[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 9 (Wednesday, February 2, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S887-S906]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. CORZINE (for himself and Mr. Lautenberg):
S. 257. A bill to amend title 23, United States Code, to provide
grant eligibility for a State that adopts a program for the impoundment
of vehicles operated by persons while under the influence of alcohol;
to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, this legislation addresses the serious
national problem of drunk driving by helping to ensure that when
drunken drivers are arrested, they can't simply get back into their car
and put the lives of others in jeopardy. This is based on original
legislation, known as ``John's Law,'' that I introduced in the Senate
in the 108th Congress and that has already been enacted at the State
level in New Jersey. I am proud that Senator Lautenberg will be co-
sponsoring this legislation.
On July 22, 2000, Navy Ensign John Elliott was driving home from the
United States Naval Academy in Annapolis for his mother's birthday when
his car was struck by another car. Both Ensign Elliott and the driver
of that car were killed. The driver of the car that caused the
collision had a blood alcohol level that exceeded twice the legal
limit.
What makes this tragedy especially distressing is that this same
driver had been arrested and charged with driving under the influence
of alcohol, DUI, just three hours before the crash. After being
processed for that offense, he had been released into the custody of a
friend who drove him back to his car and allowed him to get behind the
wheel, with tragic results.
We need to ensure that drunken drivers do not get back behind the
wheel before they sober up. With this legislation, States would be
allowed to use some of their drunk driver prevention grant money from
the Federal Government to impound the vehicles of drunk drivers for no
less than 12 hours. This would help ensure that a drunk driver cannot
get back behind the wheel until he is sober. And that would make our
roads safer, and prevent the loss of many innocent lives.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 257
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 ``John's Law of 2005''.
SEC. 2. ALCOHOL-IMPAIRED DRIVING COUNTERMEASURES.
Section 410(b)(1) of title 23, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(H) Program for impoundment of vehicles.--A program to
impound a vehicle for no less than 12 hours that is operated
by a person who is arrested for operating the vehicle while
under the influence of alcohol.''.
______
By Mr. DeWINE (for himself and Mr. Dodd):
S. 258. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to enhance
research, training, and health information dissemination with respect
to urologic diseases, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise along with Senator Dodd to
introduce the Training and Research in Urology Act--also known as the
TRU Act. During my career in the U.S. Senate, I have supported the
successful effort to double National Institutes of Health (NIH)
research funding and have provided a strong voice for our children.
This bill complements these past and continued efforts. It helps
provide urologic scientists with the tools they need to find new cures
for the many debilitating urologic diseases impacting men, women, and
children. This legislation is important to my home state of Ohio and
would impact many families in Ohio and nationwide who are afflicted
with urologic diseases.
[[Page S888]]
Ohio is a leader in urologic research. Researchers at the Children's
Hospital of Cincinnati, the Cleveland Clinic, Case Western Reserve, and
Ohio State University have made great strides toward achieving
treatments. The fact is that urologic conditions affect millions of
children and adults. Urology is a physiological system distinct from
other body systems. Urologic conditions include incontinence,
infertility, and impotence--all of which are extremely common, yet
serious and debilitating. As many as 10 million children--more than
30,000 in Ohio--are affected by urinary tract problems, and some forms
of these problems can be deadly. At least half of all diabetics have
bladder dysfunctions, which can include urinary retention, changes in
bladder compliance, and incontinence. Interstitial Cystitis (IC), a
painful bladder syndrome, affects 200,000 people, mostly women. There
are no known causes or cures, and few minimally effective treatments.
Additionally, there are 7 million urinary tract infections in the
United States each year.
Incontinence costs the healthcare system $25 billion each year and is
a leading reason people are forced to enter nursing homes, impacting
Medicare and Medicaid costs. Urinary tract infection treatment costs
total more than $1 billion each year. Many urologic diseases,
incontinence, erectile dysfunction, and cancer, increase in aging
populations. Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in American men,
and African-American men are at a greater risk for the disease.
Medicare beneficiaries suffer from benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH),
which results in bladder dysfunction and urinary frequency. Fifty
percent of men at age 60 have BPH. Treatment and surgery cost $2
billion per year.
Research for urologic disorders has failed to keep pace. Further
delay translates into increased costs--in dollars, in needless
suffering, and in the loss of human dignity. Incontinence costs the
healthcare system $23 billion each year, yet only 90 cents per patient
is spent on research--little more than the cost of a single adult
undergarment. In 2002, only $5 million of the $88 million in new
initiatives from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and
Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) was designated to urologic diseases and
conditions. Of that $5 million, no new initiatives were announced for
women's urologic health problems. In 2001, we spent less than five
cents per child on research into pediatric urologic problems. The
medications currently used are very expensive and have unknown, long-
term side effects.
The TRU Act establishes a Division of Urology at the NIDDK--the home
of the urology basic science program--and expands existing research
mechanisms, like the successful George O'Brien Urology Research
Centers. This will give NIH new opportunities for investment in efforts
to combat and vanquish these diseases.
This legislation is necessary to elevate leadership in urology
research at the NIDDK. When the Institute was created in its current
form nearly 20 years ago, Congress specifically provided for three
separate Division Directors. Regrettably, the current statute fails to
provide the NIDDK with the flexibility to create additional Division
Directors when necessary to better respond to current scientific
opportunities. This prescriptive statutory language is unique to the
NIDDK. For example, the National Cancer Institute and the National
Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute do not have any statutory language
regarding Division Directors.
Mr. President, the basic science breakthroughs of the last decade are
literally passing urology by. A greater focus on urological diseases is
needed at the NIDDK and will be best accomplished with senior
leadership with expertise in urology as provided in the TRU Act. This
legislation is supported by the Coalition for Urologic Research &
Education (CURE)--a group representing tens of thousands of patients,
researchers and healthcare providers. I urge my colleagues to join me
as co-sponsors of the TRU Act.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 258
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 ``Training and Research in
Urology Act of 2005''.
SEC. 2. RESEARCH, TRAINING, AND HEALTH INFORMATION
DISSEMINATION WITH RESPECT TO UROLOGIC
DISEASES.
(a) Division Director of Urology.--Section 428 of the
Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 285c-2) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ``and a Division
Director for Kidney, Urologic, and Hematologic Diseases'' and
inserting ``a Division Director for Urologic Diseases, and a
Division Director for Kidney and Hematologic Diseases'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking ``and the Division Director for Kidney,
Urologic, and Hematologic Diseases'' and inserting ``the
Division Director for Urologic Diseases, and the Division
Director for Kidney and Hematologic Diseases''; and
(B) by striking ``(1) carry out programs'' and all that
follows through the end and inserting the following:
``(1) carry out programs of support for research and
training (other than training for which National Research
Service Awards may be made under section 487) in the
diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of diabetes mellitus and
endocrine and metabolic diseases, digestive diseases and
nutritional disorders, and kidney, urologic, and hematologic
diseases, including support for training in medical schools,
graduate clinical training (with particular attention to
programs geared to the needs of urology residents and
fellows), graduate training in epidemiology, epidemiology
studies, clinical trials, and interdisciplinary research
programs;
``(2) establish programs of evaluation, planning, and
dissemination of knowledge related to such research and
training;
``(3) in cooperation with the urologic scientific and
patient community, develop and submit to the Congress not
later than January 1, 2006, a national urologic research plan
that identifies research needs in the various areas of
urologic diseases, including pediatrics, interstitial
cystitis, incontinence, stone disease, urinary tract
infections, and benign prostatic diseases; and
``(4) in cooperation with the urologic scientific and
patient community, review the national urologic research plan
every 3 years beginning in 2009 and submit to the Congress
any revisions or additional recommendations.''; and
(3) by adding at the end, the following:
``(c) There are authorized to be appropriated $500,000 for
each of fiscal years 2006 and 2007 to carry out paragraphs
(3) and (4) of subsection (b), and such sums as may be
necessary thereafter.''.
(b) Urologic Diseases Data System and Information
Clearinghouse.--Section 427 of the Public Health Service Act
(42 U.S.C. 285c-1) is amended--
(1) in subsection (c), by striking ``and Urologic'' and
``and urologic'' each place either such term appears; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(d) The Director of the Institute shall--
``(1) establish the National Urologic Diseases Data System
for the collection, storage, analysis, retrieval, and
dissemination of data derived from patient populations with
urologic diseases, including, where possible, data involving
general populations for the purpose of detection of
individuals with a risk of developing urologic diseases; and
``(2) establish the National Urologic Diseases Information
Clearinghouse to facilitate and enhance knowledge and
understanding of urologic diseases on the part of health
professionals, patients, and the public through the effective
dissemination of information.''.
(c) Strengthening the Urology Interagency Coordinating
Committee.--Section 429 of the Public Health Service Act (42
U.S.C. 285c-3) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``and a Kidney,
Urologic, and Hematologic Diseases Coordinating Committee''
and inserting ``a Urologic Diseases Interagency Coordinating
Committee, and a Kidney and Hematologic Diseases Interagency
Coordinating Committee'';
(2) in subsection (b), by striking ``the Chief Medical
Director of the Veterans' Administration,'' and inserting
``the Under Secretary for Health of the Department of
Veterans Affairs''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(d) The urology interagency coordinating committee may
encourage, conduct, or support intra- or interagency
activities in urology research, including joint training
programs, joint research projects, planning activities, and
clinical trials.
``(e) For the purpose of carrying out the activities of the
Urologic Diseases Interagency Coordinating Committee, there
are authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 for each of
fiscal years 2006 through 2010, and such sums as may be
necessary thereafter.''.
(d) National Urologic Diseases Advisory Board.--Section 430
of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 285c-4) is
amended by striking ``and the National Kidney and Urologic
Diseases Advisory Board'' and inserting ``the National
Urologic Diseases Advisory Board, and the National Kidney
Diseases Advisory Board''.
[[Page S889]]
(e) Expansion of O'Brien Urologic Disease Research
Centers.--
(1) In general.--Subsection (c) of section 431 of the
Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 285c-5(c)) is amended in
the matter preceding paragraph (1) by inserting ``There shall
be no fewer than 15 such centers focused exclusively on
research of various aspects of urologic diseases, including
pediatrics, interstitial cystitis, incontinence, stone
disease, urinary tract infections, and benign prostatic
diseases.'' before ``Each center developed''.
(2) Authorization of appropriations.--Section 431 of the
Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 285c-5) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(f) There are authorized to be appropriated for the
urologic disease research centers described in subsection (c)
$22,500,000 for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2010, and
such sums as are necessary thereafter.''.
(3) Technical amendment.--Subsection (c) of section 431 of
the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 285c-5(c)) is
amended at the beginning of the unnumbered paragraph--
(A) by striking ``shall develop and conduct'' and inserting
``(2) shall develop and conduct''; and
(B) by aligning the indentation of such paragraph with the
indentation of paragraphs (1), (3), and (4).
(f) Subcommittee on Urologic Diseases.--Section 432 of the
Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 285c-6) is amended by
striking ``and a subcommittee on kidney, urologic, and
hematologic diseases'' and inserting ``a subcommittee on
urologic diseases, and a subcommittee on kidney and
hematologic diseases''.
(g) Loan Repayment to Encourage Urologists and Other
Scientists to Enter Research Careers.--Subpart 3 of part C of
title IV of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 285c et
seq.) is amended by inserting after section 434A the
following:
``LOAN REPAYMENT PROGRAM FOR UROLOGY RESEARCH
``Sec. 434B. (a) Establishment.--Subject to subsection (b),
the Secretary shall carry out a program of entering into
contracts with appropriately qualified health professionals
or other qualified scientists under which such health
professionals or scientists agree to conduct research in the
field of urology, as employees of the National Institutes of
Health or of an academic department, division, or section of
urology, in consideration of the Federal Government agreeing
to repay, for each year of such research, not more than
$35,000 of the principal and interest of the educational
loans of such health professionals or scientists.
``(b) Limitation.--The Secretary may not enter into an
agreement with a health professional or scientist pursuant to
subsection (a) unless the professional or scientist--
``(1) has a substantial amount of educational loans
relative to income; and
``(2) agrees to serve as an employee of the National
Institutes of Health or of an academic department, division,
or section of urology for purposes of the research
requirement of subsection (a) for a period of not less than 3
years.
``(c) Applicability of Certain Provisions.--Except as
inconsistent with this section, the provisions of subpart 3
of part D of title III apply to the program established under
subsection (a) in the same manner and to the same extent as
such provisions apply to the National Health Service Corps
Loan Repayment Program established under such subpart.''.
(h) Authorization of Appropriations for Urology Research.--
Subpart 3 of part C of title IV of the Public Health Service
Act (42 U.S.C. 285c et seq.) (as amended by subsection (g))
is further amended by inserting after section 434B the
following:
``AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR UROLOGY RESEARCH.
``Sec. 434C. There are authorized to be appropriated to the
Director of NIH for the purpose of carrying out intra- and
interagency activities in urology research (including
training programs, joint research projects, and joint
clinical trials) $5,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2006
through 2010, and such sums as may be necessary thereafter.
Amounts authorized to be appropriated under this section
shall be in addition to amounts otherwise available for such
purpose.''.
