[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 163 (2017), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 4010-4016]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mrs. MURRAY (for herself, Ms. Collins, Ms. Baldwin, Mr. 
        Bennet, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Brown, Mr. Coons, Mr. Durbin, Mr. 
        Franken, Mr. King, Mr. Murphy, Mr. Schatz, Mr. Sanders, Mrs. 
        Shaheen, Mr. Tester, Mr. Warner, and Ms. Cantwell):

[[Page 4011]]

  S. 591. A bill to expand eligibility for the program of comprehensive 
assistance for family caregivers of the Department of Veterans Affairs, 
to expand benefits available to participants under such program, to 
enhance special compensation for members of the uniformed services who 
require assistance in everyday life, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I am once again delighted to join my 
colleague, Senator Patty Murray, to introduce the Military and Veteran 
Caregiver Services Improvement Act of 2017. Our bill would greatly 
expand eligibility for VA caregiver support services by including 
veterans from all eras, allow veterans to transfer their post 9/11 GI 
bill benefits to their dependents, expand eligibility for the VA 
caregivers program to include a wider range of injuries that may have 
previously gone unrecognized, and provide crucial support for our 
Nation's caregivers themselves.
  In 2014, my former colleague and friend, Senator Elizabeth Dole, 
commissioned a study by the RAND Corporation to learn more about the 
military caregiver population and explore common issues experienced by 
America's caregivers. The experts at RAND found that those caring for 
our servicemembers and veterans provide nearly $14 billion worth of 
unpaid services every year--an incredible cost that would otherwise be 
passed on to the Nation.
  There are more than 5.5 million military caregivers in the United 
States, and of those, 1.1 million are caring for post-9/11 veterans. 
These are spouses, parents, children, and other loved ones who have 
voluntarily put their lives on hold to provide our returning 
servicemembers with a trusted continuum of care that could not be 
replicated without them. Many of them will provide this care for years, 
if not decades, to come.
  Tragically, caring for those suffering from the scars of war takes an 
enormous toll. According to the RAND study, military caregivers face 
increased instances of mental and physical health problems, chronic 
absenteeism from work, deteriorating personal relationships, legal and 
financial troubles, and feelings of isolation. These difficulties are 
often more pronounced for post-9/11 military caregivers.
  Our Nation owes America's veterans our deepest gratitude. Their 
sacrifices are often very visible. In many cases our veterans have 
earned medals or awards for their bravery that they can wear proudly on 
their chest. But our military and veteran caregivers truly are hidden 
heroes, serving alongside our veterans to provide the love, care, and 
support they need. Despite their enormous sacrifice, these hidden 
heroes often do not receive the awards and admiration. That does not 
mean that they don't deserve it. We must honor our commitment to 
veterans by answering the call to better support those caring for our 
wounded, ill, and injured warriors.
  Our legislation would help strengthen the services offered to 
caregivers. The Military and Veteran Caregiver Services Improvement Act 
is an important step in helping those who have assumed the mantle of 
caring for the men and women who have served our Nation so honorably. I 
urge all of my colleagues to join Senator Murray and me in honoring and 
supporting our Nation's military caregivers.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KAINE (for himself, Mr. Rounds, and Mr. Perdue):
  S. 592. A bill to amend title 10, United States Code, to support 
meeting the increasing needs of the United States for a cybersecurity 
and information assurance workforce by reinvigorating and modifying the 
Information Assurance Scholarship Program of the Department of Defense, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Armed Services.
  Mr. KAINE. Mr. Presidents, a skilled workforce is essential to 
addressing the growing cyber security challenges in the United States. 
The Department of Defense, DOD, Cyber Strategy, issued in April 2015, 
cites building the cyber workforce among its objective's for achieving 
the essential strategic goal of maintaining ready forces and 
capabilities to conduct cyberspace operations. In Virginia, it is 
estimated that 36,000 cybersecurity jobs remain unfilled.
  Beginning in 2001, DOD funded the Information Assurance Scholarship 
Program, IASP, which boosts the Nation's cyber workforce through 
scholarship and capacity-building grants to colleges and universities 
designated by the National Security Agency and the Department of 
Homeland Security as Centers of Academic Excellence, CAE. Scholarship 
recipients are required to fulfill a service obligation by working in a 
cyber security position at DOD upon graduation.
  According to a DOD report from February 2015, the IASP Program had 
employed 593 students and awarded 180 capacity-building grants to CAEs. 
However, due to budget constraints, DOD reduced funding for the IASP 
beginning in 2013 and stopped recruiting new students. The IASP 
received its peak funding level of $7.5 million in 2005--for fiscal 
year 2017, it received $500,000.
  Today, I am pleased to introduce with my colleague Senator Rounds, 
the DOD Cyber Scholarship Program Act of 2017. The DOD Cyber 
Scholarship Program Act of 2017 would reinvigorate the IASP to boost 
our Nation's cyber workforce. The bill would rename the IASP as the DOD 
Cyber Scholarship Program and express the Sense of Congress that the 
program is an important tool for boosting our cyber defense workforce.
  The DOD Cyber Scholarship Program Act would also modify the program 
by expanding scholarships to students pursuing Associate's Degrees. 
There are currently 46 two-year institutions designated as CAEs, which 
would be eligible to apply for grants. Associate's degree programs 
could provide a valuable source of technical personnel, at a lower 
cost, to DOD. The bill would require that at least 5 percent of 
scholarship funds go to 2-year program students.
  The DOD Cyber Scholarship Program Act would authorize the DOD Cyber 
Scholarship Program to receive $10 million in fiscal year 2018. At its 
peak in 2005, the IASP received $7.5 million. Since then, the cost of 
tuition has increased considerably and the need for skilled cyber 
professionals has never been greater. Ten million dollars is an 
appropriate funding level to reinvigorate the program, expand it to 
associate's degree recipients, and allow for manageable program 
execution from DOD and the National Security Agency.
  The DOD Cyber Scholarship Program is a commonsense, bipartisan bill 
that would help students succeed in today's economy and strengthen our 
national security. There are good-paying jobs in Virginia and across 
the country in the cyber field that are going unfilled, and it is clear 
we must make it easier for students to access the programs that prepare 
them for these roles. Expanding scholarship funds so they're available 
to community college students will help put more of our nation's 
students on a path to success and support our national security needs.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CORNYN (for himself, Mr. Cruz, and Mr. Leahy):
  S. 594. A bill to authorize the Secretary of Homeland Security to 
work with cybersecurity consortia for training, and for other purposes; 
to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
  Mr. CORNYN. 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. 594

