the first quarter of fiscal year 2008.
  Last year, to help address the frozen credit market and the drop in 
SBA lending I introduced the 10 Steps for a Main Street Economic 
Recovery Act. Many of the provisions in 10 Steps were included in the 
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and several have already been 
credited with helping to increase SBA volume. These include fee 
reductions for 7(a) and 504 loans and allowing for the refinancing of 
504 loans. To ensure that SBA lending remains a critical source of 
capital for small businesses, we must continue to bolster this program 
and help it to evolve and grow.
  In order to maintain this momentum we must take steps to further 
reform and improve SBA-backed lending. The legislation I am 
introducing, the Next Step, builds on the 10 Steps for a Main Street 
Economic Recovery Act and makes the SBA's lending programs more vital 
and responsive to the needs of today's small business borrower.
  The Next Step includes provisions that would allow borrowers to take 
out larger 7(a) and 504 loans up to $5 million. This bill would help 
satisfy the capital needs of small businesses, looking to start or 
expand their operations. The bill would also allow for the refinancing 
of 7(a) loans. Finally, SBA borrowers must have the ability to shop and 
compare SBA loan rates online. My legislation would establish an online 
platform through the SBA that would allow borrowers to compare SBA loan 
rates and make an informed choice, giving borrowers a chance to save 
time and money.
  These targeted reforms included in the Next Step for Main Street 
Credit Availability Act of 2009 will help bring SBA lending into the 
future, make the SBA's lending programs competitive with traditional 
small businesses' borrowing, and help to increase SBA lending volume.
  I urge my colleagues to support this critical legislation to help 
improve small business lending.
  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. 1615

       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 ``Next Step for Main Street 
     Credit Availability Act of 2009''.

     SEC. 2. MAXIMUM AMOUNTS FOR 7(A) LOANS.

       Section 7(a)(3)(A) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 
     636(a)(3)(A)) is amended by striking ``$1,500,000 (or if the 
     gross loan amount would exceed $2,000,000'' and inserting 
     ``$4,000,000 (or if the gross loan amount would exceed 
     $5,000,000''.

     SEC. 3. REFINANCING EXISTING 7(A) LOANS.

       (a) In General.--Section 7(a) of the Small Business Act (15 
     U.S.C. 636(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(34) Refinancing existing loans.--A borrower that has 
     received a loan under this subsection may refinance the 
     balance of the loan by applying for a loan from the lender 
     that made the original loan or with another lender.''.
       (b) Technical Amendment.--Section 7(a) of the Small 
     Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(a)) is amended by striking ``(32) 
     Increased'' and inserting ``(33) Increased''.

     SEC. 4. MAXIMUM LOAN AMOUNTS UNDER 504 PROGRAM.

       Section 502(2)(A) of the Small Business Investment Act of 
     1958 (15 U.S.C. 696(2)(A)) is amended--
       (1) in clause (i), by striking ``$1,500,000'' and inserting 
     ``$4,000,000'';
       (2) in clause (ii), by striking ``$2,000,000'' and 
     inserting ``$5,000,000''; and
       (3) in clause (iii), by striking ``$4,000,000'' and 
     inserting ``$5,500,000''.

     SEC. 5. MAXIMUM LOAN LIMITS UNDER MICROLOAN PROGRAM.

       Section 7(m) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(m)) 
     is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)(B)(iii), by striking ``$35,000'' and 
     inserting ``$50,000'';
       (2) in paragraph (3)(E), by striking ``$35,000'' each place 
     it appears and inserting ``$50,000''; and
       (3) in paragraph (11)(B), by striking ``$35,000'' and 
     inserting ``$50,000''.

     SEC. 6. ONLINE LENDING PLATFORM.

       It is the sense of the Congress that the Administrator of 
     the Small Business Administration should establish a website 
     that--
       (1) lists each lender that makes loans guaranteed by the 
     Small Business Administration and provides information about 
     the loan rate of each such lender; and
       (2) allows prospective borrowers--
       (A) to compare rates on loans guaranteed by the Small 
     Business Administration; and
       (B) to apply online for loans guaranteed by the Small 
     Business Administration.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. CANTWELL:
  S. 1616. A bill to authorize assistance to small- and medium-sized 
businesses to promote exports to the People's Republic of China, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban 
Affairs.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the U.S.-China 
Market Engagement and Export Promotion Act of 2009. For many small- and 
medium-sized businesses across this country, some of which are in my 
home State of Washington, getting access to the Chinese market proves 
difficult at best. However, to establish a foothold in the ever 
expanding Chinese market can prove pivotal in achieving financial 
success. China is a tremendous market for U.S. goods and services. 
According to the U.S.-China Business Council, despite the global 
economic downturn, 85 percent of congressional districts increased 
their exports to China in 2008. In addition, exports to China in almost 
every congressional district grew more than exports to anywhere else 
from 2000 to 2008.
  In 2008, U.S. total exports to China equaled $71.5 billion. During 
the same time, however, our imports from China equaled $337.8 billion. 
That means our trading balance with China in 2008 was a $266.3 billion 
deficit. This bill would help States establish export promotion offices 
in China and create a new China Market Advocate Program at U.S. Export 
Assistance Centers around the Nation. The bill also provides assistance 
to small businesses for China trade missions and authorizes grants for 
Chinese business education programs.
  I support this bill because of the enormous role that small 
businesses play in our economy. Small- and medium-sized businesses are 
a great potential engine of growth. Between 2004 and 2005, small 
businesses created 78.9 percent of the Nation's net new jobs, and with 
expanded export opportunities that number will be able to increase in 
the near future. Considering the huge impact that small- and medium-
sized businesses have on our economy, I urge all my colleagues to 
support this bill and give the business owners the assistance they need 
to succeed in the Chinese export market.
  The U.S.-China Market Engagement and Promotion Act will build the 
infrastructure necessary to connect American small- and medium-sized 
businesses with export opportunities in China.
  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. 1616

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``United 
     States-China Market Engagement and Export Promotion Act''.

[[Page 20951]]

       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title and table of contents.

            TITLE I--PROGRAMS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Sec. 101. Grants to States to establish and operate offices to promote 
              exports to China.
Sec. 102. Program to establish China market advocate positions in 
              United States Export Assistance Centers.
Sec. 103. Assistance to small- and medium-sized businesses for trade 
              missions to China.
Sec. 104. Plan to consolidate fees for Gold Key matching services in 
              China.

        TITLE II--PROGRAMS OF THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Sec. 201. Trade outreach at the Office of International Trade of the 
              Small Business Administration.
Sec. 202. Grants for Chinese business education programs.

            TITLE I--PROGRAMS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

     SEC. 101. GRANTS TO STATES TO ESTABLISH AND OPERATE OFFICES 
                   TO PROMOTE EXPORTS TO CHINA.

       (a) Grants.--The Secretary of Commerce, acting through the 
     Assistant Secretary for Trade Promotion and Director of the 
     United States and Foreign Commercial Service, shall provide 
     grants to States to establish and operate State offices in 
     the People's Republic of China to provide assistance to 
     United States exporters for the promotion of exports to 
     China, with a particular focus on establishment of offices in 
     locations in addition to Beijing and Shanghai.
       (b) Amount.--The amount of a grant under subsection (a) 
     shall not exceed 33 percent of the total costs to establish 
     and operate a State office described in such subsection.
       (c) Regulations.--Not later than 270 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Commerce shall 
     promulgate such regulations as may be necessary to carry out 
     this section.
       (d) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) State.--The term ``State'' has the meaning given the 
     term in section 2301(j)(5) of the Export Enhancement Act of 
     1988 (15 U.S.C. 4721(j)(5)).
       (2) United states exporter.--The term ``United States 
     exporter'' has the meaning given the term in section 
     2301(j)(3) of the Export Enhancement Act of 1988 (15 U.S.C. 
     4721(j)(3)).
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
     the Secretary of Commerce $10,000,000 for each of the fiscal 
     years 2010 through 2014 to carry out this section.
       (2) Availability.--Amounts appropriated pursuant to the 
     authorization of appropriations under paragraph (1) shall 
     remain available until expended.

     SEC. 102. PROGRAM TO ESTABLISH CHINA MARKET ADVOCATE 
                   POSITIONS IN UNITED STATES EXPORT ASSISTANCE 
                   CENTERS.

       (a) Program Authorized.--The Secretary of Commerce, in the 
     Secretary's role as chairperson of the Trade Promotion 
     Coordinating Committee, shall establish a program to provide 
     comprehensive assistance to small- and medium-sized 
     businesses in the United States for purposes of facilitating 
     exports to China.
       (b) China Market Advocates.--
       (1) Positions authorized.--
       (A) In general.--The Secretary of Commerce shall create not 
     fewer than 50 China market advocate positions in United 
     States Export Assistance Centers.
       (B) Appointment and training.--The China market advocates 
     authorized under subparagraph (A) shall be appointed by the 
     Secretary from among individuals with expertise in matters 
     relating to trade with China and shall receive the training 
     authorized under paragraph (2).
       (C) Rate of pay.--China market advocates shall be paid at a 
     rate equal to the rate of basic pay for grades GS-10 through 
     GS-13 of the General Schedule under section 5332 of title 5, 
     United States Code.
       (D) Geographic distribution.--To the maximum extent 
     practicable, China market advocates shall be assigned to 
     United States Export Assistance Centers in a manner that 
     achieves an equitable geographic distribution of China market 
     advocates among United States Export Assistance Centers.
       (2) Training authorized.--The Secretary shall provide 
     training to China market advocates in the business culture of 
     China, the market of China, and the evolving political, 
     cultural, and economic environment in China.
       (c) Services Provided by Advocates.--China market advocates 
     authorized under subsection (b) shall provide comprehensive 
     assistance to small- and medium-sized businesses in the 
     United States for purposes of facilitating exports of United 
     States goods to China. Such assistance may include--
       (1) assistance to find and utilize Federal and private 
     resources to facilitate entering into the market of China;
       (2) continuous direct and personal contact with businesses 
     that have entered the market of China;
       (3) assistance to resolve disputes with the Government of 
     the United States or China relating to intellectual property 
     rights violations, export restrictions, and additional trade 
     barriers; and
       (4) to the extent practicable, locating and recruiting 
     businesses to enter the market of China.
       (d) Advertising of Program.--The Secretary of Commerce 
     shall make available to the public through advertising and 
     other appropriate methods information about services offered 
     by China market advocates under the program authorized under 
     subsection (a).
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Secretary of Commerce to carry out 
     this section $15,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2010 
     through 2014, of which--
       (1) $5,000,000 are authorized to be appropriated to carry 
     out subsection (b)(2); and
       (2) $2,000,000 are authorized to be appropriated to carry 
     out subsection (d).

     SEC. 103. ASSISTANCE TO SMALL- AND MEDIUM-SIZED BUSINESSES 
                   FOR TRADE MISSIONS TO CHINA.

       (a) Assistance Authorized.--The Secretary of Commerce, in 
     the Secretary's role as chairperson of the Trade Promotion 
     Coordinating Committee, shall provide assistance through 
     United States Export Assistance Centers to eligible small- 
     and medium-sized businesses in the United States for 
     business-related expenses for trade missions to China.
       (b) Selection Process.--The Secretary of Commerce shall--
       (1) develop a transparent and competitive scoring system 
     for selection of small- and medium-sized businesses to 
     receive assistance authorized under subsection (a) that 
     focuses on the feasibility of exporting goods and services to 
     China; and
       (2) develop specific criteria for a definition of 
     ``business-related expenses'', as the term is used in 
     subsection (a), that is compatible with best business 
     practices.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Secretary of Commerce $2,000,000 
     for each of the fiscal years 2010 through 2014 to carry out 
     this section.

     SEC. 104. PLAN TO CONSOLIDATE FEES FOR GOLD KEY MATCHING 
                   SERVICES IN CHINA.

       (a) Plan Required.--As soon as is practicable after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Commerce, 
     acting through the Assistant Secretary for Trade Promotion 
     and Director of the United States and Foreign Commercial 
     Service, shall submit to Congress a plan to consolidate fees 
     charged by the Department of Commerce for Gold Key matching 
     services provided to small- and medium-sized businesses that 
     export goods or services produced in the United States to 
     more than one market in China.
       (b) Gold Key Matching Services Defined.--In this section, 
     the term ``Gold Key matching services'' means the Gold Key 
     Service program of the Department of Commerce and includes--
       (1) the arrangement of business meetings with pre-screened 
     contacts, representatives, distributors, professional 
     associations, government contacts, or licensing or joint 
     venture partners in a foreign country;
       (2) customized market and industry briefings with trade 
     specialists of the Department of Commerce;
       (3) timely and relevant market research;
       (4) appointments with prospective trade partners in key 
     industry sectors;
       (5) post-meeting debriefing with trade specialists of the 
     Department of Commerce and assistance in developing 
     appropriate follow-up strategies; and
       (6) assistance with travel, accommodations, interpreter 
     service, and clerical support.

        TITLE II--PROGRAMS OF THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

     SEC. 201. TRADE OUTREACH AT THE OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE 
                   OF THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION.

       Section 22 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 649) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subsections:
       ``(h) Promotion of Exports to China.--The Office shall 
     provide strategic guidance to small business concerns with 
     respect to exporting goods and services to China.
       ``(i) Director of China Program Grants.--
       ``(1) In general.--There shall be in the Office a Director 
     of China Program Grants (in this subsection referred to as 
     the `Director').
       ``(2) Appointment.--The Director shall be appointed by the 
     Administrator and shall be an individual with demonstrated 
     successful experience in matters relating to international 
     trade and administering government contracts.
       ``(3) Rate of pay.--The Director shall be paid at a rate 
     equal to or greater than the rate of basic pay for grade GS-
     14 of the General Schedule under section 5332 of title 5, 
     United States Code.
       ``(4) Duties.--The Director shall be responsible for 
     administering the grant program authorized under section 202 
     of the United States-China Market Engagement and Export 
     Promotion Act (relating to Chinese business education 
     programs) and any other similar or related program of the 
     Office.''.

[[Page 20952]]



     SEC. 202. GRANTS FOR CHINESE BUSINESS EDUCATION PROGRAMS.

       (a) Grants Authorized.--The Administrator of the Small 
     Business Administration, acting through the Director of China 
     Program Grants in the Office of International Trade, shall 
     make grants to institutions of higher education, or 
     combinations of such institutions, to pay the Federal share 
     of the cost of planning, establishing, and operating 
     education programs described in subsection (b) to--
       (1) develop and enhance student skills, awareness, and 
     expertise relating to business in China; and
       (2) prepare students to promote the competitiveness of and 
     opportunities for United States small business concerns in 
     China.
       (b) Education Programs Described.--Education programs 
     described in this subsection are academic programs of study 
     relating to business in China, including undergraduate and 
     graduate level degrees, courses, or seminars on--
       (1) the economy of China;
       (2) trade and commerce in China;
       (3) new and expanding export opportunities for United 
     States small business concerns in China; and
       (4) the economic, commerce, and trade relations between the 
     United States and China.
       (c) Application.--A small business concern desiring a grant 
     under this section shall submit an application at such time, 
     in such manner, and containing such information as the 
     Director of China Program Grants may require.
       (d) Duration of Grants.--A grant under this section shall 
     be for an initial period not to exceed 2 years. The Director 
     of China Program Grants may renew such grant for additional 
     2-year periods.
       (e) Federal Share.--
       (1) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of an 
     education program described in subsection (b) shall not 
     exceed 50 percent of the cost of such program.
       (2) Non-federal share.--The non-Federal share of the cost 
     of an education program described in subsection (b) may be 
     provided either in cash or in-kind.
       (f) Definition.--In this section, the term ``institution of 
     higher education'' has the meaning given the term in section 
     101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001).
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DODD (for himself, Mr. Menendez, Mr. Merkley, Mr. Bennet, 
        Mr. Akaka, and Mr. Schumer):
  S. 1619. A bill to establish the Office of Sustainable Housing and 
Communities, to establish the Interagency Council on Sustainable 
Communities, to establish a comprehensive planning grant program, to 
establish a sustainability challenge grant program, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Livable Communities 
Act.
  Our communities are growing and changing. And the way we plan for 
their futures needs to evolve, as well. At stake is whether or not we 
will be able to enjoy the places where we live and work without 
excessive traffic, skyrocketing fuel costs, and sprawling development 
patterns that eat up our open space.
  As our communities grow, people are living farther from jobs, 
commuting longer distances on more crowded roadways, paying more at the 
pump at a time when family budgets are stretched thin and putting more 
greenhouse gases into the air at a time when climate change has emerged 
as an urgent threat.
  We are losing our rural land and open spaces. Transportation costs 
are making housing less affordable. Even though our communities are 
growing in size, we are losing the community spirit that makes American 
towns and cities so great.
  It is clear that current trends simply cannot continue.
  Sustainable development will cut down on the traffic that has long 
plagued my home State of Connecticut and connect people with good-
paying jobs. Done right, it will protect the environment and help us 
meet energy goals; protect rural areas and green spaces; revitalize our 
Main Streets and urban centers; create and preserve affordable housing; 
and make our communities better places to live, work, and raise 
families.
  But does that mean sustainable development is a transportation issue? 
An energy issue? A housing issue? An environmental issue?
  The answer, of course, is ``all of the above,'' and unfortunately, 
that tends to short some circuits here in Washington. Our policy has 
long been stovepiped within the various agencies responsible for each 
of the issues affected by planning and development.
  In February, I wrote a letter to President Obama urging him to 
establish a White House Office of Sustainable Development to coordinate 
housing, transportation, energy, and environmental policies.
  I felt confident I would find a partner in the White House. The 
President has been a strong leader on these issues, and he has shown a 
willingness to shake up a Federal Government that hasn't always 
succeeded when it comes to thinking outside the box and addressing 
related issues in a comprehensive, effective way.
  Sure enough, last month I brought together Secretary of 
Transportation Ray LaHood, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
Shaun Donovan, and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa 
Jackson at a Banking Committee hearing--three public servants who don't 
often find themselves in the same hearing room at the same time.
  They brought with them a pledge that the administration would work 
across agency lines to take a holistic look at development policy--and 
a firm commitment to livability principles that would serve as the 
foundation for that policy going forward.
  The administration's principles demonstrate a true understanding of 
the best way forward.
  Sustainable development, as grounded in these principles, provides 
more transportation choices for families, expands access to affordable 
housing, enhances economic competitiveness by connecting families with 
jobs and services, targets funding towards existing communities to spur 
revitalization and protect our open spaces, values the unique character 
of both our cities and our small towns, and improves collaboration 
between different government agencies to better leverage our 
investments.
  As Secretary LaHood said at the hearing, we are now all working off 
the same playbook. But now it is time to snap the ball and move down 
the field.
  Last month the White House announced the selection of Shelley Poticha 
to head up these efforts. If the Livable Communities Act becomes law, 
as I hope it will, Ms. Poticha will head a new HUD Office of 
Sustainable Housing and Communities.
  This new office will serve as a clearinghouse for best practices, so 
that successful initiatives can be easily replicated. And it will give 
HUD Secretary Donovan, Deputy Secretary Ron Simms, and Ms. Poticha the 
tools and authority they need to really dig in and become a partner to 
our communities in creating a sustainable future.
  One successful play from our playbook could be modeled after a 
project in my home State of Connecticut. It links housing and 
transportation policy, encourages smart land use, generates economic 
growth, and will reduce our carbon footprint around what's known as the 
Tri-City Corridor in Connecticut. This proposal would provide commuter 
and 110-mile-per-hour intercity rail service between New Haven, 
Hartford, and Springfield, MA, and feature 12 stops, creating ``transit 
villages'' and revitalizing local economies.
  Already, we are seeing how this proposed service is serving as a 
catalyst: attracting new business, commuters, and residents, and 
transforming struggling local economies.
  Along the corridor is Meriden, a small city of nearly 60,000 
residents located roughly halfway between New Haven and Hartford. In 
anticipation of a commuter stop on the rail line, the city would like 
to transform 15 acres of brownfields into new commercial and 
residential developments, including a public green that doubles as a 
flood buffer.
  Immediately north of that site is the Mills Memorial public housing 
complex, providing 140 units of affordable housing to low income 
residents.
  By linking transit, housing, and commercial planning, the city of 
Meriden will be able to transform its downtown into a bustling economic 
center ready to support a wide range of residents.
  The vision of Meriden and so many communities throughout the country

[[Page 20953]]

needs the support and planning tools to take these initiatives from 
idea to action.
  So, today, I offer for your consideration legislation that encourages 
communities across the country to begin planning for more prosperous 
and livable futures.
  In addition to creating the new HUD Office of Sustainable Housing and 
Communities I mentioned earlier, this bill creates a competitive grant 
program that States and localities can use to better integrate 
transportation, housing, land use, and economic development when making 
long-term planning decisions.
  In addition, it provides funding for communities to implement these 
comprehensive regional plans through a challenge grant program. This 
program will help communities invest in public transportation, 
affordable housing, complete streets, transit-oriented development, and 
redeveloping brownfields.
  Finally, this bill creates an Interagency Council on Sustainable 
Communities to break down the ``stovepiping'' that exists within the 
Federal Government and coordinate Federal policies to encourage 
sustainable development.
  In my home State of Connecticut, integrated planning and sustainable 
development is critical to growing stronger communities.
  We have a state-level program called HOMEConnecticut that provides 
grants to plan Incentive Housing Zones. In these zones, mixed-income 
housing is built near jobs and transit centers, in downtowns and in 
redeveloped brownfields. More than 50 cities and towns have either 
applied for grants or already received them. The investment will pay 
off in affordable homes, good jobs, and more livable communities.
  Like bragging on Connecticut, but I would love to see this success 
replicated in communities around the Nation. The Obama administration 
has indicated its commitment to encouraging sustainable development and 
helping local authorities build a better future. It is time for us to 
do the same.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this important 
legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Kerry, and Mr. 
        Lugar):
  S. 1620. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
tax incentives and fees for increasing motor vehicle fuel economy, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, as the success of the Cash for Clunkers 
Program that we are working to extend today makes clear, there is 
substantial interest among consumers in upgrading the fuel efficiency 
of their vehicles. In fact, maybe the most surprising thing about the 
program thus far has been the higher-than-expected appetite by 
consumers for the most fuel-efficient vehicles.
  It is an encouraging sign, but it remains surprising because it is 
extraordinarily difficult for a consumer to take into account the real 
benefits, or costs, of fuel economy. The value of fuel efficiency 
depends on the unknowable fact of what the price of gasoline is likely 
to be in future years as well as requiring a calculation to make and 
apples-to-apples comparison of the costs of ownership at different 
efficiency levels. This explains why study after study demonstrates 
that consumers don't fully account for the fuel costs of ownership when 
they make buying decisions. Decisions that many people regretted making 
only a few years earlier as gas prices climbed near $4 per gallon last 
fall.
  This isn't only a problem for consumers. Improving the fuel economy 
of a vehicle requires significant engineering and new technologies, 
often adding hundreds or thousands to the manufacturer price of a 
vehicle; costs consumers have proved unwilling to bear. Faced with this 
reality, and the uncertainty of recovering their costs from consumers 
who are unsure of the value of fuel efficiency, car makers have 
generally thought it is in their best business interests to meet the 
fuel economy requirements of CAFE but go no further. Even when 
manufacturers want to go further than the CAFE requirements and produce 
more efficient vehicles, they are faced with giving up a cost advantage 
to their competitors by putting on expensive new technologies. For this 
reason, and to attempt to take into account the very real costs in oil 
and climate insecurity by our undervaluation of efficiency, Congress 
has put in a series of incentives for specific technologies such as 
hybrids, electric-drive, and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. We have also 
recently made significant investments in battery manufacturing and 
vehicle electrification to try and close the significant gap with our 
global competitors in these technologies.
  Although I support those investments to increase our competitiveness 
in the clean energy technology manufacturing race, unless the domestic 
marketplace will support them over the long term, they simply won't be 
enough. I believe the best path to both support our climate and energy 
goals and enhance our economic competitiveness is to create a set of 
clear, technology-neutral incentives that can achieve our goals and 
then let the market and consumers sort out the best technologies.
  The Efficient Vehicle Leadership Act of 2009 that I am introducing 
today with Senators Snowe, Kerry, and Lugar provides a long-term 
pathway forward that will allow consumers to afford the most fuel 
efficient vehicles and a clear signal to the manufacturers that they 
can succeed in the marketplace by incorporating the most advanced fuel 
efficiency technologies into their new offerings. The bill would 
provide for fuel performance rebates that would decrease the cost of 
efficient cars and pay for it by assessing a fuel performance fee to 
manufacturers for inefficient vehicles to pay for the program.
  The rebates and fees would be calculated based on how much more or 
less fuel-efficient a vehicle is relative to the CAFE standard. The 
CAFE standard is based on the size, or ``footprint''--the interior 
dimensions of the four wheels of the motor vehicle, so each vehicle 
would compete with other vehicles of a similar size. The CAFE standard 
itself becomes more stringent over time, based on the ``maximum 
feasible'' fuel efficiency as determined by NHTSA, so the incentives 
are recast yearly against a higher target. Calculating the rebates and 
fees based on the CAFE standard allows them to net out, making the 
overall system revenue neutral and providing a continuing incentive 
each subsequent year. Thus, the purchasers of fuel efficiency laggards 
for each size pay to make the most fuel-efficient equivalent vehicles 
more affordable. The rebate amount must appear on the fuel efficiency 
sticker and consumers can choose if they want to receive their rebate 
directly in their tax returns or they can transfer the credit to 
dealer, as long as the dealer certifies they have given the rebate to 
the consumer at the point of purchase.
  In sum, this bill provides a long-term structure for the automotive 
sector that provides certainty to manufacturers that the technologies 
that they must employ to meet the new fuel efficiency requirements will 
be valued by consumers and, beyond that, rewards and incentivizes 
innovation in vehicle efficiency to go beyond the CAFE requirements. 
The technological acumen of the auto industry will be harnessed, with 
no net impact on safety or comfort, and without distorting the 
marketplace. Consumers would benefit for years to come from a smaller 
hit on their wallet at the pump. The United States would benefit 
overall as we began to curb our appetite for oil.
  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. 1620

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; AMENDMENT OF 1986 CODE.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Efficient 
     Vehicle Leadership Act of 2009''.

[[Page 20954]]

       (b) Amendment of 1986 Code.--Except as otherwise expressly 
     provided, whenever in this Act an amendment or repeal is 
     expressed in terms of an amendment to, or repeal of, a 
     section or other provision, the reference shall be considered 
     to be made to a section or other provision of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986.

     SEC. 2. TAX CREDIT FOR FUEL-EFFICIENT MOTOR VEHICLES.

       (a) In General.--Subpart B of part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1 (relating to other credits) is amended by inserting 
     after section 30D the following new section:

     ``SEC. 30E. FUEL PERFORMANCE REBATE.

       ``(a) Allowance of Credit.--
       ``(1) In general.--There shall be allowed as a credit 
     against the tax imposed by this chapter for the taxable year 
     an amount equal to the amount determined under paragraph (2) 
     with respect to any new qualified fuel-efficient motor 
     vehicle placed in service by the taxpayer during the taxable 
     year.
       ``(2) Credit amount.--With respect to each new qualified 
     fuel-efficient motor vehicle, the amount determined under 
     this paragraph shall be equal to the product of--
       ``(A) the absolute value of the difference between the 
     fuel-economy rating and the reference fuel-economy rating for 
     such motor vehicle for the model year, and
       ``(B) 100, and
       ``(C) the applicable amount.
       ``(3) Applicable amount.--For purposes of paragraph (2)(C), 
     the applicable amount is equal to--
       ``(A) in the case of model year 2011--
       ``(i) $1,000, or
       ``(ii) $2,000, if the fuel-economy rating for such motor 
     vehicle is at least 50 percent more efficient than the 
     reference fuel-economy rating for such motor vehicle as 
     determined under paragraph (2)(A), and
       ``(B) in the case of any succeeding model year--
       ``(i) $1,500, or
       ``(ii) $2,500, if the fuel-economy rating for such motor 
     vehicle is at least 50 percent more efficient than the 
     reference fuel-economy rating for such motor vehicle as 
     determined under paragraph (2)(A), or
       ``(iii) $3,500, if the fuel-economy rating for such motor 
     vehicle is at least 75 percent more efficient than the 
     reference fuel-economy rating for such motor vehicle as 
     determined under paragraph (2)(A).
       ``(b) New Qualified Fuel-Efficient Motor Vehicle.--For 
     purposes of this section, the term `new qualified fuel-
     efficient motor vehicle' means a passenger automobile or 
     light truck--
       ``(1) which is treated as a motor vehicle for purposes of 
     title II of the Clean Air Act,
       ``(2) which achieves a fuel-economy rating that is more 
     efficient than the reference fuel-economy rating for such 
     motor vehicle for the model year,
       ``(3) for which standards are prescribed pursuant to 
     section 32902 of title 49, United States Code,
       ``(4) the original use of which commences with the 
     taxpayer,
       ``(5) which is acquired for use or lease by the taxpayer 
     and not for resale,
       ``(6) the purchase price of which, less the amount 
     allowable under subsection (a) with respect to such vehicle, 
     does not exceed $50,000, and
       ``(7) which is made by a manufacturer beginning with model 
     year 2011.
       ``(c) Application With Other Credits.--
       ``(1) Business credit treated as part of general business 
     credit.--So much of the credit which would be allowed under 
     subsection (a) for any taxable year (determined without 
     regard to this subsection) that is attributable to property 
     of a character subject to an allowance for depreciation shall 
     be treated as a credit listed in section 38(b) for such 
     taxable year (and not allowed under subsection (a)).
       ``(2) Refundable personal credit.--
       ``(A) In general.--For purposes of this title, the credit 
     allowed under subsection (a) for any taxable year (determined 
     after application of paragraph (1)) shall be treated as a 
     credit allowable under subpart C for such taxable year (and 
     not allowed under subsection (a)).
       ``(B) Refundable credit may be transferred.--
       ``(i) In general.--A taxpayer may, in connection with the 
     purchase of a new qualified fuel-efficient motor vehicle, 
     transfer any refundable credit described in subparagraph (A) 
     to any person who is in the trade or business of selling new 
     qualified fuel-efficient motor vehicles and who sold such 
     vehicle to the taxpayer, but only if such person clearly 
     discloses to such taxpayer, through the use of a window 
     sticker attached to the new qualified fuel-efficient 
     vehicle--

       ``(I) the amount of the refundable credit described in 
     subparagraph (A) with respect to such vehicle, and
       ``(II) a notification that the taxpayer will not be 
     eligible for any credit under section 30, 30B, or 30D with 
     respect to such vehicle unless the taxpayer elects not to 
     have this section apply with respect to such vehicle.

