[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 3251-3267]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. KERRY (for himself and Mr. Rockefeller):
  S. 467. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to 
strengthen the earned income tax credit; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, today Senator Rockefeller and I are 
reintroducing the Strengthen the Earned Income Tax Credit Act of 2011. 
Since 1975, the earned income tax credit, EITC, has been an innovative 
tax credit which helps low-income working families. President Reagan 
referred to the EITC as ``the best antipoverty, the best pro-family, 
the best job creation measure to come out of Congress.'' According to 
the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the EITC lifts more 
children out of poverty than any other government program. It lifted 
6.5 million people, including 3.3 million children, above the poverty 
line in 2009.
  Last Congress, we were successful in making temporary improvements to 
the EITC by providing marriage penalty relief and increasing the credit 
rate for families with three or more children. Both of these provisions 
have been part of our legislation.
  It is time for us to reexamine the EITC and determine where we can 
strengthen it. The Finance Committee of which I am a member has started 
a series of hearings on tax reform. I believe the tax code should be 
thoroughly reviewed to see what is working and not working and what can 
be made simpler. This legislation expands the EITC permanently, but as 
part of tax reform I would be open to changing the program. However, 
those currently benefiting from the EITC should not be harmed in tax 
reform and there should still be tax relief which encourages work and 
helps low-income families with children.
  We need to help the low-income workers who struggle day after day 
trying to make ends meet. They have been left behind in the economic 
policies of the last eight years. We need to begin a discussion on how 
to help those that have been left behind. The EITC is the perfect place 
to start.
  The Strengthen the Earned Income Tax Credit Act of 2011 strengthens 
the EITC by making the following changes: makes permanent marriage 
penalty relief; makes permanent the credit for families with three or 
more children; expands the credit for individuals with no children; 
simplifies the credit; and increases the penalty for tax preparers.
  The legislation would make the marriage penalty relief included in 
the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act permanent. Under the 
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the phase-out income level for 
married taxpayers that file a joint return would be $5,000 higher than 
the income level for unmarried filers starting in 2009 and in 2010. 
This level would be indexed for inflation after 2009. The Tax Relief, 
Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization and Job Creation Act of 2010 
extended this provision through 2012. Without this provision, many 
single individuals that marry find themselves faced with a reduction in 
their EITC. In Massachusetts, approximately 100,500 children a year 
benefit from the EITC because of this provision.
  Second, the legislation makes permanent the credit for families with 
three or more children. Under prior law, the credit amount is based on 
one child or two or more children. The American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act created a third child category for 2009 and 2010 and 
Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization and Job Creation Act 
of 2010 extended this provision through 2012. This change benefits 
approximately 116,000 children a year in Massachusetts.
  Third, this legislation would increase the credit amount for 
childless workers. The EITC was designed to help childless workers 
offset their payroll tax liability. The credit phase-in was set to 
equal the employee share of the payroll tax, 7.65 percent. However, in 
reality, the employee bears the burden of both the employee and 
employer portion of the payroll tax. A typical single childless adult 
will begin to owe Federal income taxes in addition to payroll taxes 
when his or her income is only $10,655, which is below the poverty 
line. These changes will result in a full time worker receiving the 
minimum wage to be eligible for the maximum earned income credit 
amount.
  This legislation doubles the credit rate for individual taxpayer and 
married taxpayers without children. The credit rate and phase-out rate 
of 7.65 percent is doubled to 15.3 percent. For 2007, the maximum 
credit amount for an individual would increase from $457 to $929. In 
addition, the legislation would increase the credit phase-out income 
level from $7,590 to $12,690 for individuals and from $12,670 to 
$17,770 for married couples. This increase is indexed for inflation and 
includes the marriage penalty relief. Under current law, workers under 
age 25 are ineligible for the childless workers EITC. The Strengthen 
the Earned Income Tax Credit Act of 2011 would change the age to 21. 
This age change will provide an incentive for labor for less-educated 
younger adults.
  Fourth, the Strengthen the Earned Income Tax Credit Act of 2011 
simplifies the EITC by modifying the abandoned spouse rule, clarifying 
the qualifying child rules, and repealing the disqualified investment 
test.
  Finally, the legislation includes a provision which increases the 
penalty imposed on paid preparers who fail to comply with EITC due 
diligence requirements from $100 to $500. Unfortunately, about a 
quarter of EITC returns include errors and more than a majority of EITC 
returns are prepared by a preparer. This should help ensure that 
preparers comply with the due diligence requirements.
  This legislation will help those who most need our help. It will put 
more money in their pay check. We need to invest in our families and 
help individuals who want to make a living by working. I urge my 
colleagues to support an expansion of the EITC.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. McCONNELL (for himself, Mr. Paul, and Mr. Inhofe):
  S. 468. A bill to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to 
clarify the authority of the Administrator to disapprove specifications 
of disposal sites for the discharge of, dredged or fill material, and 
to clarify the procedure under which a higher review of specifications 
may be requested; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, my friend and colleague from Kentucky, 
Senator Paul, and I would like at this time to address the Senate about 
a bill we are introducing.
  Coal is an enormously vital sector of Kentucky's economy. More than 
200,000 jobs in my State depend on it, including the jobs of 
approximately 18,000 coal miners. Coal is tremendously important to our 
country as well. One-half of the country's electricity comes

[[Page 3252]]

from coal. Yet, as we are faced with a weakened economy and high 
unemployment, an overreaching Environmental Protection Agency in 
Washington is blocking new jobs for Kentuckians and Americans by waging 
a literal war on coal.
  To mine for coal, coal operators must receive what are called 404 
permits. Those come from the EPA in order to operate. One such mine in 
southern West Virginia followed all of the proper procedures and got 
the green light from EPA to proceed with operations back in 2007.
  But now, 3\1/2\ years later, in an unprecedented reversal, the EPA 
has retroactively ``reinterpreted'' its authority, withdrawn the permit 
it issued, and shut down the mine. The EPA's reinterpretation cost 280 
Americans their jobs.
  The EPA also announced that 79 of the 404 permit applications still 
being considered would be subject to ``enhanced environmental 
review''--``enhanced environmental review''--effectively putting them 
in limbo along with the jobs and economic activity they could create. 
Some of those permits are for jobs in Kentucky.
  The EPA's action simply defies logic. Not only are they changing the 
rules in the middle of the game, they are retroactively changing the 
rules to shut down mines they already approved. No mine, regardless of 
whether it has been operating for years in full compliance of every 
rule and regulation, can be assured that Uncle Sam will not come along 
and shut them down.
  Thousands of Kentuckians who work in coal mining or have jobs 
dependent on mining are literally in jeopardy. Other industries are at 
risk also. Farmers, developers, the transportation industry, and others 
also need permits from the EPA to continue to operate. They, too, could 
see these permits revoked.
  The EPA has turned the permitting process into a backdoor means of 
shutting down coal mines by sitting on permits indefinitely, thus 
removing any regulatory certainty. What they are doing is outside the 
scope of their authority and the law and represents a fundamental 
departure from the permitting process as originally envisioned by 
Congress.
  That is why I rise today to introduce, along with my good friends, 
Senator Rand Paul and Senator James Inhofe, the Mining Jobs Protection 
Act in the Senate.
  This bill will tell the EPA to ``use it or lose it'' when deciding 
whether to invoke its veto authority of a 404 permit within a 
reasonable timeframe, giving permit applicants the certainty they need 
to do business.
  The bill would ensure that all 404 permits move forward to be either 
approved or rejected, so applicants are not left in limbo, unsure how 
to act.
  The bill also ensures that EPA cannot use its veto retroactively.
  While being fair to permit applicants, the bill still preserves the 
EPA's full veto authority to protect human health and the environment.
  Here is how the legislation would work. Once the EPA receives the 404 
permit, it will have 30 days to determine if it is considering using 
its veto authority. If the Agency is considering doing so, it must 
publish that fact in the Federal Register, cite any potential concerns, 
and detail what must be done to address those concerns within the 
initial 30 days. The EPA then has an additional 30 days, for a total of 
2 months, to invoke its veto authority. If the Agency does not use its 
veto authority within 60 days, the permit automatically moves forward 
and EPA's veto authority expires. All permits that have already been 
applied for would go through this process, ensuring every permit gets a 
fair shake.
  Any permits vetoed prior to the passage of the bill would be 
reconsidered by the Army Corps of Engineers. It was important to me 
that this legislation address every 404 permit, not just one or a few.
  This is a fair process that allows the EPA to act as vigorously as 
necessary to protect the environment and those of us living in it while 
also giving permit applications the certainty of knowing within a 
reasonable timeframe whether to proceed with mining operations and 
knowing that once they have the green light, it is not going to be 
subsequently revoked. More important, this legislation will allow my 
State and others to protect the coal and related industry jobs we 
already have and grow new ones in the future.
  I wish to thank my colleague from Kentucky and Senator Inhofe for 
standing alongside me on this matter that is so important to our States 
but also to the country as a whole. This is not just a Kentucky issue. 
We think our bill strikes a fair balance toward conserving the best of 
America's natural beauty while also building toward a brighter future.
  The EPA's mission is important but so is job creation. Particularly 
when unemployment is higher than all of us would like, both sides of 
the equation must be considered. So I look forward to working with my 
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to make the Mining Jobs 
Protection Act a 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. 468

       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 ``Mining Jobs Protection 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. PERMITS FOR DREDGED OR FILL MATERIAL.

       Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 
     U.S.C. 1344) is amended by striking subsection (c) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(c) Authority of Administrator to Disapprove 
     Specifications.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Administrator, in accordance with 
     this subsection, may prohibit the specification of any 
     defined area as a disposal site, and may deny or restrict the 
     use of any defined area for specification as a disposal site, 
     in any case in which the Administrator determines, after 
     notice and opportunity for public hearings and consultation 
     with the Secretary, that the discharge of those materials 
     into the area will have an unacceptable adverse effect on--
       ``(A) municipal water supplies;
       ``(B) shellfish beds and fishery areas (including spawning 
     and breeding areas);
       ``(C) wildlife; or
       ``(D) recreational areas.
       ``(2) Deadline for action.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Administrator shall--
       ``(i) not later than 30 days after the date on which the 
     Administrator receives from the Secretary for review a 
     specification proposed to be issued under subsection (a), 
     provide notice to the Secretary of, and publish in the 
     Federal Register, a description of any potential concerns of 
     the Administrator with respect to the specification, 
     including a list of measures required to fully address those 
     concerns; and
       ``(ii) if the Administrator intends to disapprove a 
     specification, not later than 60 days after the date on which 
     the Administrator receives a proposed specification under 
     subsection (a) from the Secretary, provide to the Secretary 
     and the applicant, and publish in the Federal Register, a 
     statement of disapproval of the specification pursuant to 
     this subsection, including the reasons for the disapproval.
       ``(B) Failure to act.--If the Administrator fails to take 
     any action or meet any deadline described in subparagraph (A) 
     with respect to a proposed specification, the Administrator 
     shall have no further authority under this subsection to 
     disapprove or prohibit issuance of the specification.
       ``(3) No retroactive disapproval.--
       ``(A) In general.--The authority of the Administrator to 
     disapprove or prohibit issuance of a specification under this 
     subsection--
       ``(i) terminates as of the date that is 60 days after the 
     date on which the Administrator receives the proposed 
     specification from the Secretary for review; and
       ``(ii) shall not be used with respect to any specification 
     after issuance of the specification by the Secretary under 
     subsection (a).
       ``(B) Specifications disapproved before date of 
     enactment.--In any case in which, before the date of 
     enactment of this subparagraph, the Administrator disapproved 
     a specification under this subsection (as in effect on the 
     day before the date of enactment of the Mining Jobs 
     Protection Act) after the specification was issued by the 
     Secretary pursuant to subsection (a)--
       ``(i) the Secretary may--

       ``(I) reevaluate and reissue the specification after making 
     appropriate modifications; or
       ``(II) elect not to reissue the specification; and

       ``(ii) the Administrator shall have no further authority to 
     disapprove the modified specification or any reissuance of 
     the specification.

[[Page 3253]]

       ``(C) Finality.--An election by the Secretary under 
     subparagraph (B)(i) shall constitute final agency action.
       ``(4) Applicability.--Except as provided in paragraph (3), 
     this subsection applies to each specification proposed to be 
     issued under subsection (a) that is pending as of, or 
     requested or filed on or after, the date of enactment of the 
     Mining Jobs Protection Act''.

     SEC. 3. REVIEW OF PERMITS.

       Section 404(q) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act 
     (33 U.S.C. 1344(q)) is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``(q) Not later 
     than'' and inserting the following:
       ``(q) Agreements; Higher Review of Permits.--
       ``(1) Agreements.--
       ``(A) In general.--Not later than'';
       (2) in the second sentence, by striking ``Such agreements'' 
     and inserting the following:
       ``(B) Deadline.--Agreements described in subparagraph 
     (A)''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Higher review of permits.--
       ``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (C), before the 
     Administrator or the head of another Federal agency requests 
     that a permit proposed to be issued under this section 
     receive a higher level of review by the Secretary, the 
     Administrator or other head shall--
       ``(i) consult with the head of the State agency having 
     jurisdiction over aquatic resources in each State in which 
     activities under the requested permit would be carried out; 
     and
       ``(ii) obtain official consent from the State agency (or, 
     in the case of multiple States in which activities under the 
     requested permit would be carried out, from each State 
     agency) to designate areas covered or affected by the 
     proposed permit as aquatic resources of national importance.
       ``(B) Failure to obtain consent.--If the Administrator or 
     the head of another Federal agency does not obtain State 
     consent described in subparagraph (A) with respect to a 
     permit proposed to be issued under this section, the 
     Administrator or Federal agency may not proceed in seeking 
     higher review of the permit.
       ``(C) Limitation on elevations.--The Administrator or the 
     head of another Federal agency may request that a permit 
     proposed to be issued under this section receive a higher 
     level of review by the Secretary not more than once per 
     permit.
       ``(D) Effective date.--This paragraph applies to permits 
     for which applications are submitted under this section on or 
     after January 1, 2010.''.

  Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, I rise in support of this legislation. I 
think this is a good first step to reining in an out-of-control, 
unelected bureaucracy. I think the EPA has gone way beyond its mandated 
duty and is now at the point of stifling industry in our country. We 
see this and hear this across the State of Kentucky, as well as across 
the country. The President doesn't seem to understand why the country 
thinks he is against business and against progress. One can't be for 
job creation if one is against the job creators.
  As the minority leader indicated, we have nearly 100,000 jobs and 
hundreds of thousands of other jobs connected to coal. This really 
applies to the rest of the country as well. Over half of the 
electricity in our country comes from coal. Over 90 percent of the 
electricity in Kentucky comes from coal. Yet we have mining operations 
that went through the process, some of them taking up to 10 years. I 
think the mine in question went through a 10-year process, spent 
millions of dollars to try to get started to provide electricity for 
the rest of us. Yet then the EPA comes in at the last minute.
  There is said to be nearly 200 permits out there languishing. I asked 
the question of my staff this morning: How many have been applied for 
and how many have been granted? The EPA won't even tell us that. But 
from talking to those trying to produce the coal, to produce the 
electricity for our country, they said they can't get permits. In fact, 
there is one coal company in Kentucky that is now suing the Federal 
Government, saying they have taken his property. They have effectively 
taken his property because he can't get a permit. This is a real 
problem. The average expectancy for getting a permit in our country now 
for all mines is 7 years.
  We wonder why we are languishing as we depend on everyone else for 
our energy. We want to be energy independent, and we sit on top of some 
of our country's most natural resources in oil and coal. Yet we won't 
produce our own. We have to become so involved and there are so many 
justifications for war across the world and this and that. Yet we 
refuse to use our own resources.
  This is a very good step in trying to make the process better. All it 
is saying is that the EPA cannot have unlimited time to sit on our 
permits. This is saying there have to be rules.
  I say this is a first step because I think the last election was 
about saying that unelected bureaucrats should not write law. That is 
what has happened. The President and many of his supporters have 
indicated they can't get cap and trade through the elected body, so 
they are going to go through the back door, through regulations. The 
American people need to stand up and say that unelected bureaucrats 
should not and cannot be allowed to write law. That is essentially what 
is happening now. I think this is a great first step. I compliment the 
minority leader for bringing this forward, and I wholeheartedly support 
it.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BEGICH (for himself, Mrs. Murray, Ms. Murkowski, and Mrs. 
        Boxer):
  S. 472. A bill to increase the mileage reimbursement rate for members 
of the armed services during permanent change of station and to 
authorize the transportation of additional motor vehicles of members on 
change of permanent station to or from nonforeign areas outside the 
continental United States; to the Committee on Armed Services.
  Mr. BEGICH. Mr President, last week I had the privilege to travel to 
the Army's National Training Center to see the 1st Stryker Brigade 
Combat Team from Alaska train. I was amazed at what our soldiers do to 
prepare for the defense of our country.
  Despite their upcoming deployment to Afghanistan in May, these Arctic 
Warriors were not thinking about themselves. They were thinking about 
their families. Over and over I heard how important their family's 
security and support system was to them, especially as they prepared to 
deploy.
  To help out our military families today I am pleased to introduce the 
Service Members Permanent Change of Station Relief Act with my 
cosponsors Senator Patty Murray, Senator Barbara Boxer, and Senator 
Lisa Murkowski. This bill will improve financial security for our 
military families by increasing reimbursement for out-of-pocket 
expenses they often incur during government directed moves.
  First, the bill will provide reimbursement to military families for 
costs incurred transporting a second car on a change of permanent duty 
station to or from Alaska, Hawaii or Guam. As with their counterparts 
in civilian life, many military families today own and rely on a second 
vehicle to work, take care of their children and meet day-to-day needs 
of the family. By doing this, we can save our military families $2,000 
in personal expenses they pay to transport a second car.
  Additionally, the bill increases the gas mileage reimbursement rate 
to $.51 per mile during a move to allow for compensation of all costs 
and depreciation resulting from use of a personal vehicle for a 
government move.
  Our military families make great personal sacrifices for our country. 
Providing the Arctic Warriors and other military members a little peace 
of mind about the financial security of their families is the least we 
can do. I ask my colleagues to cosponsor 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. 472

       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 ``Service Members Permanent 
     Change of Station Relief Act''.

     SEC. 2. MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT RATE FOR MEMBERS OF THE 
                   UNIFORMED SERVICES FOR TRAVEL RELATED TO CHANGE 
                   OF PERMANENT STATION.

       Section 404(d)(1)(A) of title 37, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking ``monetary allowance'' and all that 
     follows through the period at the end and inserting the 
     following: ``monetary allowance in place of the cost of 
     transportation--

[[Page 3254]]

       ``(i) in the case of a member for whom travel has been 
     authorized in connection with a change of a change of 
     permanent station or for travel described in paragraph (2) or 
     (3) of subsection (a), at the business standard mileage rate 
     set by the Internal Revenue Service pursuant to section 
     1.274.5(j)(2) of title 26, Code of Federal Regulations; and
       ``(ii) in the case of a member's dependent for whom such 
     travel has been authorized, at the rate provided in section 
     5704 of title 5.''.

     SEC. 3. TRANSPORTATION OF ADDITIONAL MOTOR VEHICLE OF MEMBERS 
                   ON CHANGE OF PERMANENT STATION TO OR FROM 
                   NONFOREIGN AREAS OUTSIDE THE CONTINENTAL UNITED 
                   STATES.

       (a) Authority to Transport Additional Motor Vehicle.--
     Subsection (a) of section 2634 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking the sentence following paragraph (4);
       (2) by redesignating paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and (4) as 
     subparagraphs (A), (B), (C), and (D), respectively;
       (3) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(a)''; and
       (4) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) One additional motor vehicle of a member (or a 
     dependent of the member) may be transported as provided in 
     paragraph (1) if--
       ``(A) the member is ordered to make a change of permanent 
     station to or from a nonforeign area outside the continental 
     United States and the member has at least one dependent of 
     driving age who will use the motor vehicle; or
       ``(B) the Secretary concerned determines that a replacement 
     for the motor vehicle transported under paragraph (1) is 
     necessary for reasons beyond the control of the member and is 
     in the interest of the United States and the Secretary 
     approves the transportation in advance.''.
       (b) Technical and Conforming Amendments.--Such subsection 
     is further amended--
       (1) by striking ``his dependents'' and inserting ``a 
     dependent of the member'';
       (2) by striking ``him'' and inserting ``the member'';
       (3) by striking ``his)'' and inserting ``the member)'';
       (4) by striking ``his new'' and inserting ``the member's 
     new''; and
       (5) in paragraph (1)(C), as redesignated by subsection 
     (a)--
       (A) by striking ``clauses (1) and (2)'' and inserting 
     ``subparagraphs (A) and (B)''; and
       (B) by inserting ``or'' after the semicolon.

     SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       The amendments made by this Act shall take effect on 
     January 1, 2012, and apply with respect to a permanent change 
     of station order issued on or after that date to a member of 
     the uniformed services.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. COLLINS (for herself, Mr. Pryor, Mr. Portman, and Ms. 
        Landrieu):
  S. 473. A bill to extend the chemical facility security program of 
the Department of Homeland Security, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, the law granting the Federal Government, 
for the first time, the authority to regulate the security of the 
Nation's highest risk chemical facilities is due to expire on March 18. 
We cannot allow this to occur. Given the success of this law and its 
vital importance to all Americans, I am introducing legislation today 
with Senators Pryor, Portman, and Landrieu to extend and improve the 
law.
  More than 70,000 products are created through the use of chemicals, 
helping to supply the consumer, industrial, construction, and 
agricultural sectors of our economy. The United States is home to 
thousands of facilities that manufacture, use, or store chemicals.
  This industry is vital to our economy, with annual sales of $725 
billion, exports of $171 billion, and more than 780,000 employees.
  After September 11, 2001, we realized that chemical facilities were 
vulnerable to terrorist attack. Given the hazardous chemicals present 
at many locations, terrorists could view them as attractive targets, 
yielding loss of life, significant injuries, and major destruction if 
successfully attacked.
  In 2005, as Chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental 
Affairs Committee, I held a series of hearings on chemical security. 
Following these hearings, Senators Lieberman, Carper, Levin, and I 
introduced bipartisan legislation authorizing the Department of 
Homeland Security to set and enforce security standards at high-risk 
chemical facilities. That bill was incorporated into the homeland 
security appropriations act that was signed into law in 2006.
  To implement this new authority, DHS established the Chemical 
Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards program, or CFATS. The program sets 
18 risk-based performance standards that high-risk chemical facilities 
must meet. These security standards cover a range of threats, such as 
perimeter security, access control, theft, internal sabotage, and cyber 
security.
  High-risk chemical facilities covered by the program must conduct 
mandatory vulnerability assessments, develop site security plans, and 
invest in protective measures.
  The Department must approve these assessments and site security 
plans, using audits and inspections to ensure compliance with the 
performance standards. The Secretary has strong authority to shut down 
facilities that are non-compliant.
  This risk-based approach has made the owners and operators of 
chemical plants partners with the Federal Government in implementing a 
successful, collaborative security program.
  This landmark law has been in place slightly more than four years. 
Taxpayers have invested nearly $300 million in the program, and 
chemical plants have invested hundreds of millions more to comply with 
the law. As a direct result, security at our Nation's chemical 
facilities is much stronger today.
  Now we must reauthorize the program. Simply put, the program works 
and should be extended.
  Changing this successful law, as was proposed last year by the House 
of Representatives in partisan legislation, would discard what is 
working for an unproven and burdensome plan.
  We must not undermine the substantial investments of time and 
resources already made in CFATS implementation by both DHS and the 
private sector. Worse would be requiring additional expenditures with 
no demonstrable increase to the overall security of our Nation.
  In the 111th Congress, the Senate and the House of Representatives 
debated a provision that would alter the fundamental nature of CFATS. 
The provision would have required the Department to completely rework 
the program. It would have mandated the use of so-called ``inherently 
safer technology,'' or IST.
  What is IST? It is an approach to process engineering. It is not, 
however, a security measure.
  An IST mandate may actually increase or unacceptably transfer risk to 
other points in the chemical process or elsewhere in the supply chain.
  For example, many drinking water utilities have determined that 
chlorine remains their best and most effective drinking water treatment 
option. Their decisions were not based solely on financial 
considerations, but also on many other factors, such as the 
characteristics of the region's climate, geography, and source water 
supplies, the size and location of the utility's facilities, and the 
risks and benefits of chlorine use compared to the use of alternative 
treatment processes.
  According to one water utility located in an isolated area of the 
northwest United States, if Congress were to force it to replace its 
use of gaseous chlorine with sodium hypochlorite, then the utility 
would have to use as much as seven times the current quantity of 
treatment chemicals to achieve comparable water quality results. In 
turn, the utility would have to arrange for many more bulk chemical 
deliveries, by trucks, into a watershed area. The greater quantities of 
chemicals and increased frequency of truck deliveries would heighten 
the risk of an accident resulting in a chemical spill into the 
watershed. In fact, the accidental release of sodium hypochlorite into 
the watershed would likely cause greater harm to soils, vegetation, and 
streams than a gaseous chlorine release in this remote area.
  Currently, DHS cannot dictate specific security measures, like IST. 
Nor should it. The Federal Government should set performance standards, 
but leave it up to the private sector to decide precisely how to 
achieve those standards.

[[Page 3255]]

  Forcing chemical facilities to implement IST could cost jobs at some 
facilities and affect the availability of many vital products.
  Last year, the Society of Chemical Manufacturers and Affiliates 
testified that mandatory IST would restrict the production of 
pharmaceuticals and microelectronics, hobbling these industries. The 
increased cost of a mandatory IST program may force chemical companies 
to simply transfer their operations overseas, costing American workers 
thousands of jobs.
  To be clear, some owners and operators of chemical facilities may 
choose to use IST. But that decision should be theirs--not 
Washington's. Congress should not dictate specific industrial processes 
under the guise of security when a facility could choose other 
alternatives that meet the Nation's security needs.
  Last July, the Homeland Security Committee unanimously approved 
bipartisan legislation I authored with Senators Pryor, Voinovich, and 
Landrieu to extend CFATS for three more years.
  Additionally, the bill would have established voluntary exercise and 
training programs to improve collaboration with the private sector and 
state and local communities under the CFATS program; created a 
voluntary technical assistance program; and created a chemical facility 
security best practices clearinghouse and private sector advisory board 
at DHS to assist in the implementation of CFATS.
  Today, along with Senators Pryor, Portman, and Landrieu, I am 
reintroducing this bill. The Continuing Chemical Facilities 
Antiterrorism Security Act of 2011 is a straight-forward, common-sense 
reauthorization of the CFATS program.
  I am conscious of the risks our Nation faces through an attack on a 
chemical facility. That is why I authored this law in the first place 
and battled considerable opposition to get it enacted. We should 
support the continuation of this successful security program without 
the addition of costly, unproven Federal mandates. I urge my colleagues 
to support this important bill.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE (for herself, Mr. Coburn, Ms. Ayotte, Mr. Enzi, and 
        Mr. Brown, of Massachusetts):
  S. 474. A bill to reform the regulatory process to ensure that small 
businesses are free to compete and to create jobs, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
Affairs.
  Ms. Snowe. Mr. President, I rise today, with Senators Coburn, Ayotte, 
Enzi, and Brown of Massachusetts, to introduce the Small Business 
Regulatory Freedom Act of 2011, a vital measure that will help ensure 
that the federal government fully consider small business job creation 
in the bills we pass here in Congress and in the rules and regulations 
that agencies promulgate.
  As the former Chair and now Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on 
Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I believe there is no more urgent 
imperative than job creation in our country. For the past 21 months, 
the unemployment rate has stood at 9 percent or above. We cannot allow 
these outrageous levels of unemployment to become the new normal. 
Therefore, it is essential that we focus like a laser on jumpstarting 
our economy. Now is the time to tear down barriers to job creation, not 
build them higher.
  Unfortunately, recent data suggests that not only is this 
administration failing to tear down barriers to small business job 
creation, but rather is actively constructing new obstacles. In fiscal 
year 2010 alone, this administration embarked on nothing short of 
regulatory rampage, stampeding over small business, through the 
promulgation of 43 new major regulations promulgated in fiscal year 
2010, imposing $26.5 billion in new regulatory compliance costs, and 
that's on top of the $1.75 trillion in annual compliance costs that the 
SBA Office of Advocacy recently reported.
  Simply put, this is unacceptable. Too often, the Federal Government 
considers the regulatory impact on small firms merely as an 
afterthought rather than a top priority. In my recent street tours and 
meetings in Maine, aside from taxes, small businesses complain most 
about the onerous regulations emanating from every agency, every sphere 
of Washington, DC. Consider that, according to the U.S. Chamber of 
Commerce, the health reform law, which I opposed, mandates 41 separate 
rulemakings, at least 100 additional regulatory guidance documents, and 
129 reports. What's most alarming, small firms with fewer than 20 
employees bear a disproportionate burden of complying with federal 
regulations, paying an annual regulatory cost of $10,585 per employee, 
which is 36 percent higher than the regulatory cost facing larger 
firms.
  This must change, and the ``Small Business Regulatory Freedom Act of 
2011,'' aims to do just that. Our bill reforms the flawed rulemaking 
process to ensure that federal agencies consider small business impact 
before a rule is promulgated, not after. Our legislation, which is 
strongly supported by the National Federation of Independent Business, 
NFIB, would amend the Regulatory Flexibility Act, RFA, the seminal 
legislation enacted in 1980 that requires Federal agencies to conduct 
small business analyses for any proposed or final regulation that would 
impose a significant impact on a substantial number of small firms.
  The first provision in our bill would enhance these small business 
analyses, by requiring agencies to draw in rules with foreseeable 
``indirect'' economic effects under the definition of rules covered by 
the RFA. Such rules are currently exempt from the RFA, which currently 
only applies to ``direct'' economic impact. The RFA has already saved 
billions for small businesses by forcing government regulators to be 
sensitive to their direct impact on small firms. If billions of dollars 
can be filtered out of direct regulatory mandates upon small business 
while improving workplace safety and environmental conditions, even 
more can be saved by filtering out unnecessary or duplicative costs to 
those small businesses indirectly impacted by regulation.
  The bill would also expand judicial review requirements currently in 
the RFA to allow small entities to seek review and an injunction at the 
proposed rule stage if agencies fail to fully consider small business 
impact as they are required to by law. This will help to ensure that 
federal agencies complete meaningful initial analyses under the RFA. 
Currently, small entities can only seek review on the date of the final 
regulatory action.
  In addition, our legislation would amend and clarify the requirements 
under the RFA for the periodic review of rules. Many questions have 
arisen as a result of the ambiguous language in the RFA that have 
caused some confusion as to what rules require periodic review and 
when. Our bill clarifies the requirements for ``periodic review'' under 
Section 610 of the RFA so that both existing rules and rules that are 
promulgated after enactment of the Small Business Regulatory Freedom 
Act of 2011 are periodically reviewed within 10 years and every ten 
years thereafter. Along with each review, an agency must also create 
and update small business compliance guides to assist small businesses 
comply with that agencies regulations. The requirements of periodic 
review would also apply to these compliance guides and must be updated 
when the rule is reviewed.
  Unfortunately, past efforts to encourage agencies to periodically 
review their regulations have failed because of the lack of an 
enforcement mechanism. Our bill rectifies this issue. To ensure agency 
compliance the bill includes a sunset provision. If the Chief Counsel 
for the SBA Office of Advocacy determines that an agency has failed to 
conduct the necessary periodic review of a rule, then that rule will 
sunset and cease to have effect.
  Moreover, the bill would expand the small business review panel 
process requirement, SBREFA panels, to apply to all agencies. These 
panels currently only apply to the Environmental Protection Agency, 
EPA, Occupational Safety and Health Administration,

