[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 3712-3730]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. CARDIN:
  S. 538. A bill to amend the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation 
Act to reauthorize the Act; to the Committee on Environment and Public 
Works.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Neotropical 
Migratory Bird Conservation Act. This bill

[[Page 3713]]

promotes long-term conservation, education, research, monitoring, and 
habitat protection for more than 350 species of neotropical migratory 
birds that breed in North America in the summer and spend our winters 
in tropical climates south of our border. Through its successful 
competitive, matching grant program, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
supports public-private partnerships to countries mostly in Latin 
America and the Caribbean. Up to one quarter of the funds may be 
awarded for domestic projects.
  This legislation aims to sustain healthy populations of migratory 
birds that are not only beautiful to look at but help our farmers by 
consuming billions of harmful insect pests each year. These vulnerable 
bird populations face many environmental factors such as pesticide 
pollution, deforestation, sprawl, and invasive species that threaten 
their habitat and, ultimately, their survival. As good indicators of a 
healthy ecosystem, it is troubling that, according to the National 
Audubon Society, at least 29 species of migratory birds are 
experiencing significant population declines. For example, populations 
of the Cerulean Warbler and Olive-Sided Flycatcher have declined as 
much as 70 percent since surveys began in the 1960s.
  The Baltimore Oriole, the State bird of my home state of Maryland, 
has been experiencing a decline in population despite being protected 
by Federal law under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 and the 
State of Maryland's Nongame and Endangered Species Conservation Act. 
Destruction of their domestic breeding habitat and tropical winter 
habitat, coupled with the toxic pesticides ingested by insects which 
are then eaten by the Oriole, has significantly contributed to this 
decline. It is essential that we invest in conservation efforts in our 
country as well as others along the migratory route of the wide range 
of migratory birds. This legislation accomplishes this goal.
  The Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act has a proven track 
record of reversing habitat loss and advancing conservation strategies 
for the broad range of neotropical birds that populate the United 
States and the rest of the Western hemisphere. According to the U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, between 2002 and 2010, this program has 
successfully supported 333 projects, coordinated by groups in 48 U.S. 
State/territories and 36 countries. Additionally, it is a great value 
for taxpayers as it leverages over $4.00 for each Federal dollar spent. 
Since 2002, the U.S. has invested more than $25 million in 262 projects 
and leveraged an additional $112 million in partner funds to support 
these projects. It also helps to generate $2.7 billion annually for the 
U.S. economy through wildlife watching activities.
  This legislation is cost-effective, budget-friendly, and has been a 
highly successful Federal program. This simple reauthorization bill 
will make sure that this good work continues.
  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. 538

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

     SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION OF NEOTROPICAL MIGRATORY BIRD 
                   CONSERVATION ACT.

       Section 10 of the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation 
     Act (16 U.S.C. 6109) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 10. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``(a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated 
     to carry out this Act such sums as are necessary for each of 
     fiscal years 2012 through 2017.
       ``(b) Use of Funds.--Of the amounts made available under 
     subsection (a) for each fiscal year, not less than 75 percent 
     shall be expended for projects carried out at a location 
     outside of the United States.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BEGICH:
  S. 542. A bill to amend title 10, United States Code, to authorize 
space-available travel on military aircraft for members of the reserve 
components, a member or former member of a reserve component who is 
eligible for retired pay but for age, widows and widowers of retired 
members, and dependents; to the Committee on Armed Services.
  Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the Space 
Available Equity Act.
  Members and retirees of the National Guard and Reserve, their 
families, and surviving military spouses make great sacrifices for our 
nation. However, too often these individuals do not receive the 
benefits they have earned for their service.
  In Alaska, the National Guard conducts more search and rescue 
missions in the most challenging terrain than any other state. They 
save lives every day in their state role and frequently deploy just 
like their active duty counter-parts. The demands on our reserve 
component have been higher than ever before. Yet members of the reserve 
components and ``gray area'' retirees, National Guardsman or Reservist 
eligible for retirement but under the age of 60, have limited travel 
privileges on Department of Defense aircraft under current regulation. 
Their space-available travel benefits are restricted to the continental 
United States and are not extended to their dependents, unlike active 
duty members and retirees.
  Surviving spouses of a military member eligible for retired pay 
retain no space-available travel privileges at all after the death of 
their spouse, despite having made a lifetime commitment to the military 
or in many cases, lost their loved one in war. In Alaska, we understand 
how important surviving spouses are. The Tragedy Assistance Program, or 
as it's more commonly known--TAPS, was founded in my State.
  To correct these inequities, I am re-introducing the National Guard, 
Reserve, ``Gray Area'' Retiree, and Surviving Spouse Space-available 
Travel Equity Act. This bill will give these deserving individuals 
comprehensive and equitable space-available travel privileges on 
Department of Defense aircraft. The bill is endorsed by the National 
Guard Association of the United States.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in giving parity to our reserve 
component members and surviving military spouses.
  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. 542

       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 ``National Guard, Reserve, 
     ``Gray Area'' Retiree, and Surviving Spouses Space-available 
     Travel Equity Act of 2011''.

     SEC. 2. ELIGIBILITY OF RESERVE MEMBERS, GRAY-AREA RETIREES, 
                   WIDOWS AND WIDOWERS OF RETIRED MEMBERS, AND 
                   DEPENDENTS FOR SPACE-AVAILABLE TRAVEL ON 
                   MILITARY AIRCRAFT.

       (a) Eligibility.--Chapter 157 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after section 2641b the 
     following new section:

     ``Sec. 2641c. Space-available travel on Department of Defense 
       aircraft: reserve members, reserve members eligible for 
       retired pay but for age; widows and widowers of retired 
       members and dependents

       ``(a) Reserve Members.--A member of a reserve component 
     holding a valid Uniformed Services Identification and 
     Privilege Card shall be provided transportation on Department 
     of Defense aircraft, on a space-available basis, on the same 
     basis as active duty members of the uniformed services under 
     any other provision of law or Department of Defense 
     regulation.
       ``(b) Reserve Retirees Under Applicable Eligibility Age.--A 
     member or former member of a reserve component who, but for 
     being under the eligibility age applicable to the member 
     under section 12731 of this title, otherwise would be 
     eligible for retired pay under chapter 1223 of this title 
     shall be provided transportation on Department of Defense 
     aircraft, on a space-available basis, on the same basis as 
     members of the armed forces entitled to retired pay under any 
     other provision of law or Department of Defense regulation.
       ``(c) Widows and Widowers of Retired Members.--
       ``(1) In general.--An unremarried widow or widower of a 
     member of the armed forces described in paragraph (2) shall 
     be provided transportation on Department of Defense

[[Page 3714]]

     aircraft, on a space-available basis, on the same basis as 
     members of the armed forces entitled to retired pay under any 
     other provision of law or Department of Defense regulation.
       ``(2) Members covered.--A member of the armed forces 
     referred to in paragraph (1) is a member who--
       ``(A) is entitled to retired pay;
       ``(B) dies in line of duty while on active duty and is not 
     eligible for retired pay; or
       ``(C) in the case of a member of a reserve component, dies 
     as a result of a line of duty condition and is not eligible 
     for retired pay.
       ``(d) Dependents.--A dependent of a member or former member 
     described in either subsections (a) or (b) or of a deceased 
     member entitled to retired pay holding a valid Uniformed 
     Services Identification and Privilege Card and a surviving 
     unremarried spouse and the surviving dependent of a deceased 
     member or former member described in subsection (b) holding a 
     valid Uniformed Services Identification and Privilege Card 
     shall be provided transportation on Department of Defense 
     aircraft, on a space-available basis, if the dependent is 
     accompanying the member or, in the case of a deceased member, 
     is the surviving unremarried spouse of the deceased member or 
     is a dependent accompanying the surviving unremarried spouse 
     of the deceased member.
       ``(e) Definition of Dependent.--In this section, the term 
     `dependent' has the meaning given that term in section 1072 
     of this title.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to section 2641b the following new item:

``2641c. Space-available travel on Department of Defense aircraft: 
              reserve members, reserve members eligible for retired pay 
              but for age; widows and widowers of retired members and 
              dependents.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. WYDEN (for himself, Ms. Snowe, Mrs. Gillibrand, Mr. 
        McCain, Mr. Menendez, Mr. Ensign, Mr. Nelson of Florida, and 
        Mr. Burr):
  S. 543. A bill to restrict any State or local jurisdiction from 
imposing a new discriminatory tax on cell phone services, providers, or 
property; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce the Wireless Tax 
Fairness Act and I am delighted and honored to be joined in this effort 
by Senators Snowe, Gillibrand, Ensign, Menendez, McCain, Burr, and 
Senator Nelson from Florida.
  I want to start with an interesting fact that I read a few months 
ago, which is that over 20 percent of Americans have gotten rid of 
their land line telephone service in favor of wireless mobile 
technology. Unfortunately, as more and more people make this shift, 
they are being forced to pay higher and higher state and local taxes 
for their wireless service. Since 2007 the average wireless tax rate 
consumers have to pay rose by 1.1 percentage points, from 15.2 percent 
to 16.3 percent. At a time when the Federal Government is trying to 
improve consumer access to developing technologies and broadband 
Internet in particular, does it make sense to have local, state, and 
Federal Governments forcing higher taxes on them? The answer is no, 
especially as 3G and 4G emerge as dominant wireless technologies. These 
taxes only act to hurt consumers, stifle innovation in the wireless 
industry, and restrict access to the Internet.
  In order to make sure that wireless technology can continue to 
flourish I am introducing the Wireless Tax Fairness Act. This 
legislation will keep American companies competitive by putting the 
brakes on unfair wireless tax increases--allowing American companies to 
remain leaders in innovation, making it easier for Americans to afford 
these services and providing an affordable way for consumers to access 
the Internet. The technology that is developed and deployed in America 
paves the way for the same American technology to be deployed overseas, 
creating and sustaining good American jobs.
  In an era when a new cellphone, smartphone, or tablet is introduced 
nearly every month it is essential that the market for these products 
is determined by consumers and not by disproportionately high taxes. 17 
percent of American families earning less than $30,000 rely on a 
wireless device to access the Internet. The deployment and availability 
of such services needs to be encouraged by keeping prices affordable 
for both individuals and businesses through a fair and reasonable tax 
regime.
  In order to make sure that our walk is consistent with our talk on 
promoting American innovation, it is time to place a moratorium on 
discriminatory wireless taxes and fees. I hope our colleagues will join 
us in supporting this bill.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mrs. Boxer):
  S. 544. A bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct 
a study of alternatives for commemorating and interpreting the role of 
the Buffalo Soldiers in the early years of the National Parks, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resoruces.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today on behalf of myself and 
Senator Boxer to introduce the Buffalo Soldiers in the National Parks 
Study Act. This legislation is an important step in preserving the 
legacy of the Army's first all-black infantry and cavalry units and 
their unique role in the creation of our National Park system.
  The Buffalo Soldiers served bravely in campaigns both at home and 
abroad before being stationed at the military Presidio in San Francisco 
and being given charge of patrolling the National Park system. Although 
first tasked with taming the frontier, these troops also took on the 
responsibility of preserving that wilderness for future generations. 
Each summer, Buffalo Soldier regiments traveled roughly 320 miles from 
San Francisco to either Sequoia or Yosemite National Park, where they 
patrolled the parks for poachers and loggers, built trails, and 
escorted visitors. They were, in essence if not in name, the nation's 
first park rangers.
  In a time of segregation and adversity, these soldiers served their 
country bravely and the National Parks they worked to establish are 
part of the legacy they leave behind. Unfortunately, this unique aspect 
of their history is neither widely recognized nor remembered. This 
legislation would address that by authorizing a study to determine the 
most appropriate way to memorialize the Buffalo Soldiers. Money 
procured under the act would be used to determine the feasibility of 
establishing a national historic trail along the route traveled by the 
Buffalo Soldiers, scout for properties to add to the National Register 
of Historic Places, and develop educational initiatives and a public 
awareness campaign about the contribution of African-American soldiers 
after the Civil War.
  Although the experiences of the Buffalo Soldiers are an important 
piece of our national history, we are in danger of losing their legacy 
to the passage of time unless we take conscious steps to preserve the 
memory. This legislation works to ensure that the contributions of the 
Buffalo Soldiers will be remembered and shared by all. I urge my 
colleagues to join me in their support for this measure.
  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. 544

       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 ``Buffalo Soldiers in the 
     National Parks Study Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
       (1) In the late 19th century and early 20th century, 
     African-American troops who came to be known as the Buffalo 
     Soldiers served in many critical roles in the western United 
     States, including protecting some of the first National 
     Parks.
       (2) Based at the Presidio in San Francisco, Buffalo 
     Soldiers were assigned to Sequoia and Yosemite National Parks 
     where they patrolled the backcountry, built trails, stopped 
     poaching, and otherwise served in the roles later assumed by 
     National Park rangers.
       (3) The public would benefit from having opportunities to 
     learn more about the Buffalo Soldiers in the National Parks 
     and their contributions to the management of National Parks 
     and the legacy of African-Americans in the post-Civil War 
     era.
       (4) As the centennial of the National Park Service in 2016 
     approaches, it is an especially

[[Page 3715]]

     appropriate time to conduct research and increase public 
     awareness of the stewardship role the Buffalo Soldiers played 
     in the early years of the National Parks.
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to authorize a 
     study to determine the most effective ways to increase 
     understanding and public awareness of the critical role that 
     the Buffalo Soldiers played in the early years of the 
     National Parks.