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I am pleased today to join my colleague,
Senator Mike DeWine, in introducing the Training and Research in
Urology Act--the ``TRU'' Act. Each day, millions of American men, women
and children suffer with urologic conditions--children suffering from
urological abnormalities, women living with painful urologic illnesses,
the elderly for whom urologic conditions can present a wide variety of
very serious health problems. The silent struggle of patients with
urologic diseases has gone on too long. The legislation we introduce
today seeks to ease the burden of millions of Americans suffering from
urologic illnesses.
The amazing breakthroughs of the last decade in basic science have
resulted in new treatments and even cures for some urologic conditions.
Unfortunately, these exciting advancements often fail to reach many who
suffer from urologic diseases. It is time to change the way we think
and deal with urologic disease.
The TRU Act will create a new urology-specific division at the
National Institute of Diabetes & Digestive & Kidney Diseases, NIDDK.
Senior urology leadership at NIDDK will assure that urology receives
adequate attention and will allow science to drive the research agenda.
Federal legislation is necessary because more than 20 years ago
Congress established the current three divisions within NIDDK. Unlike
the other institutes at NIH, the director does not have the authority
to establish new divisions when warranted. Urologic discoveries have
advanced the science over the past two decades and I believe a urology
division at NIDDK will assure continued progress in urology research.
I was surprised to learn that the most frequently occurring birth
defects are related to urologic conditions. In fact, Spina Bifida alone
affects approximately 4,000 newborns in the United States each year.
The Spina Bifida Association of America informed me that those living
``with Spina Bifida often refer to the complications associated with
neurogenic bowel and bladder as the most difficult for them both
physically and socially. ``
The TRU Act would also charge NIDDK with creating a national urologic
research plan and create an additional 10 centers for the study of
urologic diseases, as well as recruit and retain talented investigators
through a loan repayment program.
In Connecticut, as in many states, there is important urologic
research being conducted currently. Researchers at Yale University have
made great strides toward achieving treatments of benefit to all
Americans. For example, Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia, BPH, commonly
referred as an enlarged prostate, impacts more than 125,000 men in
Connecticut and more than 50 percent of men 60 years of age and older.
BPH is the second most common kidney or urologic condition requiring
hospitalization and the fifth leading reason for physician visits. Yale
University's Dr. Harris Foster, Jr. is studying the use of phytotherapy
to relieve lower urinary tract symptoms, particularly BPH. The research
supported by the TRU Act will support this and other important urologic
research initiatives nationwide.
The TRU Act is supported by the Spina Bifida Association of America
and the Urology Section of the American Academy of Pediatrics, as well
as the Coalition for Urologic Research and Education, CURE, a group
representing hundreds of thousands of patients, researchers and
healthcare providers, including the Men's Health Network and the
Society for Women's Health Research.
The TRU Act will lead urology research and training into the 21st
century, and more important, it will lead to better the lives of
millions of patients, young and old, struggling to live with urologic
diseases. Therefore, I join my colleague in supporting this worthy
measure and urge all of my colleagues to support this important
legislation.
______
By Mr. INHOFE:
S. 260. A bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to provide
technical and financial assistance to private landowners to restore,
enhance, and manage private land to improve fish and wildlife habitats
through the Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program; to the Committee on
Environment and Public Works.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Partners for
Fish and Wildlife Act.
On August 26, 2004, President Bush signed Executive Order 13352
promoting a new approach to conservation within the Federal
government's conservation and environmental departments. This Executive
Order was offered to ensure that Federal agencies pursue cooperative
conservation actions designed to involve private landowners rather than
simply making mandates which private landowners must fulfill.
An example of this new cooperative conservation is the Partners for
Fish and Wildlife Program. Since 1987, the Partners Program has been a
successful voluntary partnership program that helps private landowners
restore fish and wildlife habitat on their own lands.
[[Page S890]]
Through 33,103 agreements with private landowners, the Partners Program
has accomplished the restoration of 677,000 acres of wetlands,
1,253,700 acres of prairies and native grasslands, and 5,560 miles of
riparian and in-stream habitat. Partners Program agreements are funded
through contributions from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service along
with cash and in-kind contributions from participating private
landowners. Since 1990, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has provided
$3,511,121 to restore habitat in Oklahoma through the Partners Program,
to which private landowners have contributed $12,638,272.
In Oklahoma, 97 percent of land is held in private ownership. Since
1990, a total of 124,285 acres in Oklahoma has been restored through
700 individual Partners Program voluntary agreements with private
landowners. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service District Office in Tulsa
currently reports that at least another 100 private landowners are
waiting to enter into Partner's projects as soon as funds become
available.
As chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, a
new approach to conservation is especially important to me. All
conservation programs should create positive incentives to protect
species and, above all, should hold sacred the rights of private
landowners. A positive step toward those aims is authorization of the
Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program which has already proven to be
an effective habitat conservation program that leverages federal funds
and utilizes voluntary private landowner participation. To date, the
Partners Program has received little attention. My bill will build on
this successful program to provide additional funding and added
stability.
I am pleased to author legislation to authorize a program with a
proven record in positive and actual conservation.
______
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Mrs. Boxer, and Mr. Akaka):
S. 262. A bill to authorize appropriations to the Secretary of
Interior for the restoration of the Angel Island Immigration Station in
the State of California; to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Angel
Island Immigration Station Restoration and Preservation Act, with
Senator Boxer as an original cosponsor.
This legislation authorizes the use of up to $15 million in Federal
funds for ongoing efforts to restore and preserve the Angel Island
Immigration Station located on Angel Island in San Francisco Bay.
I understand that Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey is introducing similar
legislation in the House. In the 108th Congress, Congresswoman
Woolsey's Angel Island bill passed the House.
The Angel Island Immigration Station is an important piece of
American history, especially to our Nation's Asian American and
immigrant communities.
From the mid 19th to early 20th century, millions of people came to
America in pursuit of the American dream. Most people are familiar with
Ellis Island and the stories of immigrants coming to America and seeing
the Statue of Liberty in New York Harbor, but often forgotten are the
experiences of those who made it to America through the West Coast by
way of Angel Island. Just like those who came through Ellis Island,
there are many stories of triumph and tribulation associated with Angel
Island.
However, for the Chinese and those from other Asian countries who
came through Angel Island Immigration Station the story goes a bit
further.
The economic downturn in the 1870s brought political pressures to
deal with the increasing population of Chinese who risked everything to
travel to ``Gold Mountain'' in search of a better life. Amongst the
harshest of measures taken was the passage of the Chinese Exclusion Act
of 1882, the only legislation enacted by Congress to ban a specific
ethnic population from entry into the United States.
To enforce this new law and subsequent legislation which excluded
most Asian immigrants to this country, the Angel Island Immigration
Station was established in 1910.
After a difficult journey across the Pacific Ocean, many new arrivals
were brought to the Station where they faced separation from their
family, embarrassing medical examinations, grueling interrogations and
long detainments that lasted months, even years, in living deplorable
conditions.
Testaments to these experiences can be found today on the wooden
walls of the barracks. Many of the detainees told their stories through
poems that they carved on the barrack walls. Using allegories and
historical references, they described their aspirations for coming to
America as well as expressed their anger and sadness at the treatment
they received. However, this experience did not break the spirit of
these new courageous immigrants. They endured and established new roots
and made immeasurable contributions to this nation.
The Station was closed in 1940 and three years later Congress
repealed the Chinese Exclusion Act. For the next 20 years the Station
remained mostly unused except for a short term during World War II,
when it was used as a prisoner of war camp.
In 1963, Angel Island became a State park and the California
Department of Parks and Recreation assumed stewardship of the
Immigration Station.
In the late 1990's, the Station was a declared a National Historic
Landmark and named on ``America's 11 Most Endangered Historic Places.''
In 1998, Congress approved $300,000 to conduct a study to determine the
feasibility and desirability of preserving sites within the Golden Gate
National Recreation Area (GGNRA) which includes the Immigration
Station. As a result, a historic three-party agreement was created
between the National Park Service, California Department of Parks and
the Angel Island Immigration Station Foundation to conduct this study.
In 2000, Save America's Treasures named the Angel Island Immigration
Station one of its Official Projects and provided $500,000 for the
preservation of poems carved into the walls.
The Station is supported by the people of California as well as
numerous private interests. The voters of California voted in 2000 to
set aside $15 million for restoration of the Station through
Proposition 12 and in addition approximately $1.1 million in private
funds has been raised so far. Most recently, in December 2004, the
California Cultural and Historical Endowment Board voted to reserve $3
million pending further staff findings for the Immigration Station.
The legislation limits Federal funding to 50 percent the total funds
from all sources spent to restore the Angel Island Immigration Station.
The remaining money will be provided through State bond funding and
raised through private means, making this a true public private
partnership.
Today, approximately 200,000 visits are made each year to Angel
Island by ferry from San Francisco, Tiburon and Alameda. In addition,
60,000 visits are made to the Immigration Station, about half of which
are students on guided tours.
The resources secured so far have set in motion designing, planning
and initial restoration efforts of the Immigration Station but much
more is needed, particularly to save the Immigration Station Hospital
building, which is deteriorating.
The bill I am introducing today will authorize $15 million in Federal
funding to complete the restoration of the Angel Island Immigration
Station so the stories of these early Americans who courageously
endured the experience at the Angel Island Immigration Station will be
preserved for future generations.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill. I ask unanimous consent
that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 262
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 ``Angel Island Immigration
Station Restoration and Preservation Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The Angel Island Immigration Station, also known as the
Ellis Island of the West, is a National Historic Landmark.
(2) Between 1910 and 1940, the Angel Island Immigration
Station processed more than
[[Page S891]]
1,000,000 immigrants and emigrants from around the world.
(3) The Angel Island Immigration Station contributes
greatly to our understanding of our Nation's rich and complex
immigration history.
(4) The Angel Island Immigration Station was built to
enforce the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and subsequent
immigration laws, which unfairly and severely restricted
Asian immigration.
(5) During their detention at the Angel Island Immigration
Station, Chinese detainees carved poems into the walls of the
detention barracks. More than 140 poems remain today,
representing the unique voices of immigrants awaiting entry
to this country.
(6) More than 50,000 people, including 30,000
schoolchildren, visit the Angel Island Immigration Station
annually to learn more about the experience of immigrants who
have traveled to our shores.
(7) The restoration of the Angel Island Immigration Station
and the preservation of the writings and drawings at the
Angel Island Immigration Station will ensure that future
generations also have the benefit of experiencing and
appreciating this great symbol of the perseverance of the
immigrant spirit, and of the diversity of this great Nation.
SEC. 3. RESTORATION.
(a) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to the Secretary of the Interior
$15,000,000 for restoring the Angel Island Immigration
Station in the San Francisco Bay, in coordination with the
Angel Island Immigration Station Foundation and the
California Department of Parks and Recreation.
(b) Federal Funding.--Federal funding under this Act shall
not exceed 50 percent of the total funds from all sources
spent to restore the Angel Island Immigration Station.
(c) Priority.--(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), the
funds appropriated pursuant to this Act shall be used for the
restoration of the Immigration Station Hospital on Angel
Island.
(2) Any remaining funds in excess of the amount required to
carry out paragraph (1) shall be used solely for the
restoration of the Angel Island Immigration Station.
______
By Mr. AKAKA (for himself, Mr. Baucus, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr.
Durbin, Mr. Roberts, and Mr. Inouye):
S. 263. A bill to provide for the protection of paleontological
resources on Federal lands, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the
Paleontological Resources Preservation Act to protect and preserve the
Nation's important fossil record for the benefit of our citizens. I am
pleased to have Senators Baucus, Feinstein, Durbin, Roberts, and Inouye
join me as original cosponsors on this significant legislation.
This bill was reported favorably by the Senate Committee on Energy
and Natural Resources, and approved by unanimous consent during the
108th Congress. A similar bill was introduced in the other body by
Representative James R. McGovern, with 15 cosponsors, but was not
reported by the Resources Committee. I hope we can pass this again
quickly in the Senate and move the bill in the House of
Representatives.
You may remember that in 1999, Congress requested that the Secretary
of the Interior review and report on the Federal policy concerning
paleontological resources on Federal lands. In its request, Congress
noted that no unified Federal policy existed regarding the--treatment
of fossils by Federal land management agencies, and emphasized
Congress's concerns that a lack of appropriate standards would lead to
the deterioration or loss of fossils, which are valuable scientific
resources. Unfortunately, that situation remains the case today.
In the past year alone, there have been compelling finds of fossils
that are helping us unlock the mysteries of the past from the earth,
whether violent tectonic cataclysms or depletion of oxygen in the
oceans and consequent drastic changes in species. The National Parks
Conservation Association NPCA, a bipartisan non-profit organization
dedicated to protecting and enhancing National Parks, recently called
for ``stronger laws, better enforcement, and better education programs
. . . to more fully protect these valuable [fossil] relics.'' In its
Fall 2004 issue of National Parks, the article described the discovery
at Wind Cave National Park, South Dakota, in July 2003, of fossilized
remains of a 5-foot tall hornless rhinoceros, a collie-sized horse, and
a foot-tall, deer-like mammal.