[[Page 3256]]

OSHA, and, thanks to an amendment that I included in the Wall Street 
Reform legislation, the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, CFPB. 
These panels have worked well at EPA and OSHA since 1996, so why not 
apply this stipulation to every federal agency, so small businesses are 
considered first, and not as an afterthought?
  Furthermore, our bill would extend the RFA to informal agency 
guidance documents, so that Federal agencies must conduct small 
business economic analyses before publishing informal guidance 
documents. Many agencies, including the OSHA, have repeatedly subverted 
the rulemaking process through the use of guidance documents or 
``reinterpretations'' so that they don't have to adhere to their RFA 
obligations, including small business review panels--this provision 
will help to end that practice.
  This legislation also seeks to clarify language included in the RFA 
that has led to a great deal of confusion regarding RFA applicability 
to the IRS, and would once and for all ensure that indeed the IRS is 
covered under the RFA ending the longstanding practice of the IRS 
utilizing some unprecedented interpretations to circumvent compliance 
with the RFA--this bill closes those loopholes. For example, the IRS 
has argued that paperwork requirements are mandated by Congress and 
thus it is Congress that is creating the requirement, not the IRS. Our 
bill would clarify the definitions so the IRS and other agencies can no 
longer dodge conducting its RFA obligations.
  Our bill will also update a dormant provision of the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, SBREFA, by requiring that federal 
agencies review existing penalty structures within 6 months of 
enactment and every two years thereafter to mitigate penalty provisions 
on small firms. Too often agencies, like OSHA, set or update their 
penalty structures without considering small business economic impact. 
Our provision should end this practice.
  Strengthening how Federal agencies execute their small business 
analyses is also a central requirement for real reform. This 
legislation will accomplish this goal through three fundamental 
reforms:
  First, it would require a calculation of the additional cumulative 
impact the proposed rule will impose on small entities, including job 
creation and employment effects, beyond what is already imposed on 
small firms by the agency.
  Second, the bill would require federal agencies to notify the Chief 
Counsel for the SBA Office Advocacy about any draft rule that will 
trigger an RFA analysis when the agency submits the draft rule to OMB's 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OIRA.
  Third, our legislation would strengthen final regulatory flexibility 
analyses under RFA. Currently, small business analyses in final rules 
are only required to produce a summary analysis, general statement, or 
explanation regarding a rule's effect on small entities. In practice 
this has allowed agencies to avoid an in depth analysis of a rule's 
effect. Our legislation would enhance reporting so an agency must 
include a detailed analysis. It also would require the promulgating 
agency to publish the entire final analysis on its web site and in the 
Federal Register.
  Our bill will also ensure that before an agency certifies that a 
proposed rule will not impose an economic impact on small business, it 
must first determine the average cost of the rule for small entities 
affected or reasonably presumed to be affected; the number of small 
firms affected or presumed to be affected; and the number of affected 
small entities for which the cost of the rule will be significant. 
Also, before a certification statement can be published the agency must 
send a copy of the certification to, and consult with, the Chief 
Counsel for Advocacy on the accuracy of the certification and 
statement.
  Finally, the bill will clarify that the Chief Counsel for the SBA 
Office of Advocacy to be an attorney with expertise or knowledge of the 
regulatory process. This will ensure that the President nominates a 
qualified individual who will be the most effective advocate for small 
business possible. We also provide additional powers to the Chief 
Counsel by allowing him or her to comment on any regulatory action, not 
just during the notice and comment rulemaking process. In the past, the 
Office of Advocacy has refused to weigh in on matters outside the 
rulemaking process--e.g., guidance documents--citing a lack of 
authority to do so.
  In a November 2010 Senate Small Business Committee hearing, it was 
noted that if there were a 30 percent cut in regulatory costs, an 
average 10-person firm would save, on average nearly $32,000, enough to 
hire one additional person. There is no doubt, reducing the regulatory 
burden on American small businesses will create jobs. After 21 straight 
months with unemployment at or above nine percent, it is more 
imperative than ever that we finally liberate American small businesses 
from the regulatory burden holding them down.
  It is essential that we pass this legislation. I urge my colleagues 
to support my bill so we can ensure that our nation's small businesses 
and their employees are provided with much needed relief.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the additional material was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 474

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Small 
     Business Regulatory Freedom Act of 2011''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Findings.
Sec. 3. Including indirect economic impact in small entity analyses.
Sec. 4. Judicial review to allow small entities to challenge proposed 
              regulations.
Sec. 5. Periodic review and sunset of existing rules.
Sec. 6. Requiring small business review panels for all agencies.
Sec. 7. Expanding the Regulatory Flexibility Act to agency guidance 
              documents.
Sec. 8. Requiring the Internal Revenue Service to consider small entity 
              impact.
Sec. 9. Mitigating penalties on small entities.
Sec. 10. Requiring more detailed small entity analyses.
Sec. 11. Ensuring that agencies consider small entity impact during the 
              rulemaking process.
Sec. 12. Qualifications of the Chief Counsel for Advocacy and authority 
              for the Office of Advocacy .
Sec. 13. Technical and conforming amendments.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) A vibrant and growing small business sector is critical 
     to the recovery of the economy of the United States.
       (2) Regulations designed for application to large-scale 
     entities have been applied uniformly to small businesses and 
     other small entities, sometimes inhibiting the ability of 
     small entities to create new jobs.
       (3) Uniform Federal regulatory and reporting requirements 
     in many instances have imposed on small businesses and other 
     small entities unnecessary and disproportionately burdensome 
     demands, including legal, accounting, and consulting costs, 
     thereby threatening the viability of small entities and the 
     ability of small entities to compete and create new jobs in a 
     global marketplace.
       (4) Since 1980, Federal agencies have been required to 
     recognize and take account of the differences in the scale 
     and resources of regulated entities, but in many instances 
     have failed to do so.
       (5) In 2009, there were nearly 70,000 pages in the Federal 
     Register, and, according to research by the Office of 
     Advocacy of the Small Business Administration, the annual 
     cost of Federal regulations totals $1,750,000,000,000. Small 
     firms bear a disproportionate burden, paying approximately 36 
     percent more per employee than larger firms in annual 
     regulatory compliance costs.
       (6) All agencies in the Federal Government should fully 
     consider the costs, including indirect economic impacts and 
     the potential for job creation and job loss, of proposed 
     rules, periodically review existing regulations to determine 
     their impact on small entities, and repeal regulations that 
     are unnecessarily duplicative or have outlived their stated 
     purpose.
       (7) It is the intention of Congress to amend chapter 6 of 
     title 5, United States Code, to

[[Page 3257]]

     ensure that all impacts, including foreseeable indirect 
     effects, of proposed and final rules are considered by 
     agencies during the rulemaking process and that the agencies 
     assess a full range of alternatives that will limit adverse 
     economic consequences, enhance economic benefits, and fully 
     address potential job creation or job loss.

     SEC. 3. INCLUDING INDIRECT ECONOMIC IMPACT IN SMALL ENTITY 
                   ANALYSES.

       Section 601 of title 5, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(9) the term `economic impact' means, with respect to a 
     proposed or final rule--
       ``(A) any direct economic effect of the rule on small 
     entities; and
       ``(B) any indirect economic effect on small entities, 
     including potential job creation or job loss, that is 
     reasonably foreseeable and that results from the rule, 
     without regard to whether small entities are directly 
     regulated by the rule.''.

     SEC. 4. JUDICIAL REVIEW TO ALLOW SMALL ENTITIES TO CHALLENGE 
                   PROPOSED REGULATIONS.

       Section 611(a) of title 5, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``603,'' after ``601,'';
       (2) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``603,'' after ``601,'';
       (3) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
       ``(3) A small entity may seek such review during the 1-year 
     period beginning on the date of final agency action, except 
     that--
       ``(A) if a provision of law requires that an action 
     challenging a final agency action be commenced before the 
     expiration of 1 year, the lesser period shall apply to an 
     action for judicial review under this section; and
       ``(B) in the case of noncompliance with section 603 or 
     605(b), a small entity may seek judicial review of agency 
     compliance with such section before the close of the public 
     comment period.''; and
       (4) in paragraph (4)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``, and'' and 
     inserting a semicolon;
       (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period and 
     inserting ``; or''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) issuing an injunction prohibiting an agency from 
     taking any agency action with respect to a rulemaking until 
     that agency is in compliance with the requirements of section 
     603 or 605.''.

     SEC. 5. PERIODIC REVIEW AND SUNSET OF EXISTING RULES.

       Section 610 of title 5, United States Code, is amended to 
     read as follows:

     ``Sec. 610. Periodic review of rules

       ``(a)(1) Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of the Small Business Regulatory Freedom Act of 
     2011, each agency shall establish a plan for the periodic 
     review of--
       ``(A) each rule issued by the agency that the head of the 
     agency determines has a significant economic impact on a 
     substantial number of small entities, without regard to 
     whether the agency performed an analysis under section 604 
     with respect to the rule; and
       ``(B) any small entity compliance guide required to be 
     published by the agency under section 212 of the Small 
     Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (5 
     U.S.C. 601 note).
       ``(2) In reviewing rules and small entity compliance guides 
     under paragraph (1), the agency shall determine whether the 
     rules and guides should--
       ``(A) be amended or rescinded, consistent with the stated 
     objectives of applicable statutes, to minimize any 
     significant adverse economic impacts on a substantial number 
     of small entities (including an estimate of any adverse 
     impacts on job creation and employment by small entities); or
       ``(B) continue in effect without change.
       ``(3) Each agency shall publish the plan established under 
     paragraph (1) in the Federal Register and on the Web site of 
     the agency.
       ``(4) An agency may amend the plan established under 
     paragraph (1) at any time by publishing the amendment in the 
     Federal Register and on the Web site of the agency.
       ``(b)(1) Each plan established under subsection (a) shall 
     provide for--
       ``(A) the review of each rule and small entity compliance 
     guide described in subsection (a)(1) in effect on the date of 
     enactment of the Small Business Regulatory Freedom Act of 
     2011--
       ``(i) not later than 8 years after the date of publication 
     of the plan in the Federal Register; and
       ``(ii) every 8 years thereafter; and
       ``(B) the review of each rule adopted and small entity 
     compliance guide described in subsection (a)(1) that is 
     published after the date of enactment of the Small Business 
     Regulatory Freedom Act of 2011--
       ``(i) not later than 8 years after the publication of the 
     final rule in the Federal Register; and
       ``(ii) every 8 years thereafter.
       ``(2)(A) If an agency determines that the review of the 
     rules and guides described in paragraph (1)(A) cannot be 
     completed before the date described in paragraph (1)(A)(i), 
     the agency--
       ``(i) shall publish a statement in the Federal Register 
     certifying that the review cannot be completed; and
       ``(ii) may extend the period for the review of the rules 
     and guides described in paragraph (1)(A) for a period of not 
     more than 2 years, if the agency publishes notice of the 
     extension in the Federal Register.
       ``(B) An agency shall transmit to the Chief Counsel for 
     Advocacy of the Small Business Administration and Congress 
     notice of any statement or notice described in subparagraph 
     (A).
       ``(c) In reviewing rules under the plan required under 
     subsection (a), the agency shall consider--
       ``(1) the continued need for the rule;
       ``(2) the nature of complaints received by the agency from 
     small entities concerning the rule;
       ``(3) comments by the Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and 
     the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
     Administration;
       ``(4) the complexity of the rule;
       ``(5) the extent to which the rule overlaps, duplicates, or 
     conflicts with other Federal rules and, unless the head of 
     the agency determines it to be infeasible, State and local 
     rules;
       ``(6) the contribution of the rule to the cumulative 
     economic impact of all Federal rules on the class of small 
     entities affected by the rule, unless the head of the agency 
     determines that such a calculation cannot be made;
       ``(7) the length of time since the rule has been evaluated, 
     or the degree to which technology, economic conditions, or 
     other factors have changed in the area affected by the rule; 
     and
       ``(8) the impact of the rule, including--
       ``(A) the estimated number of small entities to which the 
     rule will apply;
       ``(B) the estimated number of small entity jobs that will 
     be lost or created due to the rule; and
       ``(C) the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and other 
     compliance requirements of the proposed rule, including--
       ``(i) an estimate of the classes of small entities that 
     will be subject to the requirement; and
       ``(ii) the type of professional skills necessary for 
     preparation of the report or record.
       ``(d)(1) Each agency shall submit an annual report 
     regarding the results of the review required under subsection 
     (a) to--
       ``(A) Congress; and
       ``(B) in the case of an agency that is not an independent 
     regulatory agency (as defined in section 3502(5) of title 
     44), the Administrator of the Office of Information and 
     Regulatory Affairs of the Office of Management and Budget.
       ``(2) Each report required under paragraph (1) shall 
     include a description of any rule or guide with respect to 
     which the agency made a determination of infeasibility under 
     paragraph (5) or (6) of subsection (c), together with a 
     detailed explanation of the reasons for the determination.
       ``(e) Each agency shall publish in the Federal Register and 
     on the Web site of the agency a list of the rules and small 
     entity compliance guides to be reviewed under the plan 
     required under subsection (a) that includes--
       ``(1) a brief description of each rule or guide;
       ``(2) for each rule, the reason why the head of the agency 
     determined that the rule has a significant economic impact on 
     a substantial number of small entities (without regard to 
     whether the agency had prepared a final regulatory 
     flexibility analysis for the rule); and
       ``(3) a request for comments from the public, the Chief 
     Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration, 
     and the Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman concerning the 
     enforcement of the rules or publication of the guides.
       ``(f)(1) With respect to each agency, not later than 6 
     months after each date described in subsection (b)(1), the 
     Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
     Administration shall determine whether the agency has 
     completed the review required under subsection (b).
       ``(2) If, after a review under paragraph (1), the Chief 
     Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration 
     determines that an agency has failed to complete the review 
     required under subsection (b), each rule issued by the agency 
     that the head of the agency determined under subsection (a) 
     has a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
     small entities shall immediately cease to have effect.''.

