[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 10]
[Senate]
[Pages 14711-14713]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. WICKER (for himself, Mrs. Capito, Mr. King, Mr. Schatz, 
        Ms. Ayotte, Ms. Collins, and Mr. Barrasso):
  S. 2067. A bill to establish EUREKA Prize Competitions to accelerate 
discovery and development of disease-modifying, preventive, or curative 
treatments for Alzheimer's disease and related dementia, to encourage 
efforts to enhance detection and diagnosis of such diseases, or to 
enhance the quality and efficiency of care of individuals with such 
diseases; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I am wearing purple today in honor of 
World Alzheimer's Month. As a matter of fact, yesterday, September 21, 
was World Alzheimer's Day. So I have chosen today to introduce a bill 
that I hope will lead to a major breakthrough in fighting this terrible 
disease and treating and potentially curing Alzheimer's disease.
  The legislation which I introduced this morning is called the EUREKA 
Act, which stands for Ensuring Useful Research Expenditures is Key for 
Alzheimer's--EUREKA.
  I am taking this moment to briefly discuss the problem of Alzheimer's 
and to ask my colleagues to get behind this tripartisan legislation and 
see if we can create some momentum to cure Alzheimer's disease in a 
decade.
  First of all, a little bit about awareness. As we all know, 
Alzheimer's is a 100-percent fatal disease. It affects some 36 million 
people around the globe. More than 5 million Americans currently have 
Alzheimer's disease. My mother died of Alzheimer's disease. I can tell 
you it is an incredibly personal trial for families who deal with loved 
ones suffering and ultimately succumbing to this disease. So there is 
the human cost which so many of us have experienced and are 
experiencing.
  There is also the cost in dollars and cents. Americans will spend 
$226 billion from our Treasury on Alzheimer's this year alone. The 
disease puts an extraordinary burden on Medicare and Medicaid. As a 
matter of fact, one in five Medicare dollars will be spent this year on 
someone with Alzheimer's. Think of what we could do to alleviate the 
suffering our previous speaker was talking about if we didn't have to 
spend this $226 billion per year, if we didn't have to spend one in 
five of our Medicare dollars on someone with Alzheimer's. Consider the 
2013 filing from the Rand Corporation. Direct costs of Alzheimer's 
exceed similar costs associated with cancer and heart disease combined.
  According to Rush University, Alzheimer's is responsible for more 
than 500,000 deaths each year.
  Without a cure or a way to halt this disease, these numbers will 
continue to grow. By 2050 Alzheimer's is expected to cost $1.1 trillion 
per year. By then, Medicare and Medicaid could see a 500-percent 
increase in Alzheimer's spending. So we have a problem in terms of 
dollars and cents, and we certainly have a problem in terms of the 
hardship it causes on families today.
  Experts say we need $2 billion a year in public research if we are 
going to get to this goal of conquering Alzheimer's by 2025. We do the 
best we can at the National Institutes of Health, but we spend only 
$586 million a year on Alzheimer's research. We need $2 billion a year. 
We spend roughly a quarter of that amount each year, with very little 
prospect of getting it up to four times what we are spending now.
  What is the solution? I believe the solution is to go to a concept 
that has made America great for decades and even centuries, and that is 
the American spirit of innovation and entrepreneurship and competition. 
We create, we build, and we make a difference in people's lives through 
competition and innovation. So today I have introduced the EUREKA bill, 
which would establish a national prize for achieving benchmarks in 
fighting this disease. I want to make it clear that the EUREKA Act 
would proceed on a parallel track with what is being done at NIH and 
the Federal Government in terms of research. It wouldn't take a penny 
away from the research dollars currently spent on Alzheimer's and the 
funds used to attack Alzheimer's in so many ways. It would be another 
route for a breakthrough by establishing a competition to run parallel 
to the research being done.
  We will need to research some milestones before we arrive at an 
Alzheimer's cure. This bill would create a system within the 
government, with cooperation from NIH, to encourage public and private 
collaboration to help us establish prizes for milestones reached to 
conquer Alzheimer's. Of course, we need to remember that prizes are 
paid only for success. If we don't meet the milestones, we won't have 
to expend the money.
  My excellent staff and I have been working for months with some of 
the leading experts in the United States on this concept, not the least 
of which is the XPRIZE Foundation, which has done such a good job in 
establishing breakthroughs in other areas. So we have the support and 
cooperation of the XPRIZE Foundation. In addition, we have worked with 
the National Institutes of Health and the Food and Drug Administration 
to get as much information as possible, and we think we have come up 
with a way to have government-funded prizes to conquer this disease.
  This is nothing new. The XPRIZE Foundation came along relatively 
recently, but it was inspired by previous examples of success. In 1927 
Charles Lindbergh won $25,000 for his Spirit of St. Louis aircraft in a 
competition to achieve the first nonstop flight between New York City 
and Paris. He received a prize for this accomplishment. Today aviation 
is a $300 billion industry. So prizes are not a new strategy. The 
government already invests in countless areas, including health. As a 
matter of fact, the America COMPETES Act gives Federal agencies the 
authority to conduct prize-based challenges. NIH has already completed 
dozens of them. This builds on that success.
  I envision that a panel would be established under this legislation 
to set benchmarks that would get us well along the road to conquering 
Alzheimer's. Successful, prize-worthy events would be measures such as 
identifying an Alzheimer's biomarker, developing early-detection 
techniques, or repurposing existing drugs for treatment. Milestones 
such as these would be established by a panel of experts. Think of what 
could be achieved if people with expertise combine their skills inside 
and outside the government to end Alzheimer's. Think of the progress 
that could be made toward ending human suffering.
  My bill is S. 2067, the EUREKA Act, and it has received support from 
researchers, including the MIND Center at the University of Mississippi 
in my home State, where we are doing innovative, groundbreaking 
achievements every day on Alzheimer's. Other organizations supporting 
the EUREKA Act include the Alzheimer's Association, Us Against 
Alzheimer's, the XPRIZE Foundation, the Alzheimer's Foundation of 
America, BrightFocus Foundation, Leaders Engaged on Alzheimer's 
Disease, otherwise known as LEAD, and Eli Lilly. All of these 
organizations and companies are supporting EUREKA.
  We already have not bipartisan cosponsorship but tripartisan 
cosponsorship of this legislation because we have Republicans, 
Democrats, and Independents already cosponsoring this EUREKA Act.
  So I come to the floor today and ask my colleagues to talk to their 
health staff members. Look at this concept. Talk to us about the 
efforts we are engaged in, about the research we have done, about the 
learned people who know what they are talking about and who have worked 
with us to bring this bill where it is. I hope we can create some 
momentum for this act soon. I hope we can attach it to legislation 
before the end of the year. I hope we can put this on the President's 
desk sometime early in the year 2016.
  EUREKA can be a game changer in fighting one of the most terrible and 
horrible and expensive diseases we have. So I would urge my colleagues 
to