       ``(ii) Certification.--A transferee of a refundable credit 
     described in subparagraph (A) may not claim such credit 
     unless such claim is accompanied by a certification to the 
     Secretary that the transferee reduced the price the taxpayer 
     paid for the new qualified fuel-efficient motor vehicle by 
     the entire amount of such refundable credit.
       ``(iii) Consent required for revocation.--Any transfer 
     under clause (i) may be revoked only with the consent of the 
     Secretary.
       ``(iv) Regulations.--The Secretary may prescribe such 
     regulations as necessary to ensure that any refundable credit 
     described in clause (i) is claimed once and not retransferred 
     by a transferee.
       ``(d) Other Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) Fuel-economy rating.--The term `fuel-economy rating' 
     means, with respect to any motor vehicle, the combined fuel-
     economy rating for such motor vehicle, expressed in gallons 
     per mile, determined in accordance with section 32904 of 
     title 49, United States Code.
       ``(2) Model year.--The term `model year' has the meaning 
     given such term under section 32901(a) of such title 49.
       ``(3) Motor vehicle.--The term `motor vehicle' means any 
     vehicle which is manufactured primarily for use on public 
     streets, roads, and highways (not including a vehicle 
     operated exclusively on a rail or rails) and which has at 
     least 4 wheels.
       ``(4) Reference fuel-economy rating.--The term `reference 
     fuel-economy rating' means, with respect to any motor 
     vehicle, the fuel economy standard for such motor vehicle, 
     expressed in gallons per mile, calculated by applying the 
     relevant vehicle attributes to the mathematical function 
     published pursuant to section 32902(b)(3)(A) of title 49, 
     United States Code.
       ``(5) Other terms.--The terms `automobile', `passenger 
     automobile', `light truck', and `manufacturer' have the 
     meanings given such terms in regulations prescribed by the 
     Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency for 
     purposes of the administration of title II of the Clean Air 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 7521 et seq.).
       ``(e) Special Rules.--
       ``(1) Basis reduction.--For purposes of this subtitle, the 
     basis of any property for which a credit is allowable under 
     subsection (a) shall be reduced by the amount of such credit 
     so allowed (determined without regard to subsection (c)).
       ``(2) No double benefit.--No other credit shall be 
     allowable under this chapter for a new qualified fuel-
     efficient motor vehicle with respect to which a credit is 
     allowed under this section.
       ``(3) Property used by tax-exempt entity.--In the case of a 
     vehicle whose use is described in paragraph (3) or (4) of 
     section 50(b) and which is not subject to a lease, the person 
     who sold such vehicle to the person or entity using such 
     vehicle shall be treated as the taxpayer that placed such 
     vehicle in service, but only if such person clearly discloses 
     to such person or entity in a document the amount of any 
     credit allowable under subsection (a) with respect to such 
     vehicle (determined without regard to subsection (c)). For 
     purposes of subsection (c), property to which this paragraph 
     applies shall be treated as of a character subject to an 
     allowance for depreciation.
       ``(4) Property used outside united states, etc., not 
     qualified.--No credit shall be allowable under subsection (a) 
     with respect to any property referred to in section 50(b)(1) 
     or with respect to the portion of the cost of any property 
     taken into account under section 179.
       ``(5) Recapture.--The Secretary shall, by regulations, 
     provide for recapturing the benefit of any credit allowable 
     under subsection (a) with respect to any property which 
     ceases to be property eligible for such credit (including 
     recapture in the case of a lease period of less than the 
     economic life of a vehicle).
       ``(6) Election not to take credit.--No credit shall be 
     allowed under subsection (a) for any vehicle if the taxpayer 
     elects to not have this section apply to such vehicle.
       ``(7) Interaction with air quality and motor vehicle safety 
     standards.--A motor vehicle shall not be considered eligible 
     for a credit under this section unless such vehicle is in 
     compliance with--
       ``(A) the applicable provisions of the Clean Air Act for 
     the applicable make and model year of the vehicle (or 
     applicable air quality provisions of State law in the case of 
     a State which has adopted such provisions under a waiver 
     under section 209(b) of the Clean Air Act), and
       ``(B) the motor vehicle safety provisions of sections 30101 
     through 30169 of title 49, United States Code.
       ``(8) Inflation adjustment.--In the case of any model year 
     beginning in a calendar year after 2010, each dollar amount 
     in subsection (a)(3)(B) shall be increased by an amount equal 
     to--
       ``(A) such dollar amount, multiplied by
       ``(B) the cost-of-living adjustment determined under 
     section 1(f)(3) for the calendar year in which the model year 
     begins, determined by substituting `2009' for `1992' in 
     subparagraph (B) thereof.

     Any increase determined under the preceding sentence shall be 
     rounded to the nearest multiple of $100.
       ``(f) Regulations.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the 
     Secretary shall promulgate such regulations as necessary to 
     carry out the provisions of this section.

[[Page 20955]]

       ``(2) Coordination in prescription of certain 
     regulations.--The Secretary of the Treasury, in coordination 
     with the Secretary of Transportation and the Administrator of 
     the Environmental Protection Agency, shall prescribe such 
     regulations as necessary to determine whether a motor vehicle 
     meets the requirements to be eligible for a credit under this 
     section.''.
       (b) Credit Allowed Against Alternative Minimum Tax.--
       (1) Business credit.--Section 38(c)(4)(B) is amended by 
     redesignating clauses (i) through (viii) as clauses (ii) 
     through (ix), respectively, and by inserting before clause 
     (ii) (as so redesignated) the following new clause:
       ``(i) the credit determined under section 30E,''.
       (2) Personal credit.--
       (A) Section 24(b)(3)(B) is amended by striking ``and 30D'' 
     and inserting ``30D, and 30E''.
       (B) Section 25(e)(1)(C)(ii) is amended by inserting 
     ``30E,'' after ``30D,''.
       (C) Section 25B(g)(2) is amended by striking ``and 30D'' 
     and inserting ``30D, and 30E''.
       (D) Section 26(a)(1) is amended by striking `` and 30D'' 
     and inserting ``30D, and 30E''.
       (E) Section 904(i) is amended by striking ``and 30D'' and 
     inserting ``30D, and 30E''.
       (c) Display of Credit.--Section 32908(b)(1) of title 49, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (E) and (F) as 
     subparagraphs (F) and (G), and
       (2) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(E) the amount of the fuel-efficient motor vehicle credit 
     allowable with respect to the sale of the automobile under 
     section 30E of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 
     30E).''.
       (d) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 38(a) is amended by striking ``plus'' at the 
     end of paragraph (34), by striking the period at the end of 
     paragraph (35) and inserting ``, plus'', and by adding at the 
     end the following new paragraph:
       ``(36) the portion of the fuel performance rebate to which 
     section 30E(c)(1) applies.''.
       (2) Section 1016(a) is amended by striking ``and'' at the 
     end of paragraph (36), by striking the period at the end of 
     paragraph (37) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the 
     end the following new paragraph:
       ``(38) to the extent provided in section 30E(e)(1).''.
       (3) Section 6501(m) is amended by inserting ``30E(e)(6),'' 
     after ``30D(e)(4),''.
       (4) The table of section for subpart C of part IV of 
     subchapter A of chapter 1 is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to section 30D the following new item:

``Sec. 30E. Fuel performance rebate.''.

       (e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to property placed in service after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 3. FUEL PERFORMANCE FEE.

       (a) In General.--Section 4064 is amended to read as 
     follows:

     ``SEC. 4064. FUEL PERFORMANCE FEE.

       ``(a) Imposition of Tax.--
       ``(1) In general.--There is hereby imposed on the sale by 
     the manufacturer of each fuel guzzler motor vehicle a tax 
     equal to the product of--
       ``(A) the absolute value of the difference between the 
     fuel-economy rating and the reference fuel-economy rating for 
     such motor vehicle for the model year, and
       ``(B) 100, and
       ``(C) the applicable amount.
       ``(2) Applicable amount.--For purposes of paragraph (1)(C), 
     the applicable amount is equal to--
       ``(A) $1,500, or
       ``(B) $2,500, if the fuel-economy rating for such motor 
     vehicle is more than 50 percent less efficient than the 
     reference fuel-economy rating for such motor vehicle as 
     determined under paragraph (1)(A), or
       ``(C) $3,500, if the fuel-economy rating for such motor 
     vehicle is more than 75 percent less efficient than the 
     reference fuel-economy rating for such motor vehicle as 
     determined under paragraph (1)(A).
       ``(b) Fuel Guzzler Motor Vehicle.--For purposes of this 
     section--
       ``(1) In general.--The term `fuel guzzler motor vehicle' 
     means a passenger automobile or light truck--
       ``(A) which is treated as a motor vehicle for purposes of 
     title II of the Clean Air Act,
       ``(B) which achieves a fuel-economy rating that is less 
     efficient than the reference fuel-economy rating for such 
     motor vehicle for the model year,
       ``(C) which has a gross vehicle weight rating of not more 
     than 8,500 pounds, and
       ``(D) which is made by a manufacturer beginning with model 
     year 2013.
       ``(2) Exception for emergency vehicles.--The term `fuel 
     guzzler motor vehicle' does not include any vehicle sold for 
     use and used--
       ``(A) as an ambulance or combination ambulance-hearse,
       ``(B) by the United States or by a State or local 
     government for police or other law enforcement purposes, or
       ``(C) for other emergency uses prescribed by the Secretary 
     by regulations.
       ``(c) Other Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) Fuel-economy rating.--The term `fuel-economy rating' 
     means, with respect to any motor vehicle, the combined fuel-
     economy rating for such motor vehicle, expressed in gallons 
     per mile, determined in accordance with section 32904 of 
     title 49, United States Code.
       ``(2) Model year.--The term `model year' has the meaning 
     given such term under section 32901(a) of such title 49.
       ``(3) Motor vehicle.--The term `motor vehicle' means any 
     vehicle which is manufactured primarily for use on public 
     streets, roads, and highways (not including a vehicle 
     operated exclusively on a rail or rails) and which has at 
     least 4 wheels.
       ``(4) Reference fuel-economy rating.--The term `reference 
     fuel-economy rating' means, with respect to any motor 
     vehicle, the fuel economy standard for such motor vehicle, 
     expressed in gallons per mile, calculated by applying the 
     relevant vehicle attributes to the mathematical function 
     published pursuant to section 32902(b)(3)(A) of title 49, 
     United States Code.
       ``(5) Other terms.--The terms `automobile', `passenger 
     automobile', `light truck', and `manufacturer' have the 
     meanings given such terms in regulations prescribed by the 
     Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency for 
     purposes of the administration of title II of the Clean Air 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 7521 et seq.).
       ``(d) Inflation Adjustment.--In the case of any model year 
     beginning in a calendar year after 2010, each dollar amount 
     in subsection (a)(2) shall be increased by an amount equal 
     to--
       ``(1) such dollar amount, multiplied by
       ``(2) the cost-of-living adjustment determined under 
     section 1(f)(3) for the calendar year in which the model year 
     begins, determined by substituting `2009' for `1992' in 
     subparagraph (B) thereof.

     Any increase determined under the preceding sentence shall be 
     rounded to the nearest multiple of $100.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) The heading for part I of subchapter A of chapter 32 is 
     amended by striking ``GAS'' and inserting ``FUEL''.
       (2) The table of parts for subchapter A of chapter 32 is 
     amended by striking ``Gas'' in the item relating to part I 
     and inserting ``Fuel''.
       (3) The table of sections for part I of subchapter A of 
     chapter 32 is amended by striking ``Gas'' in the item 
     relating to section 4064 and inserting ``Fuel''.
       (4) The heading for subsection (d) of section 1016 is 
     amended by striking ``Gas Guzzler Tax'' and inserting ``Fuel 
     Performance Fee''.
       (5) The heading for subsection (e) of section 4217 is 
     amended by striking ``Gas Guzzler Tax'' and inserting ``Fuel 
     Performance Fee''.
       (6) The heading for subparagraph (B) of section 4217(e)(3) 
     is amended by striking ``gas guzzler tax'' and inserting 
     ``fuel performance fee''.
       (7) Section 4217(e) is amended by striking ``gas guzzler 
     tax'' each place it appears and inserting ``fuel performance 
     fee''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to sales of vehicles beginning with model year 
     2013.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SANDERS (for himself and Mr. Merkley):
  S. 1621. A bill to improve thermal energy efficiency and use, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the 
Thermal Energy Efficiency Act, which I believe can play an important 
role in moving our Nation toward green job creation and greenhouse gas 
emissions reductions. I thank Senator Merkley for being an original 
cosponsor on this bill. I also thank the International District Energy 
Association, the Biomass Energy Resource Center, the American Council 
for an Energy-Efficient Economy, Sustainable Northwest, and the U.S. 
Clean Heat and Power Association for working with us to ensure that as 
we consider comprehensive global warming legislation, we do not forget 
about energy efficiency and thermal energy.
  This legislation addresses two ways of producing and distributing 
thermal energy, which is a technical term for heat. The legislation 
focuses on combined heat and power and district energy. Combined heat 
and power is simple to understand and has great capacity to transform 
our use of energy and increase large-scale efficiency. It is a fully 
developed technology, and there is nothing experimental about it. 
Combined heat and power means that one source of energy can produce 
electricity and then capture and use the resulting heat for a second 
purpose: heating homes, schools, offices, and factories. Combined heat 
and power gets both heat and power from one energy source and can work 
with fossil fuels or biomass or even waste. Combined heat

[[Page 20956]]

and power can offer huge efficiency gains and lower carbon footprints 
for our powerplants.
  District energy can be used together with combined heat and power, or 
separate from it, in systems designed purely for heating. What district 
energy does is use heat not just for one building or location but for 
multiple locations. Just as homes or businesses share electric lines or 
telephone lines, they can also share a heat source. And sharing a heat 
source can often be a major source of efficiency.
  For too long, Federal energy policy has not focused enough on thermal 
energy or energy efficiency. We know we can do more. According to the 
Department of Energy, combined heat and power represents roughly 9 
percent of our existing electric power capacity today, but if we moved 
to 20 percent by 2030, we could avoid 60 percent of the projected 
growth in carbon dioxide emissions in this country, equivalent to 
taking more than half of the current passenger vehicles off the road in 
the United States. Additionally, we could create 1 million new jobs and 
generate $234 billion in new investments.
  We are talking about real technology that is deployable today. In 
Copenhagen, district energy provides clean heating to 97 percent of the 
city. In our own country, in St. Paul, MN, district energy and combined 
heat and power provide 65 megawatts of thermal energy and 25 megawatts 
of electricity from renewable urban wood waste. Jamestown, NY, started 
their district heating project in 1981, and today the system provides 
16 megawatts of thermal energy heating. Jamestown's public school 
district uses district energy and has saved more than 16 percent of 
their energy use over a 30-month period and saved more than $500,000 
dollars for taxpayers in the process.
  We have opportunities to expand this technology all around our 
Nation. For example, in my home State of Vermont, several of our cities 
and towns are looking at district energy. In Burlington, VT, we have 50 
megawatt powerplant that uses wood chips and wood waste for power. Yet 
approximately 60 percent of the energy produced by this plant is lost 
as wasted heat. This is typical of many conventional power plants. If 
Burlington implemented a district energy system it could use the wasted 
thermal energy to heat and cool many buildings downtown. The hurdle for 
Burlington, and many cities and towns, is the upfront capital 
investment required to build a district energy system.
  That is why today I am introducing the Thermal Energy Efficiency Act. 
We need a stable, long-term funding source for district energy and 
combined heat and power. This bill would use 2 percent of the revenues 
derived from auctioning emissions permits under global warming 
legislation to support hospitals, cities and towns, schools and 
universities, businesses and industries, and even Federal facilities 
and military bases as they implement efficient thermal energy systems.
  This bill would recognize the important role that efficiency and 
thermal energy can play in helping our Nation meet our energy security, 
emissions reduction, and economic goals. As a member of both the Energy 
and Natural Resources Committee and the Environment and Public Works 
Committee, I look forward to working with my colleagues to ensure that 
combined heat and power and district energy are included in 
comprehensive energy and global warming legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself, Mr. Dodd, and Mr. Menendez):
  S. 1623. A bill to prohibit the Secretary of the Interior from 
issuing new Federal oil and gas leases to holders of existing leases 
who do not diligently develop the land subject to the existing leases 
or relinquish the leases, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing legislation 
that seeks to answer a question more and more Americans are asking in 
light of our economic woes and our struggle toward energy independence: 
Why aren't the oil companies developing 65 million acres, or nearly 75 
percent, of land that they are leasing from the U.S. Government? Those 
same companies and some of my colleagues continue to argue that we need 
to open more Federal lands to drilling and recently have been insisting 
on opening up part of the Gulf of Mexico off Florida's coast that 
Congress agreed to keep closed during debate in 2005 for military and 
security purposes. I would first like to know why the oil companies are 
not producing on most of the Federal lands they already have under 
lease.
  Last year, at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, I had the chance 
to ask top oil executives just that question. They couldn't come up 
with a good explanation. In fact, one of the executives told me that 
they have the manpower and infrastructure to put all their existing 
leases of Federal lands into oil production.
  I find this troubling. No one is talking about pulling oil out of a 
hat. But with nearly 75 percent of currently leased Federal lands and 
waters not producing oil and gas, Congress must insist on some 
accountability. This is why today I am introducing--along with Senators 
Dodd and Menendez--the Responsible Federal Oil and Gas Lease Act, also 
known as ``Use It or Lose It'' legislation. This bill says that if oil 
and gas companies want to lease additional Federal lands, they must 
either be producing or diligently developing their existing Federal 
leases, or they have to first give up those leases. Under my bill, the 
Department of the Interior is required to establish diligent 
development benchmarks, which will encourage leaseholders to 
demonstrate they are taking steps that may lead to oil and gas 
production. This is a responsible way to increase production and keep 
the private sector accountable for production of existing Federal 
resources.
  Last fall, the Government Accountability Office issued a report, 
``Oil and Gas Leasing: Interior Could Do More to Encourage Diligent 
Development,'' that looked at whether enough is being done to ensure 
oil companies are taking steps to develop Federal oil and gas leases. 
The report found that the Department of the Interior--whose Minerals 
Management Service manages offshore leases and Bureau of Land 
Management manages onshore and National Petroleum Reserve leases--lags 
behind State and private landowner efforts to encourage development of 
land leased for oil and gas development. The GAO recommends that the 
Secretary of the Interior ``develop a strategy to evaluate options to 
encourage faster development of its oil and gas leases.''
  Though both MMS and BLM require ``reasonable diligence'' in 
developing and producing oil and gas on Federal leases, the GAO found 
that the Interior Department has not clearly defined what activities or 
timeframes constitute reasonable diligence--something my bill requires 
the agency to do. Currently, the GAO concludes that leaseholders, in 
general, are not required to take actions to develop a lease during the 
primary term. The only specific diligent development requirement that 
Interior officials identified to the GAO applies only to lessees of 8-
year leases in the Gulf of Mexico and requires drilling to occur before 
the end of the fifth year or else the lease terminates. However, these 
leases represent less than 1 percent of the total lease universe.
  In addition to the GAO evaluation, the Department of the Interior's 
Office of the Inspector General issued a report in February 2009 on its 
investigation of whether oil and gas companies were adequately 
developing Federal leases and whether the Department of the Interior 
was ensuring companies bring their leases into production. The 
inspector general concluded that, while there is no guarantee that a 
particular lease contains oil and gas in commercial quantities, there 
are no requirements to ensure lessees are taking steps to reach this 
conclusion and to ensure the development of leases capable of 
production. Specifically, the inspector general found there are no 
requirements for the Department to monitor production progress or 
compel companies to develop leases and there is no requirement to 
detail activity on nonproducing leases. My bill will ensure the Federal 
Government develops

[[Page 20957]]

diligent development requirements for oil and gas leases.
  With over 100 billion barrels of oil under Federal lands and waters 
that are being leased or are available for leasing, Congress must 
properly encourage their development. This won't solve our energy 
problems--the unfortunate truth is that in today's global market, gas 
prices are dictated less by our domestic production and more by OPEC's 
actions. Nevertheless, Congress must ensure appropriate oversight of 
our Federally leased lands and waters, as we simultaneously reduce our 
dependence on foreign oil through continuing to be a world leader in 
oil and gas production, decreasing our demand of oil and gas since we 
are the No. 1 consumer of both in the world, and pursuing alternative 
energy sources especially in the transportation sector.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. WHITEHOUSE:
  S. 1624. A bill to amend title 11 of the United States Code, to 
provide protection for medical debt homeowners, to restore bankruptcy 
protections for individuals experiencing economic distress as 
caregivers to ill, injured, or disabled family members, and to exempt 
from means testing debtors whose financial problems were caused by 
serious medical problems, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
the Judiciary.
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
that would help families struggling with medical debts overcome hurdles 
that under current law make it difficult for them to find relief in the 
bankruptcy system. With medical costs at an all-time high and the 
unemployment rate hovering near 10 percent nationwide--and 12.4 percent 
in my home State of Rhode Island--too many individuals and families 
struck with injury and illness have no other option but to file for 
bankruptcy. According to a recent Harvard University study, health 
care-related costs have been a primary driver of personal bankruptcy 
filings, contributing to over 62 percent of filings in 2007.
  The statistics are as shocking as the personal stories are 
heartbreaking. Countless Rhode Islanders have written to me during my 
time in office asking for help with crippling medical costs, and I want 
to share just two of their stories with you today.
  Adam, a 23-year-old from Bristol, recently underwent surgery for 
cancer. Adam's treatment plan requires him to undergo a CT scan every 2 
months. While his insurance initially paid for his health costs, he 
received word not long after his surgery that his policy was ``maxed 
out'' and that he would have to pay $6,700 out of pocket for an 
upcoming CT scan. As of today, Adam, a young man just starting his 
adult life, has $20,000 in medical debt and reports that he ``cannot 
see any light at the end of the tunnel.''
  Robert, a veteran and retiree also from Warwick, suffered a major 
heart attack in November of 2004. Although he had health insurance, 
Robert was responsible for paying a $2,000 deductible plus 20 percent 
of the cost of his care. After 40 years of working and saving, these 
medical costs wiped him out, and he had to sell his home.
  Adam and Robert have both suffered unexpected medical costs that have 
turned their lives upside down. These Rhode Islanders, like millions of 
others nationwide, may be forced to file for bankruptcy to get a clean 
start--but when they do, they will learn that the bankruptcy process 
can be time consuming and costly and ultimately may not allow them to 
stay in their homes.
  The legislation that I am introducing today, the Medical Bankruptcy 
Fairness Act of 2009, would help people who because of medical costs 
have no other choice but to file for bankruptcy. The bill would waive 
procedural hurdles so that Adam and Robert would have the option of a 
speedier, less expensive, and more efficient bankruptcy. To begin with, 
it would waive credit counseling requirements for these debtors. Such 
requirements have little relevance to people whose debt stems not from 
poor budgeting but, rather, from uncontrollable medical expenses. The 
bill would also waive the so-called ``means test,'' making the filing 
process quicker and less costly and making sure that people have the 
ability to file to have their debts discharged in chapter 7, as opposed 
to a chapter 13 plan under which they would have made debt payments for 
3 to 5 years.
  In addition to removing these procedural hurdles, the Medical 
Bankruptcy Fairness Act would give people with high levels of medical 
debt the ability to retain at least $250,000 in home value through the 
bankruptcy process. The ``homestead exemption'' is one of many aspects 
of bankruptcy law that looks to the laws of the individual States. 
While filers in some States already have the ability to preserve home 
equity at this level, a number of States offer homestead exemptions of 
$5,000 or less. With the average home price nationwide around $200,000, 
the $250,000 exemption included in this bill will allow the majority of 
individuals and families crushed by medical debt to keep their homes.
  Finally, the bill would eliminate an obstacle that prevents many 
bankruptcy filers from accessing the chapter 7 bankruptcy system, which 
as I mentioned earlier is the simplest and most efficient form of 
bankruptcy. Because attorneys' fees are ``discharged'' at the end of a 
chapter 7 bankruptcy, attorneys generally require the upfront payment 
of fees in chapter 7 proceedings. Many debtors who would be better off 
filing for a quicker and less costly bankruptcy in chapter 7 are forced 
to file in chapter 13 because they don't have enough cash to pay the 
attorney. The Medical Bankruptcy Fairness Act would make attorneys' 
fees nondischargeable in chapter 7 bankruptcies, as in chapter 13 
bankruptcies, making it easier for debtors to elect the more efficient 
chapter 7 proceeding.
  Before I conclude, I want to acknowledge the hard work of my 
colleague from Massachusetts, Senator Kennedy, on the issue of medical 
debt. Senator Kennedy offered amendments during the consideration of 
the 2005 bankruptcy reforms that would have given people struggling 
with medical debts treatment similar to that which they would get under 
the Medical Bankruptcy Fairness Act. Unfortunately, those amendments 
were voted down. I look forward to working with Senator Kennedy to make 
sure that we don't miss another opportunity to help Americans 
struggling with medical debt.
  There are people in every State suffering from medical hardship and 
related debts who would benefit from this legislation. I urge my 
colleagues to work with me to pass it to Adam and Robert and the 
millions like them nationwide a clean start in bankruptcy.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DODD (for himself and Mr. Bingaman):
  S. 1625. A bill to amend title II of the Public Health Service Act to 
provide for an improved method to measure poverty so as to enable a 
better assessment of the effects of programs under the Public Health 
Service Act and the Social Security Act, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I wish to speak about poverty and, 
specifically, how we measure it and its influence on millions of 
Americans.
  When we return from the August recess, the Census Bureau will release 
its annual report documenting the number of Americans living in 
poverty. But these numbers will provide a flawed picture of poverty in 
America since they are based almost exclusively on 50-year-old food 
prices. The bill I am introducing today, the Measuring American 
Poverty, or MAP, Act, directs the Census to develop a new poverty 
measure that is based on a more comprehensive definition of need. 
Improving the poverty measure is not just an academic exercise for 
statisticians, it is essential in helping us identify and implement 
effective policies that address this crisis.
  Even with an inaccurate measurement, the picture of poverty in 
America is startling. In 2007, the year for which we have the most 
recent data, one in eight Americans--and nearly one in five children--
didn't have the resources to meet their basic needs: food, clothing, 
and shelter. Think about that. One in five children in America in

[[Page 20958]]