National Parks are the home of many extraordinary fossil discoveries
already, such as the graveyards of 20-million-year old camels and
rhinos at Agate Fossil Beds National Monument in Nebraska, the only
pygmy island-dwelling mammoth at Channel Islands National Park in
California; and tropical dinosaurs in what are now the arid lands of
the Painted Desert of southern Arizona.
Besides the National Park Service, other Federal land management
agencies have a number of regulations and directives on paleontological
resources, but they are not consistent and there is no clear statutory
language providing direction in protecting and curating fossils. I
would like to commend to my colleagues two reports recently published
by the Congressional Research Service, CRS, which we know as an
impartial, non-partisan legislative research service that provides
analysis for Congress. The CRS American Law Division published two
reports entitled ``Federal Management and Protection of Fossil
Resources on Federal Lands'' and, ``Paleontological Resources
Protection Act: Proposal for the Management and Protection of Fossil
Resources Located on Federal Lands.''
These two reports analyze the status and activities of Federal
agencies with paleontological responsibilities, the statutory
authorities for fossils, the case law supporting them, and the bills
recently introduced on fossils such as S. 546 in the 108th Congress.
The reports point out that several Federal agencies have management
authority for the protection of fossil resources on the lands under
their jurisdiction--the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Land
Management, Bureau of Reclamation, Fish and Wildlife Service, and
National Park Service, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture's U.S.
Forest Service. The report also points out that the U.S. Geological
Survey, Department of Defense, and Smithsonian Institution have some
fossil responsibilities. The reports further find that agency
enforcement and prosecution policies differ greatly and there is only
limited and scattered authority for Federal management and protection
of fossil resources on Federal lands.
The report concludes that the scattered authorities result in case
law on fossil protection that is not well developed and not necessarily
consistent. The cases do not provide clear case precedent and are not
necessarily applicable to broader protection, regulation, management,
and marketing issues.
Both reports conclude that there is an absence of uniform regulations
for paleontological resources on Federal lands--as shown by an absence
of precise uniform definitions of key terms--and that there is no
comprehensive statute or management policy for the protection and
management of fossils on Federal lands.
The Paleontological Resources Preservation Act embodies the
principles recommended by an interagency group in a 2000 report to
Congress entitled ``Assessment of Fossil Management on Federal and
Indian Lands.'' The bill provides the paleontological equivalent of
protections found in the Archaeological Resources Preservation Act. The
bill finds that fossil resources on Federal lands are an irreplaceable
part of the heritage of the United States and affirms that reasonable
access to fossil resources should be provided for scientific,
educational, and recreational purposes. The bill acknowledges the value
of amateur collecting and provides an exception for casual collecting
of invertebrate fossils, but protects vertebrate fossils found on
Federal lands under a system of permits. The fossil bill does not
restrict access of the interested public to fossils on public lands but
rather will help create opportunities for involvement. For example,
there are many amateur paleontologists volunteering to assist in the
excavation and curation of fossils on national park lands already.
Finally, I would like to emphasize that this bill in no way affects
archaeological or cultural resources under the Archaeological Resources
Protection Act of 1979 or the Native American Graves Protection and
Rehabilitation Act. They are exempted because they are very different
types of resources This bill covers only paleontological remains--
fossils on Federal lands.
As we look toward the future, public access to fossil resources will
take on a new meaning, as digital images of fossils become available
worldwide. Discoveries in paleontology are made
[[Page S892]]
more frequently than we realize. They shape how we learn about the
world around us. In January of this year, Science Express, the on-line
version of the journal Science, reported two studies using
paleontological data to understand the causes of the ``Great Dying,''
or mass extinctions that occurred about 250 million years ago in the
Permian-Triassic period. The Paleontological Resources Preservation Act
would create a legacy for the production of scientific knowledge for
future generations.
The protections offered in this act are not new. Federal land
management agencies already have individual regulations prohibiting
theft of government property. However, the reality is that U.S.
attorneys are reluctant to prosecute cases involving fossil theft
because they are difficult. The National Park Service reported 721
incidents of vandalism; and visitors annually take up to 12 tons of
petrified wood from Petrified Forest National Park, a fact that has
lead the NPCA to place the Petrified National Forest on its ``Ten Most
Endangered National Parks'' lists in 2000 and 2001.
Congress has not provided a clear statute stating the value of
paleontological resources to our Nation, as has been provided for
archaeological resources. Fossils are too valuable to be left within
the general theft provisions that are difficult to prosecute, and they
are too valuable to the education of our children not to ensure public
access. We need to work together to make sure that we fulfill our
responsibility as stewards of public lands, and as protectors of our
Nation's natural resources.
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. 263
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 ``Paleontological Resources
Preservation Act''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
As used in this Act:
(1) Casual collecting.--The term ``casual collecting''
means the collecting of a reasonable amount of common
invertebrate and plant paleontological resources for non-
commercial personal use, either by surface collection or the
use of non-powered hand tools resulting in only negligible
disturbance to the Earth's surface and other resources. As
used in this paragraph, the terms ``reasonable amount'',
``common invertebrate and plant paleontological resources''
and ``negligible disturbance'' shall be determined by the
Secretary.
(2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior with respect to lands controlled or
administered by the Secretary of the Interior or the
Secretary of Agriculture with respect to National Forest
System Lands controlled or administered by the Secretary of
Agriculture.
(3) Federal lands.--The term ``Federal lands'' means--
(A) lands controlled or administered by the Secretary of
the Interior, except Indian lands; or
(B) National Forest System lands controlled or administered
by the Secretary of Agriculture.
(4) Indian lands.--The term ``Indian Land'' means lands of
Indian tribes, or Indian individuals, which are either held
in trust by the United States or subject to a restriction
against alienation imposed by the United States.
(5) State.--The term ``State'' means the fifty States, the
District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and
any other territory or possession of the United States.
(6) Paleontological resource.--The term ``paleontological
resource'' means any fossilized remains, traces, or imprints
of organisms, preserved in or on the earth's crust, that are
of paleontological interest and that provide information
about the history of life on earth, except that the term does
not include--
(A) any materials associated with an archaeological
resource (as defined in section 3(1) of the Archaeological
Resources Protection Act of 1979 (16 U.S.C. 470bb(1)); or
(B) any cultural item (as defined in section 2 of the
Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (25
U.S.C. 3001)).
SEC. 3. MANAGEMENT.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall manage and protect
paleontological resources on Federal lands using scientific
principles and expertise. The Secretary shall develop
appropriate plans for inventory, monitoring, and the
scientific and educational use of paleontological resources,
in accordance with applicable agency laws, regulations, and
policies. These plans shall emphasize interagency
coordination and collaborative efforts where possible with
non-Federal partners, the scientific community, and the
general public.
(b) Coordination.--To the extent possible, the Secretary of
the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture shall
coordinate in the implementation of this Act.
SEC. 4. PUBLIC AWARENESS AND EDUCATION PROGRAM.
The Secretary shall establish a program to increase public
awareness about the significance of paleontological
resources.
SEC. 5. COLLECTION OF PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
(a) Permit Requirement.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in this Act, a
paleontological resource may not be collected from Federal
lands without a permit issued under this Act by the
Secretary.
(2) Casual collecting exception.--The Secretary may allow
casual collecting without a permit on Federal lands
controlled or administered by the Bureau of Land Management,
the Bureau of Reclamation, and the Forest Service, where such
collection is consistent with the laws governing the
management of those Federal lands and this Act.
(3) Previous permit exception.--Nothing in this section
shall affect a valid permit issued prior to the date of
enactment of this Act.
(b) Criteria for Issuance of a Permit.--The Secretary may
issue a permit for the collection of a paleontological
resource pursuant to an application if the Secretary
determines that--
(1) the applicant is qualified to carry out the permitted
activity;
(2) the permitted activity is undertaken for the purpose of
furthering paleontological knowledge or for public education;
(3) the permitted activity is consistent with any
management plan applicable to the Federal lands concerned;
and
(4) the proposed methods of collecting will not threaten
significant natural or cultural resources.
(c) Permit Specifications.--A permit for the collection of
a paleontological resource issued under this section shall
contain such terms and conditions as the Secretary deems
necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act. Every permit
shall include requirements that--
(1) the paleontological resource that is collected from
Federal lands under the permit will remain the property of
the United States;
(2) the paleontological resource and copies of associated
records will be preserved for the public in an approved
repository, to be made available for scientific research and
public education; and
(3) specific locality data will not be released by the
permittee or repository without the written permission of the
Secretary.
(d) Modification, Suspension, and Revocation of Permits.--
(1) The Secretary may modify, suspend, or revoke a permit
issued under this section--
(A) for resource, safety, or other management
considerations; or
(B) when there is a violation of term or condition of a
permit issued pursuant to this section.
(2) The permit shall be revoked if any person working under
the authority of the permit is convicted under section 9 or
is assessed a civil penalty under section 10.
(e) Area Closures.--In order to protect paleontological or
other resources and to provide for public safety, the
Secretary may restrict access to or close areas under the
Secretary's jurisdiction to the collection of paleontological
resources.
SEC. 6. CURATION OF RESOURCES.
Any paleontological resource, and any data and records
associated with the resource, collected under a permit, shall
be deposited in an approved repository. The Secretary may
enter into agreements with non-Federal repositories regarding
the curation of these resources, data, and records.
SEC. 7. PROHIBITED ACTS; CRIMINAL PENALTIES.
(a) In General.--A person may not--
(1) excavate, remove, damage, or otherwise alter or deface
or attempt to excavate, remove, damage, or otherwise alter or
deface any paleontological resources located on Federal lands
unless such activity is conducted in accordance with this
Act;
(2) exchange, transport, export, receive, or offer to
exchange, transport, export, or receive any paleontological
resource if, in the exercise of due care, the person knew or
should have known such resource to have been excavated or
removed from Federal lands in violation of any provisions,
rule, regulation, law, ordinance, or permit in effect under
Federal law, including this Act; or
(3) sell or purchase or offer to sell or purchase any
paleontological resource if, in the exercise of due care, the
person knew or should have known such resource to have been
excavated, removed, sold, purchased, exchanged, transported,
or received from Federal lands.
(b) False Labeling Offenses.--A person may not make or
submit any false record, account, or label for, or any false
identification of, any paleontological resource excavated or
removed from Federal lands.
(c) Penalties.--A person who knowingly violates or
counsels, procures, solicits, or employs another person to
violate subsection (a) or (b) shall, upon conviction, be
fined in accordance with title 18, United States Code, or
imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both; but if the sum of
the commercial and paleontological value of the
paleontological
[[Page S893]]
resources involved and the cost of restoration and repair of
such resources does not exceed $500, such person shall be
fined in accordance with title 18, United States Code, or
imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
(d) General Exception.--Nothing in subsection (a) shall
apply to any person with respect to any paleontological
resource which was in the lawful possession of such person
prior to the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 8. CIVIL PENALTIES.
(a) In General.--
(1) Hearing.--A person who violates any prohibition
contained in an applicable regulation or permit issued under
this Act may be assessed a penalty by the Secretary after the
person is given notice and opportunity for a hearing with
respect to the violation. Each violation shall be considered
a separate offense for purposes of this section.
(2) Amount of penalty.--The amount of such penalty assessed
under paragraph (1) shall be determined under regulations
promulgated pursuant to this Act, taking into account the
following factors:
(A) The scientific or fair market value, whichever is
greater, of the paleontological resource involved, as
determined by the Secretary.
(B) The cost of response, restoration, and repair of the
resource and the paleontological site involved.
(C) Any other factors considered relevant by the Secretary
assessing the penalty.
(3) Multiple offenses.--In the case of a second or
subsequent violation by the same person, the amount of a
penalty assessed under paragraph (2) may be doubled.
(4) Limitation.--The amount of any penalty assessed under
this subsection for any one violation shall not exceed an
amount equal to double the cost of response, restoration, and
repair of resources and paleontological site damage plus
double the scientific or fair market value of resources
destroyed or not recovered.
(b) Petition for Judicial Review; Collection of Unpaid
Assessments.--
(1) Judicial review.--Any person against whom an order is
issued assessing a penalty under subsection (a) may file a
petition for judicial review of the order in the United
States District Court for the District of Columbia or in the
district in which the violation is alleged to have occurred
within the 30-day period beginning on the date the order
making the assessment was issued. Upon notice of such filing,
the Secretary shall promptly file such a certified copy of
the record on which the order was issued. The court shall
hear the action on the record made before the Secretary and
shall sustain the action if it is supported by substantial
evidence on the record considered as a whole.
(2) Failure to pay.--If any person fails to pay a penalty
under this section within 30 days--
(A) after the order making assessment has become final and
the person has not filed a petition for judicial review of
the order in accordance with paragraph (1); or
(B) after a court in an action brought in paragraph (1) has
entered a final judgment upholding the assessment of the
penalty, the Secretary may request the Attorney General to
institute a civil action in a district court of the United
States for any district in which the person if found,
resides, or transacts business, to collect the penalty (plus
interest at currently prevailing rates from the date of the
final order or the date of the final judgment, as the case
may be). The district court shall have jurisdiction to hear
and decide any such action. In such action, the validity,
amount, and appropriateness of such penalty shall not be
subject to review. Any person who fails to pay on a timely
basis the amount of an assessment of a civil penalty as
described in the first sentence of this paragraph shall be
required to pay, in addition to such amount and interest,
attorneys fees and costs for collection proceedings.