[[Page 14712]]

look at this, to get back to me. I am going to aggressively be talking 
to each of my colleagues and asking them to cosponsor this legislation. 
I think we are onto something. I think we are getting very, very near 
to achieving this goal of conquering Alzheimer's within a decade.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Mr. Carper):
  S. 2068. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to include 
automated fire sprinkler system retrofits as section 179 property and 
classify certain automated fire sprinkler system retrofits as 15-year 
property for purposes of depreciation; to the Committee on Finance.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Fire Sprinkler 
Incentive Act. I am very pleased to be joined by my colleague from 
Delaware, Senator Carper, in introducing this bipartisan bill.
  Our bill would encourage commercial building owners to invest in 
life-saving fire safety upgrades. While building codes require 
sprinklers in new commercial buildings, a great number of structures 
across the U.S. were built and put in service before sprinklers were 
required. This is of significance in Maine, which has some of the 
oldest housing stock in the country and which has experienced deadly 
apartment building fires.
  Maine has a large number of older, historic buildings--buildings that 
generally may not be required to have fire sprinklers. According to the 
Maine State Housing Authority, Maine has the sixth oldest housing stock 
in the country. In fact, many of the historic areas of Portland were 
built following a devastating fire in 1866. This fire destroyed most of 
Portland's commercial buildings, many of its churches, and countless 
homes.
  Fire sprinklers are very effective at preventing deaths caused by 
fires. Small business building owners find it difficult, however, to 
fund adding retrofit sprinklers. Our bill would provide two tax 
incentives to encourage building owners to make this investment.
  Currently, commercial building owners must depreciate fire sprinkler 
retrofits over a lengthy 39-year period. The period for residential 
buildings is 27 and a half years. This bill reclassifies fire sprinkler 
retrofits as 15-year depreciable property, thus allowing building 
owners to write off their costs more quickly. The bill also provides an 
option for certain small businesses to deduct the cost of the fire 
system upgrades immediately under Section 179 of the tax code. 
Together, these proposals will provide a strong incentive for building 
owners to install fire sprinkler systems.
  According to the National Fire Protection Association, in 2013, a 
fire department responded to a structure fire every 65 seconds, and 
fire claimed 9 lives every day. Just last October, five young adults 
were killed when fire swept through a two apartment building near the 
University of Southern Maine. In addition to these five, 20 other 
people died in fires in Maine in 2014. Just last month, a fire killed 
two people in Old Town, ME. Sprinklers decrease the fire death rate by 
about 80 percent and the average loss per home fire by about 70 
percent.
  This bill was originally drafted in response to the deadly nightclub 
fire in West Warwick, RI, in 2003. One hundred people died in that 
fire. The building did not have a fire sprinkler system. Let us work 
together to prevent another tragedy like this from happening. I invite 
my colleagues to join Senator Carper and me in support of this 
bipartisan, common sense legislation.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a letter of support be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                       Congressional Fire Services