2007 went to bed without even the most basic elements that we take for 
granted. In my home State of Connecticut, more than 85,000 kids lived 
in poverty. And that was before the economic downturn in which we now 
find ourselves. The Center for American Progress estimates that the 
cost to our Nation of persistent child poverty is $\1/2\ trillion each 
year. Every year a child stays in poverty reduces future productivity 
over the course of his or her working life by nearly $12,000.
  But the cost is more than just financial--it is moral. We are judged, 
Hubert Humphrey famously said, by how we treat those in the shadows of 
life. And every child who goes to bed hungry, every American who lacks 
the basic necessities of life, is a mark on our national conscience. As 
we struggle with the great challenges of our time, the crisis of 
poverty is growing. More and more Americans find that shadow creeping 
toward them. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimated that 
if unemployment were to rise to 9 percent--our current unemployment 
rate is 9.5 percent, the highest rate in 26 years--the number of 
Americans in poverty would increase by as many as 10.3 million, and the 
number of children in poverty would rise by as many as 3.3 million.
  To put those numbers in perspective, this recession will add a number 
of Americans equivalent to the population of Michigan to the current 
number who live in poverty, which is already equivalent to the 
population of California. In my home State of Connecticut and across 
this country, people who have long worked hard to get ahead are falling 
further behind. Folks who have worked two jobs with an eye toward 
sending their kids to college are having to choose between purchasing 
food and medications. They are hoping that a child's hacking cough 
doesn't turn into something more serious because they can't afford to 
see a doctor. They are staying up late staring at unpaid bills, 
wondering how to pay their mortgage when their only incomes from their 
meager savings and unemployment insurance, wondering what happened to 
their America dream.
  The vast majority of people who are poor do not lack the desire for a 
better life for themselves and their family. They are not poor in their 
work ethic, their love for their country and their communities. They 
are in poverty, but they are not poor in the qualities that we so 
admire in America. The truth is, many are unlucky and face 
insurmountable hurdles. For some that hurdle is their inability to pay 
for higher education. For others it is that they work two jobs and 
can't read to their kids at night like they want to. And far too many 
others are struggling to pay their mortgage and are spending all their 
retirement savings just to keep a roof over their heads.
  As many hard-working Americans are engulfed by the shadow of poverty, 
we remember Hubert Humphrey's admonition, but too often we can't even 
see into those shadows because the way we measure poverty in America is 
badly outdated. It is that challenge to which I today urge this body to 
rise.
  Currently, we measure poverty by comparing two numbers: the money a 
family has, which the census refers to as an ``income measure,'' and 
the money a family needs to meet its basic needs, which experts call 
the ``poverty threshold.'' If a family's income measure is less than 
the threshold, they are counted as poor. It is a simple calculation. 
But unfortunately both elements--the income measure and the threshold--
are flawed.
  The poverty threshold was created using data from the 1950s and 
1960s. Currently, it is calculated by taking the 1950s cost of 
emergency foodstuffs--food only for temporary use when funds are low--
and multiplying that number by three because in the 1960s, food 
represented one-third of a family budget. But today, food represents 
one-sixth or one-seventh of a family's budget. Similarly, a family's 
cash income before taxes was once an accurate and straightforward way 
to measure a family's resources. But today, many Americans are subject 
to both State and Federal income taxes and may face exorbitant health 
costs or other critical needs which drain their resources. In addition, 
many women now work outside the home, meaning they now need pay for 
childcare and for getting to and from work.
  And on the other side of the ledger, we now provide many benefits to 
low income workers that are not cash payments--they are provided 
through our Tax Code, or like energy assistance programs, paid directly 
to providers. I have fought throughout my career for programs that lift 
people out of poverty. Think of the earned-income tax credit, food 
assistance, housing assistance, home energy assistance, child care 
assistance--hundreds of billions of dollars spent to help Americans 
that aren't accounted for when we calculate whether our efforts are 
working. So, we need a new way to measure both what a family needs and 
what a family has.
  When Mayor Bloomberg decided to tackle poverty in New York City, he 
started by doing what any successful businessman would--he surveyed the 
problem. But he discovered that our outdated system of measuring 
poverty simply didn't allow him to see what was really happening. So 
the mayor charged his Center for Economic Opportunity with creating a 
system that would better represent that threshold, as well as a 
family's resources. They followed the recommendation of the National 
Academy of Sciences 1995 panel described in ``Measuring Poverty: An 
Improved Approach.'' The legislation I offer today also follows these 
guidelines.
  Specifically, this bill--the Measuring American Poverty Act--updates 
the calculations for both threshold and resources in the Federal 
poverty measure. The poverty threshold would be based on the current 
prices of food, clothing, shelter, utilities, and a few basic household 
expenses. And it would revise the current measurement of income to 
better reflect the reality that Americans not only must pay taxes but 
also certain unavoidable expenses like transportation to and from work, 
childcare, and medical expenses. This revised measure would also 
include the value of near-cash benefits like energy assistance, food 
stamps, section 8 housing vouchers, and tax credits such as the earned-
income tax credit.
  Let me be very clear: this isn't a bill to change eligibility for 
programs or the allocation of Federal funds. In fact, the bill's text 
is explicit about that. The MAP Act creates a new measurement. It does 
not replace the Federal Poverty Line. It does not change eligibility 
for programs. It will not lead to an unprecedented automatic increase 
in spending.
  What the MAP Act will do is help us to understand the scope of the 
poverty crisis in America, and to better evaluate the effectiveness of 
our solutions to it. We have a difficult job ahead of us, as we look to 
lift Americans out of poverty, provide middle-class families with a 
strong safety net, and restore the American Dream for working men and 
women. But we must begin by facing unafraid the true nature and scope 
of the poverty crisis. I urge my colleagues to join me in support of 
this legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HARKIN:
  S. 1627. A bill to improve choices for consumers for vehicles and 
fuel, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
and Transportation.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, our national energy situation continues to 
deteriorate. Volatile petroleum and gasoline prices threaten our 
economy, and our oil imports are responsible for an incredibly large 
wealth transfer from America to global oil producers. Our most 
immediate and visible energy challenge is our dependence on petroleum-
derived fuels for transportation, but we also face the need to reduce 
the greenhouse gases that result principally from fossil fuel 
production and use. Because our global warming challenge is 
fundamentally linked to our energy systems, their resolution has a 
common strategy--to transform our energy sector to one far less 
dependent on fossil fuels and far more reliant on energy efficiency and 
domestic renewable energy supplies. This energy transformation strategy 
also represents a crucial economic recovery

[[Page 20959]]

and development opportunity because millions of jobs will be created as 
we carry out this strategy.
  Americans recognize the magnitude and the urgency of our energy 
challenges. They rightfully expect us to adopt policies to move this 
energy transition forward. In particular, we need to reduce dependence 
on oil in transportation, and we have broad agreement on two 
fundamental approaches--increasing efficiency of vehicles and 
increasing use of alternative fuels. We mandated more efficient 
vehicles by passing the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, 
EISA. That bill also mandates a brisk expansion of biofuels production 
under the renewable fuels standard. However, we also need to expand the 
number of vehicles that can use these alternative fuels and the number 
of filling stations selling these biofuels.
  Today I am joined by my esteemed colleague, Senator Lugar of Indiana, 
in introducing the Consumer Fuels and Vehicles Choice Act of 2009. This 
bill will expand the number of alternative fuel automobiles at a rapid 
pace while not imposing undue production cost challenges for our auto 
manufacturers. It calls for 50 percent of all automobiles manufactured 
for sale in the United States to be dual-fuel automobiles by 2011. It 
increases that to 90 percent of all automobiles manufactured for U.S. 
sales by 2013. These requirements are reasonable because it is known 
that gasoline automobiles require relatively minor changes in fuel 
system designs to be able to use blends of gasoline and ethanol which 
qualify them for dual fuel designation.
  This bill also requires that major fuel distributors install blender 
pumps in increasing numbers of the retail fueling stations carrying 
their brand name. These blender pumps will be capable of dispensing 
ethanol and gasoline blends ranging from 0 percent ethanol to 85 
percent ethanol. This flexibility in blend choice is expected to be 
attractive to consumers, including those who want to use regular 
gasoline for non-automotive engines. This bill also authorizes grants 
of up to 50 percent of the cost for installing blender pumps and tanks 
and other infrastructure needed for selling ethanol fuel blends.
  Mr. President, the requirements established and assistance authorized 
in this bill will ensure that the number of dual fuel automobiles and 
the availability of ethanol fuel blends are expanding apace with the 
expansion of ethanol production and use in our national fuel supply 
over the next 15 years and beyond. Taken together, our increasing 
production of biofuels, our incentives for installation of alternative 
fuel infrastructure, and this automobile requirement will provide 
Americans the option of choosing clean, domestically produced fuels for 
their personal transportation needs in the future. These steps 
represent critical components in the transition of our energy systems 
away from fossil and imported fuels toward the benefits of greater 
reliance on sustainable domestic fuel sources.
  Today I urge my Senate colleagues to join us in taking action to 
boost the transition to a cleaner, more resilient, and more secure 
energy economy. I urge their support for this bill and its rapid 
enactment.
  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. 1627

       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 ``Consumer Fuels and Vehicle 
     Choice Act of 2009''.

     SEC. 2. ENSURING THE AVAILABILITY OF DUAL FUELED AUTOMOBILES 
                   AND LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 329 of title 49, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after section 32902 the 
     following:

     ``Sec. 32902A. Requirement to manufacture dual fueled 
       automobiles and light duty trucks

       ``(a) In General.--For each model year listed in the 
     following table, each manufacturer shall ensure that the 
     percentage of automobiles and light duty trucks manufactured 
     by the manufacturer for sale in the United States that are 
     dual fueled automobiles and light duty trucks is not less 
     than the percentage set forth for that model year in the 
     following table:

 
               ``Model Year                          Percentage
 
  Model years 2011 and 2012..............  50 percent
  Model year 2013 and each subsequent      90 percent
   model year.
 

       ``(b) Exception.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to 
     automobiles or light duty trucks that operate only on 
     electricity.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter 
     329 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting 
     after the item relating to section 32902 the following:

``32902A. Requirement to manufacture dual fueled automobiles and light 
              duty trucks.''.
       (c) Rulemaking.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation 
     shall prescribe regulations to carry out the amendments made 
     by this Act.

     SEC. 3. BLENDER PUMP PROMOTION.

       (a) Blender Pump Grant Program.--
       (1) Definitions.--In this subsection:
       (A) Blender pump.--The term ``blender pump'' means an 
     automotive fuel dispensing pump capable of dispensing at 
     least 3 different blends of gasoline and ethanol, as selected 
     by the pump operator, including blends ranging from 0 percent 
     ethanol to 85 percent denatured ethanol, as determined by the 
     Secretary.
       (B) E-85 fuel.--The term ``E-85 fuel'' means a blend of 
     gasoline approximately 85 percent of the content of which is 
     ethanol.
       (C) Ethanol fuel blend.--The term ``ethanol fuel blend'' 
     means a blend of gasoline and ethanol, with a minimum of 0 
     percent and maximum of 85 percent of the content of which is 
     denatured ethanol.
       (D) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Energy.
       (2) Grants.--The Secretary shall make grants under this 
     subsection to eligible facilities (as determined by the 
     Secretary) to pay the Federal share of--
       (A) installing blender pump fuel infrastructure, including 
     infrastructure necessary--
       (i) for the direct retail sale of ethanol fuel blends 
     (including E-85 fuel), including blender pumps and storage 
     tanks; and
       (ii) to directly market ethanol fuel blends (including E-85 
     fuel) to gas retailers, including inline blending equipment, 
     pumps, storage tanks, and loadout equipment; and
       (B) providing subgrants to direct retailers of ethanol fuel 
     blends (including E-85 fuel) for the purpose of installing 
     fuel infrastructure for the direct retail sale of ethanol 
     fuel blends (including E-85 fuel), including blender pumps 
     and storage tanks.
       (3) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of a 
     project carried out under this subsection shall be 50 percent 
     of the total cost of the project.
       (4) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this 
     subsection, to remain available until expended--
       (A) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2010;
       (B) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2011;
       (C) $200,000,000 for fiscal year 2012;
       (D) $300,000,000 for fiscal year 2013; and
       (E) $350,000,000 for fiscal year 2014.
       (b) Installation of Blender Pumps by Major Fuel 
     Distributors at Owned Stations and Branded Stations.--Section 
     211(o) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7545(o)) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(13) Installation of blender pumps by major fuel 
     distributors at owned stations and branded stations.--
       ``(A) Definitions.--In this paragraph:
       ``(i) E-85 fuel.--The term `E-85 fuel' means a blend of 
     gasoline approximately 85 percent of the content of which is 
     ethanol.
       ``(ii) Ethanol fuel blend.--The term `ethanol fuel blend' 
     means a blend of gasoline and ethanol, with a minimum of 0 
     percent and maximum of 85 percent of the content of which is 
     denatured ethanol.
       ``(iii) Major fuel distributor.--

       ``(I) In general.--The term `major fuel distributor' means 
     any person that owns a refinery and directly markets the 
     output of a refinery.
       ``(II) Exclusion.--The term `major fuel distributor' does 
     not include any person that owns less than 50 retail fueling 
     stations.

       ``(iv) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the Secretary 
     of Energy, acting in consultation with the Administrator of 
     the Environmental Protection Agency and the Secretary of 
     Agriculture.
       ``(B) Regulations.--The Secretary shall promulgate 
     regulations to ensure that each major fuel distributor that 
     sells or introduces gasoline into commerce in the United 
     States through majority-owned stations or branded stations 
     installs or otherwise makes available 1 or more blender pumps 
     that dispense E-85 fuel and ethanol fuel blends (including 
     any other equipment necessary, such as tanks, to ensure that 
     the pumps function properly) for a period of not less than 5 
     years at not less than the applicable percentage of the 
     majority-owned stations and the branded stations of the major 
     fuel distributor specified in subparagraph (C).
       ``(C) Applicable percentage.--For the purpose of 
     subparagraph (B), the applicable

[[Page 20960]]

     percentage of the majority-owned stations and the branded 
     stations shall be determined in accordance with the following 
     table:

``Applicable percentage of majority-owned stations and branded statio  
Calendar year:                                                 Percent:
  2011..............................................................10 
  2013..............................................................20 
  2015..............................................................35 
  2017 and each calendar year thereafter............................50.
       ``(D) Geographic distribution.--
       ``(i) In general.--Subject to clause (ii), in promulgating 
     regulations under subparagraph (B), the Secretary shall 
     ensure that each major fuel distributor described in that 
     subparagraph installs or otherwise makes available 1 or more 
     blender pumps that dispense E-85 fuel and ethanol fuel blends 
     at not less than a minimum percentage (specified in the 
     regulations) of the majority-owned stations and the branded 
     stations of the major fuel distributors in each State.
       ``(ii) Requirement.--In specifying the minimum percentage 
     under clause (i), the Secretary shall ensure that each major 
     fuel distributor installs or otherwise makes available 1 or 
     more blender pumps described in that clause in each State in 
     which the major fuel distributor operates.
       ``(E) Financial responsibility.--In promulgating 
     regulations under subparagraph (B), the Secretary shall 
     ensure that each major fuel distributor described in that 
     subparagraph assumes full financial responsibility for the 
     costs of installing or otherwise making available the blender 
     pumps described in that subparagraph and any other equipment 
     necessary (including tanks) to ensure that the pumps function 
     properly.
       ``(F) Production credits for exceeding blender pumps 
     installation requirement.--
       ``(i) Earning and period for applying credits.--If the 
     percentage of the majority-owned stations and the branded 
     stations of a major fuel distributor at which the major fuel 
     distributor installs blender pumps in a particular calendar 
     year exceeds the percentage required under subparagraph (C), 
     the major fuel distributor shall earn credits under this 
     paragraph, which may be applied to any of the 3 consecutive 
     calendar years immediately after the calendar year for which 
     the credits are earned.
       ``(ii) Trading credits.--Subject to clause (iii), a major 
     fuel distributor that has earned credits under clause (i) may 
     sell the credits to another major fuel distributor to enable 
     the purchaser to meet the requirement under subparagraph (C).
       ``(iii) Exception.--A major fuel distributor may not use 
     credits purchased under clause (ii) to fulfill the geographic 
     distribution requirement in subparagraph (D).''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. UDALL, of Colorado (for himself and Mrs. Hagan):
  S. 1628. A bill to amend title VII of the Public Health Service Act 
to increase the number of physicians who practice in underserved rural 
communities; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
Pensions.
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce an 
important piece of legislation on behalf of myself and Senator Kay 
Hagan of North Carolina, the Rural Physician Pipeline Act of 2009.
  In making my way across my home State, I have listened to rural 
constituents from all over Colorado, and their message is clear: rural 
communities are being hit hard by America's health care crisis.
  The life expectancy for women in many rural counties across the 
Nation has declined significantly over the past several decades, and 
health outcomes for Hispanic, Native American, and other minority 
populations are at unacceptable levels. Low-income rural Americans in 
these areas have very few options for affordable access to health care, 
if they have any at all.
  Just over 2 weeks ago, I reached out to health care providers and 
professionals in rural regions of Colorado that have been most impacted 
by our ailing health system to hear directly from those on health 
care's front lines. While there are many factors contributing to the 
lower health outcomes we are seeing in these regions, including 
regulatory hurdles and low reimbursement rates for rural clinics and 
hospitals, the physicians and health professionals I spoke with were 
pretty clear about the overwhelming culprit: lack of primary care 
doctors.
  Invoking imagery of the black bag toting doctor from decades ago 
making house calls to treat all that ailed you and your family, primary 
care physicians are still the lynchpin of our health care system. These 
physicians are the most familiar to Americans--they are the family 
doctor, general practitioner, and pediatrician, and they are many times 
the only point of contact that people have with the health care system. 
They are the first line of defense for keeping our families healthy.
  Unfortunately, as the entire Nation suffers from a shortage of 
primary care doctors, our rural areas are hit the hardest. For a 
variety of socioeconomic and resource-related reasons, rural 
communities struggle to compete with big cities in recruiting from an 
already scarce pool of doctors. Some of these barriers are inherent to 
these areas--lack of job opportunities for spouses or a general lack of 
desire to live the lifestyle offered by our rural communities. But some 
barriers can be overcome if we use our resources wisely and work toward 
solutions to break them down, particularly with respect to how we as a 
nation train and compensate our front line doctors.
  Medical school is where we develop and educate our new doctors, yet 
the 4 years of training they provide more often than not nudge students 
into more lucrative specialty care or toward practice in higher paying 
cities. While we certainly rely on our cardiologists, orthopedists, 
neurologists, and the many other medical specialists to provide the 
top-notch care that only they are trained to provide, we cannot 
continue to push students into these areas to the detriment of primary 
care. A balance needs to be found.
  Today, I am proud to introduce, along with Senator Kay Hagan of North 
Carolina, the Rural Physician Pipeline Act of 2009, a bill that I hope 
can be part of the solution to our rural physician shortage. This 
legislation would make grants available to medical schools across the 
country for establishing programs designed to recruit students from 
rural areas who have a desire to practice in their hometowns. These 
programs would cultivate and strengthen the rural commitment of these 
future ``homegrown'' doctors, provide them the specialized training 
necessary to excel in the unique environment of sparsely populated 
regions, and assist them in finding postgraduate training programs that 
specialize in training doctors for practice in underserved rural 
communities.
  Primary care doctors in rural areas face challenges that urban 
doctors do not. When a physician is the only health care provider for 
an entire county, he or she cannot refer patients down the hall to a 
specialist. The rural training programs encouraged by this bill would 
give students additional training in pediatrics, emergency medicine, 
obstetrics, and behavioral health, among other areas, which will allow 
them to better serve their communities and hopefully lower the 
disturbing disparities of health outcomes we have seen over the years.
  I was prompted to write this bill after seeing the promising results 
of a similar program at the University of Colorado School of Medicine. 
Faculty like associate dean for rural health, Dr. Jack Westfall, and 
rural health track director, Dr. Mark Deutchman, have found that 
reaching out to rural communities for student recruitment and 
reinforcing their rural commitment throughout their training is the 
best way to get them back into the communities that need them most.
  My hope is that an expansion of similar programs nationwide will 
provide a ``one, two punch'' for the rural physician workforce--it will 
train more rural doctors, and it will train them better.
  I recognize that this legislation would play only a modest role in 
tackling the immense workforce challenges our health care system faces. 
We need more equitable payments for low-paid primary care doctors, 
loan-forgiveness programs must be expanded to allow medical graduates 
to practice primary care without going into budget-crushing debt, and 
graduate medical education dollars need to be more flexible so that 
rural residency programs can be established to train graduates.
  Health care reform needs to address these areas.
  As my fellow Senators and I depart Washington for our home States to 
listen to the ideas, needs, and concerns of

[[Page 20961]]

our constituents over the remainder of the month, We do so with the 
knowledge that there is much to accomplish upon our return. And as 
Congress continues working toward a health reform bill that puts the 
patient in charge of his or her health care choices, brings costs down, 
ensures financial sustainability, and brings security and stability for 
all Americans, there is one other thing we must also insist: health 
reform will not leave rural America behind.
  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. 1628

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Rural Physician Pipeline Act 
     of 2009''.

     SEC. 2. RURAL PHYSICIAN TRAINING GRANTS.

       Part C of Title VII of the Public Health Service Act (42 
     U.S.C. 293k et seq.) is amended--
       (1) after the part heading, by inserting the following:

             ``Subpart I--Medical Training Generally''; and

       (2) by inserting at the end the following:

           ``Subpart II--Training in Underserved Communities

     ``SEC. 749. RURAL PHYSICIAN TRAINING GRANTS.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary, acting through the 
     Administrator of the Health Resources and Services 
     Administration, shall establish a program to make grants to 
     eligible entities for the purposes of--
       ``(1) assisting eligible entities in recruiting students 
     most likely to practice medicine in underserved rural 
     communities;
       ``(2) providing rural-focused training and experience; and
       ``(3) increasing the number of recent allopathic and 
     osteopathic medical school graduates who practice in 
     underserved rural communities.
       ``(b) Eligible Entities.--In order to be eligible to 
     receive a grant under this section, an entity shall--
       ``(1) be a school of allopathic or osteopathic medicine 
     accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or 
     association approved by the Secretary for this purpose, or 
     any combination or consortium of such schools; and
       ``(2) submit an application to the Secretary at such time, 
     in such form, and containing such information as the 
     Secretary may require, including a certification that such 
     entity--
       ``(A) will use amounts provided to the institution to--
       ``(i) establish and carry out a Rural Physician Training 
     Program described in subsection (d);
       ``(ii) improve an existing rural-focused training program 
     to meet the requirements described in subsection (d) and 
     carry out such program; or
       ``(iii) expand and carry out an existing rural-focused 
     training program that meets the requirements described in 
     subsection (d); and
       ``(B) employs, or will employ within a timeframe sufficient 
     to implement the Program (as described by a timetable and 
     supporting documentation in the application of the eligible 
     entity), faculty with experience or training in rural 
     medicine or with experience in training rural physicians.
       ``(c) Priority.--In awarding grant funds under this 
     section, the Secretary shall give priority to eligible 
     entities that--
       ``(1) demonstrate a record of successfully training 
     students, as determined by the Secretary, who practice 
     medicine in underserved rural communities;
       ``(2) demonstrate that an existing academic program of the 
     eligible entity produces a high percentage, as determined by 
     the Secretary, of graduates from such program who practice 
     medicine in underserved rural communities;
       ``(3) demonstrate rural community institutional 
     partnerships, though such mechanisms as matching or 
     contributory funding, documented in-kind services for 
     implementation, or existence of training partners with 
     interprofessional expertise (such as dental, vision, or 
     mental health services) in community health center training 
     locations or other similar facilities; or
       ``(4) submit, as part of the application of the entity 
     under subsection (b), a plan for the long-term tracking of 
     where the graduates of such entity are practicing medicine.
       ``(d) Use of Funds.--
       ``(1) Establishment.--An eligible entity receiving a grant 
     under this section shall use the funds made available under 
     such grant to--
       ``(A) establish and carry out a `Rural Physician Training 
     Program' (referred to in this section as the `Program');
       ``(B) improve an existing rural-focused training program to 
     meet the Program requirements described in this subsection 
     and carry out such program; or
       ``(C) expand and carry out an existing rural-focused 
     training program that meets the Program requirements 
     described in this subsection.
       ``(2) Structure of program.--An eligible entity shall--
       ``(A) enroll no fewer than 10 students per class year into 
     the Program; and
       ``(B) develop criteria for admission to the Program that 
     gives priority to students--
       ``(i) who have originated from or lived for a period of 2 
     or more years in an underserved rural community; and
       ``(ii) who express a commitment to practice medicine in an 
     underserved rural community.
       ``(3) Curricula.--The Program shall require students to 
     enroll in didactic coursework and clinical experience 
     particularly applicable to medical practice in underserved 
     rural communities, including--
       ``(A) clinical rotations in underserved rural communities, 
     and in specialties including family medicine, internal 
     medicine, pediatrics, surgery, psychiatry, and emergency 
     medicine;
       ``(B) in addition to core school curricula, additional 
     coursework or training experiences focused on medical issues 
     prevalent in underserved rural communities, including in 
     areas such as trauma, obstetrics, ultrasound, oral health, 
     and behavioral health; and
       ``(C) any coursework or clinical experience that--
       ``(i) may be developed as a result of the Symposium 
     described in subsection (f); or
       ``(ii) the Secretary finds appropriate.
       ``(4) Residency placement assistance.--Where available, the 
     Program shall assist all students of the Program in obtaining 
     clinical training experiences in locations with postgraduate 
     programs offering residency training opportunities in 
     underserved rural communities, or in local residency training 
     programs that support and train physicians to practice in 
     underserved rural communities, as well as assist all students 
     of the Program in obtaining postgraduate residency training 
     in such programs.
       ``(5) Program student cohort support.--The Program shall 
     provide and require all students of the Program to 
     participate in social, educational, and other group 
     activities designed to further develop, maintain, and 
     reinforce the original commitment of such students to 
     practice in an underserved rural community.
       ``(e) Annual Reporting Requirement.--On an annual basis, an 
     eligible entity receiving a grant under this section shall 
     submit a report to the Secretary on--
       ``(1) the overall success of the Program established by the 
     entity, based on criteria the Secretary determines 
     appropriate;
       ``(2) the number of students participating in the Program;
       ``(3) the number of graduating students who participated in 
     the Program;
       ``(4) the residency program selection of graduating 
     students who participated in the Program;
       ``(5) the number of graduates who participated in the 
     Program who are practicing in underserved rural communities 
     not less than one year after completing residency training; 
     and
       ``(6) the number of graduates who participated in the 
     Program who are not practicing in underserved rural 
     communities not less than one year after completing residency 
     training.
       ``(f) Rural Training Program Symposium.--
       ``(1) Purposes of symposium.--To assist the Secretary in 
     carrying out the Program and making grant determinations 
     under this section, the Secretary shall convene a Rural 
     Training Program Symposium (referred to in this section as 
     the `Symposium') to--
       ``(A) develop best practices that may be incorporated into 
     consideration of applications under subsection (b); and
       ``(B) establish a network of allopathic and osteopathic 
     medical schools that have developed or will develop rural 
     training programs in accordance with subsection (d).
       ``(2) Composition.--The Symposium shall include--
       ``(A) representatives from eligible entities with existing 
     rural training programs;
       ``(B) representatives from all eligible entities interested 
     in developing the Program;
       ``(C) representatives from area health education centers;
       ``(D) representatives from the Health Resources and 
     Services Administration; and
       ``(E) any other experts or individuals with experience in 
     practicing medicine in underserved rural communities the 
     Secretary determines appropriate.
       ``(g) Regulations.--Not later than 60 days after the date 
     of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall by 
     regulation define `underserved rural community' for purposes 
     of this section.
       ``(h) Supplement Not Supplant.--Any eligible entity 
     receiving funds under this section shall use such funds to 
     supplement, not supplant, any other Federal, State, and local 
     funds that would otherwise be expended by such entity to 
     carry out the activities described in this section.
       ``(i) Maintenance of Effort.--With respect to activities 
     for which funds awarded under this section are to be 
     expended, the entity shall agree to maintain expenditures of