       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 Cybersecurity 
     Preparedness Consortium Act of 2017''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act--
       (1) the term ``consortium'' means a group primarily 
     composed of non-profit entities, including academic 
     institutions, that develop, update, and deliver cybersecurity 
     training in support of homeland security;

[[Page 4012]]

       (2) the terms ``cybersecurity risk'' and ``incident'' have 
     the meanings given those terms in section 227(a) of the 
     Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 148(a));
       (3) the term ``Department'' means the Department of 
     Homeland Security; and
       (4) the term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security.

     SEC. 3. NATIONAL CYBERSECURITY PREPAREDNESS CONSORTIUM.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary may work with a consortium, 
     including the National Cybersecurity Preparedness Consortium, 
     to support efforts to address cybersecurity risks and 
     incidents, including threats of terrorism and acts of 
     terrorism.
       (b) Assistance to the NCCIC.--The Secretary may work with a 
     consortium to assist the national cybersecurity and 
     communications integration center of the Department 
     (established under section 227 of the Homeland Security Act 
     of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 148)) to--
       (1) provide training to State and local first responders 
     and officials specifically for preparing for and responding 
     to cybersecurity risks and incidents, including threats of 
     terrorism and acts of terrorism, in accordance with 
     applicable law;
       (2) develop and update a curriculum utilizing existing 
     programs and models in accordance with such section 227, for 
     State and local first responders and officials, related to 
     cybersecurity risks and incidents, including threats of 
     terrorism and acts of terrorism;
       (3) provide technical assistance services to build and 
     sustain capabilities in support of preparedness for and 
     response to cybersecurity risks and incidents, including 
     threats of terrorism and acts of terrorism, in accordance 
     with such section 227;
       (4) conduct cross-sector cybersecurity training and 
     simulation exercises for entities, including State and local 
     governments, critical infrastructure owners and operators, 
     and private industry, to encourage community-wide 
     coordination in defending against and responding to 
     cybersecurity risks and incidents, including threats of 
     terrorism and acts of terrorism, in accordance with section 
     228(c) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 
     149(c));
       (5) help States and communities develop cybersecurity 
     information sharing programs, in accordance with section 227 
     of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 148), for the 
     dissemination of homeland security information related to 
     cybersecurity risks and incidents, including threats of 
     terrorism and acts of terrorism; and
       (6) help incorporate cybersecurity risk and incident 
     prevention and response (including related to threats of 
     terrorism and acts of terrorism) into existing State and 
     local emergency plans, including continuity of operations 
     plans.
       (c) Prohibition on Duplication.--In carrying out the 
     functions under subsection (b), the Secretary shall, to the 
     greatest extent practicable, seek to prevent unnecessary 
     duplication of existing programs or efforts of the 
     Department.
       (d) Considerations Regarding Selection of a Consortium.--In 
     selecting a consortium with which to work under this Act, the 
     Secretary shall take into consideration the following:
       (1) Any prior experience conducting cybersecurity training 
     and exercises for State and local entities.
       (2) Geographic diversity of the members of any such 
     consortium so as to cover different regions throughout the 
     United States.
       (e) Metrics.--If the Secretary works with a consortium 
     under subsection (a), the Secretary shall measure the 
     effectiveness of the activities undertaken by the consortium 
     under this Act.
       (f) Outreach.--The Secretary shall conduct outreach to 
     universities and colleges, including historically Black 
     colleges and universities, Hispanic-serving institutions, 
     Tribal Colleges and Universities, and other minority-serving 
     institutions, regarding opportunities to support efforts to 
     address cybersecurity risks and incidents, including threats 
     of terrorism and acts of terrorism, by working with the 
     Secretary under subsection (a).
       (g) Termination.--The authority to carry out this Act shall 
     terminate on the date that is 5 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act.