                                                    Institute,

                                               September 18, 2015.
     Hon. Susan Collins,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Collins:  On behalf of the Congressional Fire 
     Services Institute (CFSI), I would like to express our thanks 
     and appreciation for sponsoring the Fire Sprinkler Incentive 
     Act. In 2002, CFSI's National Advisory Committee (NAC), a 
     coalition of 35 national fire and emergency service 
     organizations, unanimously approved a resolution expressing 
     the need for federal tax incentives to encourage the 
     installation of automatic fire sprinkler systems in 
     residential and commercial buildings. The introduction of the 
     Fire Sprinkler Incentive Act is an important step in 
     achieving this goal.
       The cost of fire in America is enormous. According to the 
     National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), in 2014, there 
     were 1,298,000 fires reported in the United States, leading 
     to 3,275 civilian fire deaths, 15,775 civilian injuries, and 
     $11.6 billion in property damage. When you include the 
     indirect cost of fire, such as lost economic activity, the 
     cost is closer to $108 billion annually.
       Studies by NFPA have concluded that buildings outfitted 
     with sprinklers reduce the death rate per fire by at least 
     57% and decrease the property damage by up to 68%. By 
     classifying the retrofit of an automatic fire sprinkler 
     system as an eligible property under Section 179 of the tax 
     code, the Fire Sprinkler Incentive Act will save lives by 
     allowing small and medium-sized businesses to deduct the cost 
     of sprinkler systems up to $125,000.00. The legislation would 
     also create a tax incentive for the retrofit of high-rise 
     buildings. In the United States alone, there are nearly 
     10,000 high-rise fires annually. These structures, when not 
     sprinklered, pose serious safety risks to both civilians and 
     firefighters.
       It is an incontrovertible fact that fire sprinklers save 
     lives, including the lives of our firefighters. No 
     firefighter has ever died while fighting a fire in a fully 
     sprinklered structure. But unfortunately approximately 100 
     firefighters die in the line of duty every year. We, as a 
     nation, owe it to our firefighters and their families to make 
     the profession as safe as possible. The Fire Sprinkler 
     Incentive Act will help us achieve that goal.
       We strongly encourage all members of Congress to support 
     this important piece of legislation. Thank you for your 
     leadership on this issue, and best wishes on your continued 
     success and safety.
           Sincerely,
                                                        Bill Webb,
                                               Executive Director.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. WYDEN (for himself and Mr. Merkley):
  S. 2069. A bill to amend the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 
2009 to modify provisions relating to certain land exchanges in the Mt. 
Hood Wilderness in the State of Oregon; to the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Mt. Hood Cooper 
Spur Land Exchange Clarification Act. This bill is a necessary step to 
ensuring that the Cooper Spur land exchange on Mt. Hood proceeds as 
Congress originally intended when it passed as a part of the Omnibus 
Public Lands Bill in 2009. I am pleased to introduce this bill with my 
colleague from Oregon, Senator Jeff Merkley.
  The Mt. Hood Cooper Spur land exchange was included in the Mt. Hood 
Wilderness designation that passed 6 years ago as part of the Omnibus 
Public Lands Act of 2009. The bill, which has now been law for over 6 
years, directed several land exchanges including the Cooper Spur land 
exchange.
  The Cooper Spur land exchange required the Forest Service to transfer 
approximately 120 acres of Federal land to Mt. Hood Meadows in exchange 
for approximately 770 acres of private land, with the goal of keeping 
development of Mt. Hood concentrated around the current development at 
Government Camp and ensuring the protection of the North side of the 
mountain. The swap was to be completed in 16 months. It is now 77 
months later and the exchange has not moved forward. The delays have 
angered the public, endangered the environment, and have now spurred a 
lawsuit against the Forest Service.
  The Mt. Hood Cooper Spur Land Exchange Clarification Act would make 
technical corrections to the Original Cooper Spur land exchange 
provisions in the Omnibus Public Lands Act to jumpstart the land 
exchange and keep the process moving forward so the exchange can 
finally be completed, as originally intended.
  I introduced the original Mt. Hood Wilderness proposal in 2004 and 
again in 2006 and 2007 with my then-colleague Senator Gordon Smith of 
Oregon. As the Wilderness proposal and associated land exchanges took 
shape, more than 1,700 constituents provided input on the proposal. It 
was supported by members of the Oregon congressional delegation at the 
time, then-Governor

[[Page 14713]]

Kulongoski, the Bush administration, and over 100 community groups. The 
Mt. Hood Cooper Spur Land Exchange Clarification Act is supported by 
Mt. Hood Meadows, Friends of Hood River Valley, Clackamas County, and 
Hood River County.
  The Cooper Spur land exchange was an important part of the Mt. Hood 
Wilderness designation to ensure the protection of the undeveloped 
North side of the mountain. In turn, the Mt. Hood Cooper Spur Land 
Exchange Clarification Act is needed in order to ensure that the land 
exchange, a community-driven solution to the development challenges on 
Mt. Hood, is finally completed.
  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. 2069

       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 ``Mount Hood Cooper Spur Land 
     Exchange Clarification Act''.