[[Page 20962]]

     non-Federal amounts for such activities at a level that is 
     not less than the level of such expenditures maintained by 
     the entity for the fiscal year preceding the fiscal year for 
     which the entity receives a grant under this section.
       ``(j) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated--
       ``(1) to carry out this section (other than subsection 
     (f))--
       ``(A) $4,000,000 for fiscal year 2010;
       ``(B) $8,000,000 for fiscal year 2011;
       ``(C) $12,000,000 for fiscal year 2012;
       ``(D) $16,000,000 for fiscal year 2013; and
       ``(2) to carry out subsection (f), such sums as may be 
     necessary.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ROCKEFELLER (for himself and Mr. Franken):
  S. 1630. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act of 
improve prescription drug coverage under Medicare part D and to amend 
the Public Health Service Act, the Employee Retirement Income Security 
Act of 1974, and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to improve 
prescription drug coverage under private health insurance, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I rise today with the newest esteemed 
Member of this Chamber, Senator Al Franken, to introduce the Affordable 
Access to Prescription Medications Act of 2009. I think this is the 
first bill we have introduced together, and I look forward to working 
with him again in the future. The legislation we are introducing today 
is a critically important bill--one that protects all Americans from 
high out-of-pocket spending on prescription drugs.
  With each passing year, Americans are paying more for their health 
care. Rising out-of-pocket costs are problematic for all patient 
populations, but are particularly burdensome for chronically ill and 
low-income individuals. The health insurance premiums and out-of-pocket 
costs for those below the federal poverty level are huge, with 28 
percent paying more than ten percent of their income. Overall, out-of-
pocket spending for individuals insured in the private insurance market 
is large and rapidly growing, with an increase of 45 percent between 
2001 and 2006.
  Prescription drugs represent the highest out-of-pocket cost for 
patients, comprising almost 31 percent of total out-of-pocket spending. 
The higher the out-of-pocket cost, the fewer individuals fill their 
needed medications. In fact, about 20 percent of individuals with out-
of-pocket spending greater than $250 a month do not fill their 
prescriptions and, thereby further exacerbate their conditions. Out-of-
pocket expenses are only getting worse, especially as prescription drug 
costs increase. A 2009 survey found that 53 percent of Americans have 
cut back on health care spending in the last twelve months, as the 
economy has worsened.
  In Medicare specifically, beneficiaries enrolled in a prescription 
drug plan in 2007 spent $38 a month, on average, for prescription drug 
co-payments. However, for those on high-cost medications, the cost 
burden can be enormous. Ninety percent of Medicare prescription drug 
plans and ten percent of private insurance plans include what is 
referred to as a specialty tier for medications costing over $600 a 
month. For these medications, enrollees can be asked to pay up to 33 
percent of the drug's cost in copayments.
  The high cost of treatment, particularly for life-saving and life-
sustaining treatment, poses an unreasonable and devastating barrier for 
sick patients that can force them to delay or entirely forgo necessary 
treatment. For one West Virginian, the chemotherapy drug he needs to 
treat his cancer is more than $13,500 for a 90-day supply. Under his 
Medicare prescription drug plan, he would have to pay $4000 of that 
cost. He didn't have $4000, so he chose not to be treated.
  Another West Virginian with multiple sclerosis contacted my office 
recently, and told me that the drug to treat her disease, which allows 
her to continue to work, costs $1900 a month. Her private insurer 
changed its policy from a $20 flat copayment for each prescription to 
25 percent co-insurance for each prescription, creating a financial 
burden for her of $475 per month. It should come as no surprise that 
she is struggling to pay this amount every month.
  These West Virginians are just a couple of examples of the millions 
of Americans who pay their health insurance premiums every month for 
coverage that is supposed to protect them from such enormous financial 
losses--but, sadly, it does not. Providing access to affordable 
prescription drugs for the treatment of chronic diseases is critical to 
improving our nation's health care system, which is why we are 
introducing this legislation today. The Affordable Access to 
Prescription Medications Act will go a long way to address the growing 
problem of catastrophic prescription drug expenses.
  First, this bill will establish a $200 cap on the amount a person 
could be charged for any one prescription, and a $500 cap on the total 
amount an individual could be charged for all prescriptions in any 
given month. These caps apply to all private and public insurance 
plans, including Medicare prescription drug plans.
  Second, this bill establishes an exceptions process for specialty 
drugs. Currently, the most expensive prescription drugs in the Medicare 
prescription drug program that are included on specialty tiers are not 
subject to beneficiary exemption requests, but for all other Medicare-
covered prescription drugs, a beneficiary can request an exemption to 
allow them access to needed drugs. High-cost, specialty drugs can be 
difficult to access and this bill will allow any beneficiary to request 
any needed prescription drug, including those in specialty tiers, 
through the exemption process.
  Third, this bill requires the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, 
MedPAC, to conduct two studies regarding discrimination and cost-
sharing. The first study will review Medicare Part B, Part C, and Part 
D prescription drug polices to make sure they do not violate the non-
discrimination rules passed as part of the 2003 Medicare law. Under 
2003 law, plans are prohibited from discriminating against individuals 
based on medical condition. The second study will examine the impact of 
prescription drug cost-sharing on beneficiaries and their health, 
particularly for those who have already paid their way through the so-
called doughnut hole.
  If enacted, this legislation will protect Americans from high out-of-
pocket spending on prescription drugs. Based on studies that explain 
the problem, this bill could potentially lower copayments for 2.5 to 10 
percent of Americans with the highest prescription costs. It will 
protect all Americans from the risk of incurring extraordinarily high 
prescription drug costs.
  The national cap on out-of-pocket spending for prescription drugs 
will reduce costs for the most vulnerable populations by over 50 
percent. Given the rising costs of drugs, the prevalence of new drugs 
on the market, and the current economic recession, addressing the 
affordability of prescriptions drugs is vitally important.
  We must act now to make prescription drugs more affordable for all 
Americans, but especially those with chronic diseases. I urge my 
colleagues to join me in support of this important bill.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 1630

       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 ``Affordable Access to 
     Prescription Medications Act of 2009''.

     SEC. 2. MEDICARE PART D PRESCRIPTION DRUG PLANS.

       (a) In General.--Section 1860D-2(b)(4) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-102(b)(4)) is amended by adding 
     at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(E) Additional protections.--
       ``(i) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this part, effective for plan years beginning on or after 
     January 1, 2011, a PDP sponsor of a prescription drug plan 
     and an MA organization offering an MA-PD plan shall, with 
     respect to any co-payment or coinsurance requirements 
     applicable to covered part D drugs under the plan, ensure 
     that--

[[Page 20963]]

       ``(I) such required co-payment or coinsurance does not 
     exceed the base cost of the covered part D drug (as 
     determined by the Secretary);
       ``(II) such required co-payment or coinsurance does not 
     exceed $200 per month for any single covered part D drug (30-
     day supply); and
       ``(III) such required co-payment or coinsurance does not 
     exceed, in the aggregate for all covered part D drugs, $500 
     per month.

       ``(ii) Adjustments.--The amounts described in clauses (II) 
     and (III) of clause (i) shall be annually adjusted to reflect 
     the average of the percentage increase or decrease in the 
     Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers (U.S. city 
     average) and the percentage increase or decrease in the 
     medical care component of such Consumer Price Index during 
     the calendar year preceding the year for which the adjustment 
     is being made.''.
       (b) Expansion of Exceptions Process.--Effective for plan 
     years beginning on or after January 1, 2011, the Secretary 
     shall expand the formulary tier exception request process 
     under sections 423.560 through 423.636 of title 42, Code of 
     Federal Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of 
     this Act), to allow individuals enrolled in a prescription 
     drug plan under part D of title XVIII of the Social Security 
     Act or an MA-PD plan under part C of such title to request an 
     exception for a specialty prescription drug to a plan's 
     designation of a covered part D drug (as defined in section 
     1860D-2(e) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-102(e)) as a non-
     preferred prescription drug.
       (c) MedPAC Studies and Reports.--
       (1) Study and report on the medicare part d anti-
     discrimination clause.--
       (A) Study.--The Medicare Payment Advisory Commission shall 
     conduct a study on various aspects of the prescription drug 
     program under part D of title XVIII of the Social Security 
     Act and, to the greatest extent practicable, the interaction 
     of such program with Medicare beneficiary access to covered 
     drugs under part B of such title. Such study shall include 
     the following:
       (i) An analysis of--

       (I) the use of specialty tiers for covered part D drugs 
     under prescription drug plans and MA-PD plans; and
       (II) the effect of such specialty tiers on access to care 
     for Medicare beneficiaries.

       (ii) Consideration of the mechanisms described in 
     subparagraph (B) in the context of the provisions of section 
     1860D-11(e)(2)(D) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1395w-111(e)(2)(D)) (in this paragraph referred to as the 
     ``Medicare part D anti-discrimination clause'').
       (B) Mechanisms described.--The following mechanisms are 
     described in this subparagraph:
       (i) The use of specialty tiers for covered part D drugs 
     under prescription drug plans and MA-PD plans.
       (ii) The application of segmented coinsurance or copayment 
     structures to covered part D drugs based on certain 
     categories of such drugs or diagnoses.
       (iii) The utilization of other differential benefit 
     structures based on certain conditions and Medicare 
     beneficiaries under prescription drug plans and MA-PD plans, 
     including an analysis of the interaction between such 
     utilization and the effects of such utilization with the 
     Medicare part D anti-discrimination clause.
       (C) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Medicare Payment Advisory 
     Commission shall submit to Congress a report containing the 
     results of the study conducted under subparagraph (A), 
     together with recommendations for such legislation and 
     administrative action as the Commission determines 
     appropriate.
       (D) Revised guidance.--Based on the results of the study 
     conducted under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall issue 
     revised guidance regarding the use of mechanisms described in 
     subparagraph (B) to all PDP sponsors offering prescription 
     drug plans under part D of title XVIII of the Social Security 
     Act and Medicare Advantage organizations offering MA-PD plans 
     under part C of such title.
       (2) Study and report on cost-sharing for prescription drugs 
     under parts b and d.--
       (A) Study.--The Medicare Payment Advisory Commission shall 
     conduct a study on cost-sharing for prescription drugs under 
     parts B and D of title XVIII of the Social Security Act. Such 
     study shall include an analysis of the impact of eliminating 
     cost-sharing for covered part D drugs for Medicare 
     beneficiaries who--
       (i) incur annual out-of-pocket cost-sharing after the 
     initial coverage limit under section 1860D-2(b)(3) of such 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-102) that exceeds 5 percent of the 
     income of the beneficiary (as determined under section 1860D-
     14(a)(3)(C) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-114(a)(3)(C)); and
       (ii) do not otherwise qualify for an income-related subsidy 
     under section 1860D-14(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-
     114(a)) or other extra help or cost-sharing relief.
       (B) Report.--Not later than 6 months after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Medicare Payment Advisory 
     Commission shall submit to Congress a report containing the 
     results of the study conducted under subparagraph (A), 
     together with recommendations for such legislation and 
     administrative action as the Commission determines 
     appropriate.
       (3) Definitions.--In this section:
       (A) Covered part d drug.--The term ``covered part D drug'' 
     has the meaning given such term in section 1860D-2(e) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-102(e)).
       (B) MA-PD plan.--The term ``MA-PD'' plan has the meaning 
     given such term in paragraph (9) of section 1860D-41(a) of 
     such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-151(a)).
       (C) Medicare advantage organization.--The term ``Medicare 
     Advantage organization'' has the meaning given such term in 
     section 1859(a)(1) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-28(a)(1)).
       (D) PDP sponsor.--The term ``PDP sponsor'' has the meaning 
     given such term in paragraph (13) of such section 1860D-
     41(a).
       (E) Prescription drug plan.--The term ``prescription drug 
     plan'' has the meaning given such term in paragraph (14) of 
     such section.

     SEC. 3. PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE.

       (a) Group Health Plans.--
       (1) Public health service act amendments.--
       (A) In general.--Subpart 2 of part A of title XXVII of the 
     Public Health Service Act is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:

     ``SEC. 2708. PROVISIONS RELATING TO PRESCRIPTION DRUGS.

       ``(a) In General.--A group health plan, and a health 
     insurance issuer offering group health insurance coverage, 
     that provides coverage for prescription drugs shall, with 
     respect to any co-payment or coinsurance requirements 
     applicable to such drug coverage, ensure that--
       ``(1) such required co-payment or coinsurance does not 
     exceed the base cost of the prescription drug (as determined 
     by the Secretary);
       ``(2) such required co-payment or coinsurance does not 
     exceed $200 per month for any single prescription drug (30-
     day supply); and
       ``(3) such required co-payment or coinsurance does not 
     exceed, in the aggregate for all prescription drugs, $500 per 
     month.
       ``(b) Adjustments.--The amounts described in paragraphs (2) 
     and (3) of subsection (a) shall be annually adjusted to 
     reflect the average of the percentage increase or decrease in 
     the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers (U.S. city 
     average) and the percentage increase or decrease in the 
     medical care component of such Consumer Price Index during 
     the calendar year preceding the year for which the adjustment 
     is being made.
       ``(c) Notice.--A group health plan under this part shall 
     comply with the notice requirement under section 714(b) of 
     the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 with 
     respect to the requirements of this section as if such 
     section applied to such plan.''.
       (B) Conforming amendment.--Section 2723(c) of such Act (42 
     U.S.C. 300gg-23(c)) is amended by striking ``section 2704'' 
     and inserting ``sections 2704 and 2708''.
       (2) ERISA amendments.--
       (A) In general.--Subpart B of part 7 of subtitle B of title 
     I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 715. PROVISIONS RELATING TO PRESCRIPTION DRUGS.

       ``(a) In General.--A group health plan, and a health 
     insurance issuer offering group health insurance coverage, 
     that provides coverage for prescription drugs shall, with 
     respect to any co-payment or coinsurance requirements 
     applicable to such drug coverage, ensure that--
       ``(1) such required co-payment or coinsurance does not 
     exceed the base cost of the prescription drug (as determined 
     by the Secretary of Health and Human Services);
       ``(2) such required co-payment or coinsurance does not 
     exceed $200 per month for any single prescription drug (30-
     day supply); and
       ``(3) such required co-payment or coinsurance does not 
     exceed, in the aggregate for all prescription drugs, $500 per 
     month.
       ``(b) Adjustments.--The amounts described in paragraphs (2) 
     and (3) of subsection (a) shall be annually adjusted to 
     reflect the average of the percentage increase or decrease in 
     the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers (U.S. city 
     average) and the percentage increase or decrease in the 
     medical care component of such Consumer Price Index during 
     the calendar year preceding the year for which the adjustment 
     is being made.
       ``(c) Notice.--A group health plan under this part shall 
     comply with the notice requirement under section 714(b) with 
     respect to the requirements of this section as if such 
     section applied to such plan.''.
       (B) Table of contents.--The table of contents in section 1 
     of such Act is amended by inserting after the item relating 
     to section 714 the following new item:

``Sec. 715. Provisions relating to prescription drugs.''.
       (3) Internal revenue code amendments.--
       (A) In general.--Subchapter B of chapter 100 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new section:

[[Page 20964]]



     ``SEC. 9813. PROVISIONS RELATING TO PRESCRIPTION DRUGS.

       ``(a) In General.--A group health plan, and a health 
     insurance issuer offering group health insurance coverage, 
     that provides coverage for prescription drugs shall, with 
     respect to any co-payment or coinsurance requirements 
     applicable to such drug coverage, ensure that--
       ``(1) such required co-payment or coinsurance does not 
     exceed the base cost of the prescription drug (as determined 
     by the Secretary of Health and Human Services);
       ``(2) such required co-payment or coinsurance does not 
     exceed $200 per month for any single prescription drug (30-
     day supply); and
       ``(3) such required co-payment or coinsurance does not 
     exceed, in the aggregate for all prescription drugs, $500 per 
     month.
       ``(b) Adjustments.--The amounts described in paragraphs (2) 
     and (3) of subsection (a) shall be annually adjusted to 
     reflect the average of the percentage increase or decrease in 
     the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers (U.S. city 
     average) and the percentage increase or decrease in the 
     medical care component of such Consumer Price Index during 
     the calendar year preceding the year for which the adjustment 
     is being made.
       ``(c) Notice.--A group health plan under this part shall 
     comply with the notice requirement under section 714(b) of 
     the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 with 
     respect to the requirements of this section as if such 
     section applied to such plan.''.
       (B) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections for such 
     subchapter is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     item:

``Sec. 9813. Provisions relating to prescription drugs.''.
       (b) Individual Health Insurance.--
       (1) In general.--Part B of title XXVII of the Public Health 
     Service Act is amended by inserting after section 2752 the 
     following new section:

     ``SEC. 2754. PROVISIONS RELATING TO PRESCRIPTION DRUGS.

       ``The provisions of section 2708 shall apply to health 
     insurance coverage offered by a health insurance issuer in 
     the individual market in the same manner as they apply to 
     health insurance coverage offered by a health insurance 
     issuer in connection with a group health plan in the small or 
     large group market.''.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--Section 2762(b)(2) of such Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 300gg-62(b)(2)) is amended by striking ``section 
     2751'' and inserting ``sections 2751 and 2754''.
       (c) Application to FEHBP.--The amendments made by this 
     section shall apply to the administration of chapter 89 of 
     title 5, United States Code.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. CANTWELL:
  S. 1633. A bill to require the Secretary of Homeland Security, in 
consultation with the Secretary of State, to establish a program to 
issue Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Business Travel Cards, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Asia-
Pacific Economic Cooperation, APEC, Business Travel Cards Act of 2009. 
This bill would authorize the Secretary of Homeland Security and State 
Department to issue APEC Business Travel Cards, ABTCs, to business 
leaders from APEC countries and senior government officials who are 
actively engaged in APEC business.
  The ABTC program has 18 nations participating, including China, Japan 
and Australia, which are among the world's larger economies. The United 
States currently recognizes foreign issued ABTC travel cards. 
Cardholders from non-Visa Waiver Program countries need to present 
valid passports and those from other countries must still obtain U.S. 
visas as required by United States law. However, ABTC card holders are 
allowed to benefit from expedited visa interview scheduling at U.S. 
embassies and consulates, and expedited immigration processing through 
airline crew and diplomat immigration lanes upon arrival at U.S. 
international airports. However, under current law U.S. passport 
holders are not yet eligible to apply for the ABTC program and 
therefore do not enjoy these same benefits in Asia-Pacific countries. 
This bill would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to issue 
ABTCs to United States citizen business leaders and senior government 
officials actively engaged in APEC business no later than January 1, 
2010.
  I support the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Business Travel Cards 
Act because I have long supported increased free trade with the Asia-
Pacific region. International business travel is an essential part of 
selling goods and services around the world. The 21 member economies of 
APEC together account for around 53 percent of world GDP and 
approximately 48 percent of global trade. This bill would help 
facilitate international cooperation and trade by allowing business 
leaders within the participating countries to enter countries on an 
expedited basis for the length of the program, currently three years.
  The success of the program has been shown by the amount of 
applications for travel cards since inception of the program in 1997. 
From 1997, applications received by participating countries have grown 
by more than 100 percent each year. By March of last year, there were 
more than 34,000 cards being used by APEC countries. The Asia-Pacific 
Economic Cooperation Business Travel Cards Act of 2009 will help 
facilitate global trade within the Asia-Pacific, and create expanded 
export opportunities for U.S. businesses. Working to grow U.S. exports 
will get our economy to grow again and create and maintain U.S. jobs.
  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. 1633

       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 ``Asia-Pacific Economic 
     Cooperation Business Travel Cards Act of 2009''.

     SEC. 2. ASIA-PACIFIC ECONOMIC COOPERATION BUSINESS TRAVEL 
                   CARDS.

       (a) In General.--Not later than January 1, 2010, the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the 
     Secretary of State, shall establish a program called the 
     ``APEC Business Travel Program'' to issue Asia-Pacific 
     Economic Cooperation Business Travel Cards (ABTC) to eligible 
     United States citizen business leaders and senior United 
     States Government officials actively engaged in Asia-Pacific 
     Economic Cooperation (APEC) business.
       (b) Integration With Existing Travel Programs.--The 
     Secretary of Homeland Security shall integrate application 
     procedures for and issuance of ABTC with other appropriate 
     international registered traveler programs of the Department 
     of Homeland Security, such as Global Entry, NEXUS, and 
     SENTRI.
       (c) Cooperation With Private Entities.--In carrying out 
     this section, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall work 
     in conjunction with appropriate private sector entities to 
     ensure that applicants for ABTC satisfy ABTC requirements. 
     The Secretary of Homeland Security may utilize such entities 
     to enroll and issue ABTC to qualified applicants.
       (d) Fee.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may 
     impose a fee for the issuance of ABTC, and may modify such 
     fee from time to time as the Secretary determines 
     appropriate.
       (2) Limitation.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall 
     ensure that the total amount of any fees imposed under 
     paragraph (1) in any fiscal year does not exceed the costs 
     associated with carrying out this section in such fiscal 
     year.
       (3) Crediting to appropriate account.--Fees collected under 
     paragraph (1) shall be credited to the appropriate account of 
     the Department of Homeland Security and are authorized to 
     remain available until expended.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ROCKEFELLER (for himself, Mr. Akaka, and Mr. Brown):
  S. 1634. A bill to amend titles XVIII and XIX of the Social Security 
Act to protect and improve the benefits provided to dual eligible 
individuals under the Medicare and Medicaid programs; to the Committee 
on Finance.
  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I rise today with my colleagues, 
Senator Akaka and Senator Brown, to introduce the Medicare Prescription 
Drug Coverage Improvement Act, legislation that makes long overdue 
improvements to the Medicare prescription drug program, particularly 
for Medicare beneficiaries who are simultaneously enrolled in Medicaid. 
Know as ``dual eligibles,'' these individuals are among our nation's 
most vulnerable populations--and they have been overlooked for far too 
long.
  Approximately 8.8 million Americans are simultaneously enrolled in 
Medicare and Medicaid, and they are among the sickest and poorest 
individuals covered by either program. Most dual eligibles are very 
low-income, in poor

[[Page 20965]]

health, and have substantial health care needs. Seventy-one percent of 
dual eligibles have annual incomes below $10,000. Over half of all 
elderly dual eligibles are limited in activities of daily living and, 
in comparison to other Medicare beneficiaries, are three times more 
likely to be disabled. Dual eligibles also have higher rates of heart 
disease, pulmonary disease, diabetes, and Alzheimer's disease than the 
general Medicare population.
  After passage of the Medicare prescription drug law, Members of 
Congress and health care advocates alike tried for more than a year to 
work with the Bush administration to prevent prescription drug coverage 
barriers for dual eligibles and other low-income Medicare 
beneficiaries. I introduced the Medicare Dual Eligible Prescription 
Drug Coverage Act of 2005, S. 566. and the Requiring Emergency 
Pharmaceutical Access for Individual Relief, REPAIR, Act of 2006, S. 
2183, to prevent disruptions in coverage for vulnerable seniors and 
individuals with disabilities.
  Unfortunately, effective fail-safe mechanisms were not put into place 
by the previous administration to address the transition of the dual 
eligibles to Medicare prescription drug coverage. Consequently, 
millions of elderly and disabled Medicare recipients continue to 
experience significant barriers to care.
  Health care problems persist for the dually eligible largely because 
of poor coordination between Medicare and Medicaid--which have two 
different sets of providers, two different sets of benefits, and two 
different sets of enrollment policies. The legislation we are 
introducing today will go a long way to provide dual eligibles with the 
right care, in the right setting, and at the right time.
  Additionally, the Medicare Prescription Drug Coverage Improvement Act 
will provide more affordable and comprehensive prescription drug 
coverage for all Medicare beneficiaries.
  First, this bill will create a new Federal Coordinated Health Care 
Office within the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, CMS. The 
purpose of this new office will be to provide a much more integrated 
model of care for dual eligibles by coordinating their Medicare and 
Medicaid benefits.
  Second, this bill contains two provisions to help make prescription 
drugs more affordable and accessible for all Medicare beneficiaries--it 
allows the Secretary of Health and Human Services to negotiate directly 
with pharmaceutical companies to lower prescription drug prices and it 
creates a Medicare-operated prescription drug plan.
  The Secretary would be required to implement two or more of the 
following strategies on an annual basis to reduce the cost of 
prescription drugs covered by Medicare: direct price negotiation with 
pharmaceutical manufacturers, additional rebate agreements for Medicare 
prescription drugs that are consistent with the rebate agreements 
provided to states for Medicaid, comparative clinical effectiveness 
data, or prescription drug rates negotiated under the Federal Supply 
Schedule.
  A Medicare-operated prescription drug plan would be created by the 
Secretary of HHS. This plan would be a stable and affordable option 
available to all Medicare beneficiaries. This plan would create a 
robust prescription drug formulary based on patient safety, efficacy 
and value. The formulary incentive process would be transparent and 
uniform. An advisory committee would be created to review petitions for 
drug inclusion and recommend formulary changes. This Medicare-operated 
plan will create fair-market competition and lead to less costly drug 
choices for Medicare recipients.
  Third, this bill contains significant new requirements for Medicare 
Advantage Special Needs Plans. These plans serve extremely vulnerable 
populations, including dual eligibles; yet, they have very few 
standards that they are required to abide by. The Medicare Prescription 
Drug Improvement Act will require special needs plans to be accredited 
by the National Committee for Quality Assurance. Additionally, our 
legislation requires special needs plans to provide more robust 
prescription drug coverage, meet uniform standards for data collection 
and reporting, and offer better care coordination.
  Finally, this bill will implement a number of technical fixes to 
facilitate enrollment in the Medicare prescription drug benefit for 
those who qualify. State and Federal officials will be required to 
clearly identify dual eligibles in all databases and electronically 
file eligibility information, so that these beneficiaries will not 
continue to fall through the cracks. Pharmacies will use a facilitated 
point-of-sale enrollment process and automatically enroll certain dual 
eligible individuals in the Medicare-operated prescription drug plan. 
New limits on cost-sharing and resource requirements for low-income 
beneficiaries will also be put into place. Prescription drug cost-
sharing for dual eligibles who are using home and community-based 
services, instead of institutionalized care, will be eliminated.
  We are in the midst of discussing sweeping changes to our health care 
system. In addition to provisions to help the uninsured, health care 
reform must also include provisions to improve the coverage that people 
have today. This is especially true for seniors and individuals with 
disabilities. The Medicare prescription drug program is extremely 
difficult to navigate and many enrollees are still denied access to the 
prescription drugs that they need. This legislation will make the 
Medicare prescription drug program much more manageable for seniors and 
individuals with disabilities, particularly those dually eligible for 
Medicare and Medicaid.
  The time for action is now, and I urge my colleagues to join us in 
support of this important 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. 1634

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Medicare 
     Prescription Drug Coverage Improvement Act''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

              TITLE I--MEDICARE AND MEDICAID IMPROVEMENTS

Sec. 101. Providing Federal coverage and payment coordination for low-
              income Medicare beneficiaries.
Sec. 102. Creating a Medicare operated prescription drug plan option.
Sec. 103. Accreditation requirement for all specialized Medicare 
              Advantage plans and revisions relating to specialized 
              Medicare Advantage plans for special needs individuals.
Sec. 104. Providing better care coordination for low-income 
              beneficiaries in Medicare part D.
Sec. 105. Improving transition of new dual eligible individuals to 
              medicare prescription drug coverage and presumptive 
              eligibility for low-income subsidies.
Sec. 106. Required information on transition from skilled nursing 
              facilities and nursing facilities to part D plans.
Sec. 107. Streamlined pharmacy compliance packaging.
Sec. 108. Lowering covered part D drug prices on behalf of Medicare 
              beneficiaries.
Sec. 109. Correction of flaws in determination of phased-down State 
              contribution for Federal assumption of prescription drug 
              costs for dually eligible individuals.
Sec. 110. No impact on eligibility for benefits under other programs.
Sec. 111. Quality indicators for dual eligible individuals.

        TITLE II--ADDITIONAL MEDICARE AND MEDICAID IMPROVEMENTS

Subtitle A--Improving the Financial Assistance Available to Low-Income 
                         Medicare Beneficiaries

Sec. 201. Improving assets tests for Medicare Savings Program and low-
              income subsidy program.
Sec. 202. Eliminating barriers to enrollment.
Sec. 203. Elimination of part D cost-sharing for certain non-
              Institutionalized full-benefit dual eligible individuals.

[[Page 20966]]

Sec. 204. Exemption of balance in any pension or retirement plan from 
              resources for determination of eligibility for low-income 
              subsidy.
Sec. 205. Cost-sharing protections for low-income subsidy-eligible 
              individuals.

                     Subtitle B--Other Improvements

Sec. 211. Enrollment improvements under Medicare parts C and D.
Sec. 212. Medicare plan complaint system.
Sec. 213. Uniform exceptions and appeals process.
Sec. 214. Prohibition on conditioning Medicaid eligibility for 
              individuals enrolled in certain creditable prescription 
              drug coverage on enrollment in the Medicare part D drug 
              program.
Sec. 215. Office of the Inspector General annual report on part D 
              formularies' inclusion of drugs commonly used by dual 
              eligibles.
Sec. 216. HHS ongoing study and annual reports on coverage for dual 
              eligibles.
Sec. 217. Authority to obtain information.

              TITLE I--MEDICARE AND MEDICAID IMPROVEMENTS

     SEC. 101. PROVIDING FEDERAL COVERAGE AND PAYMENT COORDINATION 
                   FOR LOW-INCOME MEDICARE BENEFICIARIES.