(c) Hearings.--Hearings held during proceedings instituted
under subsection (a) shall be conducted in accordance with
section 554 of title 5, United States Code.
(d) Use of Recovered Amounts.--Penalties collected under
this section shall be available to the Secretary and without
further appropriation may be used only as follows:
(1) To protect, restore, or repair the paleontological
resources and sites which were the subject of the action, or
to acquire sites with equivalent resources, and to protect,
monitor, and study the resources and sites. Any acquisition
shall be subject to any limitations contained in the organic
legislation for such Federal lands.
(2) To provide educational materials to the public about
paleontological resources and sites.
(3) To provide for the payment of rewards as provided in
section 11.
SEC. 9. REWARDS AND FORFEITURE.
(a) Rewards.--The Secretary may pay from penalties
collected under section 9 or 10--
(1) consistent with amounts established in regulations by
the Secretary; or
(2) if no such regulation exists, an amount equal to the
lesser of one-half of the penalty or $500, to any person who
furnishes information which leads to the finding of a civil
violation, or the conviction of criminal violation, with
respect to which the penalty was paid. If several persons
provided the information, the amount shall be divided among
the persons. No officer or employee of the United States or
of any State or local government who furnishes information or
renders service in the performance of his official duties
shall be eligible for payment under this subsection.
(b) Forfeiture.--All paleontological resources with respect
to which a violation under section 9 or 10 occurred and which
are in the possession of any person, and all vehicles and
equipment of any person that were used in connection with the
violation, shall be subject to civil forfeiture, or upon
conviction, to criminal forfeiture. All provisions of law
relating to the seizure, forfeiture, and condemnation of
property for a violation of this Act, the disposition of such
property or the proceeds from the sale thereof, and remission
or mitigation of such forfeiture, as well as the procedural
provisions of chapter 46 of title 18, United States Code,
shall apply to the seizures and forfeitures incurred or
alleged to have incurred under the provisions of this Act.
(c) Transfer of Seized Resources.--The Secretary may
transfer administration of seized paleontological resources
to Federal or non-Federal educational institutions to be used
for scientific or educational purposes.
SEC. 10. CONFIDENTIALITY.
Information concerning the nature and specific location of
a paleontological resource the collection of which requires a
permit under this Act or under any other provision of Federal
law shall be exempt from disclosure under section 552 of
title 5, United States Code, and any other law unless the
Secretary determines that disclosure would--
(1) further the purposes of this Act;
(2) not create risk of harm to or theft or destruction of
the resource or the site containing the resource; and
(3) be in accordance with other applicable laws.
SEC. 11. REGULATIONS.
As soon as practical after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary shall issue such regulations as are
appropriate to carry out this Act, providing opportunities
for public notice and comment.
SEC. 12. SAVINGS PROVISIONS.
Nothing in this Act shall be construed to--
(1) invalidate, modify, or impose any additional
restrictions or permitting requirements on any activities
permitted at any time under the general mining laws, the
mineral or geothermal leasing laws, laws providing for
minerals materials disposal, or laws providing for the
management or regulation of the activities authorized by the
aforementioned laws including but not limited to the Federal
Land Policy Management Act (43 U.S.C. 1701-1784), the Mining
in the Parks Act, the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation
Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 1201-1358), and the Organic
Administration Act (16 U.S.C. 478, 482, 551);
(2) invalidate, modify, or impose any additional
restrictions or permitting requirements on any activities
permitted at any time under existing laws and authorities
relating to reclamation and multiple uses of Federal lands;
(3) apply to, or require a permit for, casual collecting of
a rock, mineral, or invertebrate or plant fossil that is not
protected under this Act;
(4) affect any lands other than Federal lands or affect the
lawful recovery, collection, or sale of paleontological
resources from lands other than Federal lands;
(5) alter or diminish the authority of a Federal agency
under any other law to provide protection for paleontological
resources on Federal lands in addition to the protection
provided under this Act; or
(6) create any right, privilege, benefit, or entitlement
for any person who is not an officer or employee of the
United States acting in that capacity. No person who is not
an officer or employee of the United States acting in that
capacity shall have standing to file any civil action in a
court of the United States to enforce any provision or
amendment made by this Act.
SEC. 13. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be
necessary to carry out this Act.
______
By Mr. AKAKA (for himself and Mr. Inouye):
S. 264. A bill to amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater
Study and Facilities Act to authorize certain projects in the State of
Hawaii; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today with the senior Senator from
Hawaii to introduce legislation to authorize three important water
reclamation projects in the State of Hawaii. This legislation, the
Hawaii Water Resources Act of 2005, is identical to legislation
considered in the 108th Congress that passed the Senate by unanimous
consent on May 19, 2004.
Although one usually does not readily associate the State of Hawaii
as a place with drought problems, Hawaii has been experiencing drought
conditions since 1998. The Hawaii Water Resources Act of 2005 builds
upon the Hawaii Water Resources Act of 2000 P.L. 106-566 that
authorized the Bureau of Reclamation to survey irrigation and water
delivery systems in Hawaii and
[[Page S894]]
identify new opportunities for reclamation and reuse of water and
wastewater for agriculture and non-agricultural purposes. While the Act
resulted in the development of the initial Hawaii Drought Plan in 2000,
which was updated this past year to incorporate comments and
recommendations made by the Bureau of Reclamation, more needs to be
done.
Although Hawaii is just beginning to recover from a multi-year
drought, the National Weather Service has indicated that due to a mild
El Nino effect in the Pacific Ocean, Hawaii may again experience
another period of drought. It is imperative for Hawaii to improve its
ways to reduce consumption of drinking water. The legislation that I am
introducing today, the Hawaii Water Resources Act of 2005, will help
the State of Hawaii to be proactive by authorizing projects that will
address the demand on our freshwater supply, especially on the islands
of Oahu, Maui, and Hawaii.
The legislation authorizes three projects. The first project, in
Honolulu, will provide reliable potable water through resource
diversification to meet existing and future demands, particularly in
the Ewa area of Oahu where water demands are outpacing the availability
of drinking water. The second project, in North Kona, will address the
issue of effluent being discharged into a temporary disposal sump from
the Kealakehe Wastewater Treatment Plant. The project would utilize
subsurface wetlands to naturally clean the effluent and convey the
recycled water to a number of users. The third project, in Lahaina,
will reduce the use of potable water by extending the County of Maui's
main recycled water pipeline.
The Hawaii Water Resources Act of 2005 will begin the next phase of
ensuring that the State of Hawaii will continue to have a supply of
fresh drinking water. It is vitally important for the State to begin
working on these water reclamation projects and I urge my colleagues to
support this legislation which is important to communities in Hawaii.
______
By Mr. FRIST (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Roberts, Mr.
Jeffords, Mr. Talent, Mrs. Murray, and Mrs. Clinton):
S. 265. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to add
requirements regarding trauma care, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, each year, nearly 1 of every 10 Americans
is injured and requires medical attention. Injuries are the fifth
leading cause of death in the United States. Trauma kills more people
between the ages of one and 44 than any other disease or illness.
While injury prevention programs have greatly reduced death and
disability, severe injuries will continue. Given the mass trauma events
of September 11, 2001 and our Nation's renewed focus on enhancing
disaster preparedness, it is critical that the Federal Government
increase its commitment to strengthening programs governing trauma care
system planning and development.
The direct and indirect cost of injury is estimated to be about $224
billion a year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention. The death rate from unintentional injury is more than 50
percent higher in rural areas than in urban areas. Only one fourth of
the U.S. population lives in an area served by a trauma care system.
Studies of conventional trauma care show that as many as 35 percent of
trauma patient deaths could have been prevented if optimal acute care
had been available. It is essential that all Americans have access to a
trauma system that provides needed care as quickly as possible.
Since 1990, Congress has sought to improve care through the Trauma
Care Systems Planning and Development Act. This Act provides grants for
planning, implementing, and developing statewide trauma care systems.
This critical program must be reauthorized. Therefore, I am introducing
bipartisan legislation today, along with Senators Kennedy, Roberts,
Jeffords, Talent, Clinton, and Murray to reauthorize this program.
Despite our past investments, one half of the States in the country
are still without a statewide trauma care system. Clearly we can do
better. We must respond to the goals put forth by the Institute of
Medicine in 1999--that Congress ``support a greater national commitment
to, and support of, trauma care systems at the federal, state, and
local levels.''
The ``Trauma Care Systems Planning and Development Act of 2005'',
reauthorizes this program with several improvements: first, it improves
the collection and analysis of trauma patient data with the goal of
improving the overall system of care for these patients; second, the
bill reduces the amount of matching funds that states will have to
provide to participate in the program so that we can extend quality
trauma care systems across the nation; third, the legislation provides
a self-evaluation mechanism to assist states in assessing and improving
their trauma care systems; fourth, it authorizes the Institute of
Medicine to study the state of trauma care and trauma research; and
finally, it doubles the funding available for this program to allow
additional states to participate.
I appreciate the support of my co-sponsors. I look forward to working
with them, and with Senator Enzi, the Chairman of the Senate Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, to see this bill passed this
year.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 265
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 ``Trauma Care Systems Planning
and Development Act of 2005''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The Federal Government and State governments have
established a history of cooperation in the development,
implementation, and monitoring of integrated, comprehensive
systems for the provision of emergency medical services.
(2) Trauma is the leading cause of death of Americans
between the ages of 1 and 44 years and is the third leading
cause of death in the general population of the United
States.
(3) In 1995, the total direct and indirect cost of
traumatic injury in the United States was estimated at
$260,000,000,000.
(4) There are 40,000 fatalities and 5,000,000 nonfatal
injuries each year from motor vehicle-related trauma,
resulting in an aggregate annual cost of $230,000,000,000 in
medical expenses, insurance, lost wages, and property damage.
(5) Barriers to the receipt of prompt and appropriate
emergency medical services exist in many areas of the United
States.
(6) The number of deaths from trauma can be reduced by
improving the systems for the provision of emergency medical
services in the United States.
(7) Trauma care systems are an important part of the
emergency preparedness system needed for homeland defense.
SEC. 3. AMENDMENTS.
(a) Establishment.--Section 1201 of the Public Health
Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300d) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by inserting ``,
acting through the Administrator of the Health Resources and
Services Administration,'' after ``Secretary'';
(B) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs
(4) and (5), respectively;
(C) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
``(3) collect, compile, and disseminate information on the
achievements of, and problems experienced by, State and local
agencies and private entities in providing trauma care and
emergency medical services and, in so doing, give special
consideration to the unique needs of rural areas;'';
(D) in paragraph (4), as redesignated by subparagraph (B)--
(i) by inserting ``to enhance each State's capability to
develop, implement, and sustain the trauma care component of
each State's plan for the provision of emergency medical
services'' after ``assistance''; and
(ii) by striking ``and'' after the semicolon;
(E) in paragraph (5), as redesignated by subparagraph (B),
by striking the period at the end and inserting ``; and'';
and
(F) by adding at the end the following:
``(6) promote the collection and categorization of trauma
data in a consistent and standardized manner.'';
(2) in subsection (b), by inserting ``, acting through the
Administrator of the Health Resources and Services
Administration,'' after ``Secretary''; and
(3) by striking subsection (c).
(b) Clearinghouse on Trauma Care and Emergency Medical
Services.--The Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 201 et
seq.) is amended--
[[Page S895]]
(1) by striking section 1202; and
(2) by redesignating section 1203 as section 1202.
(c) Establishment of Programs for Improving Trauma Care in
Rural Areas.--Section 1202(a) of the Public Health Service
Act, as such section was redesignated by subsection (b), is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (2), in the matter preceding subparagraph
(A), by inserting ``, such as advanced trauma life support,''
after ``model curricula'';
(2) in paragraph (4), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon;
(3) in paragraph (5), by striking the period and inserting
``; and''; and
(4) by adding at the end the following:
``(6) by increasing communication and coordination with
State trauma systems.''.
(d) Requirement of Matching Funds for Fiscal Years
Subsequent to First Fiscal Year of Payments.--Section 1212 of
the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300d-12) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(1)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon; and
(B) by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the
following:
``(B) for the third fiscal year of such payments to the
State, not less than $1 for each $1 of Federal funds provided
in such payments for such fiscal year;
``(C) for the fourth fiscal year of such payments to the
State, not less than $2 for each $1 of Federal funds provided
in such payments for such fiscal year; and
``(D) for the fifth fiscal year of such payments to the
State, not less than $2 for each $1 of Federal funds provided
in such payments for such fiscal year.''; and
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by adding ``and'' after the
semicolon;
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``; and'' and inserting a
period; and
(C) by striking paragraph (3).