                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DURBIN (for himself and Ms. Duckworth):
  S. 600. A bill to require rulemaking by the Administrator of the 
Federal Emergency Management Agency to address considerations in 
evaluating the need for public and individual disaster assistance, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Homeland Security and 
Governmental Affairs.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr President, I am proud to introduce the Fairness in 
Federal Disaster Declarations Act today, together with my colleague 
Senator Duckworth, to try to bring some transparency and fairness into 
FEMA's disaster declaration process.
  The inspiration for this bill was a tragic one. On February 29, 2012, 
a category F-4 tornado tore through southeastern Illinois, causing 
major damage in the towns of Harrisburg and Ridgway. Eight people in 
Harrisburg died in that event and 15 people were killed in total. Winds 
reached 175 miles per hour. It is not too much of a stretch to say 
these two small towns were almost wiped off the map.
  And just last week, on February 28, 2017, another tragedy struck the 
small towns of Ottawa and Naplate after a category F-3 tornado tore 
through North Central Illinois. Two people in Ottawa died in last 
week's storm and at least 50 homes were damaged or destroyed.
  Requests for Federal assistance after a disaster are made by the 
Governor of each State based on State emergency management damage 
assessments. In the case of the Harrisburg and Ridgway tornado, the 
Governor's request for a Federal emergency declaration for individual 
assistance was denied, as was the State's appeal of that decision. With 
that denial, individuals whose homes or properties were damaged were 
precluded from direct Federal help.
  When I asked FEMA why it denied the Governor's request, I was told 
that the disaster did not meet or exceed the State's per capita figure. 
Currently, FEMA multiplies the number of people in a State by $1.43 to 
determine a threshold of the amount of damage a State would incur to be 
considered for Federal assistance. In Illinois, that figure is more 
than $18 million. In other words, because Illinois is a highly populous 
State, it is presumed it can absorb the costs of cleanup and recovery 
from disasters up to more than $18 million.
  From 2002 to 2012, Illinois was denied Federal disaster assistance 
seven times. Texas was denied 13 times. Florida was denied Federal 
disaster assistance eight times during that period, and California, New 
Jersey, and New York were each denied four times.
  FEMA's formula does not work for large, populous States, particularly 
those with a concentrated urban area, like Illinois.
  Illinois ran into this issue again in November 2013 when tornadoes 
swept through the State. That time, six people were killed and whole 
neighborhoods were nearly destroyed. The cities of Washington, Gifford, 
and New Minden, Illinois, experienced some of the worst tornado damage 
I have ever seen. Their infrastructure was decimated, but because 
Illinois did not meet one of FEMA's criteria, we were denied Federal 
public assistance.
  In the case of last week's tornado in Ottawa and Naplate, Illinois, 
may not even be able to request federal help because damage assessments 
are too low to reach anything close to FEMA's per capita requirement. 
But for these small towns, covering losses and cleaning up damage of 
this magnitude can put a real strain on the community.
  The Fairness in Federal Disaster Declaration seeks to improve the 
disaster analysis by assigning a value to each of the factors FEMA must 
consider when determining whether Federal disaster assistance will be 
made available. When it comes to individual assistance--funding to help 
people repair and rebuild their homes--the breakdown would be as 
follows:
  Concentration of damages--the density of damage in an individual 
community--would be considered 20 percent of the analysis. Trauma--the 
loss of life and injuries and the disruption of normal community 
functions--would be 20 percent. Special Populations--including the age 
and income of the residents, the amount of home ownership, etc.--would 
comprise 20 percent. Voluntary agency assistance--a consideration of 
what the volunteer and charitable groups are providing--would make up 5 
percent. The amount of Insurance coverage--20 percent. And average 
amount of individual assistance by State, which includes the per capita 
analysis, would make up 5 percent of the analysis.
  The bill also would add a seventh consideration to FEMA's metrics--
the economics of the area, which will receive 10 percent consideration. 
This includes factors such as the local assessable tax base, the median 
income as it compares to that of the State, and the poverty rate as it 
compares to that of the State.