       (a) Establishment of Federal Coordinated Health Care 
     Office.--
       (1) Establishment.--
       (A) In general.--Not later than October 1, 2009, the 
     Secretary of Health and Human Services (in this section 
     referred to as the ``Secretary'') shall establish a Federal 
     Coordinated Health Care Office.
       (B) Establishment and reporting to cms administrator.--The 
     Federal Coordinated Health Care Office shall--
       (i) be established within the Centers for Medicare & 
     Medicaid Services; and
       (ii) report directly to the Administrator of the Centers 
     for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
       (2) Purpose.--The purpose of the Federal Coordinated Health 
     Care Office is to bring together officials of the Medicare 
     and Medicaid programs at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 
     Services in order to--
       (A) more effectively integrate benefits under the Medicare 
     program under title XVIII of the Social Security Act and the 
     Medicaid program under title XIX of such Act; and
       (B) improve the coordination between the Federal Government 
     and States for individuals eligible for benefits under both 
     such programs in order to ensure that such individuals get 
     full access to the items and services to which they are 
     entitled under titles XVIII and XIX of the Social Security 
     Act.
       (3) Goals.--The goals of the Federal Coordinated Health 
     Care Office are as follows:
       (A) Providing dual eligible individuals full access to the 
     benefits to which such individuals are entitled under the 
     Medicare and Medicaid programs.
       (B) Simplifying the processes for dual eligible individuals 
     to access the items and services they are entitled to under 
     the Medicare and Medicaid programs
       (C) Improving the quality of health care and long-term 
     services for dual eligible individuals.
       (D) Increasing beneficiary understanding of and 
     satisfaction with coverage under the Medicare and Medicaid 
     programs.
       (E) Eliminating regulatory conflicts between rules under 
     the Medicare and Medicaid programs.
       (F) Improving care continuity and ensuring safe and 
     effective care transitions.
       (G) Eliminating cost-shifting between the Medicare and 
     Medicaid program and among related health care providers.
       (H) Improving the quality of performance of providers of 
     services and suppliers under the Medicare and Medicaid 
     programs.
       (4) Specific responsibilities.--The specific 
     responsibilities of the Federal Coordinated Health Care 
     Office are as follows:
       (A) Providing States, specialized MA plans for special 
     needs individuals (as defined in section 1859(b)(6) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-28(b)(6)), physicians 
     and other relevant entities or individuals with the education 
     and tools necessary for developing programs that align 
     benefits under the Medicare and Medicaid programs for dual 
     eligible individuals.
       (B) Working with the Director of the Congressional Budget 
     Office and the Director of the Office of Management and 
     Budget, and in consultation with the Medicare Payment 
     Advisory Commission and the Medicaid and CHIP Payment and 
     Access Commission, to, not later than January 1, 2011, 
     establish dynamic scoring for benefits for dual eligible 
     individuals to account for total spending and savings for 
     comparable risk groups under the Medicare program.
       (C) Supporting State efforts to coordinate and align acute 
     care and long-term care services for dual eligible 
     individuals with other items and services furnished under the 
     Medicare program.
       (D) Providing support for coordination of contracting and 
     oversight by States and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 
     Services with respect to the integration of the Medicare and 
     Medicaid programs in a manner that is supportive of the goals 
     described in paragraph (3).
       (5) Report.--The Secretary shall, as part of the budget 
     transmitted under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States 
     Code, submit to Congress an annual report containing 
     recommendations for legislation that would improve care 
     coordination and benefits for dual eligible individuals.
       (b) Addition of Medicaid Representatives to Medicare 
     Payment Advisory Commission and Consultation With Medicaid 
     and CHIP Payment and Access Commission.--
       (1) Addition of medicaid representative to medicare payment 
     advisory commission.--Section 1805(c)(2)(B) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395b-6(c)(2)(B)) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following sentence: ``Such membership 
     shall also include at least 2 individuals who are nationally 
     recognized for their expertise in financing, benefits, and 
     provider payment policies under the program under title 
     XIX.''.
       (2) Consultation with medicaid and chip payment and access 
     commission.--Section 1805(b) of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1395b-6(b)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(9) Consultation with medicaid and chip payment and 
     access commission.--In carrying out the duties of the 
     Commission under this subsection, the Commission shall 
     consult with the Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access 
     Commission established under section 506 of the Children's 
     Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009 (Public 
     Law 111-3) on an ongoing basis.''.
       (c) MACPAC Funding and Technical Amendments.--
       (1) Funding.--Section 1900(f) of the Social Security Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 1396(f)) is amended--
       (A) in the subsection heading, by striking ``Authorization 
     of Appropriations'' and inserting ``Funding'';
       (B) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``(other than for fiscal 
     year 2009)'' before ``in the same manner''; and
       (C) by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following:
       ``(2) Appropriation.--Out of any funds in the Treasury not 
     otherwise appropriated, there is appropriated to MACPAC 
     $11,403,000 for fiscal year 2009 to carry out the provisions 
     of this section.
       ``(3) Authorization.--In addition to amounts made available 
     under paragraph (2), there are authorized to be appropriated 
     for fiscal years beginning with fiscal year 2010, such sums 
     as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this 
     section.
       ``(4) Availability.--Amounts made available under 
     paragraphs (2) and (3) to carry out the provisions of this 
     section shall remain available until expended.''.
       (2) Technical amendments.--Section 1900(b) of such Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1396) is amended--
       (A) in paragraph (1)(D), by striking ``June 1'' and 
     inserting ``June 15''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(10) Consultation with medpac.--
       ``(A) In general.--MACPAC shall regularly consult with the 
     Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (in this paragraph 
     referred to as `MedPAC') established under section 1805 in 
     carrying out its duties under this section.
       ``(B) Data sharing.--MACPAC and MedPAC shall have 
     unrestricted access to all deliberations, records, and 
     nonproprietary data of the other such entity, respectively, 
     immediately upon the request of the either such entity.''.
       (d) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section--
       (1) requires mandatory integrated care under the Medicare 
     or Medicaid programs under titles XVIII and XIX, 
     respectively, of the Social Security Act;
       (2) promotes enrollment in specialized MA plans for special 
     needs individuals (as defined in section 1859(b)(6) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-28(b)(6));
       (3) promotes the development of Medicaid managed care for 
     dual eligible individuals; or
       (4) prevents dual eligible individuals from electing to 
     remain in the original Medicare fee-for-service option, or 
     the right to make such election being protected.

     SEC. 102. CREATING A MEDICARE OPERATED PRESCRIPTION DRUG PLAN 
                   OPTION.

       (a) Medicare Operated Prescription Drug Plan Option.--
       (1) In general.--Subpart 2 of part D of the Social Security 
     Act is amended by inserting after section 1860D-11 (42 U.S.C. 
     1395w-111) the following new section:


           ``medicare operated prescription drug plan option

       ``Sec. 1860D-11A.  (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any 
     other provision of this part, for each year (beginning with 
     2011), in addition to any plans offered under section 1860D-
     11, the Secretary shall offer one or more Medicare operated 
     prescription drug plans (as defined in subsection (b)) with a 
     service area that consists of the entire United States and 
     shall enter into negotiations in accordance with section 
     1860D-11A(i) with pharmaceutical manufacturers to reduce the 
     purchase cost of covered part D drugs for eligible part D 
     individuals who enroll in such a plan.

[[Page 20967]]

       ``(b) Medicare Operated Prescription Drug Plan Defined.--
     For purposes of this part, the term `Medicare operated 
     prescription drug plan' means a prescription drug plan that 
     offers qualified prescription drug coverage and access to 
     negotiated prices described in section 1860D-2(a)(1)(A).
       ``(c) Monthly Beneficiary Premium.--
       ``(1) Qualified prescription drug coverage.--The monthly 
     beneficiary premium for qualified prescription drug coverage 
     and access to negotiated prices described in section 1860D-
     2(a)(1)(A) to be charged under a Medicare operated 
     prescription drug plan shall be uniform nationally. Such 
     premium for months in 2010 and each succeeding year shall be 
     equal to the product of--
       ``(A) the beneficiary premium percentage (as specified in 
     section 1860D-13(a)(3)); and
       ``(B) the average monthly per capita actuarial cost of 
     offering the Medicare operated prescription drug plan for the 
     year involved, including administrative expenses.
       ``(2) Premium subsidy for applicable subsidy eligible 
     individuals.--
       ``(A) Full subsidy eligible individuals.--In the case of an 
     applicable subsidy eligible individual described in paragraph 
     (4)(A), the individual is entitled under this section to an 
     income-related premium subsidy equal to 100 percent of the 
     monthly beneficiary premium of the Medicare operated 
     prescription drug plan.
       ``(B) Other subsidy eligible individuals.--In the case of 
     an applicable subsidy eligible individual described in 
     paragraph (4)(B), the individual is entitled under this 
     section to an income-related premium subsidy determined on a 
     linear sliding scale as follows:
       ``(i) One hundred percent of the amount described in 
     subparagraph (A) for individuals with incomes at or below 135 
     percent of such level.
       ``(ii) Seventy-five percent of such amount for individuals 
     with incomes above 135 percent of such level and at or below 
     140 percent of such level.
       ``(iii) Fifty percent of such amount for individuals with 
     incomes above 140 percent of such level and at or below 145 
     percent of such level.
       ``(iv) Twenty-five percent of such amount for individuals 
     with incomes above 145 percent of such level and below 150 
     percent of such level.
       ``(v) Zero percent of such amount for individuals with 
     incomes at 150 percent of such level.
       ``(3) Cost-sharing for applicable subsidy eligible 
     individuals.--
       ``(A) Full-subsidy eligible individuals.--In the case of an 
     applicable subsidy eligible individual described in paragraph 
     (4)(A), the provisions of section 1860D-14(a)(1) shall apply, 
     except the premium subsidy under paragraph (2)(A) shall be 
     substituted for the premium subsidy under subparagraph (A) of 
     such section 1860D-14(a)(1); and
       ``(B) Other subsidy eligible individuals.--In the case of 
     an applicable subsidy eligible individual described in 
     paragraph (4)(B), the provisions of section 1860D-14(a)(2) 
     shall apply, except the premium subsidy under paragraph 
     (2)(B) shall be substituted for the premium subsidy under 
     subparagraph (A) of such section 1860D-14(a)(2).
       ``(4) Definition of applicable subsidy eligible 
     individuals.--For purposes of paragraphs (2) and (3), the 
     term `applicable subsidy eligible individual' means the 
     following:
       ``(A) Full-subsidy eligible individuals.--
       ``(i) Individuals with income below 135 percent of poverty 
     line.--Any individual who--

       ``(I) is enrolled in a Medicare operated prescription drug 
     plan;
       ``(II) is determined to have income that is below 135 
     percent of the poverty line applicable to a family of the 
     size involved; and
       ``(III) meets the resources requirement described in 
     section 1860D-14(a)(3)(E), as amended by section 201 of the 
     Medicare Prescription Drug Coverage Improvement Act.

       ``(ii) Certain other individuals.--Any individual who is 
     enrolled in a Medicare operated prescription drug plan who--

       ``(I) is a full-benefit dual eligible individual (as 
     defined in section 1935(c)(6));
       ``(II) receives benefits under the supplemental security 
     income program under title XVI; or
       ``(III) is eligible for medical assistance under clause 
     (i), (iii), or (iv) of section 1902(a)(10)(E).

       ``(B) Other subsidy eligible individuals.--Any individual 
     who--
       ``(i) is not described in paragraph (1);
       ``(ii) is enrolled in a Medicare operated prescription drug 
     plan;
       ``(iii) is determined to have income that is below 150 
     percent of the poverty line applicable to a family of the 
     size involved; and
       ``(iv) meets the resources requirement described in section 
     1860D-14(a)(3)(E), as amended by section 201 of the Medicare 
     Prescription Drug Coverage Improvement Act.
       ``(d) Use of a Formulary and Formulary Incentives.--
       ``(1) Use of a formulary.--
       ``(A) In general.--With respect to the operation of a 
     Medicare operated prescription drug plan, the Secretary shall 
     establish and apply a formulary (and may include formulary 
     incentives described in paragraph (5)(C)(ii)) in accordance 
     with this subsection in order to--
       ``(i) increase patient safety;
       ``(ii) increase appropriate use and reduce inappropriate 
     use of drugs; and
       ``(iii) reward value.
       ``(B) Default initial formulary.--Until such time as the 
     Secretary establishes and applies the initial formulary under 
     paragraph (5), a Medicare operated prescription drug plan 
     shall be required to include all drugs approved for safety 
     and effectiveness as a prescription drug under the Federal 
     Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act that are covered part D drugs 
     (and may include formulary incentives described in paragraph 
     (5)(C)(ii)).
       ``(2) Requirements for formularies.--The Secretary shall 
     establish a formulary that meets the following requirements:
       ``(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the formulary 
     includes the covered outpatient drugs of any manufacturer 
     which has entered into and complies with an agreement with 
     the Secretary under this section.
       ``(B) A covered outpatient drug may be excluded with 
     respect to the treatment of a specific disease or condition 
     for an identified population (if any) only if, based on the 
     drug's labeling (or, in the case of a drug the prescribed use 
     of which is not approved under the Federal Food, Drug, and 
     Cosmetic Act but is a medically accepted indication (as 
     defined in section 1860D-2(e)(4)), the excluded drug does not 
     have a significant, clinically meaningful therapeutic 
     advantage in terms of safety, effectiveness, or clinical 
     outcome of such treatment for such population over other 
     drugs included in the formulary and there is a written 
     explanation (available to the public) of the basis for the 
     exclusion.
       ``(C) The Secretary permits coverage of a drug excluded 
     from the formulary pursuant to a prior authorization program 
     that is consistent with paragraph (3).
       ``(D) The formulary meets such other requirements as the 
     Secretary may impose in order to achieve program savings 
     consistent with protecting the health of program 
     beneficiaries.
     A prior authorization program established under paragraph (3) 
     is not a formulary subject to the requirements of this 
     paragraph.
       ``(3) Requirements of prior authorization programs.--The 
     Secretary may require, with respect to drugs dispensed on or 
     after July 1, 1991, the approval of the drug before its 
     dispensing for any medically accepted indication (as defined 
     in section 1860D-2(e)(4)) only if the system providing for 
     such approval--
       ``(A) provides response by telephone or other 
     telecommunication device within 24 hours of a request for 
     prior authorization; and
       ``(B) provides for the dispensing of at least a 72-hour 
     supply of a covered outpatient prescription drug in an 
     emergency situation (as defined by the Secretary).
       ``(4) Other permissible restrictions.--The Secretary may 
     impose limitations, with respect to all such drugs in a 
     therapeutic class, on the minimum or maximum quantities per 
     prescription or on the number of refills, if such limitations 
     are necessary to improve patient safety, discourage waste, or 
     address instances of fraud or abuse by individuals in any 
     manner authorized under this Act.
       ``(5) Development of initial formulary.--
       ``(A) In general.--In selecting covered part D drugs for 
     inclusion in a formulary, the Secretary shall consider 
     clinical benefit and price.
       ``(B) Role of ahrq.--The Director of the Agency for 
     Healthcare Research and Quality shall be responsible for 
     assessing the clinical benefit of covered part D drugs and 
     making recommendations to the Secretary regarding which drugs 
     should be included in the formulary. In conducting such 
     assessments and making such recommendations, the Director 
     shall--
       ``(i) consider safety concerns including those identified 
     by the Federal Food and Drug Administration;
       ``(ii) use available data and evaluations, with priority 
     given to randomized controlled trials, to examine clinical 
     effectiveness, comparative effectiveness, safety, and 
     enhanced compliance with a drug regimen;
       ``(iii) use the same classes of drugs developed by United 
     States Pharmacopeia for this part;
       ``(iv) consider evaluations made by--

       ``(I) the Director under section 1013 of Medicare 
     Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 
     2003;
       ``(II) other Federal entities, such as the Secretary of 
     Veterans Affairs; and
       ``(III) other private and public entities, such as the Drug 
     Effectiveness Review Project and Medicaid programs; and

       ``(v) recommend to the Secretary--

       ``(I) those drugs in a class that provide a greater 
     clinical benefit, including fewer safety concerns or less 
     risk of side-effects, than another drug in the same class 
     that should be included in the formulary;
       ``(II) those drugs in a class that provide less clinical 
     benefit, including greater safety concerns or a greater risk 
     of side-effects, than another drug in the same class that 
     should be excluded from the formulary; and
       ``(III) drugs in a class with same or similar clinical 
     benefit for which it would be appropriate for the Secretary 
     to competitively bid (or negotiate) for placement on the 
     formulary.

[[Page 20968]]

       ``(C) Consideration of ahrq recommendations.--
       ``(i) In general.--Not later than January 1, 2011, the 
     Secretary, after taking into consideration the 
     recommendations under subparagraph (B)(v), shall establish a 
     formulary, and formulary incentives, to encourage use of 
     covered part D drugs that--

       ``(I) have a lower cost and provide a greater clinical 
     benefit than other drugs;
       ``(II) have a lower cost than other drugs with same or 
     similar clinical benefit; and
       ``(III) drugs that have the same cost but provide greater 
     clinical benefit than other drugs.

       ``(ii) Formulary incentives.--The formulary incentives 
     under clause (i) may be in the form of one or more of the 
     following:

       ``(I) Tiered copayments.
       ``(II) Prior authorization.
       ``(III) Step therapy.
       ``(IV) Medication therapy management.
       ``(V) Generic drug substitution.

       ``(iii) Flexibility.--In applying such formulary incentives 
     the Secretary may decide not to impose any cost-sharing for a 
     covered part D drug for which--

       ``(I) the elimination of cost sharing would be expected to 
     increase compliance with a drug regimen; and
       ``(II) compliance would be expected to produce savings 
     under part A or B or both.

       ``(iv) Development of transparent process to explain 
     formulary incentives.--Not later than January 1, 2011, the 
     Secretary shall develop and implement a transparent process 
     to identify and explain to beneficiaries formulary incentives 
     under clause (i). Such process shall be designed to assist 
     beneficiaries in understanding how prior authorization 
     requests and other formulary incentives will be evaluated.
       ``(6) Limitations on formulary.--In any formulary 
     established under this subsection, the formulary may not be 
     changed during a year, except--
       ``(A) to add a generic version of a covered part D drug 
     that entered the market;
       ``(B) to remove such a drug for which a safety problem is 
     found; and
       ``(C) to add a drug that the Secretary identifies as a drug 
     which treats a condition for which there has not previously 
     been a treatment option or for which a clear and significant 
     benefit has been demonstrated over other covered part D 
     drugs.
       ``(7) Adding drugs to the initial formulary.--
       ``(A) Use of advisory committee.--The Secretary shall 
     establish and appoint an advisory committee (in this 
     paragraph referred to as the `advisory committee')--
       ``(i) to review petitions from drug manufacturers, health 
     care provider organizations, patient groups, and other 
     entities for inclusion of a drug in, or other changes to, 
     such formulary; and
       ``(ii) to recommend any changes to the formulary 
     established under this subsection.
       ``(B) Composition.--The advisory committee shall be 
     composed of 9 members and shall include representatives of 
     physicians, pharmacists, and consumers and others with 
     expertise in evaluating prescription drugs. The Secretary 
     shall select members based on their knowledge of 
     pharmaceuticals and the Medicare and Medicaid populations. 
     Members shall be deemed to be special Government employees 
     for purposes of applying the conflict of interest provisions 
     under section 208 of title 18, United States Code, and no 
     waiver of such provisions for such a member shall be 
     permitted.
       ``(C) Consultation.--The advisory committee shall consult, 
     as necessary, with physicians who are specialists in treating 
     the disease for which a drug is being considered.
       ``(D) Request for studies.--The advisory committee may 
     request the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality or an 
     academic or research institution to study and make a report 
     on a petition described in subparagraph (A)(ii) in order to 
     assess--
       ``(i) clinical effectiveness;
       ``(ii) comparative effectiveness;
       ``(iii) safety; and
       ``(iv) enhanced compliance with a drug regimen.
       ``(E) Recommendations.--The advisory committee shall make 
     recommendations to the Secretary regarding--
       ``(i) whether a covered part D drug is found to provide a 
     greater clinical benefit, including fewer safety concerns or 
     less risk of side-effects, than another drug in the same 
     class that is currently included in the formulary and should 
     be included in the formulary;
       ``(ii) whether a covered part D drug is found to provide 
     less clinical benefit, including greater safety concerns or a 
     greater risk of side-effects, than another drug in the same 
     class that is currently included in the formulary and should 
     not be included in the formulary; and
       ``(iii) whether a covered part D drug has the same or 
     similar clinical benefit to a drug in the same class that is 
     currently included in the formulary and whether the drug 
     should be included in the formulary.
       ``(F) Limitations on review of manufacturer petitions.--The 
     advisory committee shall not review a petition of a drug 
     manufacturer under subparagraph (A)(ii) with respect to a 
     covered part D drug unless the petition is accompanied by the 
     following:
       ``(i) Raw data from clinical trials on the safety and 
     effectiveness of the drug.
       ``(ii) Any data from clinical trials conducted using active 
     controls on the drug or drugs that are the current standard 
     of care.
       ``(iii) Any available data on comparative effectiveness of 
     the drug.
       ``(iv) Any other information the Secretary requires for the 
     advisory committee to complete its review.
       ``(G) Response to recommendations.--The Secretary shall 
     review the recommendations of the advisory committee and if 
     the Secretary accepts such recommendations the Secretary 
     shall modify the formulary established under this subsection 
     accordingly. Nothing in this section shall preclude the 
     Secretary from adding to the formulary a drug for which the 
     Director of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality or 
     the advisory committee has not made a recommendation.
       ``(H) Notice of changes.--The Secretary shall provide 
     timely notice to beneficiaries and health professionals about 
     changes to the formulary or formulary incentives.
       ``(I) Stability of benefit.--Once a covered part D drug has 
     been added to the formulary established under this 
     subsection, the drug may not be removed from the formulary 
     for at least a 3-year period, unless the Secretary determines 
     there are safety or efficacy concerns with respect to the 
     drug.
       ``(8) Non-excludable drugs.--The following drugs or classes 
     of drugs shall not be excluded from the default initial 
     formulary (as described in paragraph (1)(B)) or the initial 
     formulary established by the Secretary (as described in 
     paragraph (5)):
       ``(A) Barbiturates.
       ``(B) Benzodiazepines.
       ``(e) Informing Beneficiaries.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall take steps to inform 
     beneficiaries about the availability of a Medicare operated 
     prescription drug plan or plans including providing 
     information in the annual handbook distributed to all 
     beneficiaries and adding information to the official public 
     Medicare website related to prescription drug coverage 
     available through this part.
       ``(2) Sole responsibility for marketing by the secretary.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall have sole 
     responsibility for marketing Medicare operated prescription 
     drug plans.
       ``(B) Authorization.--There is authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Secretary such sums as are necessary to 
     carry out such marketing.
       ``(f) Application of All Other Requirements for 
     Prescription Drug Plans.--Except as specifically provided in 
     this section, any Medicare operated drug plan shall meet the 
     same requirements as apply to any other prescription drug 
     plan, including the requirements of section 1860D-4(b)(1) 
     relating to assuring pharmacy access.
       ``(g) Automatic Enrollment.--The Secretary shall establish 
     procedures to provide for the automatic enrollment of subsidy 
     eligible individuals (as defined in section 1860D-14(a)(3)) 
     in a Medicare operated prescription drug plan in the case 
     where such individuals lose their current prescription drug 
     coverage, become part D eligible individuals, or in instances 
     where the amount of the monthly beneficiary premium under the 
     prescription drug plan the individual is enrolled in is 
     greater than the premium subsidy amount described in section 
     1860D-14(b).
       ``(h) Rule of Construction Regarding Eligibility for 
     Medical Assistance.--In no case may enrollment in a Medicare 
     operated prescription drug plan affect the eligibility of an 
     individual to receive medical assistance under a State plan 
     under title XIX.''.
       (2) Effective date.--The amendment made by this subsection 
     shall take effect as if included in the enactment of section 
     101 of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and 
     Modernization Act of 2003.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) In general.--
       (A) Section 1860D-3(a) of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1395w-103(a)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(4) Availability of the medicare operated prescription 
     drug plan.--A Medicare operated prescription drug plan (as 
     defined in section 1860D-11A(c)) shall be offered nationally 
     in accordance with section 1860D-11A.''.
       (B)(i) Section 1860D-3 of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1395w-103) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(c) Provisions Only Applicable in 2006, 2007, 2008, and 
     2009.--The provisions of this section shall only apply with 
     respect to 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009.''.
       (C) Section 1860D-11(g) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-
     111(g)) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(8) No authority for fallback plans after 2009.--A 
     fallback prescription drug plan shall not be available after 
     December 31, 2009.''.
       (D) Section 1860D-13(c)(3) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-
     113(c)(3)) is amended--
       (i) in the heading, by inserting ``and medicare operated 
     prescription drug plans'' after ``Fallback plans''; and
       (ii) by inserting ``or a Medicare operated prescription 
     drug plan'' after ``a fallback prescription drug plan''.
       (E) Section 1860D-14(a) of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1395w-114(a)) is amended--

[[Page 20969]]

       (i) in paragraph (1), by striking ``In the'' and inserting 
     ``Subject to section 1860D-11A(c)(2)(A), in the''; and
       (ii) in paragraph (2), by striking ``In the'' and inserting 
     ``Subject to section 1860D-11A(c)(2)(B), in the''.
       (F) Section 1860D-16(b)(1) of such Act (42 U.S.C.1395w-
     116(b)(1)) is amended--
       (i) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon at the end;
       (ii) in subparagraph (D), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (G) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(E) payments for expenses incurred with respect to the 
     operation of Medicare operated prescription drug plans under 
     section 1860D-11A.''.
       (H) Section 1860D-41(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-
     151(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(19) Medicare operated prescription drug plan.--The term 
     `Medicare operated prescription drug plan' has the meaning 
     given such term in section 1860D-11A(c).''.
       (2) Effective date.--The amendments made by this subsection 
     shall take effect as if included in the enactment of section 
     101 of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and 
     Modernization Act of 2003.

     SEC. 103. ACCREDITATION REQUIREMENT FOR ALL SPECIALIZED 
                   MEDICARE ADVANTAGE PLANS AND REVISIONS RELATING 
                   TO SPECIALIZED MEDICARE ADVANTAGE PLANS FOR 
                   SPECIAL NEEDS INDIVIDUALS.

       (a) Accreditation Requirement.--Section 1859(f) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-28(f)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraphs (2)(B), (3)(B), and (4)(B), by striking 
     ``paragraph (5)'' and inserting ``paragraphs (5) and (6)(B)'' 
     each place it appears; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(6) Accreditation requirement for all snps.--
       ``(A) Establishment of accreditation program.--Not later 
     than January 1, 2011, the Secretary, acting through the 
     Director of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality 
     and the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 
     Services, shall enter into a contract with the National 
     Committee for Quality Assurance under which the National 
     Committee for Quality Assurance shall develop an 
     accreditation (and reaccreditation) program for all 
     specialized MA plans for special needs individuals (as 
     defined in subsection (b)(6)), including specialized MA plans 
     for special needs individuals described in subsection 
     (b)(6)(B)(ii).
       ``(B) Requirement.--The requirement described in this 
     subparagraph is that, effective for plan years beginning on 
     or after January 1, 2012, a specialized MA plan for special 
     needs individuals (as so defined) meet the accreditation 
     standards developed by the National Committee for Quality 
     Assurance under the contract under subparagraph (A).''.
       (b) Revisions Relating to Specialized Medicare Advantage 
     Plans for Special Needs Individuals.--Section 1859 of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-28) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (f)(3)--
       (A) in subparagraph (D), in the first sentence, by 
     inserting ``and the plan provides for the coordination of 
     coverage for benefits under this title (including this part) 
     and such medical assistance'' before the period at the end; 
     and
       (B) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(E) The plan meets the requirements described in 
     subsection (g).''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(g) Additional Requirements for Dual SNPS.--The following 
     requirements are described in this subsection:
       ``(1) Provision of information.--The plan provides special 
     needs individuals described in subsection (b)(6)(B)(ii) up-
     front information about formularies and utilization 
     management strategies under the plan as part of the 
     information disclosed under section 1852(c)(1).
       ``(2) Premium.--The premium under the plan does not exceed 
     the premium subsidy amount described in section 1860D-14(b).
       ``(3) Formulary.--
       ``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), the plan 
     has a formulary that, based on the most recent data 
     available, covers at least--
       ``(i) 95 percent of the 200 most commonly prescribed non-
     duplicative generic covered part D drugs for the population 
     of individuals entitled to (or enrolled for) benefits under 
     part A or enrolled under part B; and
       ``(ii) 95 percent of the 200 most commonly prescribed non-
     duplicative brand name covered part D drugs for such 
     population.
       ``(B) Inclusion of drugs in certain categories and 
     classes.--The plan formulary shall include all covered part D 
     drugs in the categories and classes identified by the 
     Secretary under section 1860D-4(b)(3)(G)(i).
       ``(4) Pharmacy access.--The plan secures participation in 
     its network of a sufficient number of pharmacies that 
     dispense (other than by mail order) drugs directly to 
     patients to ensure convenient access by at least 90 percent 
     of enrollees who are residing in long-term care facilities 
     within the region.
       ``(5) Operation of a dedicated customer assistance phone 
     line.--The plan shall maintain a toll-free number or numbers 
     for inquiries concerning the plan that is solely for the use 
     of such individuals, the designated representatives of such 
     individuals (including designated family members), advocates 
     of such individuals, providers of services, and suppliers.
       ``(6) E-prescribing.--The plan adopts electronic 
     prescribing for enrollees, in accordance with section 1860D-
     4(e), to coordinate care.
       ``(7) Demonstrate experience and expertise.--The plan 
     demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the Secretary, with 
     input from the States, sufficient experience and expertise in 
     serving low-income, publicly insured, or previously uninsured 
     populations.
       ``(8) Reducing health disparities.--The plan has 
     established and implemented systems and processes which have 
     been approved by the Secretary to address and reduce health 
     disparities based on race, ethnicity, gender, age, and socio-
     economic status.
       ``(9) Proficiency in care coordination.--The plan 
     demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the Secretary, 
     proficiency in care coordination for the purpose of 
     providing, or arranging for the provision of, services to 
     assist individuals enrolled in the plan in obtaining access 
     to other public and private benefits, including services to 
     address non-medical and psycho-social needs.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to plan year beginning on or after January 1, 
     2011.