(e) Requirements With Respect To Carrying Out Purpose of
Allotments.--Section 1213 of the Public Health Service Act
(42 U.S.C. 300d-13) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in paragraph (3), in the matter preceding subparagraph
(A), by inserting ``nationally recognized'' after
``contains'';
(B) in paragraph (5), by inserting ``nationally
recognized'' after ``contains'';
(C) in paragraph (6), by striking ``specifies procedures
for the evaluation of designated'' and inserting ``utilizes a
program with procedures for the evaluation of'';
(D) in paragraph (7)--
(i) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by inserting
``in accordance with data collection requirements developed
in consultation with surgical, medical, and nursing specialty
groups, State and local emergency medical services directors,
and other trained professionals in trauma care'' after
``collection of data'';
(ii) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ``and the number of
deaths from trauma'' after ``trauma patients''; and
(iii) in subparagraph (F), by inserting ``and the outcomes
of such patients'' after ``for such transfer'';
(E) by redesignating paragraphs (10) and (11) as paragraphs
(11) and (12), respectively; and
(F) by inserting after paragraph (9) the following:
``(10) coordinates planning for trauma systems with State
disaster emergency planning and bioterrorism hospital
preparedness planning;'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``concerning such''
and inserting ``that outline resources for optimal care of
the injured patient''; and
(ii) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``1992'' and
inserting ``2005''; and
(B) in paragraph (3)--
(i) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``1991'' and inserting
``2005''; and
(ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``1992'' and
inserting ``2005''; and
(3) in subsection (c), by striking ``1990, the Secretary
shall develop a model plan'' and inserting ``2005, the
Secretary shall update the model plan''.
(f) Requirement of Submission to Secretary of Trauma Plan
and Certain Information.--Section 1214(a) of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300d-14(a)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking ``1991'' and inserting ``2005''; and
(B) by inserting ``that includes changes and improvements
made and plans to address deficiencies identified'' after
``medical services''; and
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``1991'' and inserting
``2005''.
(g) Restrictions on Use of Payments.--Section 1215(a)(1) of
the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300d-15(a)(1)) is
amended by striking the period at the end and inserting a
semicolon.
(h) Requirements of Reports by States.--The Public Health
Service Act (42 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) is amended by striking
section 1216 and inserting the following:
``SEC. 1216. [RESERVED].''.
(i) Report by the Secretary.--Section 1222 of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300d-22) is amended by striking
``1995'' and inserting ``2007''.
(j) Funding.--Section 1232(a) of the Public Health Service
Act (42 U.S.C. 300d-32(a)) is amended to read as follows:
``(a) Authorization of Appropriations.--For the purpose of
carrying out parts A and B, there are authorized to be
appropriated $12,000,000 for fiscal year 2005, and such sums
as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2006 through
2009.''.
(k) Conforming Amendment.--Section 1232(b)(2) of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300d-32(b)(2)) is amended by
striking ``1204'' and inserting ``1202''.
(l) Institute of Medicine Study.--Part E of title XII of
the Public Health Service Act (20 U.S.C. 300d-51 et seq.) is
amended--
(1) by striking the part heading and inserting the
following:
``Part E--Miscellaneous Programs'';
and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 1254. INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE STUDY.
``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall enter into a
contract with the Institute of Medicine of the National
Academy of Sciences, or another appropriate entity, to
conduct a study on the state of trauma care and trauma
research.
``(b) Content.--The study conducted under subsection (a)
shall--
``(1) examine and evaluate the state of trauma care and
trauma systems research (including the role of Federal
entities in trauma research) on the date of enactment of this
section, and identify trauma research priorities;
``(2) examine and evaluate the clinical effectiveness of
trauma care and the impact of trauma care on patient
outcomes, with special attention to high-risk groups, such as
children, the elderly, and individuals in rural areas;
``(3) examine and evaluate trauma systems development and
identify obstacles that prevent or hinder the effectiveness
of trauma systems and trauma systems development;
``(4) examine and evaluate alternative strategies for the
organization, financing, and delivery of trauma care within
an overall systems approach; and
``(5) examine and evaluate the role of trauma systems and
trauma centers in preparedness for mass casualties.
``(c) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
enactment of this section, the Secretary shall submit to the
appropriate committees of Congress a report containing the
results of the study conducted under this section.
``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $750,000 for
each of fiscal years 2005 and 2006.''.
(m) Residency Training Programs in Emergency Medicine.--
Section 1251(c) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
300d-51(c)) is amended by striking ``1993 through 1995'' and
inserting ``2005 through 2009''.
(n) State Grants for Projects Regarding Traumatic Brain
Injury.--Section 1252 of the Public Health Service Act (42
U.S.C. 300d-52) is amended in the section heading by striking
``DEMONSTRATION''.
(o) Interagency Program for Trauma Research.--Section 1261
of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300d-61) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``conducting basic'' and
all that follows through the period at the end of the second
sentence and inserting ``basic and clinical research on
trauma (in this section referred to as the `Program'),
including the prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and
rehabilitation of trauma-related injuries.'';
(2) by striking subsection (b) and inserting the following:
``(b) Plan for Program.--The Director shall establish and
implement a plan for carrying out the activities of the
Program, taking into consideration the recommendations
contained within the report of the NIH Trauma Research Task
Force. The plan shall be periodically reviewed, and revised
as appropriate.'';
(3) in subsection (d)--
(A) in paragraph (4)(B), by striking ``acute head injury''
and inserting ``traumatic brain injury''; and
(B) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``head'' and inserting
``traumatic'';
(4) by striking subsection (g);
(5) by redesignating subsections (h) and (i) as subsections
(g) and (h), respectively; and
(6) in subsection (h), as redesignated by paragraph (5), by
striking ``2001 through 2005'' and inserting ``2005 through
2009''.
______
By Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Durbin, Mr.
Corzine, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Dorgan, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Johnson,
Mr. Reed, Mr. Lieberman, and Mr. Leahy):
S. 266. A bill to stop taxpayer funded Government propaganda; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation to put
an end to the spate of propaganda we are seeing across our government.
In my view, it is a practice that is inconsistent with democracy, and
we have to put a stop to it.
That is why Senator Kennedy and I have drafted the ``Stop Government
Propaganda Act'' which we are introducing today, along with our
cosponsors, Senators Durbin, Corzine, Clinton, Dorgan, Murray, Johnson,
Jack Reed, Lieberman and Leahy.
[[Page S896]]
Our bill will shut down the Administration's propaganda mill once and
for all.
Propaganda had its place in Saddam's Iraq. Propaganda was a staple of
the old Soviet Union. But covert government propaganda has no place in
the United States Government.
In the last few weeks, we have seen revelations that a number of
conservative columnists are actually on the Bush Administration's
payroll to push the President's agenda.
Armstrong Williams was paid to improve the image of President Bush's
education programs, and the columnists Maggie Gallagher and Mike
McManus were paid to promote the President's ``marriage initiative.''
Some have called it the ``pundit payola'' scandal. But this scandal
goes well beyond these particular payments to journalists.
In fact, these secret payments are only the latest in a series of
covert propaganda activities conducted by this Administration.
Last year, we discovered that the Administration was paying a public
relations firm to creat fake television news stories. These fake news
stories touting the new Medicare law made their way onto local news
shows on forty television stations across the country.
These fake news stories even featured a fake reporter--Karen Ryan
``reporting from Washington.'' While Karen Ryan does exist, she's not a
reporter. She is a public relations consultant based here in
Washington.
Worse, the viewers who watched these fake news stories thought they
were hearing real news. But what they were watching was Government-
produced propaganda.
The Government Accountability Office investigated the legality of
these fake news stories and came back with a clear decision: it was
illegal propaganda. The GAO also said that the Administration must
officially report the misspent funds to Congress.
But the Bush Administration simply ignored GAO's legal ruling. The
Administration said that because of the separation of powers, the GAO
can't tell them what to do.
So, in other words, the Administration has said that they will ignore
the current law on the books. That is why we are introducing new
legislation today that will put real teeth in the anti-propaganda law.
Our bill, the Stop Government Propaganda Act, does two major things:
First, it makes the Anti-Propaganda law permanent.
Right now, the anti-propaganda law is passed year to year as a
``rider'' in our appropriations bills. Making the law permanent will
show that we are serious about it and want it obeyed.
Also, our bill has real consequences for violations by the
Administration. The current law is enforced by GAO, and the
Administration is obviously ignoring their rulings. That has to change.
Our bill calls for the Justice Department to pursue these violations.
But in cases where DOJ fails to act, our bill authorizes citizen
lawsuits to enforce the law.
And we also give added power to the GAO. Right now, the
Administration ignores the GAO's legal decisions. But our bill will
make it downright painful for the Administration to ignore the GAO.
When the GAO finds that taxpayer funds are misspent for propaganda
purposes, and the agency fails to follow the GAO's ordered actions, our
bill would call for the head of that agency's salary to be withheld.
Our bill establishes a point of order against any appropriations bill
that fails to enforce the salary reduction.
Last week, President Bush said he agrees that it is wrong to pay
journalists and that the practice must stop. But at the same time, the
Bush Administration continues to ignore GAO's rulings on their
propaganda violations.
And while the attention was on Armstrong Williams, the Administration
has been ramping up propaganda efforts at the Social Security
Administration. In fact, last week, the Democratic Policy Committee
heard testimony from two Social Security employees who revealed how
they are being forced to push the White House agenda on the public.
Rather than concentrate on getting benefits out or servicing people
on Social Security, the White House is using SSA employees to spread
its false propaganda message of a ``crisis'' in Social Security.
That is why we must act now to put a stop to all of these practices.
I urge my colleagues to support our bill, the Stop Government
Propaganda Act.
As we seek to establish democracy in Iraq, let's first remove this
taint from our own democracy.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 266
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Stop Government Propaganda
Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Since 1951, the following prohibition on the use of
appropriated funds for propaganda purposes has been enacted
annually: ``No part of any appropriation contained in this or
any other Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda
purposes within the United States not heretofore authorized
by Congress.''.
(2) On May 19, 2004, the Government Accountability Office
(GAO) ruled that the Department of Health and Human Services
violated the publicity and propaganda prohibitions by
creating fake television new stories for distribution to
broadcast stations across the country.
(3) On January 4, 2005, the GAO ruled that the Office of
National drug Control Policy violated the publicity and
propaganda prohibitions by distributing fake television news
stories to broadcast stations from 2002 to 2004.
(4) In 2003, the Department of Education violated publicity
and propaganda prohibitions by using of taxpayer funds to
create fake television news stories promoting the ``No Child
Left Behind'' program violated the propaganda prohibition.
(5) An analysis of individual journalists, paid for by the
Department of Education in 2003, which ranked reporters on
how positive their articles portrayed the Administration and
the Republican Party, constituted a gross violation of the
law prohibiting propaganda and the use of taxpayer funds for
partisan purposes.
(6) The payment of taxpayer funds to journalist Armstrong
Williams in 2003 to promote Administration education policies
violated the ban on covert propaganda.
(7) The payment of taxpayer funds to journalist Maggie
Gallagher in 2002 to promote Administration welfare and
family policies violated the ban on covert propaganda.
(8) Payment for and construction of 8 little red
schoolhouse facades at the entranceways to the Department of
Education headquarters in Washington, DC to boost the image
of the ``No Child Left Behind'' program was an inappropriate
use of taxpayer dollars.
(9) Messages inserted into Social Security Administration
materials in 2004 and 2005 intended to further grassroots
lobbying efforts in favor of President Bush's Social Security
privatization plan is an inappropriate use of taxpayer funds.
(10) The Department of Health and Human Services ignored
the Government Accountability Office's legal decision of May
19, 2004, and failed to follow the GAO's directive to report
its Anti-Deficiency Act violation to Congress and the
President, as provided by section 1351 of title 31, United
States Code.
(11) Despite numerous violations of the propaganda law, the
Department of Justice has not acted to enforce the law or
follow the requirements of the Anti-Deficiency Act.
(12) In order to protect taxpayer funds, stronger measures
must be enacted into law to require actual enforcement of the
ban on the use of taxpayer funds for propaganda purposes.
SEC. 3. DEFINITION.
In this Act, the term ``publicity'' or ``propaganda''
includes--
(1) a news release or other publication that does not
clearly identify the Government agency directly or indirectly
(through a contractor) financially responsible for the
message;
(2) any audio or visual presentation that does not
continuously and clearly identify the Government agency
directly or indirectly financially responsible for the
message;
(3) an Internet message that does not continuously and
clearly identify the Government agency directly or indirectly
financially responsible for the message;
(4) any attempt to manipulate the news media by payment to
any journalist, reporter, columnist, commentator, editor, or
news organization;
(5) any message designed to aid a political party or
candidate;
(6) any message with the purpose of self-aggrandizement or
puffery of the Administration, agency, Executive branch
programs or policies, or pending congressional legislation;
(7) a message of a nature tending to emphasize the
importance of the agency or its activities;
(8) a message that is so misleading or inaccurate that it
constitutes propaganda; and
[[Page S897]]
(9) the preparation, distribution, or use of any kit,
pamphlet, booklet, publication, radio, television, or video
presentation designed to support or defeat legislation
pending before Congress or any State legislature, except in
presentation to Congress or any State legislature itself.