[[Page 4013]]

  For Federal public assistance, the breakdown would be similar, with a 
greater emphasis placed on the localized impacts of the disaster, which 
would warrant 40 percent of the analysis.
  It is reasonable that FEMA should take into consideration the size of 
the State requesting assistance, but current regulations penalize large 
States. Assigning values to the factors will help ensure that the 
damage to a specific community weighs more than a State's population.
  Illinois is a geographically large State with a concentrated urban 
area. And downstate communities are being punished for it.
  If the cities of Ottawa and Naplate, Washington and Gifford, and 
Harrisburg and Ridgway cannot qualify under FEMA's current criteria for 
Federal assistance, something is wrong. The way FEMA evaluates whether 
to declare an area Federal disaster is not effective. It is working 
against small communities in States with large populations.
  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. 600

       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 ``Fairness in Federal Disaster 
     Declarations Act of 2017''.

     SEC. 2. REGULATORY ACTION REQUIRED.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 120 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal 
     Emergency Management Agency (in this Act referred to as the 
     ``Administrator'' and ``FEMA'', respectively) shall amend the 
     rules of the Administrator under section 206.48 of title 44, 
     Code of Federal Regulations, as in effect on the date of 
     enactment of this Act, in accordance with the provisions of 
     this Act.
       (b) New Criteria Required.--The amended rules issued under 
     subsection (a) shall provide for the following:
       (1) Public assistance program.--Such rules shall provide 
     that, with respect to the evaluation of the need for public 
     assistance--
       (A) specific weighted valuations shall be assigned to each 
     criterion, as follows--
       (i) estimated cost of the assistance, 10 percent;
       (ii) localized impacts, 40 percent;
       (iii) insurance coverage in force, 10 percent;
       (iv) hazard mitigation, 10 percent;
       (v) recent multiple disasters, 10 percent;
       (vi) programs of other Federal assistance, 10 percent; and
       (vii) economic circumstances described in subparagraph (B), 
     10 percent; and
       (B) FEMA shall consider the economic circumstances of--
       (i) the local economy of the affected area, including 
     factors such as the local assessable tax base and local sales 
     tax, the median income as it compares to that of the State, 
     and the poverty rate as it compares to that of the State; and
       (ii) the economy of the State, including factors such as 
     the unemployment rate of the State, as compared to the 
     national unemployment rate.
       (2) Individual assistance program.--Such rules shall 
     provide that, with respect to the evaluation of the severity, 
     magnitude, and impact of the disaster and the evaluation of 
     the need for assistance to individuals--
       (A) specific weighted valuations shall be assigned to each 
     criterion, as follows--
       (i) concentration of damages, 20 percent;
       (ii) trauma, 20 percent;
       (iii) special populations, 20 percent;
       (iv) voluntary agency assistance, 10 percent;
       (v) insurance, 20 percent;
       (vi) average amount of individual assistance by State, 5 
     percent; and
       (vii) economic considerations described in subparagraph 
     (B), 5 percent; and
       (B) FEMA shall consider the economic circumstances of the 
     affected area, including factors such as the local assessable 
     tax base and local sales tax, the median income as it 
     compares to that of the State, and the poverty rate as it 
     compares to that of the State.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amended rules issued under 
     subsection (a) shall apply to any disaster for which a 
     Governor requested a major disaster declaration under the 
     Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) and was denied on or after 
     January 1, 2012.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Mr. Wicker, Mr. Reed, Mr. Cochran, 
        Mr. Merkley, and Mr. Brown):
  S. 601. A bill to ensure that significantly more students graduate 
college with the international knowledge and experience essential for 
success in today's global economy through the establishment of the 
Senator Paul Simon Study Abroad Program in the Department of Education; 
to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, today, Senator Wicker of Mississippi and I 
are reintroducing the Senator Paul Simon Study Abroad Program Act. This 
bill, named for a mentor of mine--the late Senator from Illinois, 
embodies a vision Paul Simon believed in throughout his life: a vision 
centered on our country's need for a culturally aware, and globally 
knowledgeable population and workforce.
  Senator Simon saw these characteristics as essential to our country's 
economy, society, and national security. He believed that by building 
meaningful relationships with people around the world, America would 
grow even stronger as a nation. In his words, ``America's incompetence 
in foreign languages and cultural awareness jeopardizes our Nation's 
future in global affairs. This lack of global perspective damages 
America's ability to compete in world markets. The more our country 
becomes competent in foreign languages and cultures, the more enhanced 
our foreign policy decisions will become.''
  He also believed that to truly be educated, our students needed more 
than a minimal understanding of the world around them. To be truly 
educated, they need to immerse themselves in the beliefs, customs, 
language, and environment of a culture other than their own. I share 
these beliefs with Senator Simon and many Republicans in this Chamber 
share them as well.
  At a time when there are calls from some to shut out immigrants and 
refugees and pull away from other parts of the world, these beliefs are 
more important than ever. We need to continue to give our young people 
the opportunity to interact with people from all over the world, so 
they can develop their own informed opinions and beliefs.
  Undergraduate study abroad programs are a popular source for this 
type of engagement. Unfortunately, far too few students take advantage 
or have the means to take advantage of this opportunity. Annually, less 
than 2 percent of undergraduate students participate in study abroad.
  Those who do study abroad don't reflect the incredible diversity of 
our postsecondary institutions. Minority students, first-generation 
college students, community college students, and students with 
disabilities are significantly underrepresented in the study abroad 
population. These students miss out on the valuable personal and 
educational growth that comes from a study abroad experience, including 
interacting with other cultures, developing foreign language skills, 
and expanding international knowledge through firsthand experience.
  We also know that those who currently study abroad do so mostly in 
highly developed countries. In fact, over 50 percent of students who 
study abroad each year do so in Europe. Increasing the diversity of 
study abroad destinations to include countries in Asia, the Middle 
East, Africa, South America, and Latin America will help American 
students develop a global perspective and build the insight and skills 
needed to better understand the global challenges of the 21st century.
  In 2004, Congress took the first step towards expanding study abroad 
when it authorized the Commission on Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad 
Fellowship Program to provide recommendations to Congress and the 
President on expanding study abroad programs.
  The Senator Paul Simon Study Abroad Program Act combines the vision 
of Senator Simon with the recommendations of the Abraham Lincoln Study 
Abroad Commission. It establishes a competitive grant program for 
institutions of higher education to encourage the sustainable expansion 
of study abroad opportunities for students in the United States.
  Over the next 10 years, this grant program aims to increase the 
number of undergraduate students stud g abroad each year to one million 
students. It also emphasizes increasing opportunities for 
nontraditional students, minority students, and students