     SEC. 6. REQUIRING SMALL BUSINESS REVIEW PANELS FOR ALL 
                   AGENCIES.

       (a) Agencies.--Section 609 of title 5, United States Code, 
     is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b), by striking ``a covered agency'' 
     each place it appears and inserting ``an agency''; and
       (2) in subsection (e)(1), by striking ``the covered 
     agency'' and inserting ``the agency''.
       (b) Technical and Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 609.--Section 609 of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (A) by striking subsection (d), as amended by section 
     1100G(a) of Public Law 111-203 (124 Stat. 2112); and
       (B) by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (d).

[[Page 3258]]

       (2) Section 603.--Section 603(d) of title 5, United States 
     Code, as added by section 1100G(b) of Public Law 111-203 (124 
     Stat. 2112), is amended--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``a covered agency, as 
     defined in section 609(d)(2)'' and inserting ``the Bureau of 
     Consumer Financial Protection''; and
       (B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``A covered agency, as 
     defined in section 609(d)(2),'' and inserting ``The Bureau of 
     Consumer Financial Protection''.
       (3) Section 604.--Section 604(a) of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (A) by redesignating the second paragraph designated as 
     paragraph (6) (relating to covered agencies), as added by 
     section 1100G(c)(3) of Public Law 111-203 (124 Stat. 2113), 
     as paragraph (7); and
       (B) in paragraph (7), as so redesignated--
       (i) by striking ``a covered agency, as defined in section 
     609(d)(2)'' and inserting ``the Bureau of Consumer Financial 
     Protection''; and
       (ii) by striking ``the agency'' and inserting ``the 
     Bureau''.
       (4) Effective date.--The amendments made by this subsection 
     shall take effect on the date of enactment of this Act and 
     apply on and after the designated transfer date established 
     under section 1062 of Public Law 111-203 (12 U.S.C. 5582).

     SEC. 7. EXPANDING THE REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ACT TO AGENCY 
                   GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS.

       Section 601(2) of title 5, United States Code, is amended 
     by inserting after ``public comment'' the following: ``and 
     any significant guidance document, as defined in the Office 
     of Management and Budget Final Bulletin for Agency Good 
     Guidance Procedures (72 Fed. Reg. 3432; January 25, 2007)''.

     SEC. 8. REQUIRING THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE TO CONSIDER 
                   SMALL ENTITY IMPACT.

       (a) In General.--Section 603(a) of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended, in the fifth sentence, by striking ``but 
     only'' and all that follows through the period at the end and 
     inserting ``but only to the extent that such interpretative 
     rules, or the statutes upon which such rules are based, 
     impose on small entities a collection of information 
     requirement or a recordkeeping requirement.''.
       (b) Definitions.--Section 601 of title 5, United States 
     Code, as amended by section 3 of this Act, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (6), by striking ``and'' at the end; and
       (2) by striking paragraphs (7) and (8) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(7) the term `collection of information' has the meaning 
     given that term in section 3502(3) of title 44;
       ``(8) the term `recordkeeping requirement' has the meaning 
     given that term in section 3502(13) of title 44; and''.

     SEC. 9. MITIGATING PENALTIES ON SMALL ENTITIES.

       Section 223 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
     Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121; 110 Stat. 862) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(d) Review of Policies and Programs.--
       ``(1) Review required.--Not later than 6 months after the 
     date of enactment of this subsection, and every 2 years 
     thereafter, each agency regulating the activities of small 
     entities shall review the policy or program established by 
     the agency under subsection (a) and make any modifications to 
     the policy or program necessary to comply with the 
     requirements under this section.
       ``(2) Report.--Not later than 6 months after the date of 
     enactment of this subsection, and every 2 years thereafter, 
     each agency described in paragraph (1) shall submit a report 
     on the review and modifications required under paragraph (1) 
     to--
       ``(A) the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship 
     and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
     Affairs of the Senate; and
       ``(B) the Committee on Small Business and the Committee on 
     the Judiciary of the House of Representatives.''.

     SEC. 10. REQUIRING MORE DETAILED SMALL ENTITY ANALYSES.

       (a) Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.--Section 603 
     of title 5, United States Code, as amended by section 
     1100G(b) of Public Law 111-203 (124 Stat. 2112), is amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (b) and inserting the following:
       ``(b) Each initial regulatory flexibility analysis required 
     under this section shall contain a detailed statement--
       ``(1) describing the reasons why action by the agency is 
     being considered;
       ``(2) describing the objectives of, and legal basis for, 
     the proposed rule;
       ``(3) estimating the number and type of small entities to 
     which the proposed rule will apply;
       ``(4) describing the projected reporting, recordkeeping, 
     and other compliance requirements of the proposed rule, 
     including an estimate of the classes of small entities which 
     will be subject to the requirement and the type of 
     professional skills necessary for preparation of the report 
     and record;
       ``(5) describing all relevant Federal rules which may 
     duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the proposed rule, or 
     the reasons why such a description could not be provided; and
       ``(6) estimating the additional cumulative economic impact 
     of the proposed rule on small entities, including job 
     creation and employment by small entities, beyond that 
     already imposed on the class of small entities by the agency, 
     or the reasons why such an estimate is not available.''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(e) An agency shall notify the Chief Counsel for Advocacy 
     of the Small Business Administration of any draft rules that 
     may have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
     number of small entities--
       ``(1) when the agency submits a draft rule to the Office of 
     Information and Regulatory Affairs of the Office of 
     Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866, if that 
     order requires the submission; or
       ``(2) if no submission to the Office of Information and 
     Regulatory Affairs is required--
       ``(A) a reasonable period before publication of the rule by 
     the agency; and
       ``(B) in any event, not later than 3 months before the date 
     on which the agency publishes the rule.''.
       (b) Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.--
       (1) In general.--Section 604(a) of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (A) by inserting ``detailed'' before ``description'' each 
     place it appears;
       (B) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) by inserting ``detailed'' before ``statement'' each 
     place it appears; and
       (ii) by inserting ``(or certification of the proposed rule 
     under section 605(b))'' after ``initial regulatory 
     flexibility analysis'';
       (C) in paragraph (4), by striking ``an explanation'' and 
     inserting ``a detailed explanation''; and
       (D) in paragraph (6) (relating to a description of steps 
     taken to minimize significant economic impact), as added by 
     section 1601 of the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (Public 
     Law 111-240; 124 Stat. 2251), by inserting ``detailed'' 
     before ``statement''.
       (2) Publication of analysis on web site, etc.--Section 
     604(b) of title 5, United States Code, is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(b) The agency shall--
       ``(1) make copies of the final regulatory flexibility 
     analysis available to the public, including by publishing the 
     entire final regulatory flexibility analysis on the Web site 
     of the agency; and
       ``(2) publish in the Federal Register the final regulatory 
     flexibility analysis, or a summary of the analysis that 
     includes the telephone number, mailing address, and address 
     of the Web site where the complete final regulatory 
     flexibility analysis may be obtained.''.
       (c) Cross-References to Other Analyses.--Section 605(a) of 
     title 5, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(a) A Federal agency shall be deemed to have satisfied a 
     requirement regarding the content of a regulatory flexibility 
     agenda or regulatory flexibility analysis under section 602, 
     603, or 604, if the Federal agency provides in the agenda or 
     regulatory flexibility analysis a cross-reference to the 
     specific portion of an agenda or analysis that is required by 
     another law and that satisfies the requirement under section 
     602, 603, or 604.''.
       (d) Certifications.--Section 605(b) of title 5, United 
     States Code, is amended, in the second sentence, by striking 
     ``statement providing the factual'' and inserting ``detailed 
     statement providing the factual and legal''.
       (e) Quantification Requirements.--Section 607 of title 5, 
     United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 607. Quantification requirements

       ``In complying with sections 603 and 604, an agency shall 
     provide--
       ``(1) a quantifiable or numerical description of the 
     effects of the proposed or final rule, including an estimate 
     of the potential for job creation or job loss, and 
     alternatives to the proposed or final rule; or
       ``(2) a more general descriptive statement regarding the 
     potential for job creation or job loss and a detailed 
     statement explaining why quantification under paragraph (1) 
     is not practicable or reliable.''.

     SEC. 11. ENSURING THAT AGENCIES CONSIDER SMALL ENTITY IMPACT 
                   DURING THE RULEMAKING PROCESS.

       Section 605(b) of title 5, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(b)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) If, after publication of the certification required 
     under paragraph (1), the head of the agency determines that 
     there will be a significant economic impact on a substantial 
     number of small entities, the agency shall comply with the 
     requirements of section 603 before the publication of the 
     final rule, by--
       ``(A) publishing an initial regulatory flexibility analysis 
     for public comment; or
       ``(B) re-proposing the rule with an initial regulatory 
     flexibility analysis.
       ``(3) The head of an agency may not make a certification 
     relating to a rule under this subsection, unless the head of 
     the agency has determined--
       ``(A) the average cost of the rule for small entities 
     affected or reasonably presumed to be affected by the rule;
       ``(B) the number of small entities affected or reasonably 
     presumed to be affected by the rule; and
       ``(C) the number of affected small entities for which that 
     cost will be significant.
       ``(4) Before publishing a certification and a statement 
     providing the factual basis for the

[[Page 3259]]

     certification under paragraph (1), the head of an agency 
     shall--
       ``(A) transmit a copy of the certification and statement to 
     the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
     Administration; and
       ``(B) consult with the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 
     Small Business Administration on the accuracy of the 
     certification and statement.''.

     SEC. 12. QUALIFICATIONS OF THE CHIEF
                   COUNSEL FOR ADVOCACY AND AUTHORITY FOR THE 
                   OFFICE OF ADVOCACY.

       (a) Qualifications of Chief Counsel for Advocacy.--Section 
     201 of Public Law 94-305 (15 U.S.C. 634a) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following: ``The Chief Counsel for 
     Advocacy shall be an attorney with business experience and 
     expertise in or knowledge of the regulatory process.''.
       (b) Additional Powers of Office of Advocacy.--Section 203 
     of Public Law 94-305 (15 U.S.C. 634c) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (5), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in paragraph (6), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (6) the following:
       ``(7) at the discretion of the Chief Counsel for Advocacy, 
     comment on regulatory action by an agency that affects small 
     businesses, without regard to whether the agency is required 
     to file a notice of proposed rulemaking under section 553 of 
     title 5, United States Code, with respect to the action.''.

     SEC. 13. TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.

       (a) Heading.--Section 605 of title 5, United States Code, 
     is amended in the section heading by striking ``Avoidance'' 
     and all that follows and inserting the following: 
     ``Incorporations by reference and certification.''.
       (b) Table of Sections.--The table of sections for chapter 6 
     of title 5, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking the item relating to section 605 and 
     inserting the following:

``605. Incorporations by reference and certifications.''; and

       (2) by striking the item relating to section 607 inserting 
     the following:

``607. Quantification requirements.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HARKIN (for himself, Ms. Klobuchar, and Mr. Franken):
  S. 481. A bill to enhance and further research into the prevention 
and treatment of eating disorders, to improve access to treatment of 
eating disorders, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Health, 
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to join with Senators 
Klobuchar and Franken to reintroduce the Federal Response to 
Eliminating Eating Disorders Act, or the FREED Act. The FREED Act is a 
comprehensive legislative effort to confront eating disorders in the 
United States, to learn more about their devastating impact, and to 
offer support and care to those who suffer from these illnesses.
  Eating disorders such as anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, and binge 
eating disorder are widespread, insidious, and too often fatal. Today, 
at least 5 million Americans suffer from eating disorders. Because 
these conditions often go undiagnosed and unreported, the actual number 
may be closer to 11 million Americans, including 1 million males. These 
disorders don't discriminate by gender, race, income, or age.
  Eating disorders are dangerous conditions, though their consequences 
are often underestimated. Eating disorders are associated with serious 
heart conditions, kidney failure, osteoporosis, infertility, 
gastrointestinal disorders, and even death. The National Institute of 
Mental Health estimates that one in 10 people with anorexia nervosa 
will die of starvation, cardiac arrest, or some other medical 
complication. Let me repeat that--one in 10. That is deeply disturbing, 
and demands a much more aggressive federal response. Moreover, 
fatalities resulting from eating disorders are grossly underreported, 
because deaths are typically recorded by listing the immediate cause of 
death, such as cardiac arrest, rather than the underlying cause, which 
is the eating disorder.
  Nonetheless, despite the prevalence and very serious health impacts 
of eating disorders, we simply do not know enough about the causes of 
eating disorders, or how to stop them from developing in the first 
place. Research suggests a genetic component to eating disorders, but 
we must learn more in order to effectively prevent these deadly 
conditions before they start.
  The good news is that eating disorders are treatable. With 
appropriate nutritional, medical, and psychotherapeutic interventions, 
those who suffer from eating disorders can be successfully and fully 
treated and go on to live full and healthy lives. But right now, only 
one in 10 people receive treatment. We know how to help people with 
eating disorders and we need a renewed commitment to do just that.
  The FREED Act takes an important step forward in authorizing 
resources for research, screening, treatment, and prevention of eating 
disorders.
  First, the FREED Act expands research efforts at the National 
Institutes of Health to examine the causes and consequences of eating 
disorders. In order to effectively prevent and treat these conditions, 
it is imperative that we understand them. The FREED Act also improves 
surveillance and data collection systems at CDC so that we will have 
accurate information and epidemiological data on eating disorders. Such 
surveillance will provide us with the necessary information to be as 
effective as possible with our interventions.
  Second, the FREED Act expands access to treatment services and 
screening for eating disorders for Medicaid beneficiaries, and 
authorizes funds for a patient advocacy network that will help 
individuals with eating disorders find treatment. Furthermore, the 
FREED Act improves the training and education of health care providers 
and educators so they know how to identify and treat individuals 
suffering from eating disorders. Too often, eating disorders go 
undiagnosed when health care providers lack the necessary training to 
identify these illnesses.
  Finally, we need to step up crucial efforts to prevent these 
disorders from occurring in the first place. As I have said so many 
times, we don't have a genuine health care system in America; we have a 
sick care system. In other words, if you get sick, you get treatment. 
But we spend just pennies on the dollar to prevent disease and illness 
in the first place and need to place a much more robust emphasis on 
wellness, nutrition, physical activity, and public health. With this in 
mind, the FREED Act authorizes funds to develop and implement evidence-
based prevention programs and promote healthy eating behaviors in 
schools, athletic programs, and other community-based programs, where 
we can reach Americans at risk of developing these conditions.
  Eating disorders touch the lives of so many of us and our families 
and friends; nearly half of all Americans personally know someone with 
an eating disorder. We must do a better job at the federal level of 
conducting research, understanding treatment, and preventing these 
conditions. The FREED Act builds on the investments we made in 
prevention, wellness, and mental health in the Affordable Care Act and 
mental health parity. Millions of American will benefit from our 
attention to this significant public health problem.
  I thank Senators Klobuchar and Franken for partnering with me on the 
reintroduction of this bill, and urge our colleagues to join us in 
supporting this important federal response to eating disorders.
  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. 481

       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 Response to 
     Eliminate Eating Disorders Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds as follows:
       (1) Estimates, based on current research, indicate that at 
     least 5,000,000 people in the United States suffer from 
     eating disorders including anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, 
     binge eating disorder, and eating disorders not otherwise 
     specified (referred to in this Act as ``EDNOS'').
       (2) Anecdotal evidence suggests that as many as 11,000,000 
     people in the United States, including 1,000,000 males, may 
     suffer from eating disorders.