     SEC. 3. STUDY.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Interior shall 
     conduct a study of alternatives for commemorating and 
     interpreting the role of the Buffalo Soldiers in the early 
     years of the National Parks.
       (b) Contents of Study.--The study shall include--
       (1) a historical assessment, based on extensive research, 
     of the Buffalo Soldiers who served in National Parks in the 
     years prior to the establishment of the National Park 
     Service;
       (2) an evaluation of the suitability and feasibility of 
     establishing a national historic trail commemorating the 
     route traveled by the Buffalo Soldiers from their post in the 
     Presidio of San Francisco to Sequoia and Yosemite National 
     Parks and to any other National Parks where they may have 
     served;
       (3) the identification of properties that could meet 
     criteria for listing in the National Register of Historic 
     Places or criteria for designation as National Historic 
     Landmarks;
       (4) an evaluation of appropriate ways to enhance historical 
     research, education, interpretation, and public awareness of 
     the story of the Buffalo Soldiers' stewardship role in the 
     National Parks, including ways to link the story to the 
     development of National Parks and the story of African-
     American military service following the Civil War; and
       (5) any other matters that the Secretary of the Interior 
     deems appropriate for this study.
       (c) Report.--Not later than 3 years after funds are made 
     available for the study, the Secretary of the Interior shall 
     submit to the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural 
     Resources of the Senate a report containing the study's 
     findings and recommendations.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LIEBERMAN (for himself, Ms. Collins,  Mr. Carper, and Mr. 
        Brown of Massachusetts).
  S. 550. A bill to improve the provision of assistance to fire 
departments, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Homeland 
Security and Governmental Affairs.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, today Senators Collins, Carper, Brown, 
and I are pleased to introduce the Fire Grants Reauthorization Act of 
2011 to ensure that firefighters and emergency medical service 
personnel serving communities across the nation are repaid for the 
sacrifices they make every day with the best possible training and 
equipment--particularly given the budget cuts many communities have 
been forced to make in these economically uncertain times.
  The bill we present to the Senate reauthorizes the Assistance to 
Firefighters, AFG, program and the Staffing for Adequate Fire and 
Emergency Response program, SAFER, two highly successful programs I 
worked to establish in 2000 and 2003. This is bipartisan legislation 
that has won overwhelming Senate support in previous years. As we all 
know, our first responders make great sacrifices for us. Firefighters 
in communities of all shapes and sizes have assumed a greater role in 
overall national emergency preparedness since September 11 and the 
Hurricane Katrina catastrophe. They now serve as the frontline of 
defense in many communities for disasters of all types. More than ever, 
firefighters need the training and equipment to deal not only with 
fires but also with hazardous materials; nuclear, radioactive, and 
explosive devices; and other potential threats.
  The responsibilities placed on firefighters have only grown more 
demanding. Firefighters respond more and more to medical emergencies--
15.8 million in 2008, a 213 percent increase from 1980. Right here in 
Washington, D.C., at Fire Engine Company 10--known as the ``House of 
Pain'' for its grueling schedule--80 percent of the calls are for 
medical emergencies. Our nation's firefighters--like other first 
responders--are the first to arrive and the last to leave whenever 
trouble hits. They deserve all the support we can give them.
  Unfortunately, they do not always get it. Firefighters often lack the 
equipment and vehicles they need to do their jobs safely and 
effectively. In 2006 the U.S. Fire Administration reported that 60 
percent of fire departments did not have enough breathing apparatuses 
to equip all firefighters on a shift, 65 percent did not have enough 
portable radios, and 49 percent of all fire engines were at least 15 
years old.
  We can and must do more for these brave men and women. We must make 
sure they have what they need to protect their communities and 
themselves as they perform a very dangerous job. Our bill takes much-
needed steps to ensure that they do.
  To start with, because career, volunteer, and combination fire 
departments all suffer from shortages in equipment, vehicles, and 
training, our bill requires that each type receives at least 25 percent 
of the available AFG grant funding. The remaining funds will be 
allocated based on factors such as risk and the needs of individual 
communities and the country as a whole. This creates an appropriate 
balance, ensuring that funds are directed at departments facing the 
most significant risks while guaranteeing that no department is left 
out.
  We have also taken a number of steps in our bill to help fire 
departments in communities struggling with economic difficulties. In 
many cases, local governments have reduced spending on vital services, 
including fire departments. Among other things, these cuts have 
prevented many departments from replacing old equipment and forced them 
to lay off needed firefighters. To help departments rebuild, we have 
lowered the matching requirements for AFG and SAFER. Departments are 
still required to match some of their grant awards with funds of their 
own--ensuring they have some skin in the game--but the reduced amount 
will make it easier for them to accept awards.
  We have similarly created an economic hardship waiver for both grant 
programs that will allow FEMA to waive certain requirements, such as 
requiring that grantees provide matching funds, for departments in 
communities that have been especially hard hit by tough economic times.
  Our bill contains a number of other important provisions. It raises 
the maximum grant amounts available under AFG. As commonsense would 
suggest, large communities often require a substantial amount of 
equipment, and they will now be able to apply for funding in amounts 
more in line with what they need.
  Our bill would provide funding for national fire safety organizations 
and institutions of higher education that wish to create joint programs 
establishing fire safety research centers. There is a great need for 
research devoted to fire safety and prevention and improved technology. 
The work these centers do will help us reduce fire casualties among 
firefighters and civilians and make communities safer.
  But as important as it is to help our firefighters, we must also 
demand accountability when we spend taxpayer dollars. For this reason, 
we require that FEMA create performance management systems for these 
programs, complete with quantifiable metrics that will allow us to see 
how well they perform. Going forward, this will allow us to see what 
works in these programs and what does not so that we can make needed 
improvements when required.
  We have also included provisions to prevent earmarks from being 
attached to these programs. AFG and SAFER have never been earmarked--an 
impressive accomplishment--and we want to keep it that way. The funding 
for these programs needs to go to firefighters, not pet projects.
  Finally, this legislation authorizes $950 million each for these 
vital programs. This is actually less than what was authorized in the 
past. We believe that supporting our Nation's firefighters and 
emergency medical service responders ought to be a priority, but we 
recognize that these tough fiscal times require some belt-tightening. 
Authorizing funding for AFG and SAFER at these amounts sends the 
message that Congress can direct funding where it is needed while also 
showing discipline.
  This legislation ensures that fire departments get the support they 
need to

[[Page 3716]]

protect their communities while also protecting taxpayer dollars. It 
addresses a vital national need while increasing accountability to the 
public. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the 
reauthorization of these important programs.
  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. 550

       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 ``Fire Grants Reauthorization 
     Act of 2011''.

     SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO DEFINITIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 4 of the Federal Fire Prevention 
     and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2203) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``, except as otherwise 
     provided,'' after ``means'';
       (2) in paragraph (4), by striking ```Director' means'' and 
     all that follows through ``Agency;'' and inserting 
     ```Administrator of FEMA' means the Administrator of the 
     Federal Emergency Management Agency;'';
       (3) in paragraph (5)--
       (A) by inserting ``Indian tribe,'' after ``county,''; and
       (B) by striking ``and `firecontrol''' and inserting ``and 
     `fire control''';
       (4) by redesignating paragraphs (6) through (9) as 
     paragraphs (7) through (10), respectively;
       (5) by inserting after paragraph (5), the following:
       ``(6) `Indian tribe' has the meaning given that term in 
     section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education 
     Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b) and `tribal' means of or 
     pertaining to an Indian tribe;'';
       (6) by redesignating paragraphs (9) and (10), as 
     redesignated by paragraph (4), as paragraphs (10) and (11);
       (7) by inserting after paragraph (8), as redesignated by 
     paragraph (4), the following:
       ``(9) `Secretary' means, except as otherwise provided, the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security;'';
       (8) by amending paragraph (10), as redesignated by 
     paragraph (6), to read as follows:
       ``(10) `State' has the meaning given the term in section 2 
     of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101).''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Administrator of fema.--The Federal Fire Prevention and 
     Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2201 et seq.) is amended by 
     striking ``Director'' each place it appears and inserting 
     ``Administrator of FEMA''.
       (2) Administrator of fema's award.--Section 15 of such Act 
     (15 U.S.C. 2214) is amended by striking ``Director's Award'' 
     each place it appears and inserting ``Administrator's 
     Award''.

     SEC. 3. ASSISTANCE TO FIREFIGHTER GRANTS.

       Section 33 of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act 
     of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2229) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 33. FIREFIGHTER ASSISTANCE.

       ``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Available grant funds.--The term `available grant 
     funds', with respect to a fiscal year, means those funds 
     appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations 
     in subsection (p)(1) for such fiscal year less any funds used 
     for administrative costs pursuant to subsection (p)(2) in 
     such fiscal year.
       ``(2) Career fire department.--The term `career fire 
     department' means a fire department that has an all-paid 
     force of firefighting personnel other than paid-on-call 
     firefighters.
       ``(3) Combination fire department.--The term `combination 
     fire department' means a fire department that has--
       ``(A) paid firefighting personnel; and
       ``(B) volunteer firefighting personnel.
       ``(4) Firefighting personnel.--The term `firefighting 
     personnel' means individuals, including volunteers, who are 
     firefighters, officers of fire departments, or emergency 
     medical service personnel of fire departments.
       ``(5) Nonaffiliated ems organization.--The term 
     `nonaffiliated EMS organization' means a public or private 
     nonprofit emergency medical services organization that is not 
     affiliated with a hospital and does not serve a geographic 
     area in which the Administrator of FEMA finds that emergency 
     medical services are adequately provided by a fire 
     department.
       ``(6) Paid-on-call.--The term `paid-on-call' with respect 
     to firefighting personnel means firefighting personnel who 
     are paid a stipend for each event to which they respond.
       ``(7) Volunteer fire department.--The term `volunteer fire 
     department' means a fire department that has an all-volunteer 
     force of firefighting personnel.
       ``(b) Assistance Program.--
       ``(1) Authority.--In accordance with this section, the 
     Administrator of FEMA may, in consultation with the 
     Administrator of the United States Fire Administration, 
     award--
       ``(A) assistance to firefighters grants under subsection 
     (c); and
       ``(B) fire prevention and safety grants and other 
     assistance under subsection (d).
       ``(2) Administrative assistance.--The Administrator of FEMA 
     shall--
       ``(A) establish specific criteria for the selection of 
     grant recipients under this section; and
       ``(B) provide assistance with application preparation to 
     applicants for such grants.
       ``(c) Assistance to Firefighters Grants.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Administrator of FEMA may, in 
     consultation with the chief executives of the States in which 
     the recipients are located, award grants on a competitive 
     basis directly to--
       ``(A) fire departments, for the purpose of protecting the 
     health and safety of the public and firefighting personnel 
     throughout the United States against fire, fire-related, and 
     other hazards;
       ``(B) nonaffiliated EMS organizations to support the 
     provision of emergency medical services; and
       ``(C) State fire training academies for the purposes 
     described in subparagraphs (G), (H), and (I) of paragraph 
     (3).
       ``(2) Maximum grant amounts.--
       ``(A) Population.--The Administrator of FEMA may not award 
     a grant under this subsection in excess of amounts as 
     follows:
       ``(i) In the case of a recipient that serves a jurisdiction 
     with 100,000 people or fewer, the amount of the grant awarded 
     to such recipient shall not exceed $1,000,000 in any fiscal 
     year.
       ``(ii) In the case of a recipient that serves a 
     jurisdiction with more than 100,000 people but not more than 
     500,000 people, the amount of the grant awarded to such 
     recipient shall not exceed $2,000,000 in any fiscal year.
       ``(iii) In the case of a recipient that serves a 
     jurisdiction with more than 500,000 but not more than 
     1,000,000 people, the amount of the grant awarded to such 
     recipient shall not exceed $3,000,000 in any fiscal year.
       ``(iv) In the case of a recipient that serves a 
     jurisdiction with more than 1,000,000 people but not more 
     than 2,500,000 people, the amount of the grant awarded to 
     such recipient shall not exceed $6,000,000 for any fiscal 
     year.
       ``(v) In the case of a recipient that serves a jurisdiction 
     with more than 2,500,000 people, the amount of the grant 
     awarded to such recipient shall not exceed $9,000,000 in any 
     fiscal year.
       ``(B) State fire training academies.--The Administrator of 
     FEMA may not award a grant under this subsection to a State 
     fire training academy in an amount that exceeds $1,000,000 in 
     any fiscal year.
       ``(C) Aggregate.--
       ``(i) In general.--Notwithstanding subparagraphs (A) and 
     (B) and except as provided under clause (ii), the 
     Administrator of FEMA may not award a grant under this 
     subsection in a fiscal year in an amount that exceeds the 
     amount that is one percent of the available grant funds in 
     such fiscal year.
       ``(ii) Exception.--The Administrator of FEMA may waive the 
     limitation in clause (i) with respect to a grant recipient if 
     the Administrator of FEMA determines that such recipient has 
     an extraordinary need for a grant in an amount that exceeds 
     the limit under clause (i).
       ``(3) Use of grant funds.--Each entity receiving a grant 
     under this subsection shall use the grant for one or more of 
     the following purposes:
       ``(A) To train firefighting personnel in--
       ``(i) firefighting;
       ``(ii) emergency medical services and other emergency 
     response (including response to natural disasters, acts of 
     terrorism, and other man-made disasters);
       ``(iii) arson prevention and detection;
       ``(iv) maritime firefighting; or
       ``(v) the handling of hazardous materials.
       ``(B) To train firefighting personnel to provide any of the 
     training described under subparagraph (A).
       ``(C) To fund the creation of rapid intervention teams to 
     protect firefighting personnel at the scenes of fires and 
     other emergencies.
       ``(D) To certify--
       ``(i) fire inspectors; and
       ``(ii) building inspectors--

       ``(I) whose responsibilities include fire safety 
     inspections; and
       ``(II) who are employed by or serving as volunteers with a 
     fire department.

       ``(E) To establish wellness and fitness programs for 
     firefighting personnel to ensure that the firefighting 
     personnel are able to carry out their duties as firefighters.
       ``(F) To fund emergency medical services provided by fire 
     departments and nonaffiliated EMS organizations.
       ``(G) To acquire additional firefighting vehicles, 
     including fire trucks and other apparatus.
       ``(H) To acquire additional firefighting equipment, 
     including equipment for--
       ``(i) fighting fires with foam in remote areas without 
     access to water; and
       ``(ii) communications, monitoring, and response to a 
     natural disaster, act of terrorism, or other man-made 
     disaster, including the use of a weapon of mass destruction.
       ``(I) To acquire personal protective equipment, including 
     personal protective equipment--

[[Page 3717]]

       ``(i) prescribed for firefighting personnel by the 
     Occupational Safety and Health Administration of the 
     Department of Labor; or
       ``(ii) for responding to a natural disaster or act of 
     terrorism or other man-made disaster, including the use of a 
     weapon of mass destruction.
       ``(J) To modify fire stations, fire training facilities, 
     and other facilities to protect the health and safety of 
     firefighting personnel.
       ``(K) To educate the public about arson prevention and 
     detection.
       ``(L) To provide incentives for the recruitment and 
     retention of volunteer firefighting personnel for volunteer 
     firefighting departments and other firefighting departments 
     that utilize volunteers.
       ``(M) To support such other activities, consistent with the 
     purposes of this subsection, as the Administrator of FEMA 
     determines appropriate.
       ``(d) Fire Prevention and Safety Grants.--
       ``(1) In general.--For the purpose of assisting fire 
     prevention programs and supporting firefighter health and 
     safety research and development, the Administrator of FEMA 
     may, on a competitive basis--
       ``(A) award grants to fire departments;
       ``(B) award grants to, or enter into contracts or 
     cooperative agreements with, national, State, local, tribal, 
     or nonprofit organizations that are not fire departments and 
     that are recognized for their experience and expertise with 
     respect to fire prevention or fire safety programs and 
     activities and firefighter research and development programs, 
     for the purpose of carrying out--
       ``(i) fire prevention programs; and
       ``(ii) research to improve firefighter health and life 
     safety; and
       ``(C) award grants to, or enter into contracts with, 
     regionally accredited institutions of higher education and 
     national fire service organizations or national fire safety 
     organizations to support joint programs focused on reducing 
     firefighter fatalities and non-fatal injuries, including 
     programs for establishing fire safety research centers as the 
     Administrator of FEMA determines appropriate.
       ``(2) Maximum grant amount.--A grant awarded under this 
     subsection may not exceed $1,500,000 for a fiscal year.
       ``(3) Use of grant funds.--Each entity receiving a grant 
     under this subsection shall use the grant for one or more of 
     the following purposes:
       ``(A) To enforce fire codes and promote compliance with 
     fire safety standards.
       ``(B) To fund fire prevention programs.
       ``(C) To fund wildland fire prevention programs, including 
     education, awareness, and mitigation programs that protect 
     lives, property, and natural resources from fire in the 
     wildland-urban interface.
       ``(D) In the case of a grant awarded under paragraph 
     (1)(C), to fund the establishment or operation of--
       ``(i) a fire safety research center; or
       ``(ii) a program at such a center.
       ``(E) To support such other activities, consistent with the 
     purposes of this subsection, as the Administrator of FEMA 
     determines appropriate.
       ``(e) Applications for Grants.--
       ``(1) In general.--An entity seeking a grant under this 
     section shall submit to the Administrator of FEMA an 
     application therefor in such form and in such manner as the 
     Administrator of FEMA determines appropriate.
       ``(2) Elements.--Each application submitted under paragraph 
     (1) shall include the following:
       ``(A) A description of the financial need of the applicant 
     for the grant.
       ``(B) An analysis of the costs and benefits, with respect 
     to public safety, of the use for which a grant is requested.
       ``(C) An agreement to provide information to the national 
     fire incident reporting system for the period covered by the 
     grant.
       ``(D) A list of other sources of funding received by the 
     applicant--
       ``(i) for the same purpose for which the application for a 
     grant under this section was submitted; or
       ``(ii) from the Federal Government for other fire-related 
     purposes.
       ``(E) Such other information as the Administrator of FEMA 
     determines appropriate.
       ``(3) Joint or regional applications.--
       ``(A) In general.--Two or more entities may submit an 
     application under paragraph (1) for a grant under this 
     section to fund a joint program or initiative, including 
     acquisition of shared equipment or vehicles.
       ``(B) Nonexclusivity.--Applications under this paragraph 
     may be submitted instead of or in addition to any other 
     application submitted under paragraph (1).
       ``(C) Guidance.--The Administrator of FEMA shall--
       ``(i) publish guidance on applying for and administering 
     grants awarded for joint programs and initiatives described 
     in subparagraph (A); and
       ``(ii) encourage applicants to apply for grants for joint 
     programs and initiatives described in subparagraph (A) as the 
     Administrator of FEMA determines appropriate to achieve 
     greater cost effectiveness and regional efficiency.
       ``(f) Peer Review of Grant Applications.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Administrator of FEMA shall, after 
     consultation with national fire service and emergency medical 
     services organizations, appoint fire service personnel and 
     personnel from nonaffiliated EMS organizations to conduct 
     peer reviews of applications received under subsection 
     (e)(1).
       ``(2) Assignment of reviews.--In administering the peer 
     review process under paragraph (1), the Administrator of FEMA 
     shall ensure that--
       ``(A) applications submitted by career fire departments are 
     reviewed primarily by personnel from career fire departments;
       ``(B) applications submitted by volunteer fire departments 
     are reviewed primarily by personnel from volunteer fire 
     departments;
       ``(C) applications submitted by combination fire 
     departments and fire departments using paid-on-call 
     firefighting personnel are reviewed primarily by personnel 
     from such fire departments; and
       ``(D) applications for grants to fund emergency medical 
     services pursuant to subsection (c)(3)(F) are reviewed 
     primarily by emergency medical services personnel, 
     including--
       ``(i) emergency medical service personnel affiliated with 
     fire departments; and
       ``(ii) personnel from nonaffiliated EMS organizations.
       ``(3) Review of applications for fire prevention and safety 
     grants submitted by nonprofit organizations that are not fire 
     departments.--In conducting a review of an application 
     submitted under subsection (e)(1) by a nonprofit organization 
     described in subsection (d)(1)(B), a peer reviewer may not 
     recommend the applicant for a grant under subsection (d) 
     unless such applicant is recognized for its experience and 
     expertise with respect to--
       ``(A) fire prevention or safety programs and activities; or
       ``(B) firefighter research and development programs.
       ``(4) Applicability of federal advisory committee act.--The 
     Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall not 
     apply to activities carried out pursuant to this subsection.
       ``(g) Prioritization and Allocation of Grant Awards.--In 
     awarding grants under this section, the Administrator of FEMA 
     shall--
       ``(1) consider the findings and recommendations of the peer 
     reviews carried out under subsection (f);
       ``(2) consider the degree to which an award will reduce 
     deaths, injuries, and property damage by reducing the risks 
     associated with fire-related and other hazards;
       ``(3) consider the extent of the need of an applicant for a 
     grant under this section and the need to protect the United 
     States as a whole;
       ``(4) consider the number of calls requesting or requiring 
     a fire fighting or emergency medical response received by an 
     applicant; and
       ``(5) ensure that of the available grant funds--
       ``(A) not less than 25 percent are awarded to career fire 
     departments;
       ``(B) not less than 25 percent are awarded to volunteer 
     fire departments; and
       ``(C) not less than 25 percent are awarded to combination 
     fire departments and fire departments using paid-on-call 
     firefighting personnel.
       ``(h) Additional Requirements and Limitations.--
       ``(1) Funding for emergency medical services.--Not less 
     than 3.5 percent of the available grant funds for a fiscal 
     year shall be awarded under this section for purposes 
     described in subsection (c)(3)(F).
       ``(2) Grant awards to nonaffiliated ems organizations.--Not 
     more than 2 percent of the available grant funds for a fiscal 
     year shall be awarded under this section to nonaffiliated EMS 
     organizations.
       ``(3) Funding for fire prevention and safety grants.--For 
     each fiscal year, not less than 10 percent of the aggregate 
     of grant amounts under this section in that fiscal year shall 
     be awarded under subsection (d).
       ``(4) State fire training academies.--Not more than 3 
     percent of the available grant funds for a fiscal year shall 
     be awarded under subsection (c)(1)(C).
       ``(5) Amounts for purchasing firefighting vehicles.--Not 
     more than 25 percent of the available grant funds for a 
     fiscal year may be used to assist grant recipients to 
     purchase vehicles pursuant to subsection (c)(3)(G).
       ``(i) Further Considerations.--
       ``(1) Assistance to firefighters grants to fire 
     departments.--In considering applications for grants under 
     subsection (c)(1)(A), the Administrator of FEMA shall 
     consider the extent to which the grant would enhance the 
     daily operations of the applicant and the impact of such a 
     grant on the protection of lives and property.
       ``(2) Applications from nonaffiliated ems organizations.--
     In the case of an application submitted under subsection 
     (e)(1) by a nonaffiliated EMS organization, the Administrator 
     of FEMA shall consider the extent to which other sources of 
     Federal funding are available to the applicant to provide the 
     assistance requested in such application.
       ``(3) Awarding fire prevention and safety grants to certain 
     organizations that