     SEC. 104. PROVIDING BETTER CARE COORDINATION FOR LOW-INCOME 
                   BENEFICIARIES IN MEDICARE PART D.

       (a) Continuous Updating of Eligibility and Enrollment Data 
     for Dual Eligible Individuals.--
       (1) State requirement.--Section 1935(a) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396u-5(a)) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(4) Updating of eligibility and enrollment information on 
     a rolling basis.--Beginning not later than October 1, 2011, 
     the State shall update information with respect to the 
     eligibility and enrollment of individuals receiving any kind 
     of medical assistance under the State plan, including medical 
     assistance for payment of Medicare cost-sharing described in 
     section 1905(p)(3), in MA plans and prescription drug plans 
     under parts C and D, respectively, of title XVIII (including 
     eligibility determinations under paragraph (2) and screening 
     and enrollment under paragraph (3)) not less frequently than 
     on a weekly basis.''.
       (2) Secretarial requirements.--Section 1935(d) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396u-5(d)) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) Updating of eligibility and enrollment information on 
     a rolling basis.--The Secretary shall update information with 
     respect to the eligibility and enrollment of individuals 
     receiving any kind of medical assistance under this title, 
     including medical assistance for payment of Medicare cost-
     sharing described in section 1905(p)(3), in MA plans and 
     prescription drug plans under parts C and D, respectively, of 
     title XVIII as it is received, but not less frequently than 
     on a weekly basis.''.
       (b) Identifying Dual Eligible Individuals in Data 
     Records.--
       (1) In general.--Section 1859 of the Social Security Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 1305w-28), as amended by section 103, is amended 
     by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(h) Identifying Dual Eligible Individuals in Data 
     Records.--
       ``(1) Identification by the secretary.--Beginning on 
     January 1, 2010, the Secretary shall clearly identify all 
     dual eligible individuals that are enrolled in MA plans and 
     prescription drug plans for the current plan year and reflect 
     the low-income subsidy status of such individuals for each 
     plan year in every data record file maintained in the 
     Medicare electronic database and every such file that is used 
     to enroll or adjudicate claims for such individuals.
       ``(2) Identification by ma plans and prescription drug 
     plans.--Beginning on January 1, 2010, each MA plan and 
     prescription drug plan shall clearly identify all dual 
     eligible individuals that are enrolled in the plan for the 
     current plan year and reflect the low-income subsidy status 
     of such individuals for the plan year in every data record 
     file maintained by the plan that is used to enroll or 
     adjudicate claims for such individuals under the plan.
       ``(3) Regulations.--The Secretary shall establish 
     regulations to carry out this subsection. Such regulations 
     shall require that--
       ``(A) for each plan year and each dual eligible individual, 
     the Secretary identify on the Medicare enrollment database 
     dual eligible status that has been verified with a State or 
     the District of Columbia;
       ``(B) for each plan year and each dual eligible individual, 
     the Secretary identify on the Medicare enrollment database 
     the low-income subsidy level of the individual; and

[[Page 20970]]

       ``(C) each data file that is necessary to ensure that such 
     dual eligible status is transmitted to an MA plan or a 
     prescription drug plan, at the time the Secretary certifies 
     the enrollment of the dual eligible individual in the plan.
       ``(4) Definition of dual eligible individual.--The term 
     `dual eligible individual' means a special needs individual 
     described in subsection (b)(6)(B)(ii).''.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--Section 1860D-42 of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-152) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following new subsection:
       ``(c) Identifying Dual Eligible Individuals in Data 
     Records.--For provisions regarding the identification by 
     prescription drug plans of dual eligible individuals in data 
     records, see section 1859(h).''.
       (c) Assuring Continuity of Prescription Drug Coverage for 
     Dual Eligibles.--
       (1) In general.--Section 1935(d)(1) of the Social Security 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 1396u-5(d)(1)) is amended--
       (A) by inserting ``on and after the date described in 
     subparagraph (B),'' after ``notwithstanding any other 
     provision of this title,'';
       (B) by striking ``In the case of'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(A) In general.--In the case of''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(B) Date described.--For purposes of subparagraph (A), 
     the date described in this subparagraph is the date on which 
     the State confirms with a Medicare Advantage plan under part 
     C of title XVIII or a prescription drug plan under part D of 
     such title (including a Medicare operated prescription drug 
     plan under section 1860D-11A), as applicable--
       ``(i) that the part D eligible individual (as so defined) 
     who is described in subsection (c)(6)(A)(ii) is enrolled with 
     such plan; and
       ``(ii) the cost-sharing and premiums applicable for the 
     individual for such plan.''.
       (2) Effective date.--The amendments made by paragraph (1) 
     take effect on January 1, 2011.
       (d) Collection and Sharing of Drug Utilization Data and 
     Formulary Information for Full-Benefit Dual Eligible 
     Individuals.--
       (1) In general.--Section 1860D-42 of the Social Security 
     Act, as amended by subsection (b), is amended by adding at 
     the end the following new subsection:
       ``(d) Collection and Sharing of Drug Utilization Data and 
     Formulary Information for Full-Benefit Dual Eligible 
     Individuals.--
       ``(1) Plan requirement.--A PDP sponsor of a prescription 
     drug plan (including a Medicare operated prescription drug 
     plan under section 1860D-11A) and an MA organization offering 
     an MA-PD plan shall submit to the Secretary such information 
     regarding the drug utilization of enrollees in such plans who 
     are full-benefit dual eligible individuals (as defined in 
     section 1935(c)(6)) and any formularies under the plans such 
     individuals are enrolled in as the Secretary determines 
     appropriate to carry out paragraph (2). Such information 
     shall be submitted--
       ``(A) on a rolling basis (as determined appropriate by the 
     Secretary); and
       ``(B) using a single, uniform reporting process.
       ``(2) Collection and sharing of data.--The Secretary shall 
     collect data on the drug utilization of full-benefit dual 
     eligible individuals (as so defined) and on any formularies 
     under the plans such individuals are enrolled in. The 
     Secretary shall share such data with the States and the 
     District of Columbia on as close to a real-time basis as 
     possible.''.
       (2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1) 
     shall take effect on January 1, 2010.

     SEC. 105. IMPROVING TRANSITION OF NEW DUAL ELIGIBLE 
                   INDIVIDUALS TO MEDICARE PRESCRIPTION DRUG 
                   COVERAGE AND PRESUMPTIVE ELIGIBILITY FOR LOW-
                   INCOME SUBSIDIES.

       (a) Updating the Point of Sale Facilitated Enrollment 
     Process.--
       (1) Providing better initial protection for dual eligible 
     individuals.--Beginning January 1, 2011, each contractor 
     under the Point of Sale Facilitated Enrollment process of the 
     Department of Health and Human Services shall enroll full-
     benefit dual eligible individuals (as defined in section 
     1935(c)(6)) into a Medicare operated prescription drug plan 
     under section 1860D-11A of the Social Security Act, as added 
     by section 102.
       (2) Competitive bidding of point of sale contract.--The 
     Secretary of Health and Human Services shall establish 
     procedures to ensure that each contract entered into under 
     such process on or after January 1, 2010, under the Medicare 
     program under title XVIII of the Social Security Act is rebid 
     every 3 years through a competitive bidding process.
       (3) Requiring better education about point of sale 
     facilitated enrollment process.--Not later than January 1, 
     2010, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall have a 
     comprehensive plan in place for proactively educating 
     beneficiaries under the Medicare prescription drug program 
     under part D of title XVIII of the Social Security Act, 
     pharmacists, skilled nursing facilities (as defined in 
     section 1819(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395i-3(a)), nursing 
     facilities (as defined in section 1919(a) of such Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1396r(a)), counselors under State health insurance 
     assistance programs (SHIPs), and other advocacy organizations 
     (including disability organizations) about the Point of Sale 
     Facilitated Enrollment process. Under such plan--
       (A) information about the Point of Sale Facilitated 
     Enrollment process shall be included in all mailers to the 
     entities and individuals described in the preceding sentence 
     prior to the annual, coordinated election period described in 
     section 1851(e)(3) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1395w-21(e)(3)); and
       (B) a description of such process and other relevant 
     information shall be prominently displayed on the Medicare 
     Internet website throughout the year.
       (4) Mandatory use of point of sale facilitated enrollment 
     process.--Section 1860D-4(b)(1) of the Social Security Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 1395w-104(b)(1)) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new subparagraph:
       ``(F) Mandatory use of point of sale facilitated enrollment 
     process.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     beginning January 1, 2011, the terms and conditions under 
     subparagraph (A) shall require participating pharmacies to 
     use the Point of Sale Facilitated Enrollment process of the 
     Department of Health and Human Services.''.
       (b) Presumptive Eligibility and Mandatory Transition Period 
     for Subsidy Eligible Individuals.--Section 1860D-14 of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-104) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (c) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(d) Presumptive Eligibility and Mandatory Transition 
     Period.--
       ``(1) Presumptive eligibility.--An individual shall be 
     presumed to be a subsidy eligible individual (as defined in 
     section 1860D-14(a)(3)) if the individual presents at the 
     pharmacy with--
       ``(A) reliable evidence of--
       ``(i) Medicaid enrollment, such as a Medicaid card, recent 
     history of Medicaid billing in the pharmacy patient profile, 
     a copy of a current Medicaid award letter, or confirmation 
     from a Medicaid enrollment database; or
       ``(ii) eligibility for an income-related subsidy under 
     section 1860D-14, such as a low-income subsidy notice from 
     the Secretary or the Commissioner of Social Security, or 
     confirmation from a Social Security enrollment database; and
       ``(B) reliable evidence of Medicare enrollment, such as a 
     Medicare identification card, a Medicare enrollment approval 
     letter, a Medicare Summary Notice, or confirmation from an 
     official Medicare hotline or Medicare database.
       ``(2) Making subsidy eligible individuals whole.--
       ``(A) In general.--In the case of a subsidy eligible 
     individual (as so defined) who, between November 15, 2005 and 
     December 31, 2009, has wrongly been forced to pay higher co-
     payments, premiums, and deductibles than those applicable 
     under this part and part C for such individual, the subsidy 
     eligible individual shall be eligible for compensation under 
     the program under this title.
       ``(B) Establishment of process for refund of amount 
     incorrectly paid.--The Secretary shall establish a process 
     under which--
       ``(i) prescription drug plans and MA-PD plans are billed 
     for copayments and deductibles inappropriately charged to 
     subsidy eligible individuals during retroactive coverage 
     periods;
       ``(ii) the amounts incorrectly paid by the subsidy eligible 
     individual as a result of those inappropriate charges are 
     refunded directly to the individual, either through a rebate 
     on future payments of premiums under part B or through a 
     direct payment to the individual; and
       ``(iii) prescription drug plans and MA-PD plans are 
     required to provide detailed accounting to the Secretary of 
     the basis for any rebate or payment to a subsidy eligible 
     individual under this subparagraph, including the applicable 
     period of retroactive coverage for the subsidy eligible 
     individual and whether the rebate or credit is with respect 
     to an inappropriately charged copayment or deductible,
       ``(C) Notification.--Subsidy eligible individuals shall be 
     notified of the requirements of this subsection in their 2010 
     plan year materials.
       ``(D) No effect on eligibility for other benefits.--Amounts 
     refunded to a subsidy eligible individual under this 
     subsection shall be disregarded for purposes of determining 
     or continuing the beneficiary's eligibility for receipt of 
     benefits under any other Federal, State, or locally funded 
     assistance program, including benefits paid under titles II, 
     XVI, XVIII, XIX, or XXI.''.

     SEC. 106. REQUIRED INFORMATION ON TRANSITION FROM SKILLED 
                   NURSING FACILITIES AND NURSING FACILITIES TO 
                   PART D PLANS.

       (a) Skilled Nursing Facilities.--Section 1819(b) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395i-3(b)) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new paragraph:

[[Page 20971]]

       ``(9) Information on transition to prescription drug 
     coverage.--A skilled nursing facility must provide 
     information to residents and the families of residents on how 
     to transition to prescription drug coverage under MA-PD plans 
     under part C and prescription drug plans under part D upon 
     discharge from the facility.''.
       (b) Nursing Facilities.--Section 1919(b) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395i-3(b)) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(9) Information on transitioning to prescription drug 
     coverage.--A nursing facility must provide information to 
     residents and the families of residents on how to transition 
     to prescription drug coverage under MA-PD plans under part C 
     and prescription drug plans under part D upon discharge from 
     the facility.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on January 1, 2011.

     SEC. 107. STREAMLINED PHARMACY COMPLIANCE PACKAGING.

       (a) In General.--Section 1860D-4(b)(3) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-104(b)(3) is amended by adding 
     at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(G) Streamlined pharmacy compliance packaging for dual 
     eligible individuals.--A PDP sponsor of a prescription drug 
     plan shall streamline pharmacy compliance packaging for 
     individuals enrolled in the plan who--
       ``(i) are entitled to medical assistance under a State plan 
     under title XVIII; and
       ``(ii) reside in a nursing home.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply to drugs dispensed on or after January 1, 2010.

     SEC. 108. LOWERING COVERED PART D DRUG PRICES ON BEHALF OF 
                   MEDICARE BENEFICIARIES.

       (a) Repeal of Prohibition.--Section 1860D-11 of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-111) is amended by striking 
     subsection (i) and inserting the following:
       ``(i) Lowering Covered Part D Drug Prices.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall reduce the purchase 
     cost of covered part D drugs by implementing 2 or more of the 
     following strategies on an annual basis (beginning with 
     2011):
       ``(A) Negotiating directly with pharmaceutical 
     manufacturers for additional discounts, rebates, and other 
     price concessions that may be made available to Medicare 
     operated prescription drug plans under section 1860D-11A for 
     covered part D drugs.
       ``(B) Entering into rebate agreements with manufacturers to 
     provide to the Secretary a rebate for any covered outpatient 
     drug of a manufacturer dispensed during a rebate period 
     specified in the agreement to a subsidy eligible individual 
     described (or treated as described) in section 1860D-
     14(a)(1)) for which payment was made by a PDP sponsor under 
     part D of title XVIII or an MA organization under part C of 
     such title for such period in an amount determined in the 
     same manner as the rebate amount for such drug would have 
     been determined under subsection (c) of section 1927 if the 
     dispensing of the drug to such individual was paid for by a 
     State and subject to a rebate agreement entered into under 
     such section (and allocating any such rebates received among 
     the prescription drug plans of such PDP sponsors and MA-PD 
     plans offered by such organizations based on the enrollment 
     of such individuals in such plans).
       ``(C) In consultation with the Director of the Agency for 
     Healthcare Research and Quality, using data from relevant and 
     unbiased studies on the comparative clinical effectiveness of 
     covered part D drugs to--
       ``(i) educate physicians and pharmacists; and
       ``(ii) provide information to PDP sponsors of prescription 
     drug plans and MA organizations offering MA-PD plans for use 
     in making decisions regarding plan formularies.
       ``(D) Instituting prescription drug prices negotiated under 
     the Federal Supply Schedule of the General Services 
     Administration for the reimbursement of covered part D drugs.
       ``(2) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this subsection 
     shall be construed as preventing the PDP sponsor of a 
     prescription drug plan or an MA organization offering an MA-
     PD plan from obtaining a discount or reduction of the price 
     for a covered part D drug below the price negotiated by the 
     Secretary for a Medicare-operated plan under paragraph 
     (1)(A).
       ``(3) Annual reports to congress.--Not later than January 
     1, 2012, and annually thereafter, the Secretary shall submit 
     to the Committee on Finance of the Senate and to the 
     Committee on Ways and Means, the Committee on Energy and 
     Commerce, and the Committee on Oversight and Government 
     Reform of the House of Representatives a report on the 
     strategies implemented by the Secretary under paragraph (1) 
     to achieve lower prices on covered part D drugs for 
     beneficiaries, including the prices of such covered part D 
     drugs and any price concessions achieved by the Secretary as 
     a result of such implementation.''.

     SEC. 109. CORRECTION OF FLAWS IN DETERMINATION OF PHASED-DOWN 
                   STATE CONTRIBUTION FOR FEDERAL ASSUMPTION OF 
                   PRESCRIPTION DRUG COSTS FOR DUALLY ELIGIBLE 
                   INDIVIDUALS.

       Section 1935(c) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1396u-5(c)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), in the matter preceding subparagraph 
     (A), by striking ``Each'' and inserting ``Subject to 
     paragraph (7), each''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(7) Modification of determination of amount of state 
     contribution.--Not later than January 1, 2011, the Secretary 
     of Health and Human Services (in this section referred to as 
     the `Secretary'), acting through the Director of the Federal 
     Coordinated Health Care Office established under section 101 
     of the Medicare Prescription Drug Reform Act of 2009, shall 
     promulgate regulations for modifying the factors used to 
     determine the product under paragraph (1)(A) for each State 
     and month that take into account the following with respect 
     to each State:
       ``(A) Factoring into the determination of base year State 
     Medicaid per capita expenditures for covered part D drugs for 
     full-benefit dual eligible individuals under paragraph (3) 
     all payments collected by a State under agreements under 
     section 1927 for outpatient prescription drugs purchased in 
     2003 (not just for such payments that were collected by the 
     State in 2003).
       ``(B) Pharmacy cost savings measures implemented by the 
     State during the period that begins with 2003 and ends with 
     2006.
       ``(C) Substituting under paragraph (4) a State-specific 
     growth factor in lieu of the national applicable growth 
     factor for 2004 and succeeding years based on the annual 
     percentage increase in the State's average per capita 
     aggregate expenditures for covered outpatient drugs.

     Such regulations shall include procedures for adjusting 
     payments to States under section 1903(a) to take into account 
     any overpayments or underpayments which the Secretary 
     determines on the basis of such modifications were made by 
     States under this subsection for 2004 and succeeding 
     years.''.

     SEC. 110. NO IMPACT ON ELIGIBILITY FOR BENEFITS UNDER OTHER 
                   PROGRAMS.

       (a) In General.--Section 1860D-14(a)(3) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-114(a)(3)), is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), in the matter preceding clause 
     (i), by striking ``subparagraph (F)'' and inserting 
     ``subparagraphs (F) and (H)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(H) No impact on eligibility for benefits under other 
     programs.--The availability of premium and cost-sharing 
     subsidies under this section shall not be treated as benefits 
     or otherwise taken into account in determining an 
     individual's eligibility for, or the amount of benefits 
     under, any other Federal program.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 111. QUALITY INDICATORS FOR DUAL ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUALS.

       Section 1154(a) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1320c-3(a)) is amended by inserting after paragraph (11) the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(12) For all contracts entered into on or after August 1, 
     2011, the organization shall produce a statistically valid 
     subsample of quality indicators applicable to dual eligible 
     beneficiaries under titles XVIII and XIX.''.

        TITLE II--ADDITIONAL MEDICARE AND MEDICAID IMPROVEMENTS

Subtitle A--Improving the Financial Assistance Available to Low-Income 
                         Medicare Beneficiaries

     SEC. 201. IMPROVING ASSETS TESTS FOR MEDICARE SAVINGS PROGRAM 
                   AND LOW-INCOME SUBSIDY PROGRAM.

       (a) Application of Highest Level Permitted Under LIS.--
       (1) To full-premium subsidy eligible individuals.--Section 
     1860D-14(a) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-
     114(a)) is amended--
       (A) in paragraph (1), in the matter before subparagraph 
     (A), by inserting ``(or, beginning with 2010, paragraph 
     (3)(E))'' after ``paragraph (3)(D)''; and
       (B) in paragraph (3)(A)(iii), by striking ``(D) or''.
       (2) Annual increase in lis resource test.--Section 1860D-
     14(a)(3)(E)(i) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-
     114(a)(3)(E)(i)) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``and'' at the end of subclause (I);
       (B) in subclause (II), by inserting ``(before 2010)'' after 
     ``subsequent year'';
       (C) by striking the period at the end of subclause (II) and 
     inserting a semicolon;
       (D) by inserting after subclause (II) the following new 
     subclauses:

       ``(III) for 2010, $27,500 (or $55,000 in the case of the 
     combined value of the individual's assets or resources and 
     the assets or resources of the individual's spouse); and
       ``(IV) for a subsequent year, the dollar amounts specified 
     in this subclause (or subclause (III)) for the previous year 
     increased by the annual percentage increase in the consumer 
     price index (all items; U.S. city average) as of September of 
     such previous year.''; and

       (E) in the last sentence, by inserting ``or (IV)'' after 
     ``subclause (II)''.

[[Page 20972]]

       (3) Application of lis test under medicare savings 
     program.--Section 1905(p)(1)(C) of the Social Security Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 1396d(p)(1)(C)) is amended by striking 
     ``subparagraph (D)'' and all that follows through the period 
     at the end and inserting the following: ``section 1860D-
     14(a)(3)(E) applicable to an individual or to the individual 
     and the individual's spouse (as the case may be)''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply to eligibility determinations for income-related 
     subsidies and Medicare cost-sharing furnished for periods 
     beginning on or after January 1, 2010.

     SEC. 202. ELIMINATING BARRIERS TO ENROLLMENT.

       (a) Encouraging Application of Procedures Under Medicare 
     Savings Program.--Section 1905(p) of the Social Security Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 1396d(p)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(7) The Secretary shall take all reasonable steps to 
     encourage States to provide for administrative verification 
     of income and automatic reenrollment (as provided under 
     subparagraphs (C)(iii) and (G) of section 1860D-14(a)(3) in 
     the case of the low-income subsidy program).''.
       (b) Ensuring That SSA and States Can Electronically Process 
     All Low-Income Subsidy Program Applications.--Section 1860D-
     14(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-
     114(a)(3)(B)(i)) is amended by inserting after the first 
     sentence the following new sentence: ``Not later than January 
     1, 2012, the State plan and the Commissioner shall have in 
     place procedures to ensure the capacity to process all 
     applications for determinations (including all applications 
     that are not in English) electronically.''.

     SEC. 203. ELIMINATION OF PART D COST-SHARING FOR CERTAIN NON-
                   INSTITUTIONALIZED FULL-BENEFIT DUAL ELIGIBLE 
                   INDIVIDUALS.

       (a) In General.--Section 1860D-14(a)(1)(D)(i) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-114(a)(1)(D)(i)) is amended--
       (1) in the heading, by striking ``Institutionalized 
     individuals.--In'' and inserting ``Elimination of cost-
     sharing for certain full-benefit dual eligible individuals.--

       ``(I) Institutionalized individuals.--In''; and

       (2) by adding at the end the following new subclauses:

       ``(II) Certain other individuals.--In the case of an 
     individual who is a full-benefit dual eligible individual and 
     who is being provided medical assistance for home and 
     community-based services under subsection (c), (d), (e), (i), 
     or (j) of section 1915 or pursuant to section 1115, the 
     elimination of any beneficiary coinsurance described in 
     section 1860D-2(b)(2) (for all amounts through the total 
     amount of expenditures at which benefits are available under 
     section 1860D-2(b)(4)).''.

       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply to drugs dispensed on or after January 1, 2010.

     SEC. 204. EXEMPTION OF BALANCE IN ANY PENSION OR RETIREMENT 
                   PLAN FROM RESOURCES FOR DETERMINATION OF 
                   ELIGIBILITY FOR LOW-INCOME SUBSIDY.

       (a) In General.--Section 1860D-14(a)(3) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-114(a)(3)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (D), in the matter before clause (i), 
     by striking ``life insurance policy exclusion provided under 
     subparagraph (G)''and inserting ``additional exclusions 
     provided under subparagraphs (G) and (H)'';
       (2) in subparagraph (E)(i), in the matter before subclause 
     (I), by striking ``life insurance policy exclusion provided 
     under subparagraph (G)''and inserting ``additional exclusions 
     provided under subparagraphs (G) and (H)''
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(H) Pension or retirement plan exclusion.--In determining 
     the resources of an individual (and the eligible spouse of 
     the individual, if any) under section 1613 for purposes of 
     subparagraphs (D) and (E), no balance in any pension or 
     retirement plan shall be taken into account.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on January 1, 2010, and shall apply to 
     determinations of eligibility for months beginning with 
     January 2010.

     SEC. 205. COST-SHARING PROTECTIONS FOR LOW-INCOME SUBSIDY-
                   ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUALS.

       (a) In General.--Section 1860D-14(a) of the Social Security 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-114(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)(D), by adding at the end the following 
     new clause:
       ``(iv) Overall limitation on cost-sharing.--In the case of 
     all such individuals, a limitation on aggregate cost-sharing 
     under this part for a year not to exceed 2.5 percent of 
     income.''; and
       (2) in paragraph (2), by adding at the end the following 
     new subparagraph:
       ``(F) Overall limitation on cost-sharing.--A limitation on 
     aggregate cost-sharing under this part for a year not to 
     exceed 2.5 percent of income.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply as of January 1, 2010.

                     Subtitle B--Other Improvements

     SEC. 211. ENROLLMENT IMPROVEMENTS UNDER MEDICARE PARTS C AND 
                   D.

       (a) Special Election Period During First 60 Days of 
     Enrollment in a New Plan.--
       (1) In general.--Section 1851(e)(4) of the Social Security 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w(e)(4)) is amended--
       (A) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``or'' at the end;
       (B) by redesignating subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (E); 
     and
       (C) by inserting after subparagraph (C) the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(D) the individual has been enrolled in such plan for 
     fewer than 60 days; or''.
       (2) Effective date.--The amendments made by paragraph (1) 
     shall take effect on the date that is 90 days after the date 
     of enactment of this Act.
       (b) Extension of the Annual, Coordinated Election Period.--
       (1) In general.--Section 1851(e)(3)(B)(iv) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-1(e)(3)(B)(iv)) is amended by 
     striking ``November 15'' and inserting ``October 1''.
       (2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1) 
     shall apply to annual, coordinated election periods beginning 
     after the date of enactment of this Act.
       (c) Coordination Under Parts C and D of the Continuous Open 
     Enrollment and Disenrollment Period for the First 3 Months of 
     the Year.--
       (1) In general.--Section 1860D-1(b)(1)(B)(iii) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-101(b)(1)(B)(iii)) is 
     amended by striking ``, (C),''.
       (2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1) 
     shall take effect on January 1, 2010.

     SEC. 212. MEDICARE PLAN COMPLAINT SYSTEM.

       (a) System.--Section 1808 of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1395b-9) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (c)(2)--
       (A) in subparagraph (B)(iii), by striking ``adjustment; 
     and'' and inserting ``adjustment);'';
       (B) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(D) develop and maintain the plan complaint system under 
     subsection (d).''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(d) Plan Complaint System.--
       ``(1) System.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall develop and maintain 
     a plan complaint system, (in this subsection referred to as 
     the `system') to--
       ``(i) collect and maintain information on plan complaints;
       ``(ii) track plan complaints from the date the complaint is 
     logged into the system through the date the complaint is 
     resolved; and
       ``(iii) otherwise improve the process for reporting plan 
     complaints.
       ``(B) Timeframe.--The Secretary shall have the system in 
     place by not later than the date that is 6 months after the 
     date of enactment of this subsection.
       ``(C) Plan complaint defined.--In this subsection, the term 
     `plan complaint' means a complaint that is received 
     (including by telephone, letter, e-mail, or any other means) 
     by the Secretary (including by a regional office, the 
     Medicare Beneficiary Ombudsman, a subcontractor, a carrier, a 
     fiscal intermediary, and a Medicare administrative 
     contractor) from a Medicare Advantage eligible individual or 
     a Part D eligible individual (or an individual representing 
     such an individual) regarding a Medicare Advantage 
     organization, a Medicare Advantage plan, a prescription drug 
     plan sponsor, or a prescription drug plan, including, but not 
     limited to, complaints relating to marketing, enrollment, 
     covered drugs, premiums and cost-sharing, and plan customer 
     service, grievances and appeals, participating providers. 
     Such term also includes plan complaints that are received by 
     the Secretary directly from the organization offering the 
     plan relating to complaints by such individuals.
       ``(2) Process criteria.--In developing the system, the 
     Secretary shall establish a process for reporting plan 
     complaints. Such process shall meet the following criteria:
       ``(A) Accessible.--The process is widely known and easy to 
     use.
       ``(B) Investigative capacity.--The process involves the 
     appropriate experts, resources, and methods to assess 
     complaints and determine whether they reflect an underlying 
     pattern.
       ``(C) Intervention and follow-through.--The process 
     triggers appropriate interventions and monitoring based on 
     substantiated complaints.
       ``(D) Quality improvement orientation.--The process guides 
     quality improvement.
       ``(E) Responsiveness.--The process routinely provides 
     consistent, clear, and substantive responses to complaints.
       ``(F) Timelines.--Each process step is completed within a 
     reasonable, established timeframe, and mechanisms exist to 
     deal quickly with complaints of an emergency nature requiring 
     immediate attention.
       ``(G) Objective.--The process is unbiased, balancing the 
     rights of each party.