[[Page 3260]]

       (3) Eating disorders occur in all nations and in all 
     populations, and among people of all ages and races and of 
     both genders.
       (4) Eating disorders are diseases with grave health 
     consequences and high rates of mortality.
       (5) Health consequences associated with eating disorders 
     include heart failure and other serious cardiac conditions, 
     electrolyte imbalance, kidney failure, osteoporosis, 
     debilitating tooth decay, and gastrointestinal disorders, 
     including esophageal inflammation and rupture, gastric 
     rupture, peptic ulcers, and pancreatitis.
       (6) Anorexia nervosa has one of the highest overall 
     mortality rates of any mental illness. According to the 
     National Institute of Mental Health, 1 in 10 people with 
     anorexia nervosa will die of starvation, cardiac arrest, or 
     another medical complication.
       (7) The risk of death among adolescents with anorexia 
     nervosa is 11 times greater than in disease-free adolescents.
       (8) Anorexia nervosa has the highest suicide rate of all 
     mental illnesses.
       (9) New research suggests that bulimia nervosa has a much 
     higher rate of mortality than is reflected in current 
     statistics, because of the failure to identify the underlying 
     eating disorder.
       (10) Binge eating disorder is the most common eating 
     disorder, with an estimated 3.5 percent of American women and 
     2 percent of American men expected to suffer from this 
     disorder in their lifetime. Binge eating disorder is 
     characterized by frequent episodes of uncontrolled overeating 
     and is associated with obesity, heart disease, gall bladder 
     disease, and diabetes.
       (11) Research demonstrates that there is a significant 
     genetic component to the development of eating disorders.
       (12) Certain populations, including adolescent females and 
     athletes of both genders, are at higher risk of developing an 
     eating disorder.
       (13) Different types of eating disorders may affect certain 
     races and genders disproportionately.
       (14) Despite the serious health consequences and the high 
     risk of death, Federal research funding for eating disorders 
     has lagged behind research concerning other diseases, when 
     compared by the number of individuals affected by, and the 
     relative health consequences of, the diseases.
       (15) The ability of individuals suffering from eating 
     disorders, particularly bulimia nervosa, binge eating 
     disorder, and EDNOS to access appropriate treatment is 
     unacceptably low.
       (16) The development of an eating disorder is frequently 
     preceded by unhealthy weight control behaviors commonly 
     identified as disordered eating, including skipping meals, 
     using diet pills, taking laxatives, self-induced vomiting, 
     and fasting. Such disordered eating behaviors should be 
     included in enhanced research prevention and training 
     efforts.

     SEC. 3. PURPOSES.

       The purposes of this Act are--
       (1) to expand research into the prevention of eating 
     disorders;
       (2) to expand research on effective treatment and 
     intervention of eating disorders and to support evidence-
     based programs designed to prevent eating disorders;
       (3) to expand research on the causes, courses, and outcomes 
     of eating disorders;
       (4) to increase the number of people properly screened and 
     diagnosed with an eating disorder;
       (5) to improve training and education of health care and 
     behavioral care providers and of school personnel at all 
     levels of elementary and secondary education;
       (6) to improve surveillance and data systems for tracking 
     the prevalence, severity, and economic costs of eating 
     disorders; and
       (7) to enhance access to comprehensive treatment for eating 
     disorders.

            TITLE I--EATING DISORDER DETECTION AND RESEARCH

     SEC. 101. EXPANSION AND COORDINATION OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE 
                   NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF HEALTH AND THE NATIONAL 
                   INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH WITH RESPECT TO 
                   RESEARCH ON EATING DISORDERS.

       Part B of title IV of the Public Health Service Act (42 
     U.S.C. 284 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 409K. EXPANSION AND COORDINATION OF ACTIVITIES WITH 
                   RESPECT TO RESEARCH ON EATING DISORDERS.

       ``(a) In General.--The Director of NIH, pursuant to the 
     general authority of such director, shall expand, intensify, 
     and coordinate the activities of the National Institutes of 
     Health with respect to research on eating disorders.
       ``(b) Grants.--The Director of NIH may award grants to 
     public or private entities to pay all or part of the cost of 
     planning, establishing, improving, and providing basic 
     operating support for such entities to establish consortia in 
     eating disorder research and to carry out the activities 
     described in subsection (e).
       ``(c) Eligible Entities.--To be eligible to receive a grant 
     under this section, an entity shall--
       ``(1) be public or nonprofit private entity (including a 
     health department of a State, a political subdivision of a 
     State, or an institution of higher education); and
       ``(2) submit to the Secretary an application at such time, 
     in such manner, and containing such information as the 
     Secretary may require.
       ``(d) Requirements of Consortia.--
       ``(1) In general.--Each consortium established as described 
     in subsection (b) may use the facilities of a single lead 
     institution, or may be formed from several cooperating 
     institutions, meeting such requirements as may be prescribed 
     by the Director of NIH.
       ``(2) Coordination of consortia.--The Director of NIH--
       ``(A) may, as appropriate, provide for the coordination of 
     information among consortia established under subsection (b); 
     and
       ``(B) shall ensure regular communication between members of 
     the various consortia established using grants awarded under 
     this section.
       ``(3) Reports.--The Director of NIH shall require each 
     consortium to prepare and submit to such director annual 
     reports on the activities of such consortium.
       ``(e) Activities.--Each consortium receiving a grant under 
     subsection (b) shall conduct basic, clinical, 
     epidemiological, population-based, or translational research 
     regarding eating disorders, which may include research 
     related to--
       ``(1) the identification and classification of eating 
     disorders and disordered eating;
       ``(2) the causes, diagnosis, and early detection of eating 
     disorders;
       ``(3) the treatment of eating disorders, including the 
     development and evaluation of new treatments and best 
     practices;
       ``(4) the conditions or diseases related to, or arising 
     from, an eating disorder; and
       ``(5) the evaluation of existing prevention programs and 
     the development of reliable prevention and screening 
     programs.
       ``(f) Collaboration.--The Secretary, acting through the 
     Director of NIH and the Director of the National Institute of 
     Mental Health, shall identify relevant Federal agencies 
     (including the other institutes and centers of the National 
     Institutes of Health, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 
     Services, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the 
     Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the Substance 
     Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, the Health 
     Resources and Services Administration, and the Office on 
     Women's Health) that shall collaborate with respect to 
     activities conducted under subsection (d).
       ``(g) Public Input.--The Director of NIH shall provide for 
     a mechanism--
       ``(1) to educate and disseminate information on the 
     existing and planned programs and research activities of the 
     National Institutes of Health with respect to eating 
     disorders; and
       ``(2) through which the Director of NIH may receive 
     comments from the public regarding such programs and 
     activities.
       ``(h) Dissemination of Information.--The Director of NIH 
     shall provide for a mechanism for making the results and 
     information generated by the consortia publicly available, 
     such as through the Internet.
       ``(i) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term 
     `eating disorder' has the meaning given such term in section 
     399OO(e).
       ``(j) Authorization of Appropriations.--To carry out this 
     section, there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as 
     may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2012 through 
     2016.''.

     SEC. 102. INTERAGENCY COORDINATING COUNCIL; SURVEILLANCE AND 
                   RESEARCH PROGRAM; STUDY ON ECONOMIC COST.

       Title III of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 241 
     et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

            ``PART W--PROGRAMS RELATING TO EATING DISORDERS

     ``SEC. 399OO. INTERAGENCY EATING DISORDERS COORDINATING 
                   COUNCIL.

       ``(a) Establishment.--There is established within the 
     Department of Health and Human Services the Interagency 
     Eating Disorders Coordinating Council (referred to in this 
     section as the `Coordinating Council').
       ``(b) Responsibilities.--The Coordinating Council shall--
       ``(1) develop and annually update a summary of advances in 
     eating disorder research concerning causes of, prevention of, 
     early screening for, treatment and access to services related 
     to, and supports for individuals affected by, eating 
     disorders;
       ``(2) monitor Federal activities with respect to eating 
     disorders;
       ``(3) make recommendations to the Secretary regarding any 
     appropriate changes to such activities, and to the Director 
     of NIH, with respect to the strategic plan developed under 
     paragraph (4);
       ``(4) develop and annually update a strategic plan for the 
     conduct of, and support for, eating disorder research, 
     including proposed budgetary recommendations; and
       ``(5) submit annually to the Committee on Health, 
     Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate and the 
     Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of 
     Representatives the strategic plan developed under paragraph 
     (4) and all updates to such plan.
       ``(c) Membership.--
       ``(1) Chairperson.--The Director of NIH shall serve as the 
     chairperson of the Coordinating Council and shall be 
     responsible for the leadership and oversight of the 
     activities of the Coordinating Council.

[[Page 3261]]

       ``(2) Members in general.--The Coordinating Council shall 
     be composed of--
       ``(A) representatives of--
       ``(i) the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality;
       ``(ii) the Substance Abuse and Mental Health 
     Administration;
       ``(iii) the research institutes at the National Institutes 
     of Health, as the Director of NIH determines appropriate;
       ``(iv) the Health Resources and Services Administration;
       ``(v) the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services;
       ``(vi) the Office on Women's Health;
       ``(vii) the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention;
       ``(viii) the Department of Education; and
       ``(ix) any other Federal agency that the chairperson 
     determines is appropriate; and
       ``(B) the additional members appointed under paragraph (3).
       ``(3) Additional members.--Not fewer than \1/3\ of the 
     total membership of the Coordinating Council shall be 
     composed of non-Federal public members to be appointed by the 
     Secretary, including representatives of--
       ``(A) academic medical centers or schools of medicine, 
     nursing, or other health professions;
       ``(B) health care professionals who are actively involved 
     in the treatment of eating disorders;
       ``(C) researchers with expertise in eating disorders; and
       ``(D) at least 2 individuals with a past or present 
     diagnosis of an eating disorder or parents of individuals 
     with a past or present diagnosis of an eating disorder.
       ``(d) Administrative Support; Terms of Service; Other 
     Provisions.--
       ``(1) Administrative support.--The Coordinating Council 
     shall receive necessary and appropriate administrative 
     support from the Secretary.
       ``(2) Terms of service.--Members of the Coordinating 
     Council appointed under subsection (c)(2) shall serve for a 
     term of 4 years, and may be reappointed for one or more 
     additional 4 year-terms. Any member appointed to fill a 
     vacancy for an unexpired term shall be appointed for the 
     remainder of such term. A member may serve after the 
     expiration of the member's term until a successor has taken 
     office.
       ``(3) Meetings.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Coordinating Council shall meet at 
     the call of the chairperson or upon the request of the 
     Secretary. The Coordinating Council shall meet not fewer than 
     2 times each year.
       ``(B) Notice.--Notice of any upcoming meeting of the 
     Coordinating Council shall be published in the Federal 
     Register.
       ``(C) Public access.--Each meeting of the Coordinating 
     Council shall be open to the public and shall include 
     appropriate periods of time for questions by the public.
       ``(4) Subcommittees.--In carrying out its functions the 
     Coordinating Council may establish subcommittees and convene 
     workshops and conferences.
       ``(e) Eating Disorder.--In this part, the term `eating 
     disorder' includes anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, binge 
     eating disorder, and eating disorders not otherwise 
     specified, as defined in the fourth edition of the Diagnostic 
     and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders or any subsequent 
     edition.
       ``(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--To carry out this 
     section, there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as 
     may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2012 through 2016.

     ``SEC. 399OO-1. EATING DISORDER SURVEILLANCE AND RESEARCH 
                   PROGRAM.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary, acting through the 
     Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 
     shall award grants or cooperative agreements to eligible 
     entities for the purpose of improving the collection, 
     analysis and reporting of State epidemiological data on 
     eating disorders.
       ``(b) Activities.--An eligible entity shall assist with the 
     development and coordination of eating disorder surveillance 
     efforts within a region and may--
       ``(1) provide for the collection, analysis, and reporting 
     of epidemiological data on eating disorders through the 
     existing surveillance programs;
       ``(2) develop recommendations to enhance existing 
     surveillance programs to more accurately collect 
     epidemiological data on disordered eating and eating 
     disorders, including the prevalence, incidence, trends, 
     correlates, mortality, and causes of eating disorders and the 
     effects of eating disorders on quality of life;
       ``(3) develop recommendations to improve requirements for 
     ensuring that eating disorders are accurately recorded as 
     underlying and contributing causes of death; and
       ``(4) assist with the development and coordination of 
     surveillance efforts within a region.
       ``(c) Eligible Entities.--To be eligible to receive an 
     award under this section, an entity shall--
       ``(1) be a public or nonprofit private entity (including a 
     health department of a State, a political subdivision of a 
     State, or an institution of higher education); and
       ``(2) submit to the Secretary an application at such time, 
     in such manner, and containing such information as the 
     Secretary may require.
       ``(d) Technical Assistance.--In making awards under this 
     section, the Secretary may provide direct technical 
     assistance in lieu of cash.
       ``(e) Reports.--Each entity awarded a grant or cooperative 
     agreement under this section shall annually submit to the 
     Secretary a report describing the activities conducted using 
     grant funds and providing recommendations for improving the 
     collection, analysis, and reporting of epidemiological data 
     on eating disorders.
       ``(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--To carry out this 
     section, there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as 
     may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2012 through 2016.

     ``SEC. 399OO-2. STUDY REGARDING ECONOMIC COSTS OF EATING 
                   DISORDERS.

       ``Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of 
     the Federal Response to Eliminate Eating Disorders Act, the 
     Secretary, acting through the Director of the Centers for 
     Disease Control and Prevention, shall conduct a study 
     evaluating the economic costs of eating disorders. Such study 
     may examine years of productive life lost, missed days of 
     work, reduced work productivity, costs of medical and mental 
     health treatment, costs to family, and costs to society as a 
     result of eating disorders.''.

 TITLE II--EATING DISORDER EDUCATION AND PREVENTION; STUDIES ON EATING 
      DISORDERS AND BODY MASS INDEX; PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENTS

     SEC. 201. GRANTS TO PREVENT EATING DISORDERS.