[[Page 3718]]

     are not fire departments.--In the case of applicants for 
     grants under this section who are described in subsection 
     (d)(1)(B), the Administrator of FEMA shall give priority to 
     applicants who focus on--
       ``(A) prevention of injuries to high risk groups from fire; 
     and
       ``(B) research programs that demonstrate a potential to 
     improve firefighter safety.
       ``(4) Avoiding duplication.--The Administrator of FEMA 
     shall review lists submitted by applicants pursuant to 
     subsection (e)(2)(D) and take such actions as the 
     Administrator of FEMA considers necessary to prevent 
     unnecessary duplication of grant awards.
       ``(j) Matching and Maintenance of Expenditure 
     Requirements.--
       ``(1) Matching requirement for assistance to firefighters 
     grants.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     an applicant seeking a grant to carry out an activity under 
     subsection (c) shall agree to make available non-Federal 
     funds to carry out such activity in an amount equal to not 
     less than 15 percent of the grant awarded to such applicant 
     under such subsection.
       ``(B) Exception for entities serving small communities.--In 
     the case that an applicant seeking a grant to carry out an 
     activity under subsection (c) serves a jurisdiction of--
       ``(i) more than 20,000 residents but not more than 50,000 
     residents, the applicant shall agree to make available non-
     Federal funds in an amount equal to not less than 10 percent 
     of the grant award to such applicant under such subsection; 
     or
       ``(ii) 20,000 residents or fewer, the applicant shall agree 
     to make available non-Federal funds in an amount equal to not 
     less than 5 percent of the grant awarded to such applicant 
     under such subsection.
       ``(2) Matching requirement for fire prevention and safety 
     grants.--
       ``(A) In general.--An applicant seeking a grant to carry 
     out an activity under subsection (d) shall agree to make 
     available non-Federal funds to carry out such activity in an 
     amount equal to not less than 5 percent of the grant awarded 
     to such applicant under such subsection.
       ``(B) Means of matching.--An applicant for a grant under 
     subsection (d) may meet the matching requirement under 
     subparagraph (A) through direct funding, funding of 
     complementary activities, or the provision of staff, 
     facilities, services, material, or equipment.
       ``(3) Maintenance of expenditures.--An applicant seeking a 
     grant under subsection (c) or (d) shall agree to maintain 
     during the term of the grant the applicant's aggregate 
     expenditures relating to the uses described in subsections 
     (c)(3) and (d)(3) at not less than 80 percent of the average 
     amount of such expenditures in the 2 fiscal years preceding 
     the fiscal year in which the grant amounts are received.
       ``(4) Waiver.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph 
     (C)(ii), the Administrator of FEMA may waive or reduce the 
     requirements of paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) in cases of 
     demonstrated economic hardship.
       ``(B) Guidelines.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Administrator of FEMA shall 
     establish and publish guidelines for determining what 
     constitutes economic hardship for purposes of this paragraph.
       ``(ii) Considerations.--In developing guidelines under 
     clause (i), the Administrator of FEMA shall consider, with 
     respect to relevant communities, the following:

       ``(I) Changes in rates of unemployment from previous years.
       ``(II) Whether the rates of unemployment of the relevant 
     communities are currently and have consistently exceeded the 
     annual national average rates of unemployment.
       ``(III) Changes in percentages of individuals eligible to 
     receive food stamps from previous years.
       ``(IV) Such other factors as the Administrator of FEMA 
     considers appropriate.

       ``(C) Certain applicants for fire prevention and safety 
     grants.--The authority under subparagraph (A) shall not apply 
     with respect to a nonprofit organization that--
       ``(i) is described in subsection (d)(1)(B); and
       ``(ii) is not a fire department or emergency medical 
     services organization.
       ``(k) Grant Guidelines.--
       ``(1) Guidelines.--For each fiscal year, prior to awarding 
     any grants under this section, the Administrator of FEMA 
     shall publish in the Federal Register--
       ``(A) guidelines that describe--
       ``(i) the process for applying for grants under this 
     section; and
       ``(ii) the criteria that will be used for selecting grant 
     recipients; and
       ``(B) an explanation of any differences between such 
     guidelines and the recommendations obtained under paragraph 
     (2).
       ``(2) Annual meeting to obtain recommendations.--
       ``(A) In general.--For each fiscal year, the Administrator 
     of FEMA shall convene a meeting of qualified members of 
     national fire service organizations and qualified members of 
     emergency medical service organizations to obtain 
     recommendations regarding the following:
       ``(i) Criteria for the awarding of grants under this 
     section.
       ``(ii) Administrative changes to the assistance program 
     established under subsection (b).
       ``(B) Qualified members.--For purposes of this paragraph, a 
     qualified member of an organization is a member who--
       ``(i) is recognized for expertise in firefighting or 
     emergency medical services;
       ``(ii) is not an employee of the Federal Government; and
       ``(iii) in the case of a member of an emergency medical 
     service organization, is a member of an organization that 
     represents--

       ``(I) providers of emergency medical services that are 
     affiliated with fire departments; or
       ``(II) nonaffiliated EMS providers.

       ``(3) Applicability of federal advisory committee act.--The 
     Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall not 
     apply to activities carried out pursuant to this subsection.
       ``(l) Accounting Determination.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, for purposes of this section, equipment 
     costs shall include all costs attributable to any design, 
     purchase of components, assembly, manufacture, and 
     transportation of equipment not otherwise commercially 
     available.
       ``(m) Eligible Grantee on Behalf of Alaska Native 
     Villages.--The Alaska Village Initiatives, a non-profit 
     organization incorporated in the State of Alaska, shall be 
     eligible to apply for and receive a grant or other assistance 
     under this section on behalf of Alaska Native villages.
       ``(n) Training Standards.--If an applicant for a grant 
     under this section is applying for such grant to purchase 
     training that does not meet or exceed any applicable national 
     voluntary consensus standards developed under section 647 of 
     the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006 (6 
     U.S.C. 747), the applicant shall submit to the Administrator 
     of FEMA an explanation of the reasons that the training 
     proposed to be purchased will serve the needs of the 
     applicant better than training that meets or exceeds such 
     standards.
       ``(o) Ensuring Effective Use of Grants.--
       ``(1) Audits.--The Administrator of FEMA may audit a 
     recipient of a grant awarded under this section to ensure 
     that--
       ``(A) the grant amounts are expended for the intended 
     purposes; and
       ``(B) the grant recipient complies with the requirements of 
     subsection (j).
       ``(2) Performance assessment.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Administrator of FEMA shall develop 
     and implement a performance assessment system, including 
     quantifiable performance metrics, to evaluate the extent to 
     which grants awarded under this section are furthering the 
     purposes of this section, including protecting the health and 
     safety of the public and firefighting personnel against fire 
     and fire-related hazards.
       ``(B) Consultation.--The Administrator of FEMA shall 
     consult with fire service representatives and with the 
     Comptroller General of the United States in developing the 
     assessment system required by subparagraph (A).
       ``(3) Annual reports to administrator of fema.--The 
     recipient of a grant awarded under this section shall submit 
     to the Administrator of FEMA an annual report describing how 
     the recipient used the grant amounts.
       ``(4) Annual reports to congress.--
       ``(A) In general.--Not later than September 30, 2012, and 
     each year thereafter through 2016, the Administrator of FEMA 
     shall submit to the Committee on Homeland Security and 
     Governmental Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on 
     Science and Technology of the House of Representatives a 
     report that provides--
       ``(i) information on the performance assessment system 
     developed under paragraph (2); and
       ``(ii) using the performance metrics developed under such 
     paragraph, an evaluation of the effectiveness of the grants 
     awarded under this section.
       ``(B) Additional information.--The report due under 
     subparagraph (A) on September 30, 2015, shall also include 
     recommendations for legislative changes to improve grants 
     under this section, including recommendations as to whether 
     the provisions described in section 5(a) of the Fire Grants 
     Reauthorization Act of 2011 should be extended to apply on 
     and after the date described in such section.
       ``(p) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       ``(1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated 
     to carry out this section--
       ``(A) $950,000,000 for fiscal year 2012; and
       ``(B) for each of fiscal years 2013 through 2016, an amount 
     equal to the amount authorized for the previous fiscal year 
     increased by the percentage by which--
       ``(i) the Consumer Price Index (all items, United States 
     city average) for the previous fiscal year, exceeds
       ``(ii) the Consumer Price Index for the fiscal year 
     preceding the fiscal year described in clause (i).
       ``(2) Administrative expenses.--Of the amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to paragraph (1) for a fiscal year, the 
     Administrator of FEMA may use not more than 5 percent of such 
     amounts for salaries and expenses and other administrative 
     costs incurred by the Administrator of FEMA in the course of

[[Page 3719]]

     awarding grants and providing assistance under this section.
       ``(3) Congressionally directed spending.--Consistent with 
     the requirements in subsections (c)(1) and (d)(1) that grants 
     under those subsections be awarded on a competitive basis, 
     none of the funds appropriated pursuant to this subsection 
     may be used for any congressionally directed spending item 
     (as such term is defined in paragraph 5(a) of rule XLIV of 
     the Standing Rules of the Senate).''.

     SEC. 4. STAFFING FOR ADEQUATE FIRE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE.