SEC. 4. PROHIBITION ON PUBLICITY OR PROPAGANDA AND
ENFORCEMENT.
(a) In General.--The senior official of an Executive branch
agency who authorizes or directs funds appropriated to such
Executive branch agency for publicity or propaganda purposes
within the United States, unless authorized by law, is liable
to the United States Government for a civil penalty of not
less than $5,000 and not more than $10,000, plus 3 times the
amount of funds appropriated.
(b) Responsibilities of the Attorney General.--The Attorney
General diligently shall investigate a violation of
subsection (a). If the Attorney General finds that a person
has violated or is violating subsection (a), the Attorney
General may bring a civil action under this section against
the person.
(c) Actions by Private Persons.--
(1) In general.--A person may bring a civil action for a
violation of subsection (a) for the person and for the United
States Government. The action shall be brought in the name of
the Government. The action may be dismissed only if the court
and the Attorney General give written consent to the
dismissal and their reasons for consenting.
(2) Notice.--A copy of the complaint and written disclosure
of substantially all material evidence and information the
person possesses shall be served on the Government pursuant
to Rule 4(d)(4) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The
complaint shall be filed in camera, shall remain under seal
for at least 60 days, and shall not be served on the
defendant until the court so orders. The Government may elect
to intervene and proceed with the action within 60 days after
it receives both the complaint and the material evidence and
information.
(3) Delay of notice.--The Government may, for good cause
shown, move the court for extensions of the time during which
the complaint remains under seal under paragraph (2). Any
such motions may be supported by affidavits or other
submissions in camera. The defendant shall not be required to
respond to any complaint filed under this section until 20
days after the complaint is unsealed and served upon the
defendant pursuant to Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure.
(4) Government action.--Before the expiration of the 60-day
period or any extensions obtained under paragraph (3), the
Government shall--
(A) proceed with the action, in which case the action shall
be conducted by the Government; or
(B) notify the court that it declines to take over the
action, in which case the person bringing the action shall
have the right to conduct the action.
(5) Limited intervention.--When a person brings an action
under this subsection, no person other than the Government
may intervene or bring a related action based on the facts
underlying the pending action.
(d) Rights of the Parties.--
(1) Government action.--If the Government proceeds with the
action, it shall have the primary responsibility for
prosecuting the action, and shall not be bound by an act of
the person bringing the action. Such person shall have the
right to continue as a party to the action, subject to the
limitations set forth in paragraph (2).
(2) Limitations.--
(A) Dismissal.--The Government may dismiss the action
notwithstanding the objections of the person initiating the
action if the person has been notified by the Government of
the filing of the motion and the court has provided the
person with an opportunity for a hearing on the motion.
(B) Settlement.--The Government may settle the action with
the defendant notwithstanding the objections of the person
initiating the action if the court determines, after a
hearing, that the proposed settlement is fair, adequate, and
reasonable under all the circumstances. Upon a showing of
good cause, such hearing may be held in camera.
(C) Proceedings.--Upon a showing by the Government that
unrestricted participation during the course of the
litigation by the person initiating the action would
interfere with or unduly delay the Government's prosecution
of the case, or would be repetitious, irrelevant, or for
purposes of harassment, the court may, in its discretion,
impose limitations on the person's participation, such as--
(i) limiting the number of witnesses the person may call;
(ii) limiting the length of the testimony of such
witnesses;
(iii) limiting the person's cross-examination of witnesses;
or
(iv) otherwise limiting the participation by the person in
the litigation.
(D) Limit participation.--Upon a showing by the defendant
that unrestricted participation during the course of the
litigation by the person initiating the action would be for
purposes of harassment or would cause the defendant undue
burden or unnecessary expense, the court may limit the
participation by the person in the litigation.
(3) Action by person.--If the Government elects not to
proceed with the action, the person who initiated the action
shall have the right to conduct the action. If the Government
so requests, it shall be served with copies of all pleadings
filed in the action and shall be supplied with copies of all
deposition transcripts (at the Government's expense). When a
person proceeds with the action, the court, without limiting
the status and rights of the person initiating the action,
may nevertheless permit the Government to intervene at a
later date upon a showing of good cause.
(4) Interference.--Whether or not the Government proceeds
with the action, upon a showing by the Government that
certain actions of discovery by the person initiating the
action would interfere with the Government's investigation or
prosecution of a criminal or civil matter arising out of the
same facts, the court may stay such discovery for a period of
not more than 60 days. Such a showing shall be conducted in
camera. The court may extend the 60-day period upon a further
showing in camera that the Government has pursued the
criminal or civil investigation or proceedings with
reasonable diligence and any proposed discovery in the civil
action will interfere with the ongoing criminal or civil
investigation or proceedings.
(5) Government action.--Notwithstanding subsection (b), the
Government may elect to pursue its claim through any
alternate remedy available to the Government, including any
administrative proceeding to determine a civil money penalty.
If any such alternate remedy is pursued in another
proceeding, the person initiating the action shall have the
same rights in such proceeding as such person would have had
if the action had continued under this section. Any finding
of fact or conclusion of law made in such other proceeding
that has become final shall be conclusive on all parties to
an action under this section. For purposes of the preceding
sentence, a finding or conclusion is final if it has been
finally determined on appeal to the appropriate court of the
United States, if all time for filing such an appeal with
respect to the finding or conclusion has expired, or if the
finding or conclusion is not subject to judicial review.
(e) Award to Private Plaintiff.--
(1) Government action.--If the Government proceeds with an
action brought by a person under subsection (c), such person
shall, subject to the second sentence of this paragraph,
receive at least 15 percent but not more than 25 percent of
the proceeds of the action or settlement of the claim,
depending upon the extent to which the person substantially
contributed to the prosecution of the action.
(2) No government action.--If the Government does not
proceed with an action under this section, the person
bringing the action or settling the claim shall receive an
amount which the court decides is reasonable for collecting
the civil penalty and damages. The amount shall be not less
than 25 percent and not more than 30 percent of the proceeds
of the action or settlement and shall be paid out of such
proceeds. Such person shall also receive an amount for
reasonable expenses which the court finds to have been
necessarily incurred, plus reasonable attorneys' fees and
costs. All such expenses, fees, and costs shall be awarded
against the defendant.
(3) Frivolous claim.--If the Government does not proceed
with the action and the person bringing the action conducts
the action, the court may award to the defendant its
reasonable attorneys' fees and expenses if the defendant
prevails in the action and the court finds that the claim of
the person bringing the action was clearly frivolous, clearly
vexatious, or brought primarily for purposes of harassment.
(f) Government Not Liable for Certain Expenses.--The
Government is not liable for expenses which a person incurs
in bringing an action under this section.
(g) Fees and Expenses to Prevailing Defendant.--In civil
actions brought under this section by the United States, the
provisions of section 2412 (d) of title 28 shall apply.
(h) Whistleblower Protection.--
(1) In general.--Any employee who is discharged, demoted,
suspended, threatened, harassed, or in any other manner
discriminated against in the terms and conditions of
employment by his or her employer because of lawful acts done
by the employee on behalf of the employee or others in
furtherance of an action under this section, including
investigation for, initiation of, testimony for, or
assistance in an action filed or to be filed under this
section, shall be entitled to all relief necessary to make
the employee whole.
(2) Relief.--Relief under this subsection shall include
reinstatement with the same seniority status such employee
would have had but for the discrimination, 2 times the amount
of back pay, interest on the back pay, and compensation for
any special damages sustained as a result of the
discrimination, including litigation costs and reasonable
attorneys' fees. An employee may bring an action in the
appropriate district court of the United States for the
relief provided in this subsection.
SEC. 5. JUDICIAL NOTICE.
The courts of the United States shall take cognizance and
notice of any legal decision of the Government Accountability
Office interpreting the application of this Act.
SEC. 6. POINT OF ORDER.
(a) In General.--
(1) Reduction of salary.--It shall not be in order in the
House of Representatives or the Senate to consider a bill,
amendment, or resolution providing an appropriation for an
agency that the Government Accountability
[[Page S898]]
Office has found in violation of this Act unless the
appropriations for salary and expenses for the head of the
relevant agency contains a provision reducing the salary of
the head by an amount equal to the illegal expenditure
identified by the Government Accountability Office. If the
illegal expenditure exceeds the annual salary of the agency
head, then the point of order shall continue until the
remaining amount is subtracted from the salary of the agency
head.
(2) Compliance.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply if the
agency is complying with the decision of the Government
Accountability Office.
(b) Supermajority Waiver and Appeal.--This section may be
waived or suspended in the Senate only by an affirmative vote
of \3/5\ of the Members, duly chosen and sworn. An
affirmative vote of \3/5\ of the Members of the Senate, duly
chosen and sworn, shall be required in the Senate to sustain
an appeal of the ruling of the Chair on a point of order
raised under this section.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, we have to stop right now all the
taxpayer-financed propaganda put out by our government to influence the
American people. We need to expedite the investigations, begin
congressional hearings, and pass specific new legislation to prevent
the administration from using persons paid to pose as legitimate
journalists to push for the Bush political agenda.
Last week, we found out, according to the Washington Post, that
another commentator, Maggie Gallagher, was paid $21,500 by the
Department of Health and Human Services to promote the Bush
administration's marriage agenda--a fact she didn't disclose to her
readers while writing on the issue.
As most of us now know, thanks to USA Today, the outgoing leadership
of the Education Department secretly, and still unapologetically, paid
$241,000 to commentator Armstrong Williams to influence his broadcasts.
Mr. Williams was paid to comment favorably on the President's No Child
Left Behind Act education reform plan, to conduct phony ``interviews''
with administration officials, and to encourage his colleagues in the
media to do the same.
The Gallagher and Williams payments were part of a multimillion
dollar, taxpayer-funded public relations scheme to influence and
undermine America's free press. Journalists were ranked on the
favorability of their news coverage of President Bush on education.
Phony video reports and interviews about the President's Medicare
prescription drug law were broadcast as independent news on local
television.
All parties agree that this type of secret government paid journalism
is wrong. Yet Ms. Gallagher and Mr. Williams continue to retain their
$21,500 and $241,000 bribes.
I am pleased to join Senator Lautenberg, who has been our leader on
this issue, in introducing legislation to permanently prohibit the use
of taxpayer funds for the type of manipulative payments that Ms.
Gallagher and Mr. Williams received. Our legislation will prohibit
agencies from issuing news releases, video news releases, and internet
messages that do not clearly identify the government as financially
responsible for the information.
It will enforce these prohibitions by creating a mechanism to dock
the pay of any Cabinet Secretary or agency head responsible, and by
authorizing private citizens to bring a court action to recover
taxpayer funds.
Propaganda by the Department of Health and Human Services, the
Department of Education, and the Office of Drug Control and Policy has
to stop now, before the infection spreads. We cannot sit still in
Congress while the administration corrupts the first amendment and
freedom of the press.
______
By Mr. CRAIG (for himself, Mr. Wyden, and Mrs. Feinstein):
S. 267. A bill to reauthorize the Secure Rural Schools and Community
Self-Determination Act of 2000, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I rise today to join my colleagues and
friends, Senator Wyden of Oregon and Senator Feinstein of California,
to reauthorize a law that has stabilized payments to rural forest
counties and, more important, has brought communities together to
accomplish projects on the ground that improve watersheds and enhance
habitat.
It should be remembered that the National Forest System was formed in
1905 from the Forest Reserves, which were established between 1891 and
1905 by Presidential proclamation. During that time, 153 million acres
of forestlands were set aside in Forest Reserves and removed from
future settlement and economic development. This imposed great
hardships on those counties that were in and adjacent to these new
reserves. In many cases, 65 to 90 percent of the land in a county was
sequestered in the new forest reserves, leaving little land for
economic development and diminishing the potential tax base to support
essential community infrastructure such as roads and schools. There was
considerable opposition in the forest counties to establishing these
reserves.
In 1908, in response to the mounting opposition to the reserves in
the West, Congress passed a bill which created a revenue sharing
mechanism to offset for forest counties the effects of removing these
lands from economic development. The 1908 act specified that 10 percent
of all revenues generated from the multiple-use management of our
National Forests would be shared with the counties to support public
roads and public schools. Several years later that percentage was
increased to 25 percent. People in our forest counties refer to this as
the ``Compact with the People of Rural Counties'' which was part of the
foundation for establishing our National Forest System.
It was the intent of Congress in establishing our National Forests,
that they would be managed in a sustained multiple-use manner in
perpetuity, and that they would provide revenues for local counties and
the Federal treasury in perpetuity as well. And, from 1908 until about
1993, this revenue sharing mechanism worked extremely well. However,
from 1986 to the present, we have, for a variety of reasons, reduced
our sustained active multiple-use management of the National Forests
and the revenues have declined precipitously. Most counties have seen a
decline of more than 85 percent in actual revenues generated on our
National Forests and therefore an 85 percent reduction in 25 percent
payments to counties which are used to help fund schools and county
road departments.