[[Page 20973]]

       ``(H) Public accountability.--The process makes complaint 
     information available to the public.
       ``(3) Standard data reporting requirements.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall establish standard 
     data reporting requirements for reporting plan complaints 
     under the system.
       ``(B) Model electronic complaint form.--The Secretary shall 
     develop a model electronic complaint form to be used for 
     reporting plan complaints under the system. Such form shall 
     be prominently displayed on the front page of the 
     Medicare.gov Internet website and on the Internet website of 
     the Medicare Beneficiary Ombudsman.
       ``(4) All complaints required to be logged into the 
     system.--Every plan complaint shall be logged into the 
     system.
       ``(5) Casework notations.--The system shall provide for the 
     inclusion of any casework notations throughout the complaint 
     process on the record of a plan complaint.
       ``(6) Medicare beneficiary ombudsman.--The Secretary shall 
     carry out this subsection acting through the Medicare 
     Beneficiary Ombudsman.''.
       (b) Funding.--There are authorized to be appropriated such 
     sums as may be necessary for the costs of carrying out 
     section 1808(d) of the Social Security Act, as added by 
     subsection (a).
       (c) Reports.--
       (1) Secretary.--
       (A) Ongoing study.--The Medicare Beneficiary Ombudsman 
     (under subsection (c) of section 1808) of the Social Security 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 1395b-9) shall conduct an ongoing study of the 
     plan complaint system established under subsection (d) of 
     such section (as added by subsection (a)), in this subsection 
     referred to as the ``system''. Such study shall include an 
     analysis of--
       (i) the numbers and types of complaints reported under the 
     system;
       (ii) geographic variations in such complaints;
       (iii) the timeliness of agency or plan responses to such 
     complaints; and
       (iv) the resolution of such complaints.
       (B) Quarterly reports.--Not later than 6 months after the 
     implementation of the system, and every 3 months thereafter, 
     the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall submit to 
     Congress a report on the study conducted under subparagraph 
     (A), together with recommendations for such legislation and 
     administrative actions as the Secretary determines 
     appropriate.
       (2) Inspector general.--The Inspector General of the 
     Department of Health and Human Services shall conduct an 
     evaluation of the system. Not later than 1 year after the 
     implementation of the system, the Inspector General shall 
     submit to Congress a report on such evaluation, together with 
     recommendations for such legislation and administrative 
     actions as the Inspector General determines appropriate.

     SEC. 213. UNIFORM EXCEPTIONS AND APPEALS PROCESS.

       (a) In General.--Section 1860D-4(b)(3) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w--104(b)(3), as amended by 
     section 107, is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new subparagraph:
       ``(G) Use of single, uniform exceptions and appeals 
     process.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this part, a 
     PDP sponsor of a prescription drug plan or an MA organization 
     offering an MA-PD plan shall--
       ``(i) use a single, uniform exceptions and appeals process 
     with respect to the determination of prescription drug 
     coverage for an enrollee under the plan; and
       ``(ii) provide instant access to such process by enrollees 
     through a toll-free telephone number and an Internet 
     website.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply to exceptions and appeals on or after January 1, 
     2011.

     SEC. 214. PROHIBITION ON CONDITIONING MEDICAID ELIGIBILITY 
                   FOR INDIVIDUALS ENROLLED IN CERTAIN CREDITABLE 
                   PRESCRIPTION DRUG COVERAGE ON ENROLLMENT IN THE 
                   MEDICARE PART D DRUG PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Section 1935 of the Social Security Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 1396v) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(f) Prohibition on Conditioning Eligibility for Medical 
     Assistance for Individuals Enrolled in Certain Creditable 
     Prescription Drug Coverage on Enrollment in Medicare 
     Prescription Drug Benefit.--
       ``(1) In general.--A State shall not condition eligibility 
     for medical assistance under the State plan for a part D 
     eligible individual (as defined in section 1860D-1(a)(3)(A)) 
     who is enrolled in creditable prescription drug coverage 
     described in any of subparagraphs (C) through (H) of section 
     1860D-13(b)(4) on the individual's enrollment in a 
     prescription drug plan under part D of title XVIII or an MA-
     PD plan under part C of such title.
       ``(2) Coordination of benefits with part d for other 
     individuals.--Nothing in this subsection shall be construed 
     as prohibiting a State from coordinating medical assistance 
     under the State plan with benefits under part D of title 
     XVIII for individuals not described in paragraph (1).''.

     SEC. 215. OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL ANNUAL REPORT ON 
                   PART D FORMULARIES' INCLUSION OF DRUGS COMMONLY 
                   USED BY DUAL ELIGIBLES.

       (a) Ongoing Study.--The Inspector General of the Department 
     of Health and Human Services shall conduct an ongoing study 
     of the extent to which formularies used by prescription drug 
     plans and MA-PD plans under part D include drugs commonly 
     used by full-benefit dual eligible individuals (as defined in 
     section 1935(c)(6) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1396u-5(c)(6)).
       (b) Annual Reports.--Not later than July 1 of each year 
     (beginning with 2010), the Inspector General shall submit to 
     Congress a report on the study conducted under paragraph (1), 
     together with such recommendations as the Inspector General 
     determines appropriate.

     SEC. 216. HHS ONGOING STUDY AND ANNUAL REPORTS ON COVERAGE 
                   FOR DUAL ELIGIBLES.

       (a) Ongoing Study.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of Health and Human Services 
     (in this section referred to as the ``Secretary'') shall 
     conduct an ongoing study to track--
       (A) how many of the new full benefit dual eligible 
     individuals (as defined in section 1935(c)(6) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395u-5(c)(6))) enroll in a plan 
     under part D of title XVIII of such Act and receive 
     retroactive prescription drug coverage under the plan; and
       (B) if such retroactive coverage is provided to such 
     individuals--
       (i) the number of months of coverage provided; and
       (ii) the amount of reimbursements to individuals and to 
     individuals that made payments for prescription drugs on 
     their behalf for costs incurred during retroactive coverage 
     periods.
       (2) Data to use.--In conducting the study with respect to 
     the requirements under paragraph (1)(B), the Secretary shall 
     examine prescription drug utilization data reported by 
     Medicare part D plans.
       (b) Annual Reports on Ongoing Study.--Not later than March 
     1 of each year (beginning with 2010), the Secretary shall 
     submit a report to Congress containing the results of the 
     study conducted under subsection (a), together with 
     recommendations for such legislation and administrative 
     action as the Secretary determines appropriate.
       (c) Annual Reports on Spending and Outcomes.--Not later 
     than January 1 of each year (beginning with 2013), the 
     Secretary shall collect data and submit a report to Congress 
     that includes the following information:
       (1) Annual total expenditures (disaggregated by Federal and 
     State expenditures) for dually eligible beneficiaries under 
     title XVIII and under State plans and waivers under title 
     XIX.
       (2) An analysis of health outcomes for dually eligible 
     beneficiaries, disaggregated by subtypes of beneficiaries (as 
     determined by the Secretary).
       (3) An analysis of the extent to which dually eligible 
     beneficiaries are able to access benefits under title XVIII 
     and under State plans and waivers under title XIX.

     SEC. 217. AUTHORITY TO OBTAIN INFORMATION.

       Title XVIII of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395 et 
     seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:


      ``authority of the comptroller general to obtain information

       ``Sec. 1899.  No provision in this Act in effect on the 
     date of enactment of this section or enacted after such date 
     shall be construed to limit, amend, or supersede the 
     authority of the Comptroller General of the United States to 
     obtain agency records pursuant to section 716 of title 31, 
     United States Code, including any information obtained by, or 
     disclosed to, the Secretary under part C or D of this title, 
     except to the extent that such provision expressly and 
     specifically refers to this section and provides for such 
     limitation, amendment, or supersession.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DORGAN (for himself, Mr. Johanns, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Johnson, 
        Mr. Thune, Mr. Tester, and Mr. Udall of New Mexico):
  S. 1635. A bill to establish an Indian Youth telemental health 
demonstration project, to enhance the provision of mental health care 
services to Indian youth, to encourage Indian tribes, tribal 
organizations, and other mental health care providers serving residents 
of Indian country to obtain the services of predoctoral psychology and 
psychiatry interns, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Indian 
Affairs.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, today I introduced a bill entitled 7th 
Generation Promise: Indian Youth Suicide Prevention Act, to address the 
crisis of youth suicide in Indian Country. I introduce this legislation 
on behalf of myself and Senators Johanns, Johnson, Udall of New Mexico, 
Baucus, and Tester, in hopes that it will help provide prevention and 
intervention services to Native American youth.
  Over the past 25 years, youth suicides in Native American communities 
have

[[Page 20974]]

reached epidemic levels. Suicide ranks as the second leading cause of 
death for Native American youth ages 15 to 35--a rate 3.5 times higher 
than the national average. In fact, adolescent Native American males 
have the highest suicide rate of any population group in the United 
States.
  Over the years, the Indian Affairs Committee, which I chair, has held 
a series of hearings on the issue of Indian youth suicide. This past 
February, the Committee explored the progress made in youth suicide 
prevention in Indian Country. We heard from agencies and organizations, 
such as the Indian Health Service and the Substance Abuse and Mental 
Health Services Administration, SAMHSA, who provide worthy prevention 
and emergency response services.
  During the February hearing, we also heard from a courageous 16-year-
old young woman named Dana Lee Jetty who testified about the loss of 
her 14-year-old sister, Jami Rose Jetty. Her story illustrates the 
continued need for suicide prevention.
  In November 2008, Dana Lee found her beautiful little sister, Jami 
Rose, hanging in her bedroom, on the Spirit Lake Reservation in North 
Dakota. Dana and Jami's Mom had done all the right things--noticing 
Jami was troubled, they took her to the doctor at the Indian Health 
Service clinic. The doctors dismissed the mom's concern and said Jami 
was just being a ``typical teenager.'' Dana told me that she believes 
her sister would be alive if there had been adequate mental health 
professionals to diagnose and treat Jami's depression. Jami Rose Jetty 
serves as a tragic example of the inadequate mental health services in 
Indian Country and why we need legislation like the one I introduced 
today.
  This year, the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation, located in North 
Dakota and South Dakota, is experiencing epidemic levels of youth 
suicide. There have already been 10 suicides and an additional 53 
attempted suicides. The majority of these suicides have been among 
tribal members under the age of 24. Clearly, we must do more for the 
mental health and suicide prevention in our Native American communities 
across the United States.
  The bill I introduced includes three main sections to improve youth 
suicide prevention services in Indian Country: a youth telemental 
health demonstration project; language to streamline and improve the 
process by which Tribes apply for grants through SAMHSA; and 
encouragement of post-doctoral mental health intern programs in an 
effort to increase the availability of services in Indian Country.
  The Indian Youth Telemental Health Demonstration Project Act has been 
introduced in previous Congresses. This project would authorize the 
Secretary of Health and Human Services to carry out a four-year 
demonstration project for the use of telemental health services in 
youth suicide prevention, intervention and treatment. Telemental health 
services refer to those health care services provided from a remote 
location through technological means. These types of services are 
especially important in remote, isolated communities like those in my 
home state of North Dakota where mental health professionals are 
scarce.
  The bill also includes new language to enhance available mental 
health resources by addressing the many issues and barriers Tribes and 
tribal organizations face when applying for federal assistance through 
SAMHSA. For example, this provision requires SAMHSA to monitor the 
incidence of youth suicide in Indian Country, accept non-electronic 
grant applications from Tribes, give priority to disadvantaged tribal 
applicants with high rates of suicide, prohibit cost-sharing 
requirements, and prevent Tribes and tribal organizations from being 
required to apply through a state. In addition, this section requires 
states that apply for a SAMHSA grant using Tribal data to consult with 
Tribes and include them in any implemented programs.
  Lastly, the bill includes encouragement for Tribes to use post-
doctoral mental health professionals. Post-doctoral psychology and 
psychiatry interns are able to see patients and provide mental health 
services under the supervision of a certified mental health 
professional. The Veterans Administration is currently utilizing post-
doctoral psychology intern programs, which have been successful in 
expanding the availability of mental health services to veterans. We 
need to promote innovative programs like this to increase the mental 
health services available in Indian Country.
  The 7th Generation Promise in the bill's title is the Native American 
concept that we need to consider the impacts of our actions on our 
descendants seven generations in the future. Suicide is devastating our 
current generation of Native Americans, and we need to do something to 
protect them and our Native Americans seven generations down the road.
  I would like to thank Senator Johanns for working with me on this 
important piece of legislation. Health care, and especially mental 
health issues, remain a top priority for me as Chairman of the Indian 
Affairs Committee. I look forward to continuing this important work so 
that we may stop the high levels of youth suicide and other health 
disparities among Native Americans.
  I would like to end by saying that one youth suicide is one tragedy 
too many. My hope is that passage of this bill will bring some aid to 
our Native American communities experiencing this crisis.
  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. 1635

       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 ``7th Generation Promise: 
     Indian Youth Suicide Prevention Act of 2009''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1)(A) the rate of suicide of American Indians and Alaska 
     Natives is 1.9 times higher than the national average rate; 
     and
       (B) the rate of suicide of Indian and Alaska Native youth 
     aged 15 through 24 is--
       (i) 3.5 times the national average rate; and
       (ii) the highest rate of any population group in the United 
     States;
       (2) many risk behaviors and contributing factors for 
     suicide are more prevalent in Indian country than in other 
     areas, including--
       (A) history of previous suicide attempts;
       (B) family history of suicide;
       (C) history of depression or other mental illness;
       (D) alcohol or drug abuse;
       (E) health disparities;
       (F) stressful life events and losses;
       (G) easy access to lethal methods;
       (H) exposure to the suicidal behavior of others;
       (I) isolation; and
       (J) incarceration;
       (3) according to national data for 2005, suicide was the 
     second-leading cause of death for Indians and Alaska Natives 
     of both sexes aged 10 through 34;
       (4)(A) the suicide rates of Indians and Alaska Natives aged 
     15 through 24, as compared to suicide rates of any other 
     racial group, are--
       (i) for males, up to 4 times greater; and
       (ii) for females, up to 11 times greater; and
       (B) data demonstrates that, over their lifetimes, females 
     attempt suicide 2 to 3 times more often than males;
       (5)(A) Indian tribes, especially Indian tribes located in 
     the Great Plains, have experienced epidemic levels of 
     suicide, up to 10 times the national average; and
       (B) suicide clustering in Indian country affects entire 
     tribal communities;
       (6) death rates for Indians and Alaska Natives are 
     statistically underestimated because many areas of Indian 
     country lack the proper resources to identify and monitor the 
     presence of disease;
       (7)(A) the Indian Health Service experiences health 
     professional shortages, with physician vacancy rates of 
     approximately 17 percent, and nursing vacancy rates of 
     approximately 18 percent, in 2007;
       (B) 90 percent of all teens who die by suicide suffer from 
     a diagnosable mental illness at time of death;
       (C) more than \1/2\ of teens who commit suicide have never 
     been seen by a mental health provider; and
       (D) \1/3\ of health needs in Indian country relate to 
     mental health;
       (8) often, the lack of resources of Indian tribes and the 
     remote nature of Indian reservations make it difficult to 
     meet the requirements necessary to access Federal assistance, 
     including grants;
       (9) the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 
     Administration and the Service

[[Page 20975]]

     have established specific initiatives to combat youth suicide 
     in Indian country and among Indians and Alaska Natives 
     throughout the United States, including the National Suicide 
     Prevention Initiative of the Service, which has worked with 
     Service, tribal, and urban Indian health programs since 2003;
       (10) the National Strategy for Suicide Prevention was 
     established in 2001 through a Department of Health and Human 
     Services collaboration among--
       (A) the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 
     Administration;
       (B) the Service;
       (C) the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention;
       (D) the National Institutes of Health; and
       (E) the Health Resources and Services Administration; and
       (11) the Service and other agencies of the Department of 
     Health and Human Services use information technology and 
     other programs to address the suicide prevention and mental 
     health needs of Indians and Alaska Natives.
       (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are--
       (1) to authorize the Secretary to carry out a demonstration 
     project to test the use of telemental health services in 
     suicide prevention, intervention, and treatment of Indian 
     youth, including through--
       (A) the use of psychotherapy, psychiatric assessments, 
     diagnostic interviews, therapies for mental health conditions 
     predisposing to suicide, and alcohol and substance abuse 
     treatment;
       (B) the provision of clinical expertise to, consultation 
     services with, and medical advice and training for frontline 
     health care providers working with Indian youth;
       (C) training and related support for community leaders, 
     family members, and health and education workers who work 
     with Indian youth;
       (D) the development of culturally relevant educational 
     materials on suicide; and
       (E) data collection and reporting;
       (2) to encourage Indian tribes, tribal organizations, and 
     other mental health care providers serving residents of 
     Indian country to obtain the services of predoctoral 
     psychology and psychiatry interns; and
       (3) to enhance the provision of mental health care services 
     to Indian youth through existing grant programs of the 
     Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Administration.--The term ``Administration'' means the 
     Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
       (2) Demonstration project.--The term ``demonstration 
     project'' means the Indian youth telemental health 
     demonstration project authorized under section 4(a).
       (3) Indian.--The term ``Indian'' means any individual who 
     is--
       (A) a member of an Indian tribe; or
       (B) eligible for health services under the Indian Health 
     Care Improvement Act (25 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.).
       (4) Indian country.--The term ``Indian country'' has the 
     meaning given the term in section 1151 of title 18, United 
     States Code.
       (5) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' has the 
     meaning given the term in section 4 of the Indian Self-
     Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b).
       (6) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Health and Human Services.
       (7) Service.--The term ``Service'' means the Indian Health 
     Service.
       (8) Telemental health.--The term ``telemental health'' 
     means the use of electronic information and 
     telecommunications technologies to support long-distance 
     mental health care, patient and professional-related 
     education, public health, and health administration.
       (9) Tribal organization.--The term ``tribal organization'' 
     has the meaning given the term in section 4 of the Indian 
     Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 
     450b).

     SEC. 4. INDIAN YOUTH TELEMENTAL HEALTH DEMONSTRATION PROJECT.

       (a) Authorization.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary, acting through the Service, 
     is authorized to carry out a demonstration project to award 
     grants for the provision of telemental health services to 
     Indian youth who--
       (A) have expressed suicidal ideas;
       (B) have attempted suicide; or
       (C) have mental health conditions that increase or could 
     increase the risk of suicide.
       (2) Eligibility for grants.--Grants under paragraph (1) 
     shall be awarded to Indian tribes and tribal organizations 
     that operate 1 or more facilities--
       (A) located in an area with documented disproportionately 
     high rates of suicide;
       (B) reporting active clinical telehealth capabilities; or
       (C) offering school-based telemental health services to 
     Indian youth.
       (3) Grant period.--The Secretary shall award grants under 
     this section for a period of up to 4 years.
       (4) Maximum number of grants.--Not more than 5 grants shall 
     be provided under paragraph (1), with priority consideration 
     given to Indian tribes and tribal organizations that--
       (A) serve a particular community or geographic area in 
     which there is a demonstrated need to address Indian youth 
     suicide;
       (B) enter into collaborative partnerships with Service or 
     other tribal health programs or facilities to provide 
     services under this demonstration project;
       (C) serve an isolated community or geographic area that has 
     limited or no access to behavioral health services; or
       (D) operate a detention facility at which Indian youth are 
     detained.
       (5) Consultation with administration.--In developing and 
     carrying out the demonstration project under this subsection, 
     the Secretary shall consult with the Administration as the 
     Federal agency focused on mental health issues, including 
     suicide.
       (b) Use of Funds.--
       (1) In general.--An Indian tribe or tribal organization 
     shall use a grant received under subsection (a) for the 
     following purposes:
       (A) To provide telemental health services to Indian youth, 
     including the provision of--
       (i) psychotherapy;
       (ii) psychiatric assessments and diagnostic interviews, 
     therapies for mental health conditions predisposing to 
     suicide, and treatment; and
       (iii) alcohol and substance abuse treatment.
       (B) To provide clinician-interactive medical advice, 
     guidance and training, assistance in diagnosis and 
     interpretation, crisis counseling and intervention, and 
     related assistance to Service or tribal clinicians and health 
     services providers working with youth being served under the 
     demonstration project.
       (C) To assist, educate, and train community leaders, health 
     education professionals and paraprofessionals, tribal 
     outreach workers, and family members who work with the youth 
     receiving telemental health services under the demonstration 
     project, including with identification of suicidal 
     tendencies, crisis intervention and suicide prevention, 
     emergency skill development, and building and expanding 
     networks among those individuals and with State and local 
     health services providers.
       (D) To develop and distribute culturally appropriate 
     community educational materials regarding--
       (i) suicide prevention;
       (ii) suicide education;
       (iii) suicide screening;
       (iv) suicide intervention; and
       (v) ways to mobilize communities with respect to the 
     identification of risk factors for suicide.
       (E) To conduct data collection and reporting relating to 
     Indian youth suicide prevention efforts.
       (2) Traditional health care practices.--In carrying out the 
     purposes described in paragraph (1), an Indian tribe or 
     tribal organization may use and promote the traditional 
     health care practices of the Indian tribes of the youth to be 
     served.
       (c) Applications.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), to be eligible 
     to receive a grant under subsection (a), an Indian tribe or 
     tribal organization shall prepare and submit to the Secretary 
     an application, at such time, in such manner, and containing 
     such information as the Secretary may require, including--
       (A) a description of the project that the Indian tribe or 
     tribal organization will carry out using the funds provided 
     under the grant;
       (B) a description of the manner in which the project funded 
     under the grant would--
       (i) meet the telemental health care needs of the Indian 
     youth population to be served by the project; or
       (ii) improve the access of the Indian youth population to 
     be served to suicide prevention and treatment services;
       (C) evidence of support for the project from the local 
     community to be served by the project;
       (D) a description of how the families and leadership of the 
     communities or populations to be served by the project would 
     be involved in the development and ongoing operations of the 
     project;
       (E) a plan to involve the tribal community of the youth who 
     are provided services by the project in planning and 
     evaluating the mental health care and suicide prevention 
     efforts provided, in order to ensure the integration of 
     community, clinical, environmental, and cultural components 
     of the treatment; and
       (F) a plan for sustaining the project after Federal 
     assistance for the demonstration project has terminated.
       (2) Efficiency of grant application process.--The Secretary 
     shall carry out such measures as the Secretary determines to 
     be necessary to maximize the time and workload efficiency of 
     the process by which Indian tribes and tribal organizations 
     apply for grants under paragraph (1).
       (d) Collaboration.--The Secretary, acting through the 
     Service, shall encourage Indian tribes and tribal 
     organizations receiving grants under this section to 
     collaborate to enable comparisons regarding best practices 
     across projects.
       (e) Annual Report.--Each grant recipient shall submit to 
     the Secretary an annual report that--

[[Page 20976]]

       (1) describes the number of telemental health services 
     provided; and
       (2) includes any other information that the Secretary may 
     require.
       (f) Reports to Congress.--
       (1) Initial report.--
       (A) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date on 
     which the first grant is awarded under this section, the 
     Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Indian Affairs of 
     the Senate and the Committee on Natural Resources and the 
     Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of 
     Representatives a report that--
       (i) describes each project funded by a grant under this 
     section during the preceding 2-year period, including a 
     description of the level of success achieved by the project; 
     and
       (ii) evaluates whether the demonstration project should be 
     continued during the period beginning on the date of 
     termination of funding for the demonstration project under 
     subsection (g) and ending on the date on which the final 
     report is submitted under paragraph (2).
       (B) Continuation of demonstration project.--On a 
     determination by the Secretary under clause (ii) of 
     subparagraph (A) that the demonstration project should be 
     continued, the Secretary may carry out the demonstration 
     project during the period described in that clause using such 
     sums otherwise made available to the Secretary as the 
     Secretary determines to be appropriate.
       (2) Final report.--Not later than 270 days after the date 
     of termination of funding for the demonstration project under 
     subsection (g), the Secretary shall submit to the Committee 
     on Indian Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Natural 
     Resources and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the 
     House of Representatives a final report that--
       (A) describes the results of the projects funded by grants 
     awarded under this section, including any data available that 
     indicate the number of attempted suicides;
       (B) evaluates the impact of the telemental health services 
     funded by the grants in reducing the number of completed 
     suicides among Indian youth;
       (C) evaluates whether the demonstration project should be--
       (i) expanded to provide more than 5 grants; and
       (ii) designated as a permanent program; and
       (D) evaluates the benefits of expanding the demonstration 
     project to include urban Indian organizations.
       (g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $1,500,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2010 through 2013.

     SEC. 5. SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES 
                   ADMINISTRATION GRANTS.

       (a) Grant Applications.--
       (1) Efficiency of grant application process.--The 
     Secretary, acting through the Administration, shall carry out 
     such measures as the Secretary determines to be necessary to 
     maximize the time and workload efficiency of the process by 
     which Indian tribes and tribal organizations apply for grants 
     under any program administered by the Administration, 
     including by providing methods other than electronic methods 
     of submitting applications for those grants, if necessary.
       (2) Priority for certain grants.--
       (A) In general.--To fulfill the trust responsibility of the 
     United States to Indian tribes, in awarding relevant grants 
     pursuant to a program described in subparagraph (B), the 
     Secretary shall give priority consideration to the 
     applications of Indian tribes or tribal organizations, as 
     applicable, that serve populations with documented high 
     suicide rates, regardless of whether those Indian tribes or 
     tribal organizations possess adequate personnel or 
     infrastructure to fulfill all applicable requirements of the 
     relevant program.
       (B) Description of grant programs.--A grant program 
     referred to in subparagraph (A) is a grant program--
       (i) administered by the Administration to fund activities 
     relating to mental health, suicide prevention, or suicide-
     related risk factors; and
       (ii) under which an Indian tribe is an eligible recipient.
       (3) Clarification regarding indian tribes and tribal 
     organizations.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     in applying for a grant under any program administered by the 
     Administration, no Indian tribe or tribal organization shall 
     be required to apply through a State or State agency.
       (4) Requirements for affected states.--
       (A) Definitions.--In this paragraph:
       (i) Affected state.--The term ``affected State'' means a 
     State--

       (I) the boundaries of which include 1 or more Indian 
     tribes; and
       (II) the application for a grant under any program 
     administered by the Administration of which includes 
     statewide data.

       (ii) Indian population.--The term ``Indian population'' 
     means the total number of residents of an affected State who 
     are members of 1 or more Indian tribes located within the 
     affected State.
       (B) Requirements.--As a condition of receipt of a grant 
     under any program administered by the Administration, each 
     affected State shall--
       (i) describe in the grant application--

       (I) the Indian population of the affected State; and
       (II) the contribution of that Indian population to the 
     statewide data used by the affected State in the application; 
     and

       (ii) demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Secretary 
     that--

       (I) of the total amount of the grant, the affected State 
     will allocate for use for the Indian population of the 
     affected State an amount equal to the proportion that--

       (aa) the Indian population of the affected State; bears to
       (bb) the total population of the affected State; and

       (II) the affected State will offer to enter into a 
     partnership with each Indian tribe located within the 
     affected State to carry out youth suicide prevention and 
     treatment measures for members of the Indian tribe.