       (a) Improvements to Hiring Grants.--
       (1) Term of grants.--Subsection (a)(1)(B) of section 34 of 
     the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15 
     U.S.C. 2229a) is amended by striking ``4 years'' and 
     inserting ``3 years''.
       (2) Limitation on portion of costs of hiring 
     firefighters.--Subsection (a)(1)(E) of such section 34 is 
     amended by striking ``not exceed--'' and all that follows 
     through the period and inserting ``not exceed 75 percent in 
     any fiscal year.''.
       (b) Clarification Regarding Eligible Entities for 
     Recruitment and Retention Grants.--The second sentence of 
     subsection (a)(2) of such section 34 is amended by striking 
     ``organizations on a local or statewide basis'' and inserting 
     ``national, State, local, or tribal organizations''.
       (c) Maximum Amount for Hiring Firefighter.--Paragraph (4) 
     of subsection (c) of such section 34 is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(4) The amount of funding provided under this section to 
     a recipient fire department for hiring a firefighter in any 
     fiscal year may not exceed 75 percent of the usual annual 
     cost of a first-year firefighter in that department at the 
     time the grant application was submitted.''.
       (d) Waivers.--Such section 34 is further amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (d) through (i) as 
     subsection (e) through (j), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (c) the following:
       ``(d) Waivers.--
       ``(1) In general.--In a case of demonstrated economic 
     hardship, the Administrator of FEMA may--
       ``(A) waive the requirements of subsection (a)(1)(B)(ii) or 
     subsection (c)(1); or
       ``(B) waive or reduce the requirements in subsection 
     (a)(1)(E) or subsection (c)(2).
       ``(2) Guidelines.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Administrator of FEMA shall 
     establish and publish guidelines for determining what 
     constitutes economic hardship for purposes of paragraph (1).
       ``(B) Considerations.--In developing guidelines under 
     subparagraph (A), the Administrator of FEMA shall consider, 
     with respect to relevant communities, the following:
       ``(i) Changes in rates of unemployment from previous years.
       ``(ii) Whether the rates of unemployment of the relevant 
     communities are currently and have consistently exceeded the 
     annual national average rates of unemployment.
       ``(iii) Changes in percentages of individuals eligible to 
     receive food stamps from previous years.
       ``(iv) Such other factors as the Administrator of FEMA 
     considers appropriate.''.
       (e) Improvements to Performance Evaluation Requirements.--
     Subsection (e) of such section 34, as redesignated by 
     subsection (d)(1) of this section, is amended by inserting 
     before the first sentence the following:
       ``(1) In general.--The Administrator of FEMA shall 
     establish a performance assessment system, including 
     quantifiable performance metrics, to evaluate the extent to 
     which grants awarded under this section are furthering the 
     purposes of this section.
       ``(2) Submission of information.--''.
       (f) Report.--
       (1) In general.--Subsection (f) of such section 34, as 
     redesignated by subsection (d)(1) of this section, is amended 
     by striking ``The authority'' and all that follows through 
     ``Congress concerning'' and inserting the following: ``Not 
     later than September 30, 2015, the Administrator of FEMA 
     shall submit to the Committee on Homeland Security and 
     Governmental Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on 
     Science and Technology of the House of Representatives a 
     report on''.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--The heading for such subsection 
     (f) is amended by striking ``Sunset and Reports'' and 
     inserting ``Report''.
       (g) Additional Definitions.--
       (1) In general.--Subsection (i) of such section 34, as 
     redesignated by subsection (d)(1) of this section, is 
     amended--
       (A) in the matter before paragraph (1), by striking ``In 
     this section, the term--'' and inserting ``In this 
     section:'';
       (B) in paragraph (1)--
       (i) by inserting ``The term'' before ```firefighter' has''; 
     and
       (ii) by striking ``; and'' and inserting a period;
       (C) by striking paragraph (2); and
       (D) by inserting at the end the following:
       ``(2) The terms `career fire department', `combination fire 
     department', and `volunteer fire department' have the meaning 
     given such terms in section 33(a).''.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--Subsection (a)(1)(A) of such 
     section 34 is amended by striking ``career, volunteer, and 
     combination fire departments'' and inserting ``career fire 
     departments, combination fire departments, and volunteer fire 
     departments''.
       (h) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       (1) In general.--Subsection (j) of such section 34, as 
     redesignated by subsection (d)(1) of this section, is 
     amended--
       (A) in paragraph (6), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (B) in paragraph (7), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(8) $950,000,000 for fiscal year 2012; and
       ``(9) for each of fiscal years 2013 through 2016, an amount 
     equal to the amount authorized for the previous fiscal year 
     increased by the percentage by which--
       ``(A) the Consumer Price Index (all items, United States 
     city average) for the previous fiscal year, exceeds
       ``(B) the Consumer Price Index for the fiscal year 
     preceding the fiscal year described in subparagraph (A).''.
       (2) Administrative expenses.--Such subsection (j) is 
     further amended--
       (A) in paragraph (9), as added by paragraph (1) of this 
     subsection, by redesignating subparagraphs (A) and (B) as 
     clauses (i) and (ii), respectively, and moving the left 
     margin of such clauses, as so redesignated, 2 ems to the 
     right;
       (B) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through (9) as 
     subparagraphs (A) through (I), respectively, and moving the 
     left margin of such subparagraphs, as so redesignated, 2 ems 
     to the right;
       (C) by striking ``There are'' and inserting the following:
       ``(1) In general.--There are''; and
       (D) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Administrative expenses.--Of the amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to paragraph (1) for a fiscal year, the 
     Administrator of FEMA may use not more than 5 percent of such 
     amounts to cover salaries and expenses and other 
     administrative costs incurred by the Administrator of FEMA to 
     make grants and provide assistance under this section.''.
       (3) Congressionally directed spending.--Such subsection (j) 
     is further amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) Congressionally directed spending.--Consistent with 
     the requirement in subsection (a) that grants under this 
     section be awarded on a competitive basis, none of the funds 
     appropriated pursuant to this subsection may be used for any 
     congressionally direct spending item (as defined in paragraph 
     5(a) of Rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the Senate).''.
       (i) Technical Amendment.--Such section 34 is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), in paragraphs (1)(A) and (2), by 
     striking ``Administrator shall'' and inserting 
     ``Administrator of FEMA shall, in consultation with the 
     Administrator,''; and
       (2) by striking ``Administrator'' each place it appears, 
     other than in subsection (a)(1)(A) and (a)(2), and inserting 
     ``Administrator of FEMA''.
       (j) Clerical Amendment.--Section 34 of such Act (15 U.S.C. 
     2229a) is amended by striking ``EXPANSION OF PRE-SEPTEMBER 
     11, 2001, FIRE GRANT PROGRAM'' and inserting the following: 
     ``STAFFING FOR ADEQUATE FIRE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE''.

     SEC. 5. SUNSET AND PRIOR PROVISIONS.

       (a) Sunset.--Section 3 and subsections (a), (c), (d), (e), 
     (f), (g), and (h) of section 4, and the amendments made by 
     such section and subsections shall not apply on or after 
     October 1, 2016.
       (b) Application of Prior Law.--On and after October 1, 
     2016, sections 33 and 34 of the Federal Fire Prevention and 
     Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2229 and 2229a) are amended to 
     read as such sections read on the day before the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, except that the amendments made by 
     subsections (b), (i), and (j) of section 4 shall continue to 
     apply to such section 34.

     SEC. 6. REPORT.

       Not later than September 30, 2015, the Comptroller General 
     of the United States shall submit to the Committee on 
     Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate and 
     the Committee on Science and Technology of the House of 
     Representatives a report on the effect of the amendments made 
     by this Act. Such report shall include the following:
       (1) An assessment of the effect of the amendments made by 
     sections 3 and 4 on the effectiveness, relative allocation, 
     accountability, and administration of the grants awarded 
     under sections 33 and 34 of the Federal Fire Prevention and 
     Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2229 and 2229a) after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act .
       (2) An evaluation of the extent to which the amendments 
     made by sections 3 and 4 have enabled recipients of grants 
     awarded under such sections 33 and 34 after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act to mitigate fire and fire-related and 
     other hazards more effectively.

  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I am proud to once again cosponsor the 
Fire Grants Reauthorization Act. I am pleased to join with Senators 
Lieberman, Brown, and Carper in this effort

[[Page 3720]]

to reauthorize these vital programs. I have always been an ardent 
supporter of our Nation's fire services. In addition to serving as a 
cochair of the Congressional Fire Services Caucus, I was a cosponsor of 
the original FIRE Act, and an original cosponsor of the FIRE Act 
reauthorization bills in 2004 and in 2010. Unfortunately, last year's 
bill did not become law.
  The FIRE Act grants program provides fire departments with the 
support they need to purchase equipment and vehicles, and to conduct 
the training and exercises necessary to perform their jobs well. 
Indeed, this is one of the most successful programs administered by the 
Department of Homeland Security.
  The FIRE Act grants program is an efficient and effective model for 
delivering grant funding because it has a competitive process for 
evaluating applications, which are peer-reviewed. It is also successful 
because monies are provided directly to local fire departments. This 
bipartisan legislation would retain and build upon these aspects of the 
FIRE Act program that made it successful in the first place.
  In visits across the State of Maine, I have seen first-hand how these 
grants build the critical response capabilities of local fire 
departments. Maine has received more than $50 million through the FIRE 
Act grants program--a testament to the needs of our often rural, 
volunteer fire departments and proof that the program is succeeding in 
delivering funds to communities that need it most.
  Independent analyses have confirmed that the FIRE Act grants program 
has been effective. To quote a 2007 study by the National Academy of 
Public Administration, ``From the standpoint of administrative 
efficiency, there is broad agreement among stakeholders and observers 
that the program has been well run. It is a positive case study in the 
management of a grant program by a government agency.''
  I believe this bill will increase the capabilities of our Nation's 
fire services, and protect the thousands of firefighters and EMTs who 
put their lives on the line every day.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SANDERS (for himself and Ms. Mikulski):
  S. 552. A bill to reduce the Federal budget deficit by creating a 
surtax on high income individuals and eliminating big oil and gas 
company tax loopholes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, I will try to bring this budget debate 
down to Earth and talk a little bit about the reality of what is 
happening and go beyond the amount of numbers that are out there.
  My good friend from Alabama who sits with me on the Budget Committee 
makes the point that this country has a severe budget crisis. He is 
right. The question is, How did we get to where we are today and how do 
we go forward in a way that is fair and responsible to address it? In 
that regard, the Senator from Alabama and I have very strong 
disagreements.
  How did we get to where we are today when not so many years ago, the 
day George W. Bush became President, we had a significant surplus? We 
had a surplus when Clinton left office. Now we have a major deficit 
crisis. There are a number of reasons:
  No. 1, against my vote, we are fighting a war in Iraq which, by the 
time we take care of our last veteran, is going to cost us some $3 
trillion. I didn't hear any of my Republican friends saying we can't go 
to war unless we figure out a way to pay for it.
  No. 2, my Republican friends for years have been pushing huge tax 
breaks for the very wealthiest people. I didn't hear them ask how that 
was going to be paid for.
  No. 3, under President Bush, with strong Republican support and 
against my vote, Congress passed a $400 billion-plus Medicare Part D 
prescription drug program, written by the insurance companies and the 
drug companies. It drove up the deficit.
  No. 4, against my vote, Congress voted for a massive bailout of Wall 
Street. I didn't hear too many people talking about how we would pay 
for that, $700 billion to bail out Wall Street. I didn't hear them 
arguing that it was too much money and it would drive up the deficit.
  Yesterday, the Republicans brought forth and voted on H.R. 1. Almost 
all of them voted for it. Those who did not actually wanted to go 
further.
  The main point I wish to make is, A, we do have to address the 
deficit crisis, but, B, we have to address it in a way that is fair and 
responsible and not solely on the backs of working families, the middle 
class, the elderly, the sick, and the poor. That is immoral. That is 
wrong. That is bad economics.
  To my mind, it is absolutely absurd that when my Republican friends 
talk about deficit reduction, they forget to talk about the reality 
that the wealthiest people have never had it so good; that the 
effective, the real tax rate for the richest people is the lowest on 
record; and that the wealthiest people, the top 2 percent, have 
received many hundreds of billions of dollars in tax breaks.
  I ask my Republican friends, why do they want to balance the budget 
on the backs of low-income children, low-income senior citizens, those 
who are sick, those who are vulnerable, without asking the wealthiest 
people who have never had it so good to put one penny into deficit 
reduction? I think that is wrong, and the American people think that is 
wrong. When we talk about deficit reduction, we have to talk about 
shared sacrifice, everybody playing a role, not just little kids, not 
just the elderly, not just the sick, but even--dare I say it--people 
who have a whole lot of money and who have never done so well.
  I have not been impressed at how the media has been covering this 
issue. They have not made it clear to the American people how 
devastating the cuts are that Republicans want to impose on working 
families. Let me briefly tick off some of them.
  The Republicans want to throw over 200,000 children off of the Head 
Start Program. Every working family in America knows how hard it is 
today to come up with affordable childcare, early childhood education. 
We have the highest rate of childhood poverty in the industrialized 
world. The Republican solution is to slash Head Start by 20 percent, 
cut 218,000 kids off of Head Start, and lay off 55,000 Head Start 
instructors.
  The cost of college education today is so high that many young people 
are giving up their dream of going to college, while many others are 
graduating deeply in debt. Republican solution: Slash Pell grants by 
$5.7 billion and reduce or eliminate Pell grants for 9.4 million low-
income college students. Middle-class families, working-class families, 
do they hear that? We are going to balance the budget by either 
eliminating or lowering Pell grants--the ability of young people to go 
to college--for over 9 million college students.
  I know in my office we get calls every week from senior citizens, 
people with disabilities, widows who are having a hard time getting a 
timely response toward their Social Security claims. It takes too long 
to process the paperwork. What the Republicans want to do is slash the 
Social Security Administration, the people who administer Social 
Security for seniors and the disabled, widows and orphans, by $1.7 
billion. That means half a million Americans who are legally entitled 
to Social Security benefits will have to wait significantly longer 
times in order to receive them.
  We have 50 million Americans with no health insurance today, and 
45,000 Americans die because they don't get to a doctor in time. Last 
year, as part of health care reform, I worked very hard with many 
Members to expand community health centers so that more and more low-
and moderate-income people could walk into a doctor's office, get 
health care, dental care, low-cost prescription drugs, mental health 
counseling. In H.R. 1, the bill they voted for yesterday, Republicans 
want to deny primary health care to 11 million Americans at a time when 
State after State is cutting back on Medicaid. What are you supposed to 
do if you are 50 years old, you have a pain in your chest, and you 
don't have any

[[Page 3721]]

health insurance? Where do you go? Republicans want to deny health care 
to another 11 million Americans.
  For the poorest people, community services block grants provide the 
infrastructure, the ability to get out emergency food help, emergency 
help to pay the electric bill, LIHEAP. They are the infrastructure of 
this country that protects the poorest and most vulnerable. Republicans 
want to slash $405 million from the Community Services Block Grant 
Program. That is wrong. And the President's proposed cut to the 
community services block grant is also wrong.
  In real terms, 16 percent of our population today is really 
unemployed, if we add together the official unemployment--those people 
who have given up looking for work, those people who work part time and 
want to work full time. Republicans want to slash $2 billion in Federal 
job-training programs.
  Republicans want to slash $400 million in LIHEAP. That is the program 
that in my State and all over the country enables people to stay warm 
in the winter. We have a lot of senior citizens in Vermont getting by 
on $13,000 or $14,000 a year in income. They need help. It gets cold in 
Vermont. It gets 20 below zero. People don't have the income. LIHEAP is 
a very valuable tool. Republicans want to slash $100 million for 
LIHEAP.
  They want to slash the EPA by 30 percent. These are the people who 
have successfully enforced the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, so 
that the air we breathe does not give us asthma, doesn't provide us 
with the soup that makes us sick. The Clean Air Act has been an 
enormous success in cleaning up our air. Republicans want to slash that 
by 30 percent.
  Republicans want to cut the WIC Program. This is the program that 
provides supplemental nutrition for women, infants, and children. They 
want to cut that by $750 million. Poverty in America is increasing. 
What we understand is that if pregnant women and little kids do not get 
good nutrition, the likelihood is that births might be low weight or 
the little babies might come down with illnesses if they don't have 
good nutrition. Poverty is increasing. Yet the Republicans want to cut 
the WIC Program by $750 million--10 percent.
  Title I education funding. Everybody understands we have problems 
with education right now, with large dropout rates. Republicans want to 
cut $5 billion from the Department of Education.
  On and on and on it goes.
  What do I think? Do I think it is appropriate we balance the budget 
on low-income pregnant women and infants who need nutrition? Do I think 
you should throw 200,000 kids off the Head Start Program? Do I think we 
cut the Social Security Administration severely? Do I think we cut 
Planned Parenthood, which has done such a good job in preventing 
unwanted pregnancies? Does that make sense? I do not think so. I do not 
think that is good for America.
  But I do believe we have to move toward a balanced budget. So what is 
one way to go forward, other than savage cuts on programs for the most 
vulnerable people in this country? That is, I think we have to begin 
talking about revenue, not just cuts.
  Today I am introducing legislation which does two things. No. 1, it 
creates a millionaire's surtax, which will be used strictly for deficit 
reduction. It will be a 5.4-percent surtax on income over $1 million. 
That says that all households that have income over $1 million will pay 
a 5.4-percent surtax on that income, which will go into an emergency 
deficit reduction fund. Just doing that--asking millionaires to pay a 
little bit more in taxes, after all the huge tax breaks they have 
received--will bring in approximately $50 billion a year.
  I think that is a good idea, but it is not just me who thinks it is a 
good idea. Recently, last week, there was an NBC News/Wall Street 
Journal poll, and they asked the American people: What is the best way 
to go forward on deficit reduction? Mr. President, 81 percent of the 
American people believe it is totally acceptable or mostly acceptable 
to impose a surtax on millionaires to reduce the deficit.
  The American people get it. They understand you cannot move toward 
deficit reduction just by cutting programs that working families, the 
middle class, and low-income people desperately need in order to 
survive in the midst of this terrible recession. They understand 
serious, responsible deficit reduction requires shared sacrifice. It is 
insane--and I use that word advisably--it is insane to be talking about 
deficit reduction, as my Republican friends do on one hand, and then 
say: Oh, yes, we have to give hundreds and hundreds of billions of 
dollars in tax breaks to the top 1 percent, the top 2 percent, when 
those guys are doing phenomenally well, are seeing an effective tax 
rate lower than it has been in decades and have received huge tax 
breaks already.
  Why does anyone think it is moral or right to move toward deficit 
reduction on the backs of the weak and the vulnerable? I understand--
and I know something about politics--I do understand the parents of 
kids who are in Head Start do not make large campaign contributions. I 
know the senior citizens of this country who need some help with Social 
Security do not make large campaign contributions. I understand that. I 
understand college students, desperately trying to go through college 
on a Pell grant, do not make large campaign contributions.
  But there is a sense of morality we have to deal with. I think it 
makes no sense, I think it is immoral, I think it is bad economics to 
balance the budget on the backs of working families, while we give 
continued tax breaks to those people who do not need it.
  So today we are introducing a piece of legislation which I hope will 
have strong support. I think it paves the way for us to go forward with 
serious deficit reduction in a way that is fair. Do we need to make 
cuts? Absolutely. But do we also need to ask the wealthiest people in 
this country to start contributing toward deficit reduction? I think we 
do.
  Once again, the legislation I am introducing today creates a 
millionaire's surtax of 5.4 percent, which would bring in about $50 
billion a year, to be used exclusively for an emergency deficit 
reduction fund.
  We also end tax breaks for big oil and gas companies, which will 
bring in about $3.5 billion a year. Over the past decade, the five 
largest oil companies in the United States have earned nearly $1 
trillion in profits. Meanwhile, in recent years, some of the very 
largest oil companies in America have paid absolutely nothing in 
Federal income taxes. In fact, some of them have actually gotten a 
refund, a rebate from the IRS.
  So that is my plea. My plea is that, yes, the need for deficit 
reduction is real. It is urgent. Let's go forward, but let's go forward 
in a way that is fair and responsible and not simply on the backs of 
the most vulnerable people in this country.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. FRANKEN (for himself, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Kerry, Mrs. Murray, 
        Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Merkley, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. 
        Bennet, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Udall of Colorado, Ms. Mikulski, 
        Mr. Leahy, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. 
        Cardin, Mrs. Boxer, Mrs. Gillibrand, Mr. Menendez, Mr. Akaka, 
        Mr. Schumer, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Begich, Mr. Casey, Ms. Cantwell, 
        Mr. Brown of Ohio, Mrs. Shaheen, Mr. Reed, and Mr. Coons):
  S. 555. A bill to end discrimination based on actual or perceived 
sexual orientation or gender identity in public schools, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. FRANKEN. Mr. President, I wish to tell you about a teenager whom 
I think you know about--Justin Aaberg--from our home State of 
Minnesota. Yesterday should have been Justin's 16th birthday. Justin 
was a kind young man, friendly and cheerful, a budding composer, but he 
was also the target for bullies at his high school, who targeted him 
because he was different--because he was gay.