And more important, they have seen a 60-percent reduction in the
economic activity that the federal timber sale programs generated in
these counties. The Forest Service in its 1997 TSPIRS report estimates
the total economic activity in these rural counties to be more than
$2.1 billion, compared to more than $5.5 billion as recently as 1991.
In 2000, Congress passed the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self
Determination Act to address the needs of the National Forest counties
and to focus on creating a new cooperative partnership between citizens
in forest counties and our Federal land management agencies to develop
forest health improvement projects on public lands and simultaneously
stimulate job development and community economic stability.
This Act restored the 1908 compact between the people of rural
America and the Federal Government, and it has been an enormous success
in achieving and even surpassing the goals of Congress.
This is a remarkable success story for rural forest communities.
These funds have restored and sustained essential infrastructure such
as county schools and county roads through title I. Essential forest
improvement projects have been completed through title II projects
funded by forest counties, and planned by diverse stakeholder resource
advisory committees. In Idaho, resource advisory committees are
partnering with the Forest Service and other organizations to fight the
spread of weeds on the Nez Perce National Forest, make road
improvements in Hells Canyon National Recreation Area, and repair
culverts and improve fish habitat on the Caribou-Targhee National
Forest.
These groups are reducing management gridlock and building
collaborative public lands decisionmaking capacity in counties across
America. These resource advisory committees are a real and working
compact between the Federal land management agencies and rural
communities that includes all interest groups; they represent a true
coupling of community with land managers that is good for the land and
good for the communities.
[[Page S899]]
Finally, essential services are being supported and developed in
forest counties by investing title III funds. In Idaho, counties are
using the funding as directed for search and rescue operations and
youth employment and educational opportunities.
The impact of this act over the last few years is positive and
substantial. This law should be extended so it can continue to benefit
the forest counties and their schools, and continue to contribute to
improving the health of our National Forests.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 267
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 ``Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Reauthorization Act of 2005''.
SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITY
SELF-DETERMINATION ACT OF 2000.
(a) Extension Through Fiscal Year 2013.--The Secure Rural
Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 (Public
Law 106-393; 16 U.S.C. 500 note) is amended--
(1) in sections 101(a), 203(a)(1), 207(a), 208, 303, and
401, by striking ``2006'' each place it appears and inserting
``2013'';
(2) in section 208, by striking ``2007'' and inserting
``2014''; and
(3) in section 303, by striking ``2007'' and inserting
``2014,''.
(b) Authority to Resume Receipt of 25- or 50-percent
Payments.--
(1) 25-percent payments.--Section 102(b) of the Secure
Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 is
amended--
(A) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``of the Treasury''
after ``Secretary''; and
(B) in paragraph (2)--
(i) in the first sentence, by inserting ``, including such
an election made during the last quarter of fiscal year 2006
under this paragraph,'' after ``25-percent payment''; and
(ii) in the second sentence, by striking ``fiscal year
2006'' and inserting ``fiscal year 2013, except that the
Secretary of the Treasury shall give the county the
opportunity to elect, in writing during the last quarter of
fiscal year 2006, to begin receiving the 25-percent payment
effective with the payment for fiscal year 2007''.
(2) 50-percent payments.--Section 103(b)(1) of such Act is
amended by striking ``fiscal year 2006'' and inserting
``fiscal year 2013, except that the Secretary of the Treasury
shall give the county the opportunity to elect, in writing
during the last quarter of fiscal year 2006, to begin
receiving the 50-percent payment effective with the payment
for fiscal year 2007''.
(c) Clarification Regarding Source of Payments.--
(1) Payments to eligible states from national forest
lands.--Section 102(b)(3) of the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 is amended--
(A) by striking ``trust fund,'' and inserting ``trust
funds, permanent funds,'';
(B) by inserting a comma after ``and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``If
the Secretary of the Treasury determines that a shortfall is
likely for a fiscal year, all revenues, fees, penalties, and
miscellaneous receipts referred to in the preceding sentence,
exclusive of required deposits to relevant trust funds,
permanent funds, and special accounts, that are received
during that fiscal year shall be reserved to make payments
under this section for that fiscal year.''.
(2) Payments to eligible counties from blm lands.--Section
103(b)(2) of such Act is amended--
(A) by striking ``trust fund,'' and inserting ``trust
funds'';
(B) by inserting a comma after ``and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``If
the Secretary of the Treasury determines that a shortfall is
likely for a fiscal year, all revenues, fees, penalties, and
miscellaneous receipts referred to in the preceding sentence,
exclusive of required deposits to relevant trust funds and
permanent operating funds, that are received during that
fiscal year shall be reserved to make payments under this
section for that fiscal year.''.
(d) Term for Resource Advisory Committee Members;
Reappointment.--Section 205(c)(1) of the Secure Rural Schools
and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 is amended--
(1) in the second sentence, by striking ``The Secretary
concerned may reappoint members to'' and inserting ``A member
of a resource advisory committee may be reappointed for one
or more''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new sentence:
``Section 1803(c) of Food and Agriculture Act of 1977 (7
U.S.C. 2283(c)) shall not apply to a resource advisory
committee established by the Secretary of Agriculture.''.
(e) Revision of Pilot Program.--Section 204(e)(3) of the
Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of
2000 is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``The Secretary'' and
all that follows through ``approved projects'' and inserting
``At the request of a resource advisory committee, the
Secretary concerned may establish a pilot program to
implement one or more of the projects proposed by the
resource advisory committee under section 203'';
(2) by striking subparagraph (B);
(3) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``by the Secretary
concerned'';
(4) in subparagraph (D)--
(A) by striking ``the pilot program'' in the first sentence
and inserting ``pilot programs established under subparagraph
(A)''; and
(B) by striking ``the pilot program is'' in the second
sentence and inserting ``pilot programs are''; and
(5) by redesignating subparagraphs (C), (D), and (E), as so
amended, as subparagraphs (B), (C), and (D).
(f) Notification and Reporting Requirements Regarding
County Projects.--
(1) Additional requirements.--Section 302 of the Secure
Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 is
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(c) Notification and Reporting Requirements.--
``(1) Notification.--Not later than 90 days after the end
of each fiscal year during which county funds are obligated
for projects under this title, the participating county shall
submit to the Secretary concerned written notification
specifying--
``(A) each project for which the participating county
obligated county funds during that fiscal year;
``(B) the authorized use specified in subsection (b) that
the project satisfies; and
``(C) the amount of county funds obligated or expended
under the project during that fiscal year, including
expenditures on Federal lands, State lands, and private
lands.
``(2) Review.--The Secretary concerned shall review the
notifications submitted under paragraph (1) for a fiscal year
for the purpose of assessing the success of participating
counties in achieving the purposes of this title.
``(3) Annual report.--The Secretary concerned shall prepare
an annual report containing the results of the most-recent
review conducted under paragraph (2) and a summary of the
notifications covered by the review.
``(4) Submission of report.--The report required by
paragraph (3) for a fiscal year shall be submitted to the
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry and the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and
the Committee on Agriculture and the Committee on Resources
of the House of Representatives not later than 150 days after
the end of that fiscal year.''.
(2) Definition of secretary concerned.--Section 301 of such
Act is amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
``(3) Secretary concerned.--The term `Secretary concerned'
means--
``(A) the Secretary of Agriculture or the designee of the
Secretary of Agriculture, with respect to county funds
reserved under section 102(d)(1)(B)(ii) for expenditure in
accordance with this title;
``(B) the Secretary of the Interior or the designee of the
Secretary of the Interior, with respect to county funds
reserved under section 103(c)(1)(B)(ii) for expenditure in
accordance with this title.''.
(3) References to participating county.--Section 302(b) of
such Act is amended--
(A) by striking ``An eligible county'' each place it
appears in paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) and inserting ``A
participating county''; and
(B) by striking ``A county'' each place it appears in
paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) and inserting ``A participating
county''.
(g) Technical Correction.--Section 205(a)(3) of the Secure
Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 is
amended by striking the comma after ``the Secretary concerned
may''.
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I rise today to join my very dear friend
and colleague, Senator Craig of Idaho, as his principal cosponsor on
legislation to reauthorize a law that has spawned a revolution in
forest dependent communities in 42 States and in over 700 counties
across the country. Our bill will reauthorize the Secure Rural Schools
and Community Self Determination Act of 2000.
This bill is short and simple but also extraordinary: it renews the
original law and its programs for 8 more years. It also makes some
technical and grammatical corrections to the original law and adds an
oversight report on some of the projects done under this Act. As we
introduce this bill today in the Senate, our friends and colleagues in
the House are introducing the exact same bill with the same, bi-
partisan spirit.
The reason we can pursue reauthorization of such a far reaching law
with such little language is because the folks that it affects, the
forest dependent communities, as well as the educators, the county
leaders and the environmentalists in those communities, have made this
law work. The reason we want to reauthorize this legislation is because
these same folks want to continue the work this law allows
[[Page S900]]
them to do together, on federal and private lands, and in rural
communities.
The Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act of2000
is sustaining rural communities as well as encouraging industry and
creating jobs based on natural resources. If I may paraphrase a famous
commercial to describe this legislation, I'd say:
Stabilization of payments to counties for roads and schools--millions
of dollars; Additional investments and the creation of new jobs through
forest related projects--thousands of projects; Improving cooperative
relationships among the people that use and care for federal lands:
Priceless.
Title I of the Act stabilizes funding for public education in rural
communities. It also fortifies local government budgets that provide
health and safety services in rural America, as well as maintains the
transportation corridors that move people and material to and from
forest communities.
Title II of the Act provides resources for community-based
stewardship for local federal lands. By establishing Resource Advisory
Committees, RACs, tasked with reviewing and recommending to the Forest
Service and Bureau of Land Management projects to be completed on
Federal lands that benefit the community and the federal lands
associated with that RAC, this Act has resulted in over a thousand
projects making Federal lands more environmentally healthy today than
before this Act passed in 2000. RACs enlist community members
representing environmental interests, recreations users, farmers, local
officials and forest products industry. This collaborative planning of
management of local Federal lands has put people to work building fish-
friendly culverts; reducing hazardous fuel loads; enhancing picnic,
camping and hiking facilities; and removing debris and noxious plant
species.
The kinds of projects the RACs have supported are varied: watershed
restoration and maintenance; wild life habitat restoration; native
fisheries habitat enhancement; forest health improvements; wild land
fire hazard reduction; control of noxious weeds; removal of trash and
illegal dumps; road maintenance and obliteration; trail maintenance and
obliteration; and campground maintenance.
Title III of the Act supports activities protecting federal
infrastructure and the forest ecosystem. Fire Planning, emergency
response, law enforcement and search and rescue services make
federa1lands safe. They reinforce county government's commitment to the
partnership between the Federal Government and local communities. These
funds are being used to respond to forest fires conduct search and
rescue missions and improve forest health while teaching at-risk
children and rehabilitating prisoners in prison-work camp programs.
Title III projects, like Title II projects, are also helping to develop
cooperative projects between counties, local, State and Federal
officials and agencies.
The Act's greatest financial footprint is felt in the West, but
financial benefits flow to counties nationwide. Significant investment
in Federal lands has taken or will take place: $121 million from Title
II and $124 million from Title III. At least 1,168 Title II projects
were approved during the Act's first two years.
Under the reauthorization we are sponsoring the payment amount will
continue to be based on the average of timber receipts for the three
top federal land timber production years: FY 1985 through FY 2000.
Currently, on lands where there is no harvest and no safety net, the
communities get no money. For those lands, funds will be provided from
the general treasury. For others, there would be funds available, first
from receipts but then from the general treasury. Still, for counties
where the status quo is their best source of funds, they could stay
with the status quo until they feel the need to use the safety net. No
longer will there be an absolute a reliance on receipts, thus
decreasing pressure on land managers to produce timber harvest for
schools and counties. While there is widespread application of the Act,
86 percent of counties nationwide have opted for the ``stable
payment;'' under the reauthorization bill, if a county that has been
part of this Act would like to opt out it may do so. It is only fair to
allow this, given that the county may have opted in by assuming the law
would only last through 2006.
Very strong support exists across the nation from stakeholders for
renewal of the Act past fiscal year 2006.
I urge my colleagues to work with me and my colleague across the
aisle on this bi-partisan, bi-cameral effort to renew a law that is
actually working on the ground.
______
By Mr. HARKIN (for himself, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Kohl,
Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Rockefeller, and Mr.
Wyden):
S. 268. A bill to provide competitive grants for training court
reporters and closed captioners to meet requirements for realtime
writers under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation, the
Training for Realtime Writers Act of 2005, on behalf of myself and my
colleagues, Senators Clinton, Cochran, Kohl, Lautenberg, Leahy, Lugar,
Rockefeller, and Wyden.
The 1996 Telecom Act required that all television broadcasts were to
be captioned by 2006 and all Spanish language programming was to be
captioned by 2010. This was a much needed reform that has helped
millions of deaf and hard-of-hearing Americans to be able to take full
advantage of television programming. Sadly, we have yet to meet that
demand. It has been estimated that 3,000 captioners are needed to
fulfill the 2006 mandate, and that number continues to increase as more
and more broadband stations come online. Unfortunately, the United
States has fallen behind in training these individuals. We must jump
start training programs to get students in the pipeline and begin to
address the need for Spanish language broadcasting.