       (C) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     receipt of a grant described in subparagraph (B), an affected 
     State shall submit to the Secretary a report describing the 
     measures carried out by the affected State to ensure 
     compliance with the requirements of subparagraph (B)(ii).
       (b) No Non-Federal Share Requirement.--Notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law, no Indian tribe or tribal 
     organization shall be required to provide a non-Federal share 
     of the cost of any project or activity carried out using a 
     grant provided under any program administered by the 
     Administration.
       (c) Outreach for Rural and Isolated Indian Tribes.--Due to 
     the rural, isolated nature of most Indian reservations and 
     communities (especially those reservations and communities in 
     the Great Plains region), the Secretary shall conduct 
     outreach activities, with a particular emphasis on the 
     provision of telemental health services, to achieve the 
     purposes of this Act with respect to Indian tribes located in 
     rural, isolated areas.
       (d) Provision of Other Assistance.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary, acting through the 
     Administration, shall carry out such measures (including 
     monitoring and the provision of required assistance) as the 
     Secretary determines to be necessary to ensure the provision 
     of adequate suicide prevention and mental health services to 
     Indian tribes described in paragraph (2), regardless of 
     whether those Indian tribes possess adequate personnel or 
     infrastructure--
       (A) to submit an application for a grant under any program 
     administered by the Administration, including due to problems 
     relating to access to the Internet or other electronic means 
     that may have resulted in previous obstacles to submission of 
     a grant application; or
       (B) to fulfill all applicable requirements of the relevant 
     program.
       (2) Description of indian tribes.--An Indian tribe referred 
     to in paragraph (1) is an Indian tribe--
       (A) the members of which experience--
       (i) a high rate of youth suicide;
       (ii) low socioeconomic status; and
       (iii) extreme health disparity;
       (B) that is located in a remote and isolated area; and
       (C) that lacks technology and communication infrastructure.
       (3) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Secretary such sums as the 
     Secretary determines to be necessary to carry out this 
     subsection.
       (e) Early Intervention and Assessment Services.--
       (1) Definition of affected entity.--In this subsection, the 
     term ``affected entity'' means any entity--
       (A) that receives a grant for suicide intervention, 
     prevention, or treatment under a program administered by the 
     Administration; and
       (B) the population to be served by which includes Indian 
     youth.
       (2) Requirement.--The Secretary, acting through the 
     Administration, shall ensure that each affected entity 
     carrying out a youth suicide early intervention and 
     prevention strategy described in section 520E(c)(1) of the 
     Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 290bb-36(c)(1)), or any 
     other youth suicide-related early intervention and assessment 
     activity, provides training or education to individuals who 
     interact frequently with the Indian youth to be served by the 
     affected entity (including parents, teachers, coaches, and 
     mentors) on identifying warning signs of Indian youth who are 
     at risk of committing suicide.

     SEC. 6. USE OF PREDOCTORAL PSYCHOLOGY AND PSYCHIATRY INTERNS.

       The Secretary shall carry out such activities as the 
     Secretary determines to be necessary to encourage Indian 
     tribes, tribal organizations, and other mental health care 
     providers serving residents of Indian country to obtain the 
     services of predoctoral psychology and psychiatry interns--
       (1) to increase the quantity of patients served by the 
     Indian tribes, tribal organizations, and other mental health 
     care providers; and
       (2) for purposes of recruitment and retention.

[[Page 20977]]


                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself, Ms. Snowe, and Mrs. Feinstein):
  S. 1639. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to improve 
and extend certain energy-related tax provisions, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Expanding 
Industrial Energy Efficiency Incentives Act of 2009. I am pleased to be 
joined by my Finance Committee colleague, Senator Snowe, in introducing 
the Act, which creates the first direct tax-based incentives for 
industrial energy efficiency. As such, the Act helps our industrial 
sector adopt advanced energy technologies and processes, enabling 
American industry to reduce fuel dependency, cut costs, reduce 
greenhouse gas emissions, add jobs, and enhance global competitiveness.
  Even though the industrial sector represents 32 percent of our 
domestic energy consumption, there are currently no significant tax 
credits that directly promote industrial energy efficiency. But as a 
recent study by McKinsey & Company found, the industrial sector 
represents the largest potential for end-use energy efficiency in the 
U.S. and could save $47 billion per year on energy costs through 
efficiency improvements. The time to make this investment is now.
  The act creates incentives in the three critical areas: water reuse, 
advanced motors, and CFC chillers. It also enhances incentives for 
combined heat and power systems. Energy efficiency organizations 
estimate that these incentives together will save over 92 terawatt 
hours of energy--the equivalent of four months' worth of total U.S. 
energy consumption.
  First, the act adds a new investment tax credit for reuse, recycling, 
and/or efficiency measures related to process, sanitary, and cooling 
water, as well as for blowdown from cooling towers and steam systems 
used by utility-scale thermo-electric generators. The U.S. currently 
reuses only 6 percent of its water, and there is significant potential 
for gains in this area. The industrial sector, which is responsible for 
45 percent of domestic freshwater withdrawals, is an ideal place to 
introduce transformative water reuse and water saving technologies. 
Approximately 3 percent of U.S. electricity use is for pumping, 
treating and transporting water. The ``water-watts connection'' is 
well-recognized. For instance, the California Energy Commission 
estimates that 95 percent of the energy savings of proposed energy-
efficiency programs could be achieved through water-efficiency 
programs, at 58 percent of the cost. Water conservation is therefore a 
cost-effective way to achieve significant energy savings.
  Second, the bill establishes a $120-per-horsepower tax credit for 
efficient motor systems with adjustable speed capability. On average, 
motors account for 65 percent of an industrial energy user's 
electricity use, a percentage that is even higher in certain 
industries, such as water supply, mining, and oil and gas extraction. 
In fact, industrial motors are expected to be responsible for 7 percent 
of total global carbon emissions by 2020.
  New advances in power electronics and controls over the past five 
years have advanced the potential for new smart motor technologies to 
provide a significant energy savings potential if these new motors are 
placed widely into service. By reducing the initial design and added 
component costs, this new credit will accelerate the adoption of 
advanced motor technologies into higher volume production, helping to 
make the technology available economy-wide.
  Third, the bill adds a new incentive for replacing CFC chillers. 
Large water-cooled chillers are the engines of air-conditioning systems 
for almost all large buildings. The bill establishes a credit of $150 
per ton, plus an additional incentive of $100 for each ton downsized 
during replacement. The incentive extends only to pre-1993, post-1980 
water-cooled chillers that use the refrigerants CFC-11 and CFC-12. 
While chillers that use CFC-11 and CFC-12 refrigerants have been banned 
for new installations because their refrigerant breakdown products 
attack the ozone layer, some 30,000 chillers that still use these 
refrigerants remain in both public and private facilities across the 
country. Replacing these obsolete systems would allow for the recovery 
of 37 million pounds of ozone depleting CFCs--or 64 million metric tons 
of carbon dioxide equivalents. Additionally, the improvement in new 
chiller efficiency that would be achieved by replacing these old 
systems would save 17.2 million metric tons of carbon dioxide from 
reduced electricity consumption--the equivalent of taking 3.3 million 
cars off the road.
  While CFC chiller replacement is cost-effective over the long-term, 
the high up-front costs mean that many building owners do not make 
these investments. This moderate tax incentive improves the economics 
and reduces the up-front cost, substantially increasing the number of 
systems replaced.
  Collaterally, but just as significantly, this bill is a jobs bill. 
For instance, if all CFC chillers are replaced, we expect that 
approximately 10,500 American jobs can be directly created or preserved 
in the manufacturing, removal and installation of new chillers. 
Additional jobs will be created by the engineering services required to 
take advantage of these incentives, adding up to a potential 60,000 
jobs.
  Finally, the bill improves the combined heat and power incentive, 
which was enacted last October as part of the tax extenders package. 
The package added a 10 percent investment tax credit for combined heat 
and power systems. The expansion of the combined heat and power tax 
credit would increase the credit's applicability from the first 15 
megawatts to the first 25 megawatts of system capacity and remove the 
overall system size cap of 50 megawatts, allowing a greater number of 
combined heat and power projects to be financially viable and move 
forward. A recent Department of Energy study estimates that ramping up 
total U.S. combined heat and power to account for twenty percent of 
electricity capacity, a percentage that is within our reach, would 
eliminate over sixty percent of the expected increase in carbon dioxide 
emissions from today to 2030--the equivalent of taking more than half 
of current passenger vehicles in the U.S. off the road.
  Together, these four industrial energy efficiency incentives capture 
a large portion of the energy efficiency potential in the industrial 
sector. These incentives will catalyze the deployment of new 
technologies that will decrease carbon emissions and protect our 
natural resources, all while saving money on energy costs and creating 
jobs.
  I look forward to working with Senator Snowe to see these provisions 
enacted into law.
  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. 1639

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; AMENDMENT OF 1986 CODE; TABLE OF 
                   CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Expanding 
     Industrial Energy Efficiency Incentives Act of 2009''.
       (b) Amendment of 1986 Code.--Except as otherwise expressly 
     provided, whenever in this Act an amendment or repeal is 
     expressed in terms of an amendment to, or repeal of, a 
     section or other provision, the reference shall be considered 
     to be made to a section or other provision of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986.
       (c) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; amendment of 1986 Code; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Modifications in credit for combined heat and power system 
              property.
Sec. 3. Motor energy efficiency improvement tax credit.
Sec. 4. Credit for replacement of CFC refrigerant chiller.
Sec. 5. Qualifying efficient industrial process water use project 
              credit.

     SEC. 2. MODIFICATIONS IN CREDIT FOR COMBINED HEAT AND POWER 
                   SYSTEM PROPERTY.

       (a) Modification of Certain Capacity Limitations.--Section 
     48(c)(3)(B) is amended--

[[Page 20978]]

       (1) by striking ``15 megawatts'' in clause (ii) and 
     inserting ``25 megawatts'',
       (2) by striking ``20,000 horsepower'' in clause (ii) and 
     inserting ``34,000 horsepower'', and
       (3) by striking clause (iii).
       (b) Nonapplication of Certain Rules.--Section 48(c)(3)(C) 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new clause:
       ``(iv) Nonapplication of certain rules.--For purposes of 
     determining if the term `combined heat and power system 
     property' includes technologies which generate electricity or 
     mechanical power using back-pressure steam turbines in place 
     of existing pressure-reducing valves or which make use of 
     waste heat from industrial processes such as by using organic 
     rankine, stirling, or kalina heat engine systems, 
     subparagraph (A) shall be applied without regard to clause 
     (ii).''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to periods after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, under rules similar to the rules of section 48(m) 
     of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (as in effect on the day 
     before the date of the enactment of the Revenue 
     Reconciliation Act of 1990).

     SEC. 3. MOTOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENT TAX CREDIT.

       (a) In General.--Subpart D of part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1 is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``SEC. 45R. MOTOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENT TAX CREDIT.

       ``(a) In General.--For purposes of section 38, the motor 
     energy efficiency improvement tax credit determined under 
     this section for the taxable year is an amount equal to $120 
     multiplied by the motor horsepower of an appliance, machine, 
     or equipment--
       ``(1) manufactured in such taxable year by a manufacturer 
     which incorporates an advanced motor system into a newly 
     designed appliance, machine, or equipment or into a 
     redesigned appliance, machine, or equipment which did not 
     previously make use of the advanced motor system, or
       ``(2) placed back into service in such taxable year by an 
     end user which upgrades an existing appliance, machine, or 
     equipment with an advanced motor system.

     For any advanced motor system with a total horsepower of less 
     than 10, such motor energy efficiency improvement tax credit 
     is an amount which bears the same ratio to $120 as 1 
     horsepower bears to such total horsepower.
       ``(b) Advanced Motor System.--For purposes of this section, 
     the term `advanced motor system' means a motor and any 
     required associated electronic control which--
       ``(1) offers variable or multiple speed operation, and
       ``(2) uses permanent magnet technology, electronically 
     commutated motor technology, switched reluctance motor 
     technology, or such other motor systems technologies as 
     determined by the Secretary of Energy.
       ``(c) Aggregate Per Taxpayer Limitation.--
       ``(1) In general.--The amount of the credit determined 
     under this section for any taxpayer for any taxable year 
     shall not exceed the excess (if any) of $2,000,000 over the 
     aggregate credits allowed under this section with respect to 
     such taxpayer for all prior taxable years.
       ``(2) Aggregation rules.--For purposes of this section, all 
     persons treated as a single employer under subsections (a) 
     and (b) of section 52 shall be treated as 1 taxpayer.
       ``(d) Special Rules.--
       ``(1) Basis reduction.--For purposes of this subtitle, the 
     basis of any property for which a credit is allowable under 
     subsection (a) shall be reduced by the amount of such credit 
     so allowed.
       ``(2) No double benefit.--No other credit shall be 
     allowable under this chapter for property with respect to 
     which a credit is allowed under this section.
       ``(3) Property used outside united states not qualified.--
     No credit shall be allowable under subsection (a) with 
     respect to any property referred to in section 50(b)(1).
       ``(e) Application.--This section shall not apply to 
     property manufactured or placed back into service before the 
     date which is 6 months after the date of the enactment of 
     this section or after December 31, 2013.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 38(b) is amended by striking ``plus'' at the 
     end of paragraph (34), by striking the period at the end of 
     paragraph (35) and inserting ``, plus'', and by adding at the 
     end the following new paragraph:
       ``(36) the motor energy efficiency improvement tax credit 
     determined under section 45R.''.
       (2) Section 1016(a) is amended by striking ``and'' at the 
     end of paragraph (36), by striking the period at the end of 
     paragraph (37) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the 
     end the following new paragraph:
       ``(38) to the extent provided in section 45R(d)(1).''.
       (3) The table of sections for subpart D of part IV of 
     subchapter A of chapter 1 is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``Sec. 45R. Motor energy efficiency improvement tax credit.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to property manufactured or placed back into 
     service after the date which is 6 months after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 4. CREDIT FOR REPLACEMENT OF CFC REFRIGERANT CHILLER.

       (a) In General.--Subpart D of part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1, as amended by this Act, is amended by adding at 
     the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 45S. CFC CHILLER REPLACEMENT CREDIT.

       ``(a) In General.--For purposes of section 38, the CFC 
     chiller replacement credit determined under this section for 
     the taxable year is an amount equal to--
       ``(1) $150 multiplied by the tonnage rating of a CFC 
     chiller replaced with a new efficient chiller that is placed 
     in service by the taxpayer during the taxable year, plus
       ``(2) if all chilled water distribution pumps connected to 
     the new efficient chiller include variable frequency drives, 
     $100 multiplied by any tonnage downsizing.
       ``(b) CFC Chiller.--For purposes of this section, the term 
     `CFC chiller' includes property which--
       ``(1) was installed after 1980 and before 1993,
       ``(2) utilizes chlorofluorocarbon refrigerant, and
       ``(3) until replaced by a new efficient chiller, has 
     remained in operation and utilized for cooling a commercial 
     building.
       ``(c) New Efficient Chiller.--For purposes of this section, 
     the term `new efficient chiller' includes a water-cooled 
     chiller which is certified to meet efficiency standards 
     effective on January 1, 2010, as defined in table 6.8.1c in 
     Addendum M to Standard 90.1-2007 of the American Society of 
     Heating, Refrigerating, and Air Conditioning Engineers.
       ``(d) Tonnage Downsizing.--For purposes of this section, 
     the term `tonnage downsizing' means the amount by which the 
     tonnage rating of the CFC chiller exceeds the tonnage rating 
     of the new efficient chiller.
       ``(e) Energy Audit.--As a condition of receiving a tax 
     credit under this section, an energy audit shall be performed 
     on the building prior to installation of the new efficient 
     chiller, identifying cost-effective energy-saving measures, 
     particularly measures that could contribute to chiller 
     downsizing. The audit shall satisfy criteria that shall be 
     issued by the Secretary of Energy.
       ``(f) Property Used by Tax-Exempt Entity.--In the case of a 
     CFC chiller replaced by a new efficient chiller the use of 
     which is described in paragraph (3) or (4) of section 50(b), 
     the person who sold such new efficient chiller to the entity 
     shall be treated as the taxpayer that placed in service the 
     new efficient chiller that replaced the CFC chiller, but only 
     if such person clearly discloses to such entity in a document 
     the amount of any credit allowable under subsection (a) and 
     the person certifies to the Secretary that the person reduced 
     the price the entity paid for such new efficient chiller by 
     the entire amount of such credit.
       ``(g) Termination.--This section shall not apply to 
     replacements made after December 31, 2012.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 38(b), as amended by this Act, is amended by 
     striking ``plus'' at the end of paragraph (35), by striking 
     the period at the end of paragraph (36) and inserting ``, 
     plus'', and by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(37) the CFC chiller replacement credit determined under 
     section 45S.''.
       (2) The table of sections for subpart D of part IV of 
     subchapter A of chapter 1, as amended by this Act, is amended 
     by adding at the end the following new item:

``Sec. 45S. CFC chiller replacement credit.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to replacements made after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 5. QUALIFYING EFFICIENT INDUSTRIAL PROCESS WATER USE 
                   PROJECT CREDIT.

       (a) In General.--Section 46 is amended by striking ``and'' 
     at the end of paragraph (4), by striking the period at the 
     end of paragraph (5), and by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(6) the qualifying efficient industrial process water use 
     project credit.''.
       (b) Amount of Credit.--Subpart E of part IV of subchapter A 
     of chapter 1 is amended by inserting after section 48C the 
     following new section:

     ``SEC. 48D. QUALIFYING EFFICIENT INDUSTRIAL PROCESS WATER USE 
                   PROJECT CREDIT.

       ``(a) In General.--
       ``(1) Allowance of credit.--For purposes of section 46, the 
     qualifying efficient industrial process water use project 
     credit for any taxable year is an amount equal to the 
     applicable percentage of the qualified investment for such 
     taxable year with respect to any qualifying efficient 
     industrial process water use project of the taxpayer.
       ``(2) Applicable percentage.--For purposes of subsection 
     (a), the applicable percentage is--
       ``(A) 10 percent in the case of a qualifying efficient 
     industrial process water use project which achieves a net 
     energy consumption of less than 3,000 kilowatt hours per 
     million gallons of water, and is placed in service before 
     January 1, 2013,
       ``(B) 20 percent in the case of a qualifying efficient 
     industrial process water use project which achieves a net 
     energy consumption of less than 2,000 kilowatt hours per 
     million gallons of water, and

[[Page 20979]]

       ``(C) 30 percent in the case of a qualifying efficient 
     industrial process water use project which achieves a net 
     energy consumption of less than 1,000 kilowatt hours per 
     million gallons of water.
       ``(b) Qualified Investment.--
       ``(1) In general.--For purposes of subsection (a), the 
     qualified investment for any taxable year is the basis of 
     eligible property placed in service by the taxpayer during 
     such taxable year which is part of a qualifying efficient 
     industrial process water use project.
       ``(2) Exceptions.--Such term shall not include any portion 
     of the basis related to--
       ``(A) permitting,
       ``(B) land acquisition, or
       ``(C) infrastructure associated with sourcing or water 
     discharge.
       ``(3) Certain qualified progress expenditures rules made 
     applicable.--Rules similar to the rules of subsections (c)(4) 
     and (d) of section 46 (as in effect on the day before the 
     enactment of the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1990) shall 
     apply for purposes of this section.
       ``(4) Special rule for subsidized energy financing.--Rules 
     similar to the rules of section 48(a)(4) (without regard to 
     subparagraph (D) thereof) shall apply for purposes of this 
     section.
       ``(5) Limitation.--The amount which is treated for all 
     taxable years with respect to any qualifying efficient 
     industrial process water use project with respect to any site 
     shall not exceed $10,000,000.
       ``(c) Definitions.--
       ``(1) Qualifying efficient industrial process water use 
     project.--The term `qualifying efficient industrial process 
     water use project' means, with respect to any site, a 
     project--
       ``(A) which replaces or modifies a system for the use of 
     water or steam in the production of goods in the trade or 
     business of manufacturing (including any system for the use 
     of water derived from blow-down from cooling towers and steam 
     systems in the generation of electric power at a site also 
     used for the production of goods in the trade or business of 
     manufacturing), and
       ``(B) which is designed to achieve--
       ``(i) a reduction of not less than 20 percent in water 
     withdrawal and a reduction of not less than 10 percent of 
     water discharge when compared to the existing water use at 
     the site, or
       ``(ii) a reduction of not less than 10 percent in water 
     withdrawal and a reduction of not less than 20 percent of 
     water discharge when compared to the existing water use at 
     the site, and
       ``(2) Eligible property.--The term `eligible property' 
     means any property--
       ``(A) which is part of a qualifying efficient industrial 
     process water use project and which is necessary for the 
     reduction in withdrawals or discharge described in paragraph 
     (1)(B),
       ``(B)(i) the construction, reconstruction, or erection of 
     which is completed by the taxpayer, or
       ``(ii) which is acquired by the taxpayer if the original 
     use of such property commences with the taxpayer, and
       ``(C) with respect to which depreciation (or amortization 
     in lieu of depreciation) is allowable.
       ``(3) Net energy consumption.--The term `net energy 
     consumption' means the energy consumed , both on-site and 
     off-site, with respect to the water described in paragraph 
     (1)(A). Net energy consumption shall be normalized per unit 
     of industrial output and measured under rules and procedures 
     established by the Secretary, in consultation with the 
     Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
       ``(4) Water discharge.--The term `water discharge' means 
     all water leaving the site via permitted or unpermitted 
     surface water discharges, discharges to publicly owned 
     treatment works, and shallow- or deep-injection (whether on-
     site or off-site).
       ``(5) Water withdrawal.--The term `water withdrawal' means 
     all water taken for use at the site from on-site ground and 
     surface water sources together with any water supplied to the 
     site by a public water system.
       ``(d) Termination.--This section shall not apply to periods 
     after December 31, 2014, under rules similar to the rules of 
     section 48(m) (as in effect on the day before the date of the 
     enactment of the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1990).''.
       (c) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 49(a)(1)(C) is amended by striking ``and'' at 
     the end of clause (iv), by striking the period at the end of 
     clause (v) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding after 
     clause (v) the following new clause:
       ``(vi) the basis of any property which is part of a 
     qualifying efficient industrial use water project under 
     section 48D.''.
       (2) The table of sections for subpart E of part IV of 
     subchapter A of chapter 1 is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to section 48B the following new item:

``Sec. 48D. Qualifying efficient industrial process water use project 
              credit.''.
       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to periods after January 1, 2011, under rules 
     similar to the rules of section 48(m) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 (as in effect on the day before the date of the 
     enactment of the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1990).
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. WYDEN (for himself, Mr. Cornyn, and Mr. Harkin):
  S. 1640. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to 
provide coverage of intensive lifestyle treatment; to the Committee on 
Finance.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Take Back 
Your Health Act of 2009. I want to thank my friends Senator Cornyn and 
Senator Harkin for joining as original cosponsors of this bill.
  This bill is another example of how Democrats and Republicans can 
come together on health reform. This bill incorporates ideas that 
bridge the philosophies of both parties: prevention, individual 
responsibility, and paying for health care services that provide value.
  These days, health care reformers talk about bending the cost curve 
down and focusing on delivery system ``game changers''. Often my 
friends and I have talked about how pevention--preventing disease or 
illness before it happens--does both, but is not scored as bending the 
cost curve by the Congressional Budget Office.
  Over the last year, I have worked with some of the brightest minds in 
prevention--Doctors Dean Ornish, Mike Roizen, and Mark Hyman--on how to 
design a program that will change the focus of medicine from treating 
medical problems to preventing them while delivering savings. The road 
that took us to this bill has not been an easy one, but I believe this 
bill achieves all of our goals when it comes to encouraging healthier 
behaviors that will help prevent disease, especially chronic diseases.
  The heart of this bill is what's called an intensive lifestyle 
treatment program. This program is an individualized health plan 
prescribed by a doctor that gets people living healthier and getting 
healthier through exercise, nutrition counseling, care coordination, 
medication management, and stopping smoking.
  This type of program has been proven to help or even reverse the 
progression of many chronic diseases. A Highmark Blue Cross Blue Shield 
study found that their costs went down 50 percent after their patients 
took part in an intensive lifestyle program. That can mean big savings 
for Medicare and for seniors.
  Even a CMS Medicare demonstration--which notoriously does not score 
savings for anything--found that people who went through a lifestyle 
program had the same or lower costs over three years than as Medicare 
beneficiaries who didn't go through the program.
  In times like these, the American people want to know that the 
Medicare program is going to get their money's worth. The Take Back 
Your Health Act embraces a pay-for-performance type system. Doctors are 
paid a bundled payment to encourage efficiency and teamwork, and they 
are held responsible for their success. If a patient's health status 
does not improve according to at least two measures, the doctor doesn't 
get paid. In addition, if a patient goes through the program for 
diabetes, but still has problems and has to go to the hospital, the 
lifestyle treatment doctor doesn't get paid.
  The last innovation in this program is that it gives individuals a 
financial incentive for getting healthier. Every person who goes 
through this treatment program and improves his or her health status 
gets a one-time $200 reward.
  The beauty of this bill is that everyone has skin in the game: the 
doctor, the patient, and the government. That will be the secret of its 
success. It is just this kind of innovative program that can be a real 
game-changer for Medicare and for our entire health care system, by 
bringing the focus of our health care system back to the basics of 
making us healthier.
  I look forward to working with Chairman Baucus and Senator Grassley 
on including this bill in health reform. I urge my colleagues to join 
me as cosponsors on this bill.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE (for herself and Mr. Bingaman):
  S. 1643. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a 
credit

[[Page 20980]]

for the conversion of heating using oil fuel to using natural gas or 
biomass feedstocks, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Finance.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, addressing our Nation's dependence on 
imported oil and our greenhouse gas emissions will require policies 
that extend across the economy, as well as policies that are more 
narrowly tailored to specific sectors. Today, I rise with my colleague 
from Maine, Senator Snowe, to offer a bill that would enhance energy 
security and reduce greenhouse gas emissions associated with heating 
our nation's homes and buildings. Our bill, the Cleaner, Secure and 
Affordable Thermal Energy Act, creates significant incentives for 
consumers, businesses, and tax-exempt entities that now rely on heating 
oil to convert to energy-efficient natural gas or biomass heating 
systems.
  Across the country, and particularly in the Northeast and Midwest, 
many homes and buildings still derive heat from oil-burning furnaces. 
According to the Energy Information Administration, in 2007, our Nation 
consumed nearly 160 million barrels of oil for heating fuel. This use 
of heating oil continues despite the existence of widely available 
alternatives that are cleaner, more secure, and more affordable.
  On April 22, I held a hearing in the Energy and Natural Resources 
Committee on the Energy Efficiency Resource Standards. The Committee 
heard from several witnesses about the advantages of and efforts to 
convert residential, business, and public users from fuel oil to 
natural gas and biomass heating systems. For each household that 
converts from fuel oil to a natural gas heating system, we avoid 2.1 
metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions. For each commercial building, 
we avoid 9.9 metric tons, and for each industrial facility, we avoid as 
much as 2,984 metric tons. These emission reductions are even more 
significant for conversions to heating systems that are fired by 
biomass resources.
  Besides being cleaner, natural gas and biomass are far more secure 
resources. Ninety-eight percent of domestically consumed natural gas is 
produced in North America, and domestic reserves of natural gas are 
estimated at 100 years based on current consumption.
  Finally, since the price of natural gas and biomass is lower and less 
volatile than the price of oil, converting offers significant short- 
and long-term cost savings to consumers. For instance, while the 
average annual cost of using fuel oil for home heating averages $1,734, 
the average annual cost of operating a natural gas furnace is $1,004.
  But significant up-front costs prevent many families and businesses 
from converting their heating systems.
  The Cleaner, Secure and Affordable Thermal Energy Act will make these 
conversions more affordable for American families, businesses, and tax-
exempt entities.
  First, for residential consumers, the Act establishes a 30 percent 
tax credit for costs associated with converting from a fuel oil to 
natural gas or biomass heating system. The credit is capped at $3,500, 
$4,000 in the case of biomass stoves. To qualify, the replacement 
equipment must be energy efficient; a natural gas boiler must have an 
AFUE rating of at least 85 percent, a replacement natural gas furnace 
must have an AFUE rating of at least 92 percent, and a replacement 
biomass appliance must have a thermal efficiency rating of more than 75 
percent.
  For business taxpayers, the act authorizes bonus depreciation for 
property installed before 2012. This would enable business taxpayers to 
expense--that is, immediately write-off--half of the cost of qualifying 
property, and depreciate the remaining balance over the typical cost-
recovery period.
  Many of the Nation's heating oil systems are used by public entities, 
particularly school systems. To help public entities finance their 
conversions to natural gas and biomass heating, the Act adds conversion 
programs as an activity eligible for Qualified Energy Conservation 
Bonds.
  Finally, to encourage expansion of natural gas service capabilities, 
the act includes a two-year extension of the 15-year depreciation 
schedule created for distribution facilities under the Energy Policy 
Act of 2005.
  The act would move us significantly in the direction of a low-carbon 
economy while enhancing energy security and reducing heating costs. I 
look forward to working with Senator Snowe to enacting our bill into 
law.

                          ____________________