       Title III of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 241 
     et seq.), as amended by section 102, is further amended by 
     adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 399OO-3. GRANTS TO PREVENT EATING DISORDERS.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary, acting through the 
     Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 
     and in coordination with the Administrator of the Health 
     Resources and Services Administration, shall award grants to 
     eligible entities to plan, implement, and evaluate programs 
     to prevent eating disorders and obesity and the acute and 
     chronic medical conditions that accompany such conditions, 
     and to promote healthy body image and appropriate nutrition-
     based eating behaviors.
       ``(b) Eligibility.--To be eligible to receive a grant under 
     this section, an entity shall--
       ``(1) be a State, local or tribal educational agency, an 
     accredited institution of higher education, a State or local 
     health department, or a community based organization; and
       ``(2) submit an application to the Secretary at such time, 
     in such manner, and containing such information as the 
     Secretary may require.
       ``(c) Use of Funds.--An entity receiving a grant under this 
     section shall fund development and testing of school-, 
     clinic-, community-, or health department-based programs 
     designed to promote healthy eating behaviors and to prevent 
     eating disorders including--
       ``(1) developing evidence-based interventions to prevent 
     eating disorders, including educational or intervention 
     programs regarding nutritional content, understanding and 
     responding to hunger and satiety, positive body image 
     development, positive self-esteem development, and life 
     skills, that take into account cultural and developmental 
     issues and the role of family, school, and community;
       ``(2) planning and implementing a healthy lifestyle 
     curriculum or program with an emphasis on healthy eating 
     behaviors, physical activity, and emotional wellness, the 
     connection between emotional and physical health, and the 
     prevention of bullying based on body size, shape, and weight;
       ``(3) forming partnerships with parents and caregivers to 
     educate adults about identifying unhealthy eating behaviors 
     and promoting healthy eating behaviors, physical activity, 
     and emotional wellness; and
       ``(4) integrating eating disorder prevention and awareness 
     in physical education, health, education, athletic training 
     programs, and after-school recreational sports programs, to 
     the extent possible.
       ``(d) Requirements of Grant Recipients.--
       ``(1) Limitation on administrative expenses.--A recipient 
     of a grant under this section shall not use more than 10 
     percent of the amounts received under a grant under this 
     section for administrative expenses.
       ``(2) Contribution of funds.--A recipient of a grant under 
     this section, and any entity receiving assistance under the 
     grant for training and education, shall contribute non-
     Federal funds, either directly or through in-kind 
     contributions, to the costs of the activities to be funded 
     under the grant in an amount that is not less than 10 percent 
     of the total cost of such activities.
       ``(3) Evaluation.--Each recipient of a grant under this 
     section shall provide to the Secretary, in such form and 
     manner as the Secretary shall specify, relevant data and an 
     evaluation of the activities of the grant recipient in 
     promoting healthy eating behaviors and preventing eating 
     disorders. Evaluation reports shall be made publicly 
     available, such as through the Internet.

[[Page 3262]]

       ``(e) Technical Assistance.--The Secretary may set aside an 
     amount not to exceed 1 percent of the total amount 
     appropriated for a fiscal year to provide grantees with 
     technical support in the development, implementation, and 
     evaluation of programs under this section and to disseminate 
     information about preventing and treating eating disorders 
     and obesity.

     ``SEC. 399OO-4. STUDY OF EATING DISORDERS IN ELEMENTARY 
                   SCHOOLS, SECONDARY SCHOOLS, AND INSTITUTIONS OF 
                   HIGHER EDUCATION.

       ``Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of 
     the Federal Response to Eliminate Eating Disorders Act, the 
     National Center for Health Statistics of the Centers for 
     Disease Control and Prevention and the National Center for 
     Education Statistics of the Department of Education shall 
     conduct a joint study, or enter into a contract to have a 
     study conducted, on the impact eating disorders have on 
     educational advancement and achievement. The study shall--
       ``(1) determine the incidence of eating disorders and 
     disordered eating among students, and the morbidity and 
     mortality rates associated with eating disorders;
       ``(2) evaluate the extent to which students with eating 
     disorders are more likely to miss school, have delayed rates 
     of development, or have reduced cognitive skills;
       ``(3) report on current State and local programs to 
     increase awareness about the dangers of eating disorders 
     among youth and to prevent eating disorders and the risk 
     factors for eating disorders, and evaluate the value of such 
     programs; and
       ``(4) make recommendations on measures that could be 
     undertaken by Congress, the Department of Education, States, 
     and local educational agencies to strengthen eating disorder 
     prevention and awareness programs including development of 
     best practices.

     ``SEC. 399OO-5. STUDY OF THE SUITABILITY OF MANDATING BODY 
                   MASS INDEX REPORTING IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS AND 
                   SECONDARY SCHOOLS.

       ``Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of 
     the Federal Response to Eliminate Eating Disorders Act, the 
     Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 
     in consultation with the Secretary of Education, shall 
     conduct a study on mandatory reporting of body mass index, 
     including--
       ``(1) how many schools are currently conducting mandatory 
     reporting of body mass index;
       ``(2) how schools are assessing the impacts of such 
     mandatory reporting on body mass index; and
       ``(3) how schools are assessing potential unintended 
     consequences of such mandatory reporting on students, 
     including those related to parent and peer relations.

     ``SEC. 399OO-6. PUBLIC SERVICE ADVERTISEMENTS.

       ``The Secretary, in consultation with the Director of the 
     National Institutes of Health and the Secretary of Education, 
     shall carry out a program to develop, distribute, and promote 
     the broadcasting of public service announcements to improve 
     public awareness of, and to promote the identification and 
     prevention, of eating disorders.

     ``SEC. 399OO-7. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``To carry out sections 399OO-3, 399OO-4, 399OO-5, and 
     399OO-6, there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as 
     may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2012 through 
     2016.''.

     SEC. 202. SENSE OF THE SENATE.

       It is the sense of the Senate that critically necessary 
     programs to reduce obesity in children may also 
     unintentionally increase the unhealthy weight control 
     behaviors that can lead to development of eating disorders, 
     and that federally funded programs to combat obesity should 
     take this connection into consideration.

  TITLE III--IMPROVING TRAINING IN HEALTH PROFESSIONS, EDUCATION, AND 
                             RELATED FIELDS

     SEC. 301. GRANTS FOR HEALTH PROFESSIONALS.

       Part D of title VII of the Public Health Service Act (42 
     U.S.C. 294 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 760. GRANTS FOR HEALTH PROFESSIONALS.

       ``(a) Grants.--The Secretary, acting through the 
     Administrator of the Health Resources and Services 
     Administration, in collaboration with the Director of the 
     Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, shall award 
     grants under this section to develop interdisciplinary 
     training and education programs that provide undergraduate, 
     graduate, post-graduate medical, nursing (including advanced 
     practice nursing students), dental, mental and behavioral 
     health, pharmacy, and other health professions students or 
     residents with an understanding of, and clinical skills 
     pertinent to identifying and treating, eating disorders.
       ``(b) Eligibility.--To be eligible to receive a grant under 
     this section an entity shall--
       ``(1) be an accredited school of allopathic or osteopathic 
     medicine, or an accredited school of nursing, public health, 
     social work, dentistry, behavioral and mental health, or 
     pharmacy, or an accredited medical, dental, or nursing 
     residency program;
       ``(2) prepare and submit to the Secretary an application at 
     such time, in such manner, and containing such information as 
     the Secretary may require.
       ``(c) Use of Funds.--
       ``(1) Required uses.--Amounts provided under a grant 
     awarded under this section shall be used to fund 
     interdisciplinary training and education projects that are 
     designed to train medical, nursing, and other health 
     professions students and residents to--
       ``(A) better identify patients at-risk of becoming 
     overweight or obese or developing an eating disorder;
       ``(B) detect overweight or obesity or eating disorders 
     among a diverse patient population;
       ``(C) counsel, refer, or treat patients with overweight or 
     obesity or an eating disorder;
       ``(D) educate patients and the families of patients about 
     effective strategies to establish healthy eating habits and 
     appropriate levels of physical activity; and
       ``(E) assist in the creation and administration of 
     community-based overweight and obesity and eating disorder 
     prevention efforts.''
       ``(2) Permissive use.--Amounts provided under a grant under 
     this section may be used to offer community-based training 
     opportunities in rural areas for medical, nursing, and other 
     health professions students and residents on eating 
     disorders, which may include the use of distance learning 
     networks and other available technologies needed to reach 
     isolated rural areas.
       ``(d) Requirements of Grantees.--
       ``(1) Limitation on administrative expenses.--A grantee 
     shall not use more than 10 percent of the amounts received 
     under a grant under this section for administrative expenses.
       ``(2) Contribution of funds.--A grantee under this section, 
     and any entity receiving assistance under the grant for 
     training and education, shall contribute non-Federal funds, 
     either directly or through in-kind contributions, to the 
     costs of the activities to be funded under the grant in an 
     amount that is not less than 10 percent of the total cost of 
     such activities.
       ``(e) Eating Disorder.--In this section, the term `eating 
     disorder' has the meaning given such term in section 
     399OO(e).
       ``(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section such 
     sums as may be necessary for fiscal years 2012 through 
     2016.''.

     SEC. 302. TRAINING IN ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOLS.

       Section 5131(a) of the Elementary and Secondary Education 
     Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7215(a)) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:
       ``(28) Programs to improve the identification of students 
     with eating disorders (as defined in section 399OO of the 
     Public Health Service Act), increase awareness of such 
     disorders among parents and students, and train educators 
     (including teachers, school nurses, school social workers, 
     coaches, school counselors, and administrators) on effective 
     eating disorder prevention, screening, detection and 
     assistance methods.''.

        TITLE IV--IMPROVING AVAILABILITY AND ACCESS TO TREATMENT

     SEC. 401. MEDICAID COVERAGE FOR EATING DISORDER TREATMENT 
                   SERVICES.

       (a) In General.--Section 1905 of the Social Security Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 1396d(a)) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in paragraph (28), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (B) by redesignating paragraph (29) as paragraph (30); and
       (C) by inserting after paragraph (28) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(29) eating disorder treatment services (as defined in 
     subsection (ee)(1)); and''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(ee) Eating Disorder Treatment Services.--
       ``(1) Definition.--The term `eating disorder treatment 
     services' means services relating to diagnosis and treatment 
     of an eating disorder (as defined in section 399OO of the 
     Public Health Service Act), including screening, counseling, 
     pharmacotherapy (including coverage of drugs described in 
     paragraph (2)), and other necessary health care services.
       ``(2) Coverage for pharmacological treatment of eating 
     disorders.--For purposes of paragraph (1), eating disorder 
     treatment services shall include drugs provided as part of 
     care in an inpatient setting, covered outpatient drugs (as 
     defined in section 1927(k)(2)), and non-prescription drugs 
     described in section 1927(d)(2)(A) that are prescribed, in 
     accordance with generally accepted medical guidelines, for 
     treatment of an eating disorder.''.
       (b) Increased FMAP for Eating Disorder Treatment 
     Services.--
       (1) Effective until january 1, 2013.--Section 1905(b) of 
     the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396d(b)) is amended in 
     the first sentence--
       (A) by striking ``and'' before ``(4)''; and
       (B) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``, and (5) the Federal medical assistance 
     percentage shall be equal to the enhanced FMAP described in 
     section 2105(b) with respect to medical assistance for eating 
     disorder treatment services (as defined in subsection 
     (ee)(1)) provided to an individual who is eligible for such 
     assistance and has an eating disorder (as defined in section 
     399OO of the Public Health Service Act)''.

[[Page 3263]]

       (2) Effective january 1, 2013.--Section 4106(b) of the 
     Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111-
     148) is amended--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``(4)'' each time such 
     term appears and inserting ``(5)''; and
       (B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``, and (5)'' and 
     inserting ``, and (6)''.
       (c) Inclusion in EPSDT Services.--Section 1905(r)(1)(B) of 
     such Act (42 U.S.C. 1396d(r)(1)(B)) is amended--
       (1) in clause (iv), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in clause (v), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by inserting after clause (v) the following new clause:
       ``(vi) appropriate diagnostic services relating to eating 
     disorders (as defined in section 399OO of the Public Health 
     Service Act).''.
       (d) Exception From Optional Restriction Under Medicaid Drug 
     Coverage.--Section 1927(d)(2)(A) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1396r-8(d)(2)(A)) is amended by inserting before the period 
     at the end the following: ``, except for drugs that are 
     prescribed, in accordance with generally accepted medical 
     guidelines, for the purpose of treatment of an individual who 
     is eligible for medical assistance under the State plan and 
     has an eating disorder (as defined in section 399OO of the 
     Public Health Service Act)''.
       (e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to drugs and services furnished on or after 
     January 1, 2012.

     SEC. 402. GRANTS TO SUPPORT PATIENT ADVOCACY.

       Subpart II of part D of title IX of the Public Health 
     Service Act is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 938. GRANTS TO SUPPORT PATIENT ADVOCACY.

       ``(a) Grants.--The Secretary, acting through the Director, 
     shall award grants under this section to develop and support 
     patient advocacy work to help individuals with eating 
     disorders obtain adequate health care services and insurance 
     coverage.
       ``(b) Eligibility.--To be eligible to receive a grant under 
     this section, an entity shall--
       ``(1) be a public or nonprofit private entity (including a 
     health department of a State or tribal agency, a community-
     based organization, or an institution of higher education);
       ``(2) 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) comprehensive strategies for advocating on behalf of, 
     and working with, individuals with eating disorders or at 
     risk for developing eating disorders;
       ``(B) a plan for consulting with community-based 
     coalitions, treatment centers, or eating disorder research 
     experts who have experience and expertise in issues related 
     to eating disorders or patient advocacy in providing services 
     under a grant awarded under this section; and
       ``(C) a plan for financial sustainability involving State, 
     local, and private contributions.
       ``(c) Use of Funds.--Amounts provided under a grant awarded 
     under this section shall be used to support patient advocacy 
     work, including--
       ``(1) providing education and outreach in community 
     settings regarding eating disorders and associated health 
     problems, especially among low-income, minority, and 
     medically underserved populations;
       ``(2) facilitating access to appropriate, adequate, and 
     timely health care for individuals with eating disorders and 
     associated health problems;
       ``(3) assisting in communication and cooperation between 
     patients and providers;
       ``(4) representing the interests of patients in managing 
     health insurance claims and plans;
       ``(5) providing education and outreach regarding enrollment 
     in health insurance, including enrollment in the Medicare 
     program under title XVIII of the Social Security Act, the 
     Medicaid program under title XIX of such Act, and the 
     Children's Health Insurance Program under title XXI of such 
     Act;
       ``(6) identifying, referring, and enrolling underserved 
     populations in appropriate health care agencies and 
     community-based programs and organizations in order to 
     increase access to high-quality health care services;
       ``(7) providing technical assistance, training, and 
     organizational support for patient advocates; and
       ``(8) creating, operating, and participating in State or 
     regional networks of patient advocates.
       ``(d) Requirements of Grantees.--
       ``(1) Limitation on administrative expenses.--A grantee 
     shall not use more than 5 percent of the amounts received 
     under a grant under this section for administrative expenses.
       ``(2) Contribution of funds.--A grantee under this section, 
     and any entity receiving assistance under the grant for 
     training and education, shall contribute non-Federal funds, 
     either directly or through in-kind contributions, to the 
     costs of the activities to be funded under the grant in an 
     amount that is not less than 75 percent of the total cost of 
     such activities.
       ``(3) Reporting to secretary.--A grantee under this section 
     shall annually submit to the Secretary a report, at such 
     time, in such manner, and containing such information as the 
     Secretary may require, including a description and evaluation 
     of the activities described in subsection (c) carried out by 
     such entity.
       ``(e) Eating Disorder.--In this section, the term `eating 
     disorder' has the meaning given such term in section 
     399OO(e).
       ``(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--To carry out this 
     section, there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as 
     may be necessary for fiscal years 2012 through 2016.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. REED (for himself, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Merkley, Mr. 
        Whitehouse, Mr. Franken, and Mr. Leahy):
  S. 489. A bill to require certain mortgagees to evaluate loans for 
modifications, to establish a grant program for State and local 
government mediation programs, and for other purposes; to the Committee 
on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
  Mr. REED. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Preserving Homes 
and Communities Act. I introduced an earlier version of this 
legislation in 2009. I am pleased to again be joined by Senators 
Durbin, Leahy, Merkley, Whitehouse, and Franken as cosponsors of this 
bill.
  The sheer number of foreclosures across the country is startling. 
Since the beginning of 2009, there have been approximately 5 million 
foreclosures, and the Center for Responsible Lending estimates there 
will be a total of 9 million foreclosures between 2009 and 2012. In my 
home state of Rhode Island, the numbers are similarly shocking because 
1 in every 10 mortgaged homeowners is in foreclosure or seriously 
delinquent on their mortgage payment.
  Rhode Island families have felt the effects of the recession and the 
national housing crisis harder than most, which is why I worked with 
the Obama Administration and led the effort to expand the Hardest Hit 
Fund to include Rhode Island. This program is just getting underway, 
and my hope is that it will provide much needed targeted assistance to 
struggling homeowners and expand the number of loss mitigation tools in 
order to prevent more Rhode Islanders from falling into foreclosure.
  Unfortunately, additional efforts are needed because the foreclosure 
crisis has grown in complexity as a result of the revelations last fall 
pointing to poorly handled, if not illegal, foreclosure processing. 
Cutting these corners at the risk of severe legal consequences raises 
serious questions about not only the value of mortgage related 
investments, but also the loan modification efforts of servicers.
  I will persist in my efforts to fight improper foreclosures and to 
bring Rhode Islanders the relief they deserve, and this commitment 
continues today with the introduction of the Preserving Homes and 
Communities Act. This bill has been updated and enhanced from its 
predecessor in the last Congress to reflect the fact that some 
provisions have been enacted into law and to address emerging issues 
that are standing in the way of saving as many homes as possible.
  Most importantly, this bill, like the one I introduced in 2009, 
eliminates the so called ``dual-track'' in which a homeowner is 
evaluated for a home loan modification while simultaneously being 
foreclosed upon. The prospect of losing one's home is daunting enough, 
and unfortunately, too many troubled homeowners have received a 
modification notice one day followed by a foreclosure notice the next 
day. This is just too confusing and injects additional uncertainty at 
the most unnerving time for a troubled homeowner. Simply put, there 
should be no dual track. There should be one track, and while a 
troubled homeowner is being evaluated for a loan modification, they 
should have the comfort of knowing that foreclosure proceedings will 
not be initiated. This bill establishes this single track.
  Second, in light of the repeated difficulties that troubled 
homeowners have faced in contacting and remaining in touch with their 
servicers, this bill continues to provide a means for more State and 
local governments to establish mediation programs. These programs 
provide a process by which a neutral third party presides over 
discussions between homeowners and