     SEC. 2. COOPER SPUR LAND EXCHANGE CLARIFICATION AMENDMENTS.

       Section 1206(a) of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act 
     of 2009 (Public Law 111-11; 123 Stat. 1018) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``120 acres'' and 
     inserting ``107 acres''; and
       (B) in subparagraph (E)(ii), by inserting ``improvements,'' 
     after ``buildings,''; and
       (2) in paragraph (2)--
       (A) by amending the text of subparagraph (C) to read as 
     follows: ``As a condition of the land exchange under this 
     subsection, title to the non-Federal land to be acquired by 
     the Secretary under this subsection shall be acceptable to 
     the Secretary.'';
       (B) in subparagraph (D)--
       (i) in clause (i), by striking ``As soon as practicable 
     after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary and 
     Mt. Hood Meadows shall select'' and inserting ``Not later 
     than 60 days after the date of the enactment of the Mount 
     Hood Cooper Spur Land Exchange Clarification Act, the 
     Secretary and Mt. Hood Meadows shall jointly select'';
       (ii) in clause (ii), in the matter preceding subclause (I), 
     by striking ``An appraisal under clause (i) shall'' and 
     inserting ``Except as provided under clause (iii), an 
     appraisal under clause (i) shall assign a separate value to 
     each tax lot to allow for the equalization of values and''; 
     and
       (iii) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(iii) Final appraised value.--

       ``(I) In general.--Subject to subclause (II), after the 
     final appraised value of the Federal land and the non-Federal 
     land are determined and approved by the Secretary, the 
     Secretary shall not be required to reappraise or update the 
     final appraised value for a period of up to 3 years, 
     beginning on the date of the approval by the Secretary of the 
     final appraised value.
       ``(II) Exception.--Subclause (I) shall not apply if the 
     condition of either the Federal land or the non-Federal land 
     referred to in subclause (I) is significantly and 
     substantially altered by fire, windstorm, or other events.

       ``(iv) Public review.--Before completing the land exchange 
     under this Act, the Secretary shall make available for public 
     review the complete appraisals of the land to be 
     exchanged.'';
       (C) in subparagraph (F), by striking ``16 months after the 
     date of enactment of this Act'' and inserting ``1 year after 
     the date of the enactment of the Mount Hood Cooper Spur Land 
     Exchange Clarification Act''; and
       (D) by striking subparagraph (G) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(G) Required conveyance conditions.--Prior to the 
     exchange of the Federal and non-Federal land--
       ``(i) in full satisfaction of Executive Order 11990, Mt. 
     Hood Meadows shall obtain the concurrence of the Oregon 
     Department of State Lands with the identification of wetland 
     boundaries on the Federal land as designated on a wetland 
     delineation report prepared by an independent professional 
     engineer registered in the State of Oregon so as to provide 
     protection of the identified wetland according to applicable 
     law; and
       ``(ii) the Secretary shall reserve a 24-foot-wide 
     nonexclusive trail easement at the existing trail locations 
     on the Federal land that retains for the United States 
     existing rights to construct, reconstruct, maintain, and 
     permit nonmotorized use by the public of existing trails 
     subject to the right of the owner of the Federal land--

       ``(I) to cross the trails with roads, utilities, and 
     infrastructure facilities; and
       ``(II) to improve or relocate the trails to accommodate 
     development of the Federal land.

       ``(H) Equalization of values.--
       ``(i) In general.--Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), in 
     addition to or in lieu of monetary compensation, a lesser 
     area of Federal land or non-Federal land may be conveyed if 
     necessary to equalize appraised values of the exchange 
     properties, without limitation, consistent with the 
     requirements of this Act and subject to the approval of the 
     Secretary and Mt. Hood Meadows.
       ``(ii) Treatment of certain compensation or conveyances as 
     donation.--If, after payment of compensation or adjustment of 
     land area subject to exchange under this Act, the amount by 
     which the appraised value of the land and other property 
     conveyed by Mt. Hood Meadows under subparagraph (A) exceeds 
     the appraised value of the land conveyed by the Secretary 
     under subparagraph (A) shall be considered a donation by Mt. 
     Hood Meadows to the United States.''.

                          ____________________