[[Page 4014]]

with disabilities so that the demographics of students who study abroad 
more closely reflect the population of current undergraduate students.
  This bill also focuses on getting students to study abroad in 
nontraditional destinations particularly in developing countries. We 
need to send more students to developing nations because these are the 
places that America needs to better understand. This legislation takes 
important steps toward expanding and diversifying participation in 
study abroad.
  Senator Wicker and I are pleased to be joined today in introducing 
this bill by Senators Reed, Cochran, Merkley, and Brown. I am also 
pleased that several organizations have endorsed this bill including 
the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities, the Association 
of International Educators, the American Council on Education, the 
Association of American Universities, and the Hispanic Association of 
Colleges and Universities.
  In today's increasingly interconnected world, study abroad 
participation is an important element of a meaningful undergraduate 
education. Expanded access to study abroad opportunities is necessary 
to prepare the next generation of Americans with the global knowledge 
and skills needed to succeed. I hope other colleagues will join us in 
that effort.
  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. 601

       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 ``Senator Paul Simon Study 
     Abroad Program Act of 2017''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) To prepare students for success in the modern global 
     economy, opportunities for study abroad should be included as 
     part of a well-rounded education.
       (2) Study abroad programs provide students with 
     unparalleled access to international knowledge, an unmatched 
     opportunity to learn foreign languages, and a unique 
     environment for developing cultural understanding, all of 
     which are knowledge and skills needed in today's global 
     economy.
       (3) Less than 2 percent of all enrolled postsecondary 
     students in the United States study abroad for credit in any 
     given year, and minority students, first generation college 
     students, community college students, and students with 
     disabilities are significantly underrepresented in study 
     abroad participation.
       (4) Congress authorized the establishment of the Commission 
     on the Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad Fellowship Program 
     pursuant to section 104 of the Miscellaneous Appropriations 
     and Offsets Act, 2004 (division H of Public Law 108-199). 
     Pursuant to its mandate, the Lincoln Commission submitted to 
     Congress and the President a report of its recommendations 
     for greatly expanding the opportunity for students at 
     institutions of higher education in the United States to 
     study abroad, with special emphasis on studying in developing 
     nations.
       (5) According to the Lincoln Commission, ``[e]xperience 
     shows that leadership from administrators and faculty will 
     drive the number of study abroad participants higher and 
     improve the quality of programs. Such leadership is the only 
     way that study abroad will become an integral part of the 
     undergraduate experience.''. A competitive grant program is 
     necessary to encourage and support such leadership.