[[Page 3264]]

servicers to review and discuss alternatives to foreclosure.
  Third, with this bill, I continue my efforts to fund the National 
Housing Trust Fund, which would enable the building, preservation, and 
rehabilitation of affordable rental housing through the proceeds 
received from the warrant provisions I crafted for the financial rescue 
package in 2008. These warrant provisions ensured that as banking 
institutions recovered from their near collapse, American taxpayers, 
who bankrolled their recovery, would also benefit from the upside. To 
date, more than $8 billion in warrant proceeds have been recouped by 
taxpayers. As I have stated before, my view is that some of these 
returns from providing a firmer foundation for our financial 
institutions would be put to good use by providing a firmer foundation 
for affordable rental housing in our country by finally funding the 
National Housing Trust Fund.
  This bill also has several new provisions. First, in response to 
repeated concerns that the loan modification process has been lacking 
in transparency, this bill creates a dispute resolution mechanism 
within the loan modification process itself. Under this bill, troubled 
homeowners and servicers may work out their disagreements with a 
neutral third party on a fair playing field with all the information 
required to evaluate whether a home loan modification application was 
properly evaluated.
  Second, this legislation addresses the recent robo-signing 
allegations by requiring servicers, if a home loan modification is 
denied, to prove that they actually have the legal right to foreclose.
  Third, this bill responds to difficulties faced by individuals who, 
for example, have come to own and live in a mortgaged home through the 
death of a loved one. These unfortunate life events are tough enough. 
As long as these individuals live in these homes as their primary 
residences and are having difficulties paying their mortgages due to 
financial hardship, they too would have to be evaluated for a loan 
modification before banks could foreclose under my legislation.
  Fourth, this bill adds another provision to the section placing 
reasonable limits on foreclosure fees and costly markups by prohibiting 
abusive fees charged in response to lapsed home insurance policies. 
Under this bill, when a home insurance policy lapses, the servicer may 
only charge a fee in an amount equal to the cost of continuing or re-
establishing the home insurance policy. No more, and no less.
  Lastly, I think it's important to make one final point about this 
bill. It provides the means for servicers to legitimately evaluate 
struggling homeowners for loan modifications, but it does not require 
servicers to work with homeowners who have clearly abandoned their 
homes, as determined by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. 
This bill is narrowly and responsibly tailored to prevent foreclosures 
that can be avoided and to ensure that all finalized foreclosures are 
properly and objectively processed. In short, this legislation is fair.
  The foreclosure crisis has persisted for far too long, and it is time 
to finally address this issue once and for all. The Preserving Homes 
and Communities Act provides a path to stabilizing the housing sector 
as a means of bolstering and sustaining our economic recovery. I hope 
my colleagues will join me and Senators Durbin, Leahy, Merkley, 
Whitehouse, and Franken in supporting this bill and taking the 
legislative steps necessary to address foreclosures.
  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. 489

       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 ``Preserving Homes and 
     Communities Act of 2011''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITION.

       In this Act, the term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of 
     Housing and Urban Development.

     SEC. 3. LOAN MODIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section--
       (1) the term ``covered mortgagee'' means--
       (A) an original lender under a federally related mortgage 
     loan;
       (B) any servicer, affiliate, agent, subsidiary, successor, 
     or assignee of a lender under a federally related mortgage 
     loan; and
       (C) any purchaser, trustee, or transferee of any mortgage 
     or credit instrument issued by an original lender under a 
     federally related mortgage loan;
       (2) the term ``covered mortgagor''--
       (A) means an individual--
       (i) who--

       (I) is a mortgagor under a federally related mortgage 
     loan--

       (aa) made by a covered mortgagee; and
       (bb) secured by the principal residence of the mortgagor; 
     or

       (II) is eligible to assume a federally related mortgage 
     loan described in clause (I) in a manner described in 
     paragraph (3), (5), (6), or (7) of section 341(d) of the 
     Garn-St Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982 (12 
     U.S.C. 1701j-3(d)), if the principal residence of the 
     individual is the principal residence securing the federally 
     related mortgage loan; and

       (ii) who cannot make payments on a federally related 
     mortgage loan due to financial hardship, as determined by the 
     Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury 
     and the Director of the Bureau of Consumer Financial 
     Protection; and
       (B) does not include an individual who the Secretary, in 
     consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury and the 
     Director of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, 
     determines has abandoned the principal residence securing the 
     federally related mortgage loan;
       (3) the term ``federally related mortgage loan'' has the 
     same meaning as in section 3 of the Real Estate Settlement 
     Procedures Act of 1974 (12 U.S.C. 2602);
       (4) the term ``home loan modification protocol'' means a 
     home loan modification protocol that--
       (A) is developed under a home loan modification program 
     developed or put into effect by the Secretary of the 
     Treasury, the Secretary, or the Director of the Bureau of 
     Financial Protection;
       (B) includes principal reduction; and
       (C) to the extent possible, in the case of real property on 
     which there is a first lien and a subordinate lien securing a 
     federally related mortgage loan, requires that any principal 
     reduction with respect to the first lien be accompanied by a 
     proportional principal reduction with respect to the 
     subordinate lien;
       (5) the term ``qualified loan modification'' means a 
     modification to the terms of a mortgage agreement between a 
     covered mortgagee and a covered mortgagor that--
       (A) is made pursuant to a determination by the covered 
     mortgagee using a home loan modification protocol that a 
     modification would--
       (i) produce a greater net present value than not modifying 
     the loan to--

       (I) the covered mortgagee; or
       (II) in the aggregate, all persons that hold an interest in 
     the mortgage agreement; and

       (ii) produce mortgage payments that, at a minimum, are 
     reduced to an affordable and sustainable amount, based on a 
     debt-to-income ratio that takes into account the total 
     housing debt and gross household income of the covered 
     mortgagor;
       (B) applies for the remaining term of the original mortgage 
     agreement, prior to modification or amendment; and
       (C) permits the maximum amount of principal reduction that 
     produces a greater net present value than foreclosure to the 
     persons described in subparagraph (A)(i); and
       (6) the term ``State'' means any State of the United 
     States, the District of Columbia, any territory of the United 
     States, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the Trust 
     Territory of the Pacific Islands, the Virgin Islands, and the 
     Northern Mariana Islands.
       (b) Loan Modification Procedures.--
       (1) Initiation of foreclosure.--A covered mortgagee may not 
     initiate a nonjudicial foreclosure or a judicial foreclosure 
     against a covered mortgagor that is otherwise authorized 
     under State law unless--
       (A) the covered mortgagee has used its best efforts to 
     determine whether the covered mortgagor is eligible for a 
     qualified loan modification;
       (B) in the case of a covered mortgagor who the covered 
     mortgagee determines is eligible for a qualified loan 
     modification, the covered mortgagee has used its best efforts 
     to promptly offer a qualified loan modification to the 
     covered mortgagor; and
       (C) in the case of a covered mortgagor who the covered 
     mortgagee determines is not eligible for a qualified loan 
     modification, the covered mortgagee has made available to the 
     covered mortgagor documentation of--
       (i) a loan modification calculation or net present value 
     calculation, including the information necessary to verify 
     and evaluate the calculation, made by the covered mortgagee 
     in relation to the federally related mortgage using a home 
     loan modification protocol;

[[Page 3265]]

       (ii) the loan origination, including any note, deed of 
     trust, or other document necessary to establish the right of 
     the mortgagee to foreclose on the mortgage, including proof 
     of assignment of the mortgage to the mortgagee and the right 
     of the mortgagee to enforce the relevant note under the law 
     of the State in which the real property securing the mortgage 
     is located;
       (iii) any pooling and servicing agreement that the covered 
     mortgagee believes prohibits a qualified loan modification;
       (iv) the payment history of the covered mortgagor and a 
     detailed accounting of any costs or fees associated with the 
     account of the covered mortgagor; and
       (v) the specific alternatives to foreclosure considered by 
     the covered mortgagee, including qualified loan 
     modifications, workout agreements, and short sales.
       (2) Foreclosure in progress.--If a covered mortgagee 
     initiated a nonjudicial foreclosure or a judicial foreclosure 
     proceeding against a covered mortgagor before the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the covered mortgagee--
       (A) shall use its best efforts to take all steps necessary 
     to--
       (i) suspend the foreclosure or foreclosure proceeding, as 
     permitted under the law of the State in which the real 
     property securing the federally related mortgage loan is 
     located, including the cancellation of any sale date that has 
     been scheduled with respect to the real property securing the 
     federally related mortgage loan; and
       (ii) toll any deadlines limiting the rights of the covered 
     mortgagor, whether imposed by statute, scheduling order, or 
     otherwise, until the covered mortgagee has complied with the 
     requirements under this section; and
       (B) may not--
       (i) conduct or schedule a sale of the real property 
     securing the federally related mortgage loan; or
       (ii) cause judgment to be entered against the covered 
     mortgagor.
       (3) Reevaluation of application for qualified loan 
     modification.--If, after receiving information under 
     paragraph (1)(C), a covered mortgagor is able to demonstrate 
     that the covered mortgagor is eligible for a qualified loan 
     modification, the covered mortgagee shall--
       (A) promptly reevaluate the application by the covered 
     mortgagor for a qualified loan modification; and
       (B) if the covered mortgagor is eligible, offer the covered 
     mortgagor a qualified loan modification.
       (4) Dispute resolution.--Not later than 90 days after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Treasury, 
     the Secretary, and the Director of the Bureau of Financial 
     Protection shall ensure that any home loan modification 
     protocol established by the Secretary of the Treasury, the 
     Secretary, or the Director of the Bureau of Financial 
     Protection, respectively, includes a procedure with a neutral 
     third party to resolve disputes between covered mortgagors 
     and covered mortgagees regarding applications for qualified 
     loan modifications.
       (5) No waiver of rights.--A covered mortgagee may not 
     require a covered mortgagor to waive any right of the covered 
     mortgagor as a condition of making a qualified loan 
     modification.
       (6) Certification required prior to sale of real property 
     securing mortgage.--
       (A) Certification.--A covered mortgagee shall submit to the 
     appropriate State entity in the State in which the real 
     property securing a federally related mortgage loan is 
     located a certification that the covered mortgagee has 
     complied with all requirements of this section, before--
       (i) the covered mortgagee may sell the real property; or
       (ii) a purchaser at sale may file an action to recover 
     possession of the real property.
       (B) Recordation of deed prohibited without certification.--
     The government official responsible for recording deeds and 
     other transfers of real property in a jurisdiction may not 
     permit the recordation of a deed transferring title after a 
     foreclosure relating to a federally related mortgage loan in 
     the jurisdiction unless the government official certifies 
     that--
       (i) the person conducting the sale has demonstrated that 
     the requirements of this subsection have been met with 
     respect to the federally related mortgage loan; or
       (ii) the requirements of this subsection do not apply to 
     the federally related mortgage loan.
       (C) Voiding of sale.--A sale of property in violation of 
     this subsection is void.
       (D) Regulations.--The Secretary, in consultation with the 
     Secretary of the Treasury and Director of the Bureau of 
     Consumer Financial Protection, shall issue regulations 
     establishing the content of the certification under this 
     subparagraph.
       (7) Bar to foreclosure.--Failure to comply with this 
     subsection is a bar to foreclosure under the applicable law 
     of a State.
       (8) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this subsection may 
     be construed to prevent a covered mortgagee from offering or 
     making a loan modification with a lower payment, lower 
     interest rate, or principal reduction beyond that required by 
     a modification made using a home loan modification protocol 
     with respect to a covered mortgagor.
       (c) Fees Prohibited.--
       (1) Loan modification fees prohibited.--A covered mortgagee 
     may not charge a fee to a covered mortgagor for carrying out 
     the requirements under subsection (b).
       (2) Foreclosure-related fees.--
       (A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B) and 
     (C), a covered mortgagee may not charge a foreclosure-related 
     fee to a covered mortgagor before--
       (i) the covered mortgagee has made a determination under 
     subsection (b)(1); and
       (ii) the mortgage has entered the foreclosure process.
       (B) Delinquency fees.--A covered mortgagee may charge 1 
     delinquency fee for each late payment by a covered mortgagor, 
     if the fee is specified by the mortgage agreement and 
     permitted by other applicable Federal and State law. A 
     delinquency fee may be collected only once on an installment 
     however long it remains in default.
       (C) Other fees.--A covered mortgagee may charge a covered 
     mortgagor 1 property valuation fee and 1 title search fee in 
     connection with a foreclosure.
       (3) Fees not in contract.--A covered mortgagee may charge a 
     fee to a covered mortgagor only if--
       (A) the fee was specified by the mortgage agreement before 
     a modification or amendment; and
       (B) the fee is otherwise permitted under this subsection.
       (4) Fees for expenses incurred.--
       (A) In general.--A covered mortgagee may charge a fee to a 
     covered mortgagor only--
       (i) for services actually performed by the covered 
     mortgagee or a third party in relation to the mortgage 
     agreement, before a modification or amendment; and
       (ii) if the fee is reasonably related to the actual cost of 
     providing the service.
       (B) Home preservation services.--A covered mortgagee may 
     charge a fee to a covered mortgagor for home preservation 
     services, only if the covered mortgagor has not submitted a 
     payment under the federally related mortgage during the 60-
     day period ending on the date the fee is charged.
       (5) Forceplaced insurance.--
       (A) Fee permitted.--If a home insurance policy on the real 
     property securing a federally related mortgage loan lapses 
     due to the failure of a covered mortgagor to make a payment, 
     a covered mortgagee may charge the covered mortgagor a fee in 
     an amount equal to the actual cost of continuing or re-
     establishing the home insurance policy on the same terms in 
     effect before the lapse.
       (B) Recovery of fee.--A covered mortgagee may recover the 
     fee described in subparagraph (A)--
       (i) by establishing an escrow account in accordance with 
     section 10 of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act of 
     1974 (12 U.S.C. 2609); or
       (ii) in equal monthly amounts during one 12-month period.
       (6) Penalty.--The Director of the Bureau of Consumer 
     Financial Protection shall collect from any covered mortgagee 
     that charges a fee in violation of this subsection an amount 
     equal to $6,000 for each such fee.
       (d) Regulations.--Not later than 3 months after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary, in consultation with 
     the Secretary of the Treasury and the Director of the Bureau 
     of Consumer Financial Protection, shall issue by notice any 
     requirements to carry out this section. The Secretary shall 
     subsequently issue, after notice and comment, final 
     regulations to carry out this section.
       (e) Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection Home Loan 
     Modification Protocol.--Not later than 90 days after the date 
     of enactment of this Act, the Director of the Bureau of 
     Consumer Financial Protection shall develop a home loan 
     modification protocol.
       (f) Treasury and HUD Home Loan Modification Protocols.--Not 
     later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, 
     the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary shall make 
     any changes to the home loan modification protocol of the 
     Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary, respectively, 
     that are necessary to carry out this Act.