[[Page 3722]]

  I never had the opportunity to meet Justin. His family lost him to 
suicide last summer. The Presiding Officer knows that. But you and I 
have been privileged to meet his mother Tammy. I have been privileged 
to meet her a few times. She is incredible. She has been speaking out 
to protect other kids. Because, unfortunately, there are a lot of other 
kids out there struggling to get through school as they suffer from 
bullying and harassment and discrimination at their public schools. 
Nine out of ten LGBT students are harassed or bullied or taunted in 
school. This harassment deprives them of an equal education. They are 
more likely to skip school, they are less likely to perform well 
academically, and they are more likely to drop out before they graduate 
from high school.
  In some tragic cases, such as Justin's, the harassment of LGBT 
students can even lead to suicide. We have seen this in all too many 
cases all over the country, because, sadly, this problem is so much 
broader than Justin. More than a third--more than a third--of lesbian, 
gay, and bisexual youth have made a suicide attempt. More than a third. 
That is horrifying beyond belief to me.
  We are failing these kids. That is why I, along with 29 of my Senate 
colleagues, including the Presiding Officer, have reintroduced the 
Student Nondiscrimination Act today. While Federal civil rights laws 
prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, 
disability, and national origin, they do not expressly cover sexual 
origin or gender identity. As a result, parents of LGBT students have 
limited legal recourse when schools fail to protect their children from 
harassment and bullying.
  You might be wondering why I am mentioning bullying and 
discrimination in the same breath. It is simple: When a school acts to 
protect kids with disabilities from bullying but looks the other way 
when LGBT kids are harassed by their peers, that is discrimination. 
When school staff members participate in or encourage bullying of LGBT 
youth, that is discrimination. When a principal excuses a bully who 
torments an LGBT kid with ``boys will be boys,'' this is discrimination 
and needs to stop. It needs to stop before more kids are hurt.
  The Student Nondiscrimination Act would prohibit discrimination and 
harassment in public schools based on sexual orientation and gender 
identity. It would give LGBT students similar civil rights protections 
against bullying and harassment as those that currently apply to 
students based on characteristics such as race and gender.
  This legislation would also provide meaningful remedies for 
discrimination in public schools based on sexual orientation or gender 
identity, modeled on Title IX's protection against discrimination and 
harassment based on gender. Fifty years of civil rights history shows 
that similar laws that contain such remedies are often most effective 
in preventing discrimination from occurring in the first place. Like 
other civil rights laws, the one we introduce today would prompt 
schools to avoid liability by taking proactive steps to prevent the 
discrimination and bullying of students protected by the bill.
  I guarantee you that when this bill is passed, nearly every school 
district in this country is going to go to its lawyer and ask, ``How do 
we come into compliance?'' I guarantee you that the U.S. Department of 
Education will issue regulations, as it has under Title IX, so that 
schools have guidance in how to protect these kids. The goal isn't for 
any school to be sued for failing to protect kids from bullying and 
harassment. The goal isn't for any school to come under Department of 
Education scrutiny. The goal is for schools to do all they can to 
ensure these incidents never happen in the first place.
  Parents in Minnesota and across the country entrust their children to 
public schools with the understanding that these schools will do 
everything in their power to keep their children safe. When 9 in 10 
LGBT kids are bullied at school, when they are three times more likely 
than straight kids to feel unsafe at school, when one third of LGBT 
kids say they have skipped a day of school in the last month because of 
feeling unsafe, then we know that our public education system is not 
fulfilling its most basic obligation to parents to keep children safe. 
We have an obligation to do something about it.
  Yesterday, Justin Aaberg from Minnesota should have celebrated his 
16th birthday with family and friends. But instead, I know that his 
family and friends were missing him terribly--are still missing him 
terribly.
  No child should have to go through the pain that Justin went through 
at school. No mom or dad should have to go through the heartbreaking 
pain that Justin's family has gone through. It is time. It is time that 
we extend equal rights to LGBT students. We have the opportunity now, 
as we reform No Child Left Behind--the ESEA, the Elementary and 
Secondary Education Act--to include this legislation. Our children 
cannot afford for us to squander this opportunity. I urge my colleagues 
to join me today in supporting the Student Non-Discrimination Act and 
demanding protection for all of our children under the 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. 555

       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 ``Student Non-Discrimination 
     Act of 2011''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

       (a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
       (1) Public school students who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, 
     or transgender (referred to in this Act as ``LGBT''), or are 
     perceived to be LGBT, or who associate with LGBT people, have 
     been and are subjected to pervasive discrimination, including 
     harassment, bullying, intimidation, and violence, and have 
     been deprived of equal educational opportunities, in schools 
     in every part of the Nation.
       (2) While discrimination, including harassment, bullying, 
     intimidation, and violence, of any kind is harmful to 
     students and to the education system, actions that target 
     students based on sexual orientation or gender identity 
     represent a distinct and especially severe problem.
       (3) Numerous social science studies demonstrate that 
     discrimination, including harassment, bullying, intimidation, 
     and violence, at school has contributed to high rates of 
     absenteeism, dropping out, adverse health consequences, and 
     academic underachievement, among LGBT youth.
       (4) When left unchecked, discrimination, including 
     harassment, bullying, intimidation, and violence, in schools 
     based on sexual orientation or gender identity can lead, and 
     has led, to life-threatening violence and to suicide.
       (5) Public school students enjoy a variety of 
     constitutional rights, including rights to equal protection, 
     privacy, and free expression, which are infringed when school 
     officials engage in or are indifferent to discrimination, 
     including harassment, bullying, intimidation, and violence, 
     on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.
       (6) While Federal statutory provisions expressly address 
     discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, 
     disability, and national origin, Federal civil rights 
     statutes do not expressly address discrimination on the basis 
     of sexual orientation or gender identity. As a result, 
     students and parents have often had limited recourse to law 
     for remedies for discrimination on the basis of sexual 
     orientation or gender identity.
       (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are--
       (1) to ensure that all students have access to public 
     education in a safe environment free from discrimination, 
     including harassment, bullying, intimidation, and violence, 
     on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity;
       (2) to provide a comprehensive Federal prohibition of 
     discrimination in public schools based on actual or perceived 
     sexual orientation or gender identity;
       (3) to provide meaningful and effective remedies for 
     discrimination in public schools based on actual or perceived 
     sexual orientation or gender identity;
       (4) to invoke congressional powers, including the power to 
     enforce the 14th Amendment to the Constitution and to provide 
     for the general welfare pursuant to section 8 of article I of 
     the Constitution and the power to make all laws necessary and 
     proper for the execution of the foregoing powers pursuant to 
     section 8 of article I of the Constitution, in order to 
     prohibit discrimination in public schools on the basis of 
     sexual orientation or gender identity; and

[[Page 3723]]

       (5) to allow the Department of Education to effectively 
     combat discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender 
     identity in public schools, through regulation and 
     enforcement, as the Department has issued regulations under 
     and enforced title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 and 
     other nondiscrimination laws in a manner that effectively 
     addresses discrimination.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS AND RULE.

       (a) Definitions.--For purposes of this Act:
       (1) Educational agency.--The term ``educational agency'' 
     means a local educational agency, an educational service 
     agency, and a State educational agency, as those terms are 
     defined in section 9101 of the Elementary and Secondary 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
       (2) Gender identity.--The term ``gender identity'' means 
     the gender-related identity, appearance, or mannerisms or 
     other gender-related characteristics of an individual, with 
     or without regard to the individual's designated sex at 
     birth.
       (3) Harassment.--The term ``harassment'' means conduct that 
     is sufficiently severe, persistent, or pervasive to limit a 
     student's ability to participate in or benefit from a program 
     or activity of a public school or educational agency, or to 
     create a hostile or abusive educational environment at a 
     program or activity of a public school or educational agency, 
     including acts of verbal, nonverbal, or physical aggression, 
     intimidation, or hostility, if such conduct is based on--
       (A) a student's actual or perceived sexual orientation or 
     gender identity; or
       (B) the actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender 
     identity of a person with whom a student associates or has 
     associated.
       (4) Program or activity.--The terms ``program or activity'' 
     and ``program'' have the same meanings given such terms as 
     applied under section 606 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 
     U.S.C. 2000d-4a) to the operations of public entities under 
     paragraph (2)(B) of such section.
       (5) Public school.--The term ``public school'' means an 
     elementary school (as the term is defined in section 9101 of 
     the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965) that is a 
     public institution, and a secondary school (as so defined) 
     that is a public institution.
       (6) Sexual orientation.--The term ``sexual orientation'' 
     means homosexuality, heterosexuality, or bisexuality.
       (7) Student.--The term ``student'' means an individual who 
     is enrolled in a public school or who, regardless of official 
     enrollment status, attends classes or participates in the 
     programs or activities of a public school or educational 
     agency.
       (b) Rule.--Consistent with Federal law, in this Act the 
     term ``includes'' means ``includes but is not limited to''.

     SEC. 4. PROHIBITION AGAINST DISCRIMINATION.

       (a) In General.--No student shall, on the basis of actual 
     or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity of such 
     individual or of a person with whom the student associates or 
     has associated, be excluded from participation in, be denied 
     the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any 
     program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.
       (b) Harassment.--For purposes of this Act, discrimination 
     includes harassment of a student on the basis of actual or 
     perceived sexual orientation or gender identity of such 
     student or of a person with whom the student associates or 
     has associated.
       (c) Retaliation Prohibited.--
       (1) Prohibition.--No person shall be excluded from 
     participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected 
     to discrimination, retaliation, or reprisal under any program 
     or activity receiving Federal financial assistance based on 
     the person's opposition to conduct made unlawful by this Act.
       (2) Definition.--For purposes of this subsection, 
     ``opposition to conduct made unlawful by this Act'' 
     includes--
       (A) opposition to conduct reasonably believed to be made 
     unlawful by this Act;
       (B) any formal or informal report, whether oral or written, 
     to any governmental entity, including public schools and 
     educational agencies and employees of the public schools or 
     educational agencies, regarding conduct made unlawful by this 
     Act or reasonably believed to be made unlawful by this Act;
       (C) participation in any investigation, proceeding, or 
     hearing related to conduct made unlawful by this Act or 
     reasonably believed to be made unlawful by this Act; and
       (D) assistance or encouragement provided to any other 
     person in the exercise or enjoyment of any right granted or 
     protected by this Act,

     if in the course of that expression, the person involved does 
     not purposefully provide information known to be false to any 
     public school or educational agency or other governmental 
     entity regarding conduct made unlawful, or reasonably 
     believed to be made unlawful, by this Act.

     SEC. 5. FEDERAL ADMINISTRATIVE ENFORCEMENT; REPORT TO 
                   CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES.

       (a) Requirements.--Each Federal department and agency which 
     is empowered to extend Federal financial assistance to any 
     education program or activity, by way of grant, loan, or 
     contract other than a contract of insurance or guaranty, is 
     authorized and directed to effectuate the provisions of 
     section 4 with respect to such program or activity by issuing 
     rules, regulations, or orders of general applicability which 
     shall be consistent with achievement of the objectives of the 
     statute authorizing the financial assistance in connection 
     with which the action is taken. No such rule, regulation, or 
     order shall become effective unless and until approved by the 
     President.
       (b) Enforcement.--Compliance with any requirement adopted 
     pursuant to this section may be effected--
       (1) by the termination of or refusal to grant or to 
     continue assistance under such program or activity to any 
     recipient as to whom there has been an express finding on the 
     record, after opportunity for hearing, of a failure to comply 
     with such requirement, but such termination or refusal shall 
     be limited to the particular political entity, or part 
     thereof, or other recipient as to whom such a finding has 
     been made, and shall be limited in its effect to the 
     particular program, or part thereof, in which such 
     noncompliance has been so found; or
       (2) by any other means authorized by law,
     except that no such action shall be taken until the 
     department or agency concerned has advised the appropriate 
     person or persons of the failure to comply with the 
     requirement and has determined that compliance cannot be 
     secured by voluntary means.
       (c) Reports.--In the case of any action terminating, or 
     refusing to grant or continue, assistance because of failure 
     to comply with a requirement imposed pursuant to this 
     section, the head of the Federal department or agency shall 
     file with the committees of the House of Representatives and 
     Senate having legislative jurisdiction over the program or 
     activity involved a full written report of the circumstances 
     and the grounds for such action. No such action shall become 
     effective until 30 days have elapsed after the filing of such 
     report.

     SEC. 6. CAUSE OF ACTION.

       (a) Cause of Action.--Subject to subsection (c), an 
     aggrieved individual may bring an action in a court of 
     competent jurisdiction, asserting a violation of this Act. 
     Aggrieved individuals may be awarded all appropriate relief, 
     including equitable relief, compensatory damages, and costs 
     of the action.
       (b) Rule of Construction.--This section shall not be 
     construed to preclude an aggrieved individual from obtaining 
     remedies under any other provision of law or to require such 
     individual to exhaust any administrative complaint process or 
     notice of claim requirement before seeking redress under this 
     section.
       (c) Statute of Limitations.--For actions brought pursuant 
     to this section, the statute of limitations period shall be 
     determined in accordance with section 1658(a) of title 28, 
     United States Code. The tolling of any such limitations 
     period shall be determined in accordance with the law 
     governing actions under section 1979 of the Revised Statutes 
     (42 U.S.C. 1983) in the State in which the action is brought.

     SEC. 7. STATE IMMUNITY.

       (a) State Immunity.--A State shall not be immune under the 
     11th Amendment to the Constitution from suit in Federal court 
     for a violation of this Act.
       (b) Waiver.--A State's receipt or use of Federal financial 
     assistance for any program or activity of a State shall 
     constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity, under the 11th 
     Amendment or otherwise, to a suit brought by an aggrieved 
     individual for a violation of section 4.
       (c) Remedies.--In a suit against a State for a violation of 
     this Act, remedies (including remedies both at law and in 
     equity) are available for such a violation to the same extent 
     as such remedies are available for such a violation in the 
     suit against any public or private entity other than a State.