     SEC. 3. PURPOSES.

       The purposes of this Act are--
       (1) to ensure that significantly more students have access 
     to quality study abroad opportunities;
       (2) to ensure that the diversity of students studying 
     abroad reflects the diversity of students and institutions of 
     higher education in the United States;
       (3) to encourage greater diversity in study abroad 
     destinations by increasing the portion of study abroad that 
     takes place in nontraditional study abroad destinations, 
     especially in developing countries; and
       (4) to encourage a greater commitment by institutions of 
     higher education to expand study abroad opportunities.

     SEC. 4. SENATOR PAUL SIMON STUDY ABROAD PROGRAM.

       Section 741 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     1138) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by redesignating paragraphs (12) and (13) as paragraphs 
     (13) and (14), respectively; and
       (B) by inserting after paragraph (11) the following:
       ``(12) awarding grants under the Senator Paul Simon Study 
     Abroad Program described in subsection (g);''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(g) Senator Paul Simon Study Abroad Program.--
       ``(1) Definitions.--In this subsection:
       ``(A) Institution of higher education.--The term 
     `institution of higher education' has the meaning given the 
     term in section 101(a).
       ``(B) National of the united states.--The term `national of 
     the United States' means a national of the United States or 
     an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence (as those 
     terms are defined in section 101 of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101)).
       ``(C) Nontraditional study abroad destination.--The term 
     `nontraditional study abroad destination' means a location 
     that is determined by the Secretary to be a less common 
     destination for students who study abroad.
       ``(D) Student.--The term `student' means a national of the 
     United States who is enrolled at an institution of higher 
     education located within the United States.
       ``(E) Study abroad.--The term `study abroad' means an 
     educational program of study, work, research, internship, or 
     combination thereof that is conducted outside the United 
     States and that carries academic credit.
       ``(2) Senator paul simon study abroad program.--
       ``(A) Establishment.--There is established in the 
     Department a program to be called the `Senator Paul Simon 
     Study Abroad Program'.
       ``(B) Objectives.--The objectives of the program 
     established under subparagraph (A) are, that not later than 
     10 years after the date of enactment of the Senator Paul 
     Simon Study Abroad Program Act of 2017--
       ``(i) not less than 1,000,000 undergraduate students will 
     study abroad annually;
       ``(ii) the demographics of study abroad participation will 
     reflect the demographics of the United States undergraduate 
     population by increasing the participation of 
     underrepresented groups; and
       ``(iii) an increasing portion of study abroad will take 
     place in nontraditional study abroad destinations, with a 
     substantial portion of such increases in developing 
     countries.
       ``(C) Competitive grants to institutions of higher 
     education.--In order to accomplish the objectives set forth 
     in subparagraph (B), the Secretary shall award grants on a 
     competitive basis to institutions of higher education, 
     individually or in a consortium, based on applications by the 
     institutions that--
       ``(i) set forth detailed plans for using grant funds to 
     further such objectives;
       ``(ii) include an institutional commitment to expanding 
     access to study abroad;
       ``(iii) include plans for evaluating progress made in 
     increasing access to study abroad;
       ``(iv) describe how increases in study abroad participation 
     achieved through the grant will be sustained in subsequent 
     years; and
       ``(v) demonstrate that the programs have established health 
     and safety guidelines and procedures.
       ``(D) Nongovernmental institutions.--Consortia of 
     institutions of higher education applying for grants 
     described in subparagraph (C) may include nongovernmental 
     institutions that provide and promote study abroad 
     opportunities for students.
       ``(E) Commission on the abraham lincoln study abroad 
     fellowship program.--In administering the program, the 
     Secretary shall take fully into account the recommendations 
     of the Commission on the Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad 
     Fellowship Program, established pursuant to section 104 of 
     the Miscellaneous Appropriations and Offsets Act, 2004 
     (division H of Public Law 108-199).
       ``(F) Consultation.--In carrying out this paragraph, the 
     Secretary shall consult with representatives of diverse 
     institutions of higher education, educational policy 
     organizations, and others with appropriate expertise.
       ``(3) Annual report.--Not later than December 31 of each 
     year following the date of enactment of the Senator Paul 
     Simon Study Abroad Program Act of 2017, the Secretary shall 
     submit to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
     Pensions of the Senate and the Committee on Education and the 
     Workforce of the House of Representatives a report on the 
     implementation of this subsection during the prior fiscal 
     year.
       ``(4) Authorization of appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subsection 
     such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 2018 and each 
     subsequent fiscal year.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Mr. Carper):
  S. 602. 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.