     SEC. 4. MEDIATION INITIATIVES.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section--
       (1) the term ``mortgagee'' includes the agent of a 
     mortgagee; and
       (2) the term ``mediation'' means a process in which a 
     neutral third party presides over discussions between 
     mortgagors and mortgagees to review and discuss available 
     loss mitigation options in order to avoid foreclosure.
       (b) Grant Program Established.--The Secretary shall 
     establish a grant program to make competitive grants to State 
     and local governments to establish mediation programs that 
     assist mortgagors facing foreclosure.
       (c) Mediation Programs.--A mediation program established 
     using a grant under this section shall--
       (1) require participation in the program by--
       (A) any mortgagee that seeks to initiate or has initiated a 
     judicial or nonjudicial foreclosure; and
       (B) any mortgagor who is subject to a judicial or 
     nonjudicial foreclosure;
       (2) require that a representative of the mortgagee who has 
     authority to decide on

[[Page 3266]]

     loss mitigation options (including loan modification) 
     participate, in person, in scheduled sessions;
       (3) require any mortgagee or mortgagor required to 
     participate in the program to make a good faith effort to 
     resolve promptly, through mediation, issues relating to the 
     default on the mortgage;
       (4) if mediation is not made available to the mortgagor 
     before a foreclosure proceeding is initiated, allow the 
     mortgagor to request mediation at any time before a 
     foreclosure sale;
       (5) provide that any proceeding to foreclose that is 
     initiated by the mortgagee shall be stayed until the mediator 
     has issued a written certification that the mortgagee 
     complied in good faith with its obligations under the 
     mediation program established under this section;
       (6) provide for--
       (A) supervision by a State court (or a State court in 
     conjunction with an agency or department of a State or local 
     government) of the mediation program;
       (B) selection and training of neutral, third-party 
     mediators by a State court (or an agency or department of the 
     State or local government);
       (C) penalties to be imposed by a State court, or an agency 
     or department of a State or local government, if a mortgagee 
     fails to comply with an order to participate in mediation; 
     and
       (D) consideration by a State court (or an agency or 
     department of a State or local government) of recommendations 
     by a mediator relating to penalties for failure to fulfill 
     the requirements of the mediation program;
       (7) require that each mortgagee that participates in the 
     mediation program make available to the mortgagor, before and 
     during participation in the mediation program, documentation 
     of--
       (A) a loan modification calculation or net present value 
     calculation, including the information necessary to verify 
     and evaluate the calculation, made by the mortgagee in 
     relation to the mortgage using a home loan modification 
     protocol;
       (B) the loan origination, including any note, deed of 
     trust, or other document necessary to establish the right of 
     the mortgagee to foreclose on the mortgage, including proof 
     of assignment of the mortgage to the mortgagee and the right 
     of the mortgagee to enforce the relevant note under the law 
     of the State in which the real property securing the mortgage 
     is located;
       (C) any pooling and servicing agreement that the mortgagee 
     believes prohibits a loan modification;
       (D) the payment history of the mortgagor and a detailed 
     accounting of any costs or fees associated with the account 
     of the mortgagor; and
       (E) the specific alternatives to foreclosure considered by 
     the mortgagee, including loan modifications, workout 
     agreements, and short sales;
       (8) prohibit a mortgagee from shifting the costs of 
     participation in the mediation program, including the 
     attorney's fees of the mortgagee, to a mortgagor;
       (9) provide that--
       (A) any holder of a junior lien against the property that 
     secures a mortgage that is the subject of a mediation--
       (i) be notified of the mediation; and
       (ii) be permitted to participate in the mediation; and
       (B) any proceeding initiated by a holder of a junior lien 
     against the property that secures a mortgage that is the 
     subject of a mediation be stayed pending the mediation;
       (10) provide information to mortgagors about housing 
     counselors approved by the Secretary; and
       (11) be free of charge to the mortgagor and mortgagee.
       (d) Recordkeeping.--A State or local government that 
     receives a grant under this section shall keep a record of 
     the outcome of each mediation carried out under the mediation 
     program, including the nature of any loan modification made 
     as a result of participation in the mediation program.
       (e) Targeting.--A State that receives a grant under this 
     section may establish--
       (1) a statewide mediation program; or
       (2) a mediation program in a specific locality that the 
     State determines has a high need for such program due to--
       (A) the number of foreclosures in the locality; or
       (B) other characteristics of the locality that contribute 
     to the number of foreclosures in the locality.
       (f) Federal Share.--The Federal share of the cost of a 
     mediation program established using a grant under this 
     section may not exceed 50 percent.
       (g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section such sums as may 
     be necessary for each of fiscal years 2011 through 2014.

     SEC. 5. OVERSIGHT OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE EFFORTS TO REDUCE 
                   MORTGAGE DEFAULTS AND FORECLOSURES.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section--
       (1) the term ``heads of appropriate agencies'' means the 
     Comptroller of the Currency, the Board of Governors of the 
     Federal Reserve System, the Federal Deposit Insurance 
     Corporation, the National Credit Union Administration, the 
     Director of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, the 
     Director of the Office of Financial Research of the 
     Department of the Treasury, and a representative of State 
     banking regulators selected by the Secretary;
       (2) the term ``mortgagee'' means--
       (A) an original lender under a mortgage;
       (B) any servicers, affiliates, agents, subsidiaries, 
     successors, or assignees of an original lender; and
       (C) any subsequent purchaser, trustee, or transferee of any 
     mortgage or credit instrument issued by an original lender; 
     and
       (3) the term ``servicer'' means any person who collects on 
     a home loan, whether such person is the owner, the holder, 
     the assignee, the nominee for the loan, or the beneficiary of 
     a trust, or any person acting on behalf of such person.
       (b) Monitoring of Home Loans.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary, in consultation with the 
     heads of appropriate agencies, shall develop and implement a 
     plan to monitor--
       (A) conditions and trends in homeownership and the mortgage 
     industry, in order to predict trends in foreclosures to 
     better understand other critical aspects of the mortgage 
     market; and
       (B) the effectiveness of public and private efforts to 
     reduce mortgage defaults and foreclosures.
       (2) Report to congress.--Not later than 1 year after the 
     development of the plan under paragraph (1), and each year 
     thereafter, the Secretary shall submit a report to Congress 
     that--
       (A) summarizes and describes the findings of the monitoring 
     required under paragraph (1); and
       (B) includes recommendations or proposals for legislative 
     or administrative action necessary--
       (i) to increase the authority of the heads of appropriate 
     agencies to levy penalties against any mortgagee, or other 
     person or entity, who fails to comply with the requirements 
     described in this section;
       (ii) to improve coordination between public and private 
     initiatives to reduce the overall rate of mortgage defaults 
     and foreclosures; and
       (iii) to improve coordination between initiatives 
     undertaken by Federal, State, and local governments.

     SEC. 6. HOUSING TRUST FUND.

       From funds received or to be received by the Secretary of 
     the Treasury from the sale of warrants under title I of the 
     Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (12 U.S.C. 5211 
     et seq.), the Secretary of the Treasury shall transfer and 
     credit $1,000,000,000 to the Housing Trust Fund established 
     under section 1338 of the Federal Housing Enterprises 
     Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 4568) 
     for use in accordance with such section.

  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I rise today to speak in support of 
legislation I have introduced with Senators Reed, Merkley, Sanders and 
Tester to enhance foreclosure protections for our servicemembers and 
their families, and to help ensure that their rights under the 
Servicemembers Civil Relief Act are not violated.
  We have all heard horror stories about how servicers treat homeowners 
in distress. When these abusive mortgage practices harm the men and 
women who are sent into harm's way to protect our country, it is a 
particular tragedy and it deserves our urgent attention.
  Not only are these practices illegal and morally repugnant, they can 
also be a dangerous distraction from our military mission. Holly 
Petraeus, General Petraeus' wife, leads the Consumer Financial 
Protection Bureau's Office for Service Member Affairs, and she 
testified on this issue during a recent hearing before the House 
Veterans' Affairs Committee. As she put it, ``[i]t is a terrible 
situation for the family at home and for the servicemember abroad who 
feels helpless.''
  Service members over at the point of the spear in Afghanistan have 
enough to worry about without worrying about the bank foreclosing on 
their family.
  According to recent media reports, it has come to light that 
financial institutions have repeatedly failed to comply with the 
Servicemembers Civil Relief Act or ``SCRA''. These violations led to 
thousands of mortgage overcharges and a number of unlawful 
foreclosures. Under the SCRA, it is illegal to foreclose on a protected 
servicemember unless an authorization by a judge is obtained. Then, the 
judge can only act after a hearing is held in which the military 
homeowner is represented.
  One of the most troubling cases is the story of SGT James B. Hurley, 
who lost his home while he was serving in Iraq. Like many Reservists, 
Sergeant Hurley made less money serving on active duty than he did in 
his civilian

[[Page 3267]]

 job. So, when he was mobilized, it became a real struggle for his 
family to afford his mortgage and they fell behind in making his 
payments.
  The SCRA was designed to protect our servicemembers from financial 
challenges associated with deployments, and it should have prevented 
the bank from foreclosing on Sergeant Hurley. However, the bank 
violated the SCRA, foreclosing on Sergeant Hurley illegally, and 
forcing his wife and children out of their home. Sergeant Hurley 
returned from combat, as a disabled veteran, only to find that the bank 
had sold the home that he worked so hard to build.
  The current economic climate has hit our returning veterans 
particularly hard, adding to the financial challenges our deployed 
servicemembers already face. According to a recent Department of Labor 
report, the unemployment rate for veterans rose to 9.9 percent overall, 
and 15.2 percent for veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
  These heartbreaking statistics underscore how difficult it can be to 
readjust economically to life at home. For our returning servicemembers 
that need time to get back on financial solid footing, to rebuild what 
they had to walk away from to defend the rest of us, we should do 
everything we can to accommodate their needs, especially during these 
difficult economic times.
  The Protecting Servicemembers from Mortgage Abuses Act of 2011, which 
I am introducing would encourage compliance with the SCRA by doubling 
the maximum criminal penalties for violations of its foreclosure and 
eviction protections. It would also double civil penalties in cases 
where the Attorney General has commenced a civil action against the 
lender.
  In addition, the bill will give servicemembers the time they need 
after returning from deployment to regain solid financial footing, by 
extending the period of foreclosure protection coverage from 9 to 24 
months after military service has ended.
  I hope Senators on both sides of the aisle will come together and 
join me in supporting legislation to discourage loan servicers from 
further violations and help to protect the financial and emotional 
well-being of our troops.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. AKAKA.
  S. 490. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to increase the 
maximum age for children eligible for medical care under the CHAMPVA 
program, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today, many dependent children of veterans 
who permanently and totally disabled from a service connected 
disability or who died in the line of duty are no longer being covered 
by their health insurance program. I am introducing important 
legislation that would make a critical adjustment to current 
eligibility requirements for children who receive health care under the 
Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Department of Veterans 
Affairs program.
  CHAMPVA was established in 1973 within the Veterans Administration to 
provide health care services to dependents and survivors of our 
Nation's veterans. CHAMPVA enrollment has grown steadily over the years 
and, as of fiscal year 2009, covers more than 336,000 beneficiaries.
  Under the current law, a dependent child loses eligibility for 
CHAMPVA upon turning 18-years-old, unless the child is enrolled in 
school on a full-time basis. After losing full-time status at school, 
or upon turning 23-years-old, an eligible child of a veteran would lose 
eligibility.
  The landmark health care reform act that was enacted into law last 
year includes a provision that requires private health insurance to 
cover dependent children until age 26.
  I believe it is only fair to afford children who are CHAMPVA 
beneficiaries the same eligibility as dependent children whose parents 
have private sector coverage. Beneficiaries are already being cut off 
from coverage. We need to take prompt action to extend coverage to the 
dependents of these veterans who have given so much to our country. I 
urge my colleagues to support this necessary modification.
  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. 490

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

     SECTION 1. INCREASE OF MAXIMUM AGE FOR CHILDREN ELIGIBLE FOR 
                   MEDICAL CARE UNDER CHAMPVA PROGRAM.

       (a) Increase.--Subsection (c) of section 1781 of title 38, 
     United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(c)(1) Notwithstanding clauses (i) and (iii) of section 
     101(4)(A) of this title and except as provided in paragraph 
     (2), for purposes of this section, a child who is eligible 
     for benefits under subsection (a) shall remain eligible for 
     benefits under this section until the child's 26th birthday, 
     regardless of the child's marital status.
       ``(2) Before January 1, 2014, paragraph (1) shall not apply 
     to a child who is eligible to enroll in an eligible employer-
     sponsored plan (as defined in section 5000A(f)(2) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986).
       ``(3) This subsection shall not be construed to limit 
     eligibility for coverage of a child described in section 
     101(4)(A)(ii) of this title.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--Such subsection, as so amended, shall 
     apply with respect to medical care provided on or after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act.

                          ____________________