     SEC. 8. ATTORNEY'S FEES.

       Section 722(b) of the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1988(b)) 
     is amended by inserting ``the Student Non-Discrimination Act 
     of 2011,'' after ``Religious Land Use and Institutionalized 
     Persons Act of 2000,''.

     SEC. 9. EFFECT ON OTHER LAWS.

       (a) Federal and State Nondiscrimination Laws.--Nothing in 
     this Act shall be construed to preempt, invalidate, or limit 
     rights, remedies, procedures, or legal standards available to 
     victims of discrimination or retaliation, under any other 
     Federal law or law of a State or political subdivision of a 
     State, including title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 
     U.S.C. 2000d et seq.), title IX of the Education Amendments 
     of 1972 (20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.), section 504 of the 
     Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794), the Americans 
     with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.), or 
     section 1979 of the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1983). The 
     obligations imposed by this Act are in addition to those 
     imposed by title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 
     U.S.C. 2000d et seq.), title IX of the Education Amendments 
     of 1972 (20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.), section 504 of the 
     Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794), the Americans 
     with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.), and 
     section 1979 of the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1983).
       (b) Free Speech and Expression Laws and Religious Student 
     Groups.--Nothing in this

[[Page 3724]]

     Act shall be construed to alter legal standards regarding, or 
     affect the rights available to individuals or groups under, 
     other Federal laws that establish protections for freedom of 
     speech and expression, such as legal standards and rights 
     available to religious and other student groups under the 
     First Amendment and the Equal Access Act (20 U.S.C. 4071 et 
     seq.).

     SEC. 10. SEVERABILITY.

       If any provision of this Act, or any application of such 
     provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be 
     unconstitutional, the remainder of this Act, and the 
     application of the provision to any other person or 
     circumstance shall not be impacted.

     SEC. 11. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       This Act shall take effect 60 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act and shall not apply to conduct 
     occurring before the effective date of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Bingaman, Mrs. 
        Boxer, Mr. Brown of Ohio, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Cardin, Mr. Casey, 
        Mr. Durbin, Mr. Franken, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Johnson of South 
        Dakota, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Menendez, Mr. Merkley, Ms. Mikulski, 
        Mrs. Murray, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Udall of New 
        Mexico, Mr. Whitehouse, and Mr. Wyden):
  S. 558. A bill to limit the use of cluster munitions; to the 
Committee on Foreign Relations.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today with my friend and 
colleague from Vermont, Senator Leahy, and 20 co-sponsors to introduce 
the Cluster Munitions Civilian Protection Act of 2011.
  Cluster munitions are large bombs, rockets, or artillery shells that 
contain up to hundreds of small submunitions, or individual 
``bomblets.''
  They are intended for attacking enemy troop formations and armor 
covering over a half mile radius.
  But, in reality, they pose a deadly threat to innocent civilians. 
Before I discuss our legislation, I would like to share a few stories 
that show what these weapons can do.
  Several months after the end of the Iraq war, Ahmed, 12 years old 
from Kebala, Iraq, was walking with his 9-year-old brother and picked 
up what he thought was just a shiny object, but was, in fact, a cluster 
bomb.
  It exploded and Ahmed lost his right hand and three fingers off his 
left hand.
  He also lost an eye and suffered shrapnel wounds to his torso and 
head.
  A young shepherd, Akim, 13 years old, from Al-Radwaniya, Iraq, was 
playing on his parents' farm when it was hit by a cluster bomb attack.
  He suffered burns to his lower limbs and multiple fractures to his 
right leg.
  His wounds became infected and he developed pressure ulcers.
  In 2003, 30 years after the Vietnam war, Dan, 9 years old from 
Phalanexay, Laos, was injured when he picked up and played with a 
cluster bomb. It exploded.
  He suffered massive abdominal trauma, multiple shrapnel wounds, and a 
broken arm and leg.
  Waleed Thamer, 10 years old, is from Iraq. In 2003, he was wounded by 
a cluster bomb on his way to the local market.
  He lost his right hand and suffered shrapnel wounds to his eyes, 
neck, torso, and thighs.
  These stories are deeply distressing. But they show us why our 
legislation is necessary.
  Our legislation places commonsense restrictions on the use of cluster 
bombs. It prevents any funds from being spent to use cluster munitions 
that have a failure rate of more than 1 percent; and unless the rules 
of engagement specify the cluster munitions will only be used against 
clearly defined military targets; and will not be used where civilians 
are known to be present or in areas normally inhabited by civilians.
  Finally, our legislation includes a national security waiver that 
allows the President to waive the prohibition on the use of cluster 
bombs with a failure rate of more than 1 percent, if he determines it 
is vital to protect the security of the United States to do so.
  If the President issues the waiver, he must issue a report to 
Congress within 30 days on the failure rate of the cluster bombs used 
and the steps taken to protect innocent civilians.
  If our bill is enacted, it will have an immediate impact.
  Out of the 728.5 million cluster submunitions in the U.S. arsenal, 
only 30,900 have self-destruct devices that would ensure a less than 1 
percent dud rate.
  Those submunitions account for only 0.00004 percent of the U.S. 
total.
  So, the technology exists for the U.S. to meet the 1 percent standard 
but our arsenal consists overwhelmingly of cluster bombs with high 
failure rates.
  Simply put, our bill will help save lives.
  As the above stories demonstrate, cluster bombs pose a real threat to 
the safety of civilians when used in populated areas because they leave 
hundreds of unexploded bombs over a very large area and they are often 
inaccurate.
  Indeed, the human toll of these weapons has been terrible:
  In Laos, approximately 11,000 people, 30 percent of them children, 
have been killed or injured by U.S. cluster munitions since the Vietnam 
war ended.
  In Afghanistan, between October 2001 and November 2002, 127 civilians 
lost their lives due to cluster munitions, 70 percent of them under the 
age of 18.
  An estimated 1,220 Kuwaitis and 400 Iraqi civilians have been killed 
by cluster munitions since 1991.
  In the 2006 war in Lebanon, Israeli cluster munitions, many of them 
manufactured in the U.S., injured and killed 343 civilians.
  During the 2003 invasion of Baghdad, the last time the U.S. used 
cluster munitions, these weapons killed more civilians than any other 
type of U.S. weapon.
  The U.S. 3rd Infantry Division described cluster munitions as 
``battlefield losers'' in Iraq, because they were often forced to 
advance through areas contaminated with unexploded duds.
  During the 1991 Gulf War, U.S. cluster munitions caused more U.S. 
troop casualties than any single Iraqi weapon system, killing 22 U.S. 
servicemen.
  Yet we have seen significant progress in the effort to protect 
innocent civilians from these deadly weapons since we first introduced 
this legislation in the 110th Congress.
  In December 2008, 95 countries came together to sign the Oslo 
Convention on Cluster Munitions which would prohibit the production, 
use, and export of cluster bombs and requires signatories to eliminate 
their arsenals within 8 years.
  This group includes key NATO allies such as Canada, the United 
Kingdom, France, and Germany, who are fighting alongside our troops in 
Afghanistan.
  It includes 33 countries that have produced and used cluster 
munitions.
  To date, 108 countries have signed the convention and 48 have 
ratified it.
  It formally came into force on August 1, 2010.
  In 2007, Congress passed and President Bush signed into law a 
provision from our legislation contained in the fiscal year 2008 
Consolidated Appropriations Act prohibiting the sale and transfer of 
cluster bombs with a failure rate of more than 1 percent.
  Congress extended this ban as a part of the Omnibus Appropriations 
Act for fiscal year 2009 and the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 
2010.
  These actions will help save lives. But much more work remains to be 
done and significant obstacles remain.
  For one, the United States chose not to participate in the Oslo 
process or sign the treaty.
  The Pentagon continues to believe that cluster munitions are 
``legitimate weapons with clear military utility in combat.''
  It would prefer that the United States work within the Geneva-based 
Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, CCW, to negotiate limits on 
the use of cluster munitions.
  Yet these efforts have been going on since 2001 and it was the 
inability of the CCW to come to any meaningful agreement which prompted 
other countries, led by Norway, to pursue an alternative treaty through 
the Oslo process.
  A lack of U.S. leadership in this area has given cover to other major 
cluster munitions producing nations--China, Russia, India, Pakistan, 
Israel, and

[[Page 3725]]

Egypt--who have refused to sign the Oslo Convention as well.
  Recognizing the United States could not remain silent in the face of 
international efforts to restrict the use of cluster bombs, Secretary 
of Defense Robert Gates issued a new policy on cluster munitions in 
June 2008 stating that after 2018, the use, sale and transfer of 
cluster munitions with a failure rate of more than 1 percent would be 
prohibited.
  The policy is a step in the right direction, but under the terms of 
this new policy, the Pentagon will still have the authority to use 
cluster bombs with high failure rates for the next 10 years.
  That is unacceptable and runs counter to our values. The 
administration should take another look at this policy.
  In fact, on September 29, 2009, Senator Leahy and I were joined by 14 
of our colleagues in sending a letter to President Obama urging him to 
conduct a thorough review of U.S. policy on cluster munitions.
  On April 14, 2010, we received a response from then National Security 
Advisor Jim Jones stating that the administration will undertake this 
review following the policy review on U.S. landmines policy.
  The administration should complete this review without delay.
  Let us not forget that the United States maintains an arsenal of an 
estimated 5.5 million cluster munitions containing 728 million 
submunitions which have an estimated failure rate of between 5 and 15 
percent.
  What does that say about us, that we are still prepared to use, sell 
and transfer these weapons with well-known failure rates?
  The fact is, cluster munition technologies already exist, that meet 
the 1 percent standard. Why do we need to wait 10 years?
  This delay is especially troubling given that in 2001, former 
Secretary of Defense William Cohen issued his own policy on cluster 
munitions stating that, beginning in fiscal year 2005, all new cluster 
munitions must have a failure rate of less than 1 percent.
  Unfortunately, the Pentagon was unable to meet this deadline and 
Secretary Gates' new policy essentially postpones any meaningful action 
for another 10 years.
  That means if we do nothing, by 2018 close to 20 years will have 
passed since the Pentagon first recognized the threat these deadly 
weapons pose to innocent civilians.
  We can do better.
  Our legislation simply moves up the Gates policy by 7 years.
  For those of my colleagues who are concerned that it may be too soon 
to enact a ban on the use of cluster bombs with failure rates of more 
than 1 percent, I point out again that our bill allows the President to 
waive this restriction if he determines it is vital to protect the 
security of the United States to do so.
  I would also remind my colleagues that the United States has not used 
cluster bombs in Iraq since 2003 and has observed a moratorium on their 
use in Afghanistan since 2002.
  We introduce this legislation to make this moratorium permanent for 
the entire U.S. arsenal of cluster munitions.
  We introduce this legislation for children like Hassan Hammade.
  A 13-year-old Lebanese boy, Hassan lost four fingers and sustained 
injuries to his stomach and shoulder after he picked up an unexploded 
cluster bomb in front of an orange tree.
  He said:

       I started playing with it and it blew up. I didn't know it 
     was a cluster bomb--it just looked like a burned out piece of 
     metal.
       All the children are too scared to go out now, we just play 
     on the main roads or in our homes.

  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. We should do 
whatever we can to protect more innocent children and other civilians 
from these dangerous weapons.
  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. 558

       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 ``Cluster Munitions Civilian 
     Protection Act of 2011''.

     SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON THE USE OF CLUSTER MUNITIONS.

       No funds appropriated or otherwise available to any Federal 
     department or agency may be obligated or expended to use any 
     cluster munitions unless--
       (1) the submunitions of the cluster munitions, after 
     arming, do not result in more than 1 percent unexploded 
     ordnance across the range of intended operational 
     environments; and
       (2) the policy applicable to the use of such cluster 
     munitions specifies that the cluster munitions will only be 
     used against clearly defined military targets and will not be 
     used where civilians are known to be present or in areas 
     normally inhabited by civilians.

     SEC. 3. PRESIDENTIAL WAIVER.

       The President may waive the requirement under section 2(1) 
     if, prior to the use of cluster munitions, the President--
       (1) certifies that it is vital to protect the security of 
     the United States; and
       (2) not later than 30 days after making such certification, 
     submits to the appropriate congressional committees a report, 
     in classified form if necessary, describing in detail--
       (A) the steps that will be taken to protect civilians; and
       (B) the failure rate of the cluster munitions that will be 
     used and whether such munitions are fitted with self-destruct 
     or self-deactivation devices.

     SEC. 4. CLEANUP PLAN.

       Not later than 90 days after any cluster munitions are used 
     by a Federal department or agency, the President shall submit 
     to the appropriate congressional committees a plan, prepared 
     by such Federal department or agency, for cleaning up any 
     such cluster munitions and submunitions which fail to explode 
     and continue to pose a hazard to civilians.

     SEC. 5. APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES DEFINED.

       In this Act, the term ``appropriate congressional 
     committees'' means the Committee on Foreign Relations, the 
     Committee on Armed Services, and the Committee on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign 
     Affairs, the Committee on Armed Services, and the Committee 
     on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Mr. Brown of Ohio, and Mr. Akaka):
  S. 560. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to 
deliver a meaningful benefit and lower prescription drug prices under 
the Medicare program; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, this Congress, members from both sides of 
the aisle recognize the need to reduce the national deficit. Today, I 
am introducing the Medicare Prescription Drugs Savings and Choice Act 
of 2011, a bill that would save taxpayer dollars by giving Medicare 
beneficiaries the choice to participate in a Medicare Part D 
prescription drug plan run by Medicare, not private insurance 
companies.
  In 2003, Congress enacted the Medicare Modernization Act, which added 
a long overdue prescription drug benefit to Medicare. Senior citizens 
and people with disabilities were relieved to finally have coverage for 
this important aspect of their healthcare needs.
  The way the Part D program was structured under the original law, it 
included a coverage gap known as the ``donut hole.'' Once an initial 
coverage limit was reached, beneficiaries had to absorb 100 percent of 
their drug costs until catastrophic coverage kicked in. That meant that 
approximately 3.4 million seniors nationwide with the heaviest reliance 
on prescription drugs faced the prospect of paying up to $4,000 out of 
pocket before they qualified for further assistance from Medicare.
  When Congress passed the Affordable Care Act last year, we made 
significant improvements to the Medicare Part D program. Seniors who 
hit the ``donut hole'' in 2010 received a one-time $250 check. This 
helped 109,421 seniors in Illinois pay for their prescriptions during 
the coverage gap. In addition, this year Medicare beneficiaries will 
receive a 50 percent discount on brand name drugs in the donut hole, 
and the donut hole will be fully closed by 2020. This means that 
Illinois seniors will save $1.2 billion in out of pocket costs over the 
next decade.

[[Page 3726]]

  The bill I am introducing today would make yet another improvement to 
the Medicare prescription drug benefit. The Part D program is not 
structured like the rest of Medicare. For all other Medicare benefits, 
seniors can choose whether to receive benefits directly through 
Medicare or through a private insurance plan. The overwhelming majority 
choose the Medicare-run option for their hospital and physician 
coverage.
  No such choice is available for prescription drugs. Medicare 
beneficiaries must enroll in a private insurance plan to obtain drug 
coverage.
  In many regions, dozens of plan choices are available and each plan 
has its own premium, cost-sharing requirements, list of covered drugs, 
and pharmacy network. After you have identified the right drug plan, 
you have to go through the whole process again at the end of the year 
because your plan may have changed the drugs it covers or added new 
restrictions on how to access covered drugs. Anyone who has visited a 
senior center or spoken with an elderly relative knows that the 
complexity of the drug benefit has created confusion.
  Adding to the frustration with the program so far is accumulating 
evidence that private drug plans have not been effective negotiators, 
which means seniors and taxpayers end up paying more than they should.
  We know that drug prices are higher in private Medicare drug plans 
than drug prices available through the Veterans Administration, 
Medicaid, and other countries like Canada.
  The Veterans Administration has authority to directly negotiate with 
drug companies, and as a result it has cut drug prices by as much as 50 
percent. A study published in 2008 found that if Medicare negotiated 
drug prices on behalf of seniors, $21.5 billion could be saved 
annually.
  The Medicare Prescription Drug Savings and Choice Act of 2011 would 
provide a simple and stable way to obtain drug coverage, since the plan 
Medicare-operated prescription drug plan would be available nationwide 
every year, and would charge everyone the same premium.
  It would also save money because the Secretary of Health and Human 
Services would have the tools to design a formulary and negotiate 
prices with drug companies. The best medical evidence would determine 
which drugs are covered in the formulary, and it would be used to 
promote safety, appropriate use of drugs, and value.
  The bill would establish an appeals process that is efficient, 
imposes minimal administrative burdens, and ensures timely procurement 
of non-formulary drugs or non-preferred drugs when medically necessary.
  The Secretary would also develop a system for paying pharmacies that 
would include the prompt payment of claims.
  Seniors want the ability to choose a Medicare-administered drug plan. 
Let us give them this option--just as they have this choice with every 
other benefit covered by Medicare.
  A Medicare administered drug plan would create a ``win-win'' 
situation that could save billions of taxpayer dollars and provide a 
high-quality affordable option to seniors.
  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. 560

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Medicare Prescription Drug 
     Savings and Choice Act of 2011''.

     SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF MEDICARE OPERATED PRESCRIPTION DRUG 
                   PLAN OPTION.

       (a) In General.--Subpart 2 of part D of title XVIII of the 
     Social Security Act is amended by inserting after section 
     1860D-11 (42 U.S.C. 1395w-111) the following new section:


           ``medicare operated prescription drug plan option

       ``Sec. 1860D-11A.  (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any 
     other provision of this part, for each year (beginning with 
     2012), in addition to any plans offered under section 1860D-
     11, the Secretary shall offer one or more Medicare operated 
     prescription drug plans (as defined in subsection (c)) with a 
     service area that consists of the entire United States and 
     shall enter into negotiations in accordance with subsection 
     (b) with pharmaceutical manufacturers to reduce the purchase 
     cost of covered part D drugs for eligible part D individuals 
     who enroll in such a plan.
       ``(b) Negotiations.--Notwithstanding section 1860D-11(i), 
     for purposes of offering a Medicare operated prescription 
     drug plan under this section, the Secretary shall negotiate 
     with pharmaceutical manufacturers with respect to the 
     purchase price of covered part D drugs in a Medicare operated 
     prescription drug plan and shall encourage the use of more 
     affordable therapeutic equivalents to the extent such 
     practices do not override medical necessity as determined by 
     the prescribing physician. To the extent practicable and 
     consistent with the previous sentence, the Secretary shall 
     implement strategies similar to those used by other Federal 
     purchasers of prescription drugs, and other strategies, 
     including the use of a formulary and formulary incentives in 
     subsection (e), to reduce the purchase cost of covered part D 
     drugs.
       ``(c) Medicare Operated Prescription Drug Plan Defined.--
     For purposes of this part, the term `Medicare operated 
     prescription drug plan' means a prescription drug plan that 
     offers qualified prescription drug coverage and access to 
     negotiated prices described in section 1860D-2(a)(1)(A). Such 
     a plan may offer supplemental prescription drug coverage in 
     the same manner as other qualified prescription drug coverage 
     offered by other prescription drug plans.
       ``(d) Monthly Beneficiary Premium.--
       ``(1) Qualified prescription drug coverage.--The monthly 
     beneficiary premium for qualified prescription drug coverage 
     and access to negotiated prices described in section 1860D-
     2(a)(1)(A) to be charged under a Medicare operated 
     prescription drug plan shall be uniform nationally. Such 
     premium for months in 2012 and each succeeding year shall be 
     based on the average monthly per capita actuarial cost of 
     offering the Medicare operated prescription drug plan for the 
     year involved, including administrative expenses.
       ``(2) Supplemental prescription drug coverage.--Insofar as 
     a Medicare operated prescription drug plan offers 
     supplemental prescription drug coverage, the Secretary may 
     adjust the amount of the premium charged under paragraph (1).
       ``(e) Use of a Formulary and Formulary Incentives.--
       ``(1) In general.--With respect to the operation of a 
     Medicare operated prescription drug plan, the Secretary shall 
     establish and apply a formulary (and may include formulary 
     incentives described in paragraph (2)(C)(ii)) in accordance 
     with this subsection in order to--
       ``(A) increase patient safety;
       ``(B) increase appropriate use and reduce inappropriate use 
     of drugs; and
       ``(C) reward value.
       ``(2) Development of initial formulary.--
       ``(A) In general.--In selecting covered part D drugs for 
     inclusion in a formulary, the Secretary shall consider 
     clinical benefit and price.
       ``(B) Role of ahrq.--The Director of the Agency for 
     Healthcare Research and Quality shall be responsible for 
     assessing the clinical benefit of covered part D drugs and 
     making recommendations to the Secretary regarding which drugs 
     should be included in the formulary. In conducting such 
     assessments and making such recommendations, the Director 
     shall--
       ``(i) consider safety concerns including those identified 
     by the Federal Food and Drug Administration;
       ``(ii) use available data and evaluations, with priority 
     given to randomized controlled trials, to examine clinical 
     effectiveness, comparative effectiveness, safety, and 
     enhanced compliance with a drug regimen;
       ``(iii) use the same classes of drugs developed by the 
     United States Pharmacopeia for this part;
       ``(iv) consider evaluations made by--

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

       ``(v) recommend to the Secretary--

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

       ``(C) Consideration of ahrq recommendations.--

[[Page 3727]]

       ``(i) In general.--The Secretary, after taking into 
     consideration the recommendations under subparagraph (B)(v), 
     shall establish a formulary, and formulary incentives, to 
     encourage use of covered part D drugs that--

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

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

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

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

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

       ``(3) Limitations on formulary.--In any formulary 
     established under this subsection, the formulary may not be 
     changed during a year, except--
       ``(A) to add a generic version of a covered part D drug 
     that entered the market;
       ``(B) to remove such a drug for which a safety problem is 
     found; and
       ``(C) to add a drug that the Secretary identifies as a drug 
     which treats a condition for which there has not previously 
     been a treatment option or for which a clear and significant 
     benefit has been demonstrated over other covered part D 
     drugs.
       ``(4) Adding drugs to the initial formulary.--
       ``(A) Use of advisory committee.--The Secretary shall 
     establish and appoint an advisory committee (in this 
     paragraph referred to as the `advisory committee')--
       ``(i) to review petitions from drug manufacturers, health 
     care provider organizations, patient groups, and other 
     entities for inclusion of a drug in, or other changes to, 
     such formulary; and
       ``(ii) to recommend any changes to the formulary 
     established under this subsection.
       ``(B) Composition.--The advisory committee shall be 
     composed of 9 members and shall include representatives of 
     physicians, pharmacists, and consumers and others with 
     expertise in evaluating prescription drugs. The Secretary 
     shall select members based on their knowledge of 
     pharmaceuticals and the Medicare population. Members shall be 
     deemed to be special Government employees for purposes of 
     applying the conflict of interest provisions under section 
     208 of title 18, United States Code, and no waiver of such 
     provisions for such a member shall be permitted.
       ``(C) Consultation.--The advisory committee shall consult, 
     as necessary, with physicians who are specialists in treating 
     the disease for which a drug is being considered.
       ``(D) Request for studies.--The advisory committee may 
     request the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality or an 
     academic or research institution to study and make a report 
     on a petition described in subparagraph (A)(ii) in order to 
     assess--
       ``(i) clinical effectiveness;
       ``(ii) comparative effectiveness;
       ``(iii) safety; and
       ``(iv) enhanced compliance with a drug regimen.
       ``(E) Recommendations.--The advisory committee shall make 
     recommendations to the Secretary regarding--
       ``(i) whether a covered part D drug is found to provide a 
     greater clinical benefit, including fewer safety concerns or 
     less risk of side-effects, than another drug in the same 
     class that is currently included in the formulary and should 
     be included in the formulary;
       ``(ii) whether a covered part D drug is found to provide 
     less clinical benefit, including greater safety concerns or a 
     greater risk of side-effects, than another drug in the same 
     class that is currently included in the formulary and should 
     not be included in the formulary; and
       ``(iii) whether a covered part D drug has the same or 
     similar clinical benefit to a drug in the same class that is 
     currently included in the formulary and whether the drug 
     should be included in the formulary.
       ``(F) Limitations on review of manufacturer petitions.--The 
     advisory committee shall not review a petition of a drug 
     manufacturer under subparagraph (A)(ii) with respect to a 
     covered part D drug unless the petition is accompanied by the 
     following:
       ``(i) Raw data from clinical trials on the safety and 
     effectiveness of the drug.
       ``(ii) Any data from clinical trials conducted using active 
     controls on the drug or drugs that are the current standard 
     of care.
       ``(iii) Any available data on comparative effectiveness of 
     the drug.
       ``(iv) Any other information the Secretary requires for the 
     advisory committee to complete its review.
       ``(G) Response to recommendations.--The Secretary shall 
     review the recommendations of the advisory committee and if 
     the Secretary accepts such recommendations the Secretary 
     shall modify the formulary established under this subsection 
     accordingly. Nothing in this section shall preclude the 
     Secretary from adding to the formulary a drug for which the 
     Director of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality or 
     the advisory committee has not made a recommendation.
       ``(H) Notice of changes.--The Secretary shall provide 
     timely notice to beneficiaries and health professionals about 
     changes to the formulary or formulary incentives.
       ``(f) Informing Beneficiaries.--The Secretary shall take 
     steps to inform beneficiaries about the availability of a 
     Medicare operated drug plan or plans including providing 
     information in the annual handbook distributed to all 
     beneficiaries and adding information to the official public 
     Medicare website related to prescription drug coverage 
     available through this part.
       ``(g) Application of All Other Requirements for 
     Prescription Drug Plans.--Except as specifically provided in 
     this section, any Medicare operated drug plan shall meet the 
     same requirements as apply to any other prescription drug 
     plan, including the requirements of section 1860D-4(b)(1) 
     relating to assuring pharmacy access.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 1860D-3(a) of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1395w-103(a)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(4) Availability of the medicare operated prescription 
     drug plan.--A Medicare operated prescription drug plan (as 
     defined in section 1860D-11A(c)) shall be offered nationally 
     in accordance with section 1860D-11A.''.
       (2)(A) Section 1860D-3 of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1395w-103) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(c) Provisions Only Applicable in 2006 Through 2011.--The 
     provisions of this section shall only apply with respect to 
     2006 through 2011.''.
       (B) Section 1860D-11(g) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-
     111(g)) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(8) No authority for fallback plans after 2011.--A 
     fallback prescription drug plan shall not be available after 
     December 31, 2011.''.
       (3) Section 1860D-13(c)(3) of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1395w-113(c)(3)) is amended--
       (A) in the heading, by inserting ``and medicare operated 
     prescription drug plans'' after ``Fallback plans''; and
       (B) by inserting ``or a Medicare operated prescription drug 
     plan'' after ``a fallback prescription drug plan''.
       (4) Section 1860D-16(b)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1395w-116(b)(1)) is amended--
       (A) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon at the end;
       (B) in subparagraph (D), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(E) payments for expenses incurred with respect to the 
     operation of Medicare operated prescription drug plans under 
     section 1860D-11A.''.
       (5) Section 1860D-41(a) of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1395w-151(a)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(19) Medicare operated prescription drug plan.--The term 
     `Medicare operated prescription drug plan' has the meaning 
     given such term in section 1860D-11A(c).''.

     SEC. 3. IMPROVED APPEALS PROCESS UNDER THE MEDICARE OPERATED 
                   PRESCRIPTION DRUG PLAN.

       Section 1860D-4(h) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1305w-104(h)) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(4) Appeals process for medicare operated prescription 
     drug plan.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall develop a well-
     defined process for appeals for denials of benefits under 
     this part under the Medicare operated prescription drug plan. 
     Such process shall be efficient, impose minimal 
     administrative burdens, and ensure the timely procurement of 
     non-formulary drugs or exemption from formulary incentives 
     when medically necessary. Medical necessity shall be based on 
     professional medical judgment, the medical condition of the 
     beneficiary, and other medical evidence. Such appeals process 
     shall include--
       ``(i) an initial review and determination made by the 
     Secretary; and
       ``(ii) for appeals denied during the initial review and 
     determination, the option of an external review and 
     determination by an independent entity selected by the 
     Secretary.
       ``(B) Consultation in development of process.--In 
     developing the appeals process under subparagraph (A), the 
     Secretary shall consult with consumer and patient groups, as 
     well as other key stakeholders to ensure the goals described 
     in subparagraph (A) are achieved.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself and Mr. Udall of New Mexico):
  S. 564. A bill to designate the Valles Caldera National Preserve as a 
unit of

[[Page 3728]]

the National Park System, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce legislation 
that would transfer administrative jurisdiction of the Valles Caldera 
National Preserve from the Valles Caldera Trust to the National Park 
Service. I am pleased that my colleague from New Mexico, Tom Udall, is 
again a cosponsor of this bill.
  For those not familiar with this area, the Valles Caldera in Northern 
New Mexico is one of only three supervolcanoes in the United States, 
the other two being Yellowstone, WY, and Long Valley, CA. Spanning more 
than 100,000 acres, the caldera contains lush and expansive grassland 
valleys, ponderosa pines in the foothills and mixed conifer forests in 
the higher elevations of the volcanic domes and peaks. Numerous 
cultural and archaeological sites are scattered throughout the 
landscape that provides quality habitat to elk, trout, golden and bald 
eagles, and myriad other species. In 1975, the Valles Caldera received 
formal recognition as an outstanding and nationally significant 
geologic resource when it was designated a National Natural Landmark.
  More recently in 2000, the Valles Caldera Preservation Act authorized 
the Federal Government to acquire the property and established the 
Valles Caldera Trust--an independent government corporation led by a 
board of trustees appointed by the President whose mission is to 
provide for public access and protection of the Preserve's natural and 
cultural resources. The Trust is also directed to manage the Preserve 
in a manner that would achieve financial self-sustainability after 
fifteen years.
  While the individual board members have done their best to fulfill 
the original legislative directives, time has shown in my opinion that 
this management framework is not the best suited for the long-term 
management of the Preserve. These issues have been laid out at length 
in two GAO reports, during the hearing we held on this legislation in 
the 111th Congress, and in previous statements I have made on the 
subject.
  In weighing the various alternatives, the conclusion was reached that 
management by the National Park Service--an agency with a mission of 
protecting natural, historic, and cultural resources while also 
providing for public enjoyment of those resources--is more appropriate 
for the long-term future of the Valles Caldera. In my view, it would 
also best serve the public's desire for increased public access, 
balanced with the need to protect and interpret the Preserve's unique 
cultural and natural resources.
  Senator Udall and I first introduced this legislation during the 
111th Congress, during which time the bill received a hearing in the 
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and was reported out 
favorably by that Committee. The reported legislation, which is what we 
are introducing today, incorporated the many comments we received 
during the hearing process. This includes improvements to the 
provisions on hunting and fishing and cattle grazing as well as changes 
made based on recommendations by tribal governments. Other stakeholder 
comments, including those from the friends group, Los Amigos de Valles 
Caldera, led to modifications that will ensure the ecological 
restoration of the Preserve remains a priority under Park Service 
management. I also appreciated the valuable comments we received from 
the staff at the Valles Caldera Trust who remain steadfast in their 
commitment to the highest management standards at the Preserve.
  Beyond these changes, however, the original framework and intent of 
the legislation remains the same. The existing character of the 
Preserve would be maintained and protections for tribal cultural and 
religious sites would be strengthened. The Park Service would manage 
the Preserve to protect and preserve its natural and cultural 
resources, while increasing public access and continuing to permit 
hunting and fishing and grazing. The National Park Service would also 
establish a science and education program similar to the highly 
successful program created by the Trust.
  While the full Senate was unable to take action on this bill during 
the last Congress, I remain hopeful that we will find an opportunity 
during this one to bring it before the Senate for consideration. Public 
support in my State remains very high for the Park Service to manage 
this unique resource, and it is my hope that the enactment of this 
legislation will allow more Americans as well as future generations to 
enjoy this special place.
  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. 564

       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 ``Valles Caldera National 
     Preserve Management Act''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Eligible employee.--The term ``eligible employee'' 
     means a person who was a full-time or part-time employee of 
     the Trust during the 180-day period immediately preceding the 
     date of enactment of this Act.
       (2) Fund.--The term ``Fund'' means the Valles Caldera Fund 
     established by section 106(h)(2) of the Valles Caldera 
     Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 698v-4(h)(2)).
       (3) Preserve.--The term ``Preserve'' means the Valles 
     Caldera National Preserve in the State.
       (4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.
       (5) State.--The term ``State'' means the State of New 
     Mexico.
       (6) Trust.--The term ``Trust'' means the Valles Caldera 
     Trust established by section 106(a) of the Valles Caldera 
     Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 698v-4(a)).