[[Page 4015]]


  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Fire Sprinkler 
Incentive Act. I am pleased to be joined by my colleague from Delaware, 
Senator Carper, in introducing this bipartisan bill.
  In the United States, the annual cost of fires is enormous. In 2015, 
according to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), fires 
resulted in approximately $14 billion in direct property loss. In 
addition, more than 3,000 civilians were killed and more than 15,000 
people were injured in fires. The NFPA also reports that a fire 
department responded to a structure fire every 63 seconds.
  These statistics are of particular concern in Maine, which has some 
of the oldest housing stock in the country and which has experienced 
deadly apartment building fires. In 2014, an apartment fire resulted in 
the deaths of six people--Maine's deadliest fire in nearly four 
decades.
  Historically, Maine has also seen commercial property damaged by 
fires. In fact, much of the construction in the historic areas of 
Portland was done following a devastating fire in 1866. This fire 
destroyed a third of the city, including most of Portland's commercial 
buildings, many of its churches, and countless homes.
  The NFPA reports that when fire sprinklers are present during a large 
fire, they are effective 96 percent of the time, saving billions of 
dollars in property damage but more importantly, thousands of lives. 
Our bill would encourage commercial building owners to invest in 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.
  Small business building owners, however, may find it difficult to 
fund retrofit sprinklers. To help these owners, our bill would provide 
two tax incentives to encourage them to make this lifesaving 
investment.
  Currently, commercial building owners must depreciate fire sprinkler 
retrofits over a lengthy 39-year period. The period for residential 
buildings is 7\1/2\ 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.
  This bill was originally drafted in response to the deadly nightclub 
fire in West Warwick, RI, in 2003, which killed a staggering 100 
people. That building did not have a fire sprinkler system. Let us work 
together to lessen the chances of another tragedy like this one. 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 letter of support was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                         International Association


                                               of Fire Chiefs,

                                       Fairfax, VA, March 6, 2017.
     Hon. Susan Collins,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Collins: On behalf of the more than 12,000 
     chief fire and emergency service officers of the 
     International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC), thank you 
     for introducing the Fire Sprinkler Incentive Act (FSIA). The 
     IAFC appreciates your leadership in creating an incentive for 
     property owners to retrofit their properties with automatic 
     fire sprinkler systems. If passed, the FSIA will be an 
     important tool to save lives in the future.
       Fires continue to be a devastating problem in Maine and 
     across the United States. According to the National Fire 
     Protection Association (NFPA), in 2015 alone, there were more 
     than 1.3 million fires in the United States which resulted in 
     nearly 3,300 civilian deaths, 15,700 civilian injuries, and 
     $14.3 billion in property damage. Additionally, the U.S. Fire 
     Administration reports that the relative risk of fire death 
     in Maine is 1.5 times higher than the U.S. average. Fire 
     sprinkler systems play a crucial role by significantly 
     increasing the chances of surviving a fire and reducing 
     property damages. The NFPA found that a fire sprinkler system 
     decreases the likelihood of dying in a fire by 83%, reduces 
     property damage by 74%, and confines a fire to its room of 
     origin in 95% of instances. Incentivizing fire sprinkler 
     systems simply makes sense from both life safety and public 
     policy perspectives.
       Despite the clear benefits of fire sprinkler systems, the 
     current tax code fails to incentivize these lifesaving 
     systems. Your legislation would fix this oversight by 
     classifying fire sprinkler systems as Section 179 expenses 
     and allowing property owners to deduct the cost of 
     retrofitting their buildings. Additionally, the FSIA will 
     allow high-rise building owners to depreciate the costs of 
     these systems much faster than the current tax code allows. 
     The FSIA provides a real incentive for building owners to 
     protect not only their properties but the lives of those 
     people inside them.
       Thank you again for your strong support for the fire and 
     emergency service. The IAFC looks forward to continuing to 
     work with you to protect communities across Maine and the 
     entire United States.
           Sincerely,
                                      Fire Chief John D. Sinclair,
                              President and Chairman of the Board.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DAINES (for himself and Mr. Tester):
  S. 605. A bill to amend the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources 
Planning Act of 1974 and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 
1976 to discourage litigation against the Forest Service and the Bureau 
of Land Management relating to land management projects; to the 
Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of 
the Litigation Relief for Forest Management Projects Act 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. 605

       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 ``Litigation Relief for Forest 
     Management Projects Act''.