     SEC. 3. VALLES CALDERA NATIONAL PRESERVE.

       (a) Designation as Unit of the National Park System.--To 
     protect, preserve, and restore the fish, wildlife, watershed, 
     natural, scientific, scenic, geologic, historic, cultural, 
     archaeological, and recreational values of the area, the 
     Valles Caldera National Preserve is designated as a unit of 
     the National Park System.
       (b) Management.--
       (1) Applicable law.--The Secretary shall administer the 
     Preserve in accordance with--
       (A) this Act; and
       (B) the laws generally applicable to units of the National 
     Park System, including--
       (i) the National Park Service Organic Act (16 U.S.C. 1 et 
     seq.); and
       (ii) the Act of August 21, 1935 (16 U.S.C. 461 et seq.).
       (2) Management coordination.--The Secretary may coordinate 
     the management and operations of the Preserve with the 
     Bandelier National Monument.
       (3) Management plan.--
       (A) In general.--Not later than 3 fiscal years after the 
     date on which funds are made available to implement this 
     subsection, the Secretary shall prepare a management plan for 
     the Preserve.
       (B) Applicable law.--The management plan shall be prepared 
     in accordance with--
       (i) section 12(b) of Public Law 91-383 (commonly known as 
     the ``National Park Service General Authorities Act'') (16 
     U.S.C. 1a-7(b)); and
       (ii) any other applicable laws.
       (C) Consultation.--The management plan shall be prepared in 
     consultation with--
       (i) the Secretary of Agriculture;
       (ii) State and local governments;
       (iii) Indian tribes and pueblos, including the Pueblos of 
     Jemez, Santa Clara, and San Ildefonso; and
       (iv) the public.
       (c) Acquisition of Land.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary may acquire land and 
     interests in land within the boundaries of the Preserve by--
       (A) purchase with donated or appropriated funds;
       (B) donation; or
       (C) transfer from another Federal agency.
       (2) Administration of acquired land.--On acquisition of any 
     land or interests in land under paragraph (1), the acquired 
     land or interests in land shall be administered as part of 
     the Preserve.
       (d) Science and Education Program.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall--
       (A) until the date on which a management plan is completed 
     in accordance with subsection (b)(3), carry out the science 
     and education program for the Preserve established by the 
     Trust; and
       (B) beginning on the date on which a management plan is 
     completed in accordance with subsection (b)(3), establish a 
     science and education program for the Preserve that--
       (i) allows for research and interpretation of the natural, 
     historic, cultural, geologic and other scientific features of 
     the Preserve;

[[Page 3729]]

       (ii) provides for improved methods of ecological 
     restoration and science-based adaptive management of the 
     Preserve; and
       (iii) promotes outdoor educational experiences in the 
     Preserve.
       (2) Science and education center.--As part of the program 
     established under paragraph (1)(B), the Secretary may 
     establish a science and education center outside the 
     boundaries of the Preserve.
       (e) Grazing.--The Secretary may allow the grazing of 
     livestock within the Preserve to continue--
       (1) consistent with this Act; and
       (2) to the extent the use furthers scientific research or 
     interpretation of the ranching history of the Preserve.
       (f) Fish and Wildlife.--Nothing in this Act affects the 
     responsibilities of the State with respect to fish and 
     wildlife in the State, except that the Secretary, in 
     consultation with the New Mexico Department of Game and 
     Fish--
       (1) shall permit hunting and fishing on land and water 
     within the Preserve in accordance with applicable Federal and 
     State laws; and
       (2) may designate zones in which, and establish periods 
     during which, no hunting or fishing shall be permitted for 
     reasons of public safety, administration, the protection of 
     wildlife and wildlife habitats, or public use and enjoyment.
       (g) Ecological Restoration.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall undertake activities 
     to improve the health of forest, grassland, and riparian 
     areas within the Preserve, including any activities carried 
     out in accordance with title IV of the Omnibus Public Land 
     Management Act of 2009 (16 U.S.C. 7301 et seq.).
       (2) Cooperative agreements.--The Secretary may enter into 
     cooperative agreements with adjacent pueblos to coordinate 
     activities carried out under paragraph (1) on the Preserve 
     and adjacent pueblo land.
       (h) Withdrawal.--Subject to valid existing rights, all land 
     and interests in land within the boundaries of the Preserve 
     are withdrawn from--
       (1) entry, disposal, or appropriation under the public land 
     laws;
       (2) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and
       (3) operation of the mineral leasing laws, geothermal 
     leasing laws, and mineral materials laws.
       (i) Volcanic Domes and Other Peaks.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (3), for 
     the purposes of preserving the natural, cultural, religious, 
     archaeological, and historic resources of the volcanic domes 
     and other peaks in the Preserve described in paragraph (2) 
     within the area of the domes and peaks above 9,600 feet in 
     elevation or 250 feet below the top of the dome, whichever is 
     lower--
       (A) no roads or buildings shall be constructed; and
       (B) no motorized access shall be allowed.
       (2) Description of volcanic domes.--The volcanic domes and 
     other peaks referred to in paragraph (1) are--
       (A) Redondo Peak;
       (B) Redondito;
       (C) South Mountain;
       (D) San Antonio Mountain;
       (E) Cerro Seco;
       (F) Cerro San Luis;
       (G) Cerros Santa Rosa;
       (H) Cerros del Abrigo;
       (I) Cerro del Medio;
       (J) Rabbit Mountain;
       (K) Cerro Grande;
       (L) Cerro Toledo;
       (M) Indian Point;
       (N) Sierra de los Valles; and
       (O) Cerros de los Posos.
       (3) Exception.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply in cases in 
     which construction or motorized access is necessary for 
     administrative purposes (including ecological restoration 
     activities or measures required in emergencies to protect the 
     health and safety of persons in the area).
       (j) Traditional Cultural and Religious Sites.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary, in consultation with Indian 
     tribes and pueblos, shall ensure the protection of 
     traditional cultural and religious sites in the Preserve.
       (2) Access.--The Secretary, in accordance with Public Law 
     95-341 (commonly known as the ``American Indian Religious 
     Freedom Act'') (42 U.S.C. 1996)--
       (A) shall provide access to the sites described in 
     paragraph (1) by members of Indian tribes or pueblos for 
     traditional cultural and customary uses; and
       (B) may, on request of an Indian tribe or pueblo, 
     temporarily close to general public use 1 or more specific 
     areas of the Preserve to protect traditional cultural and 
     customary uses in the area by members of the Indian tribe or 
     pueblo.
       (3) Prohibition on motorized access.--The Secretary shall 
     maintain prohibitions on the use of motorized or mechanized 
     travel on Preserve land located adjacent to the Santa Clara 
     Indian Reservation, to the extent the prohibition was in 
     effect on the date of enactment of this Act.
       (k) Caldera Rim Trail.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 3 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary, in consultation with 
     the Secretary of Agriculture, affected Indian tribes and 
     pueblos, and the public, shall study the feasibility of 
     establishing a hiking trail along the rim of the Valles 
     Caldera on--
       (A) land within the Preserve; and
       (B) National Forest System land that is adjacent to the 
     Preserve.
       (2) Agreements.--On the request of an affected Indian tribe 
     or pueblo, the Secretary and the Secretary of Agriculture 
     shall seek to enter into an agreement with the Indian tribe 
     or pueblo with respect to the Caldera Rim Trail that provides 
     for the protection of--
       (A) cultural and religious sites in the vicinity of the 
     trail; and
       (B) the privacy of adjacent pueblo land.
       (l) Valid Existing Rights.--Nothing in this Act affects 
     valid existing rights.

     SEC. 4. TRANSFER OF ADMINISTRATIVE JURISDICTION.

       (a) In General.--Administrative jurisdiction over the 
     Preserve is transferred from the Secretary of Agriculture and 
     the Trust to the Secretary, to be administered as a unit of 
     the National Park System, in accordance with section 3.
       (b) Exclusion From Santa Fe National Forest.--The 
     boundaries of the Santa Fe National Forest are modified to 
     exclude the Preserve.
       (c) Interim Management.--
       (1) Memorandum of agreement.--Not later than 90 days after 
     the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary and the 
     Trust shall enter into a memorandum of agreement to 
     facilitate the orderly transfer to the Secretary of the 
     administration of the Preserve.
       (2) Existing management plans.--Notwithstanding the repeal 
     made by section 5(a), until the date on which the Secretary 
     completes a management plan for the Preserve in accordance 
     with section 3(b)(3), the Secretary may administer the 
     Preserve in accordance with any management activities or 
     plans adopted by the Trust under the Valles Caldera 
     Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 698v et seq.), to the extent the 
     activities or plans are consistent with section 3(b)(1).
       (3) Public use.--The Preserve shall remain open to public 
     use during the interim management period, subject to such 
     terms and conditions as the Secretary determines to be 
     appropriate.
       (d) Valles Caldera Trust.--
       (1) Termination.--The Trust shall terminate 180 days after 
     the date of enactment of this Act unless the Secretary 
     determines that the termination date should be extended to 
     facilitate the transitional management of the Preserve.
       (2) Assets and liabilities.--
       (A) Assets.--On termination of the Trust--
       (i) all assets of the Trust shall be transferred to the 
     Secretary; and
       (ii) any amounts appropriated for the Trust shall remain 
     available to the Secretary for the administration of the 
     Preserve.
       (B) Assumption of obligations.--
       (i) In general.--On termination of the Trust, the Secretary 
     shall assume all contracts, obligations, and other 
     liabilities of the Trust.
       (ii) New liabilities.--

       (I) Budget.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary and the Trust shall 
     prepare a budget for the interim management of the Preserve.
       (II) Written concurrence required.--The Trust shall not 
     incur any new liabilities not authorized in the budget 
     prepared under subclause (I) without the written concurrence 
     of the Secretary.

       (3) Personnel.--
       (A) Hiring.--The Secretary and the Secretary of Agriculture 
     may hire employees of the Trust on a noncompetitive basis for 
     comparable positions at the Preserve or other areas or 
     offices under the jurisdiction of the Secretary or the 
     Secretary of Agriculture.
       (B) Salary.--Any employees hired from the Trust under 
     subparagraph (A) shall be subject to the provisions of 
     chapter 51, and subchapter III of chapter 53, title 5, United 
     States Code, relating to classification and General Schedule 
     pay rates.
       (C) Interim retention of eligible employees.--For a period 
     of not less than 180 days beginning on the date of enactment 
     of this Act, all eligible employees of the Trust shall be--
       (i) retained in the employment of the Trust;
       (ii) considered to be placed on detail to the Secretary; 
     and
       (iii) subject to the direction of the Secretary.
       (D) Termination for cause.--Nothing in this paragraph 
     precludes the termination of employment of an eligible 
     employee for cause during the period described in 
     subparagraph (C).
       (4) Records.--The Secretary shall have access to all 
     records of the Trust pertaining to the management of the 
     Preserve.
       (5) Valles caldera fund.--
       (A) In general.--Effective on the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary shall assume the powers of the Trust over 
     the Fund.
       (B) Availability and use.--Any amounts in the Fund as of 
     the date of enactment of this Act shall be available to the 
     Secretary for use, without further appropriation, for the 
     management of the Preserve.

[[Page 3730]]



     SEC. 5. REPEAL OF VALLES CALDERA PRESERVATION ACT.

       (a) Repeal.--On the termination of the Trust, the Valles 
     Caldera Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 698v et seq.) is 
     repealed.
       (b) Effect of Repeal.--Notwithstanding the repeal made by 
     subsection (a)--
       (1) the authority of the Secretary of Agriculture to 
     acquire mineral interests under section 104(e) of the Valles 
     Caldera Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 698v-2(e)) is transferred 
     to the Secretary and any proceeding for the condemnation of, 
     or payment of compensation for, an outstanding mineral 
     interest pursuant to the transferred authority shall 
     continue;
       (2) the provisions in section 104(g) of the Valles Caldera 
     Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 698v-2(g)) relating to the Pueblo 
     of Santa Clara shall remain in effect; and
       (3) the Fund shall not be terminated until all amounts in 
     the Fund have been expended by the Secretary.
       (c) Boundaries.--The repeal of the Valles Caldera 
     Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 698v et seq.) shall not affect 
     the boundaries as of the date of enactment of this Act 
     (including maps and legal descriptions) of--
       (1) the Preserve;
       (2) the Santa Fe National Forest (other than the 
     modification made by section 4(b));
       (3) Bandelier National Monument; and
       (4) any land conveyed to the Pueblo of Santa Clara.

     SEC. 6. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are 
     necessary to carry out this Act.

  Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. President, today I join Senator Bingaman 
in reintroducing a bill to designate the Valles Caldera National 
Preserve in New Mexico as a unit of the National Park System. The 
Valles Caldera is one of the largest volcanic calderas in the world. 
The vast grass-filled valleys, forested hillsides, and numerous 
volcanic peaks make the area a treasure to New Mexico, and a landscape 
of national significance millions of years in the making. It is 
appropriate that an area of such value be protected in perpetuity as a 
unit of the National Park Service.
  Around 1.5 million years ago a series of explosive rhyolitic 
eruptions created the massive caldera and dropped hundreds of meters of 
volcanic ash for miles. This volcanic activity gave the Pajarito 
Plateau its distinctive cliffs of pink and white tuff overlaying the 
black basalts of the Rio Grande Rift.
  In the millennia following the caldera's explosive creation, erosion 
and weathering carved vibrant canyons and left pinion-topped mesas 
stretching like fingers away from the massive crater. In time, magma 
and water drained from the great valley, and a diversity of plants and 
wildlife took their place. With such resources and natural beauty, it 
is no wonder that for millennia people have also been an integral part 
of the Valles Caldera.
  For the Pueblo Tribes of northern New Mexico, the Valles Caldera has 
been a part of life from time immemorial. The continued cultural and 
religious significance of the area must and will be respected and 
protected as the preserve moves into the management of the National 
Park Service.
  Private ownership of the Caldera began with Spanish settlers who 
introduced livestock to the grassy valleys that continue to fatten elk 
and cattle in the summer months. After a series of owners managed the 
caldera, the Federal Government finally purchased the area in 2000 
through the Valles Caldera Preservation Act, which I was proud to help 
shepherd through Congress with Senator Bingaman and then-Senator 
Domenici. The subsequent creation of the Valles Caldera National 
Preserve included the establishment of a board of directors and the 
Valles Caldera Trust to manage the area, and mandates for stakeholder 
involvement and eventual financial self-sufficiency of the Trust.
  I applaud the decade of work that both the Board of Trustees and the 
Valles Caldera Trust have dedicated to the preserve. The exceptional 
dedication of Caldera employees has led to the creation of a robust 
science and research program, to the development of incredible 
educational opportunities for visiting schools and universities, to a 
restoration of natural resources, and to an expansion of cutting-edge 
scientific research.
  Since 1939, the National Park Service has deemed the area of 
significant national value because of its unique and unaltered geology, 
and its singular setting, which are conducive to public recreation, 
reflection, education, and research. By utilizing the resources and 
skills within the National Park Service, I believe the Valles Caldera 
National Preserve will continue to prosper as a natural wonder full of 
significant geology, ecology, history, and culture.
  The bill that we introduce today reflects the comments and proposals 
that emerged through a successful committee process on a similar bill 
that Senator Bingaman and I introduced last year. In September 2010, 
the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources reported the bill out 
favorably, and it is my hope that the Committee will act quickly to 
move this reintroduced bill to the Senate floor for a vote. I look 
forward to working with Senator Bingaman and all of the stakeholders 
who care about the future of this preserve to complete our efforts to 
establish Park Service management of the preserve.

                          ____________________