     SEC. 2. FOREST AND RANGELAND RENEWABLE RESOURCES PLANNING ACT 
                   OF 1974.

       (a) Consultation Regarding Land Management Plans.--Section 
     6(d) of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning 
     Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1604(d)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``(d) The Secretary'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(d) Public Participation and Consultation.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) No additional consultation required after approval of 
     land management plans.--
       ``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, the Secretary shall not be required to engage in 
     consultation under this subsection or any other provision of 
     law (including section 7 of Public Law 93-205 (16 U.S.C. 
     1536) and section 402.16 of title 50, Code of Federal 
     Regulations (or a successor regulation)) with respect to--
       ``(i) the listing of a species as threatened or endangered, 
     or a designation of critical habitat pursuant to Public Law 
     93-205 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), if a land management plan 
     has been adopted by the Secretary as of the date of listing 
     or designation; or
       ``(ii) any provision of a land management plan adopted as 
     described in clause (i).
       ``(B) Effect of paragraph.--Nothing in this paragraph 
     affects any applicable requirement of the Secretary to 
     consult with the head of any other Federal department or 
     agency--
       ``(i) regarding any project to implement a land management 
     plan, including a project carried out, or proposed to be 
     carried out, in an area designated as critical habitat 
     pursuant to Public Law 93-205 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); or
       ``(ii) with respect to the development of a modification to 
     a land management plan that would result in a significant 
     change (within the meaning of subsection (f)(4)) in the land 
     management plan.''.
       (b) Definition of Secretary; Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Definition of secretary.--Section 3(a) of the Forest 
     and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 (16 
     U.S.C. 1601(a)) is amended, in the first sentence of the 
     matter preceding paragraph (1), by inserting ``(referred to 
     in this Act as the `Secretary')'' after ``Secretary of 
     Agriculture''.
       (2) Conforming amendments.--The Forest and Rangeland 
     Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1600 et 
     seq.) is amended, in sections 4 through 9, 12, 13, and 15, by 
     striking ``Secretary of Agriculture'' each place it appears 
     and inserting ``Secretary''.

     SEC. 3. FEDERAL LAND POLICY AND MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1976.

       Section 202(f) of the Federal Land Policy and Management 
     Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1712(f)) is amended--

[[Page 4016]]

       (1) by striking ``(f) The Secretary'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(f) Public Involvement.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) No additional consultation required after approval of 
     land use plans.--
       ``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, the Secretary shall not be required to engage in 
     consultation under this subsection or any other provision of 
     law (including section 7 of Public Law 93-205 (16 U.S.C. 
     1536) and section 402.16 of title 50, Code of Federal 
     Regulations (or a successor regulation)), with respect to--
       ``(i) the listing of a species as threatened or endangered, 
     or a designation of critical habitat, pursuant to Public Law 
     93-205 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), if a land use plan has been 
     adopted by the Secretary as of the date of listing or 
     designation; or
       ``(ii) any provision of a land use plan adopted as 
     described in clause (i).
       ``(B) Effect of paragraph.--
       ``(i) Definition of significant change.--In this 
     subparagraph, the term `significant change' means a 
     significant change within the meaning of section 219.13(b)(3) 
     of title 36, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on the 
     date of enactment of this subparagraph), except that--

       ``(I) any reference contained in that section to a land 
     management plan shall be deemed to be a reference to a land 
     use plan;
       ``(II) any reference contained in that section to the 
     Forest Service shall be deemed to be a reference to the 
     Bureau of Land Management; and
       ``(III) any reference contained in that section to the 
     National Forest Management Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-588; 90 
     Stat. 2949) shall be deemed to be a reference to this Act.

       ``(ii) Effect.--Nothing in this paragraph affects any 
     applicable requirement of the Secretary to consult with the 
     head of any other Federal department or agency--

       ``(I) regarding a project carried out, or proposed to be 
     carried out, with respect to a species listed as threatened 
     or endangered, or in an area designated as critical habitat, 
     pursuant to Public Law 93-205 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); or
       ``(II) with respect to the development of a new land use 
     plan or the revision of or other significant change to an 
     existing land use plan.''.

                          ____________________