This is an issue that I feel very strongly about because my late
brother, Frank, was deaf. I know personally that access to culture,
news, and other media was important to him and to others in achieving a
better quality of life. More than 28 million Americans, or 8 percent of
the population, are considered deaf or hard of hearing and many require
captioning services to participate in mainstream activities. In 1990, I
authored legislation that required all television sets to be equipped
with a computer chip to decode closed captioning. This bill completes
the promise of that technology, affording deaf and hard of hearing
Americans the same equality and access that captioning provides.
But let me emphasize that the deaf and hard of hearing population is
only one of a number of groups that will benefit from the legislation.
The audience for captioning also includes individuals seeking to
acquire or improve literacy skills, including approximately 27 million
functionally illiterate adults, 3 to 4 million immigrants learning
English as a second language, and 18 million children learning to read
in grades kindergarten through 3. I see people using closed captioning
to stay informed everywhere--from the gym to the airport. Here in the
Senate, I would wager that many individuals on our staff have the
captioning turned on right now to follow what is happening on the
Senate floor while they go about conducting the meetings and phone
calls that advance legislation. Captioning helps people educate
themselves and helps all of us stay informed and entertained when audio
isn't the most appropriate medium.
Although the 2006 deadline is only 23 months away, our nation is
facing a serious shortage of captioners. Over the past decade, student
enrollment in programs that train court reporters to become realtime
writers has decreased by 50 percent causing such programs to close on
many campuses. Yet the need for these skills continues to rise. In
fact, the rate of job placement upon graduation nears 100 percent. In
addition, the majority of closed captioners are independent
contractors. They are the small businesses that run the American
economy and we should do everything we can to promote the creation and
support of those businesses.
[[Page S901]]
That is why my colleagues and I are introducing this vital piece of
legislation. The Training for Realtime Writers Act of 2005 would
establish competitive grants to be used toward training real time
captioners. This is necessary to ensure that we meet our goal set by
the 1996 Telecom Act.
The Senate Commerce Committee reported this bill unanimously last
session, the full Senate has passed this Act without objection twice
now, and we stand here today, once again at the beginning of the
process. I ask my colleagues to join us once again in support of this
legislation and join us in our effort to win its passage into law. I
ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 268
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 `Training for Realtime Writers
Act of 2005'.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) As directed by Congress in section 723 of the
Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 613), as added by
section 305 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Public Law
104-104; 110 Stat. 126), the Federal Communications
Commission adopted rules requiring closed captioning of most
television programming, which gradually require new video
programming to be fully captioned in English by 2006 and
Spanish by 2010.
(2) More than 28,000,000 Americans, or 8 percent of the
population, are considered deaf or hard of hearing, and many
require captioning services to participate in mainstream
activities.
(3) More than 24,000 children are born in the United States
each year with some form of hearing loss.
(4) According to the Department of Health and Human
Services and a study done by the National Council on Aging--
(A) 25 percent of Americans over 65 years old are hearing
impaired;
(B) 33 percent of Americans over 70 years old are hearing
impaired; and
(C) 41 percent of Americans over 75 years old are hearing
impaired.
(5) The National Council on Aging study also found that
depression in older adults may be directly related to hearing
loss and disconnection with the spoken word.
(6) Empirical research demonstrates that captions improve
the performance of individuals learning to read English and,
according to numerous Federal agency statistics, could
benefit--
(A) 3,700,000 remedial readers;
(B) 12,000,000 young children learning to read;
(C) 27,000,000 illiterate adults; and (D) 30,000,000 people
for whom English is a second language.
(7) Over the past decade, student enrollment in programs
that train realtime writers and closed captioners has
decreased by 50%, even though job placement upon graduation
is 100%.
SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF GRANT PROGRAM TO PROMOTE TRAINING
AND JOB PLACEMENT OF REAL TIME WRITERS.
(a) In General.--The National Telecommunications and
Information Administration shall make competitive grants to
eligible entities under subsection
(b) to promote training and placement of individuals,
including individuals who have completed a court reporting
training program, as realtime writers in order to meet the
requirements for closed captioning of video programming set
forth in section 723 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47
U.S.C. 613) and the rules prescribed thereunder.
(b) Eligiible Entities.--For purposes of this Act, an
eligible entity is a court reporting program that--
(1) can document and demonstrate to the Secretary of
Commerce that it meets minimum standards of educational and
financial accountability, with a curriculum capable of
training realtime writers qualified to provide captioning
services;
(2) is accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by
the Department of Education; and
(3) is participating in student aid programs under title IV
of the Higher Education Act of 1965.
(c) Priority in Grants.--In determining whether to make
grants under this section, the Secretary of Commerce shall
give a priority to eligible entities that, as determined by
the Secretary of Commerce--
(1) possess the most substantial capability to increase
their capacity to train realtime writers;
(2) demonstrate the most promising collaboration with local
educational institutions, businesses, labor organizations, or
other community groups having the potential to train or
provide job placement assistance to realtime writers; or
(3) propose the most promising and innovative approaches
for initiating or expanding training and job placement
assistance efforts with respect to realtime writers.
(d) Duration of Grant.--A grant under this section shall be
for a period of two years.
(e) Maximum Amount of Grant.--The amount of a grant
provided under subsection (a) to an entity eligible may not
exceed $1,500,000 for the two-year period of the grant under
subsection (d).
SEC. 4. APPLICATION.
(a) In General.--To receive a grant under section 3, an
eligible entity shall submit an application to the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration at such
time and in such manner as the Administration may require.
The application shall contain the information set forth under
subsection (b).
(b) Information.--Information in the application of an
eligible entity under subsection (a) for a grant under
section 3 shall include the following:
(1) A description of the training and assistance to be
funded using the grant amount, including how such training
and assistance will increase the number of realtime writers.
(2) A description of performance measures to be utilized to
evaluate the progress of individuals receiving such training
and assistance in matters relating to enrollment, completion
of training, and job placement and retention.
(3) A description of the manner in which the eligible
entity will ensure that recipients of scholarships, if any,
funded by the grant will be employed and retained as realtime
writers.
(4) A description of the manner in which the eligible
entity intends to continue providing the training and
assistance to be funded by the grant after the end of the
grant period, including any partnerships or arrangements
established for that purpose.
(5) A description of how the eligible entity will work with
local workforce investment boards to ensure that training and
assistance to be funded with the grant will further local
workforce goals, including the creation of educational
opportunities for individuals who are from economically
disadvantaged backgrounds or are displaced workers.
(6) Additional information, if any, of the eligibility of
the eligible entity for priority in the making of grants
under section 3(c).
(7) Such other information as the Administration may
require.
SEC. 5. USE OF FUNDS.
(a) In General.--An eligible entity receiving a grant under
section 3 shall use the grant amount for purposes relating to
the recruitment, training and assistance, and job placement
of individuals, including individuals who have completed a
court reporting training program, as realtime writers,
including--
(1) recruitment;
(2) subject to subsection (b), the provision of
scholarships;
(3) distance learning;
(4) further develop and implement both English and Spanish
curriculum to more effectively train realtime writing skills,
and education in the knowledge necessary for the delivery of
high-quality closed captioning services;
(5) mentor students to ensure successful completion of the
realtime training and provide assistance in job placement;
(6) encourage individuals with disabilities to pursue a
career in realtime writing; and
(7) the employment and payment of personnel for such
purposes.
(b) Scholarships.--
(1) Amount.--The amount of a scholarship under subsection
(a)(2) shall be based on the amount of need of the recipient
of the scholarship for financial assistance, as determined in
accordance with part F of title IV of the Higher Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087kk).
(2) Agreement.--Each recipient of a scholarship under
subsection (a)(2) shall enter into an agreement with the
National Telecommunications and Information Administration to
provide realtime writing services for a period of time (as
determined by the Administration) that is appropriate (as so
determined) for the amount of the scholarship received.
(3) Coursework and Employment.--The Administration shall
establish requirements for coursework and employment for
recipients of scholarships under subsection (a)(2), including
requirements for repayment of scholarship amounts in the
event of failure to meet such requirements for coursework and
employment. Requirements for repayment of scholarship amounts
shall take into account the effect of economic conditions on
the capacity of scholarship recipients to find work as
realtime writers.
(c) Administrative Costs.--The recipient of a grant under
section 3 may not use more than 5 percent of the grant amount
to pay administrative costs associated with activities funded
by the grant.
(d) Supplement Not Supplant.--Grant amounts under this Act
shall supplement and not supplant other Federal or non-
Federal funds of the grant recipient for purposes of
promoting the training and placement of individuals as
realtime writers
SEC. 6. REPORTS.
(a) Annual Reports.--Each eligible entity receiving a grant
under section 3 shall submit to the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration, at the end
of each year of the grant period, a report on the activities
of such entity with respect to the use of grant amounts
during such year.
(b) Report Information.--
(1) In General.--Each report of an entity for a year under
subsection (a) shall include
[[Page S902]]
a description of the use of grant amounts by the entity
during such year, including an assessment by the entity of
the effectiveness of activities carried out using such funds
in increasing the number of realtime writers. The assessment
shall utilize the performance measures submitted by the
entity in the application for the grant under section 4(b).
(2) Final Report.--The final report of an entity on a grant
under subsection (a) shall include a description of the best
practices identified by the entity as a result of the grant
for increasing the number of individuals who are trained,
employed, and retained in employment as realtime writers.
SEC. 7. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this
Act, amounts as follows:
(1) $20,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2006, 2007, and
2008.
(2) Such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 2009.
______
By Mr. KERRY (for himself, Mr. Reed, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Bingaman, Mr.
Kohl, Mr. Jeffords, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Pryor, Mr.
Leahy, Mr. Levin, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Lieberman, Mrs. Clinton, Mr.
Harkin, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Bayh, and Mr. Obama):
S. 269. A bill to provide emergency relief to small business concerns
affected by a significant increase in the price of heating oil, natural
gas, propane, or kerosene, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Small Business and Entrepreneurship.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, tonight the President will deliver his
fifth State of the Union address. It is expected that he will, in that
address, talk about his plan to expand the ownership of businesses, as
he did in his Inaugural Address. As a long-time member of the Senate
Committee on Small Business & Entrepreneurship, I hope that the
administration will also tend to the needs of small businesses that
already exist, in particular those struggling to make ends meet with
the record high cost of heating fuels. It could be done very easily by
making those small businesses eligible to apply for low-cost disaster
loans through the Small Business Administration's Economic Injury
Disaster Loan Program. And by making small farms and agricultural
businesses eligible for loans through a similar loan program at the
Department of Agriculture.
There has been a bipartisan push for this assistance in Congress
twice in the past few years, most recently in November during the
consideration of the mega funding bill, the FY2005 Omnibus
Appropriations Conference Report. It makes no sense that out of 3,000
pages of legislation and almost $400 billion in spending, the White
House and the Republican leadership, opposing members in their own
party, refused to help the little guy. While it would have been most
helpful to these businesses--from small heating oil dealers to small
manufacturers--to enact the legislation in November when the prices
were at an all-time high, we can still be helpful now.
In that spirit, together with Senator Reed and 17 of my colleagues, I
am re-introducing the Small Business and Farm Energy Emergency Relief
Act. I thank Senators Reed, Dodd, Bingaman, Kohl, Jeffords, Cantwell,
Johnson, Pryor, Leahy, Levin, Schumer, Lieberman, Clinton, Harkin,
Kennedy, Bayh and Obama. In the past, this assistance has been
supported by many Republicans, and I hope they will again cosponsor the
legislation. I have reached out to them in hopes that they will once
again work in a bipartisan way to help our small businesses. I know the
heating oil issue is important to Senator Snowe, my colleague and
chairman of the Committee on Small Business & Entrepreneurship, and I
look forward to working with her. I am hopeful that she will cosponsor
this bill and agree to take action on it in Committee as soon as
possible.
We have built a very clear record over the years on how this
legislation would work and why it is needed. Let me take a few minutes
to summarize those conclusions. The Small Business and Farm Energy
Emergency Relief Act of 2005 would provide emergency relief, through
affordable, low-interest SBA and USDA Disaster loans, to small
businesses adversely affected by, or likely to be adversely affected
by, significant increases in the prices of four heating fuels--heating
oil, propane, kerosene, and natural gas. This would be helpful, because
for those businesses in danger of or already suffering from significant
economic injury caused by crippling increases in the costs of heating
fuel, they need access to capital to mitigate or avoid serious losses.
However, commercial lenders typically won't make loans to these small
businesses because they often don't have the increased cash flow to
demonstrate the ability to repay the loan.
Economic injury disaster loans give affected small businesses
necessary working capital until normal operations resume, or until they
can restructure or change the business to address the market changes.
These are direct loans, made through the SBA, with interest rates of 4
percent or less. The SBA tailors the repayment of each economic injury
disaster loan to each borrower's financial capability, enabling them to
avoid the robbing Peter to pay Paul syndrome, as they juggle bills.
In practical terms, SBA considers economic injury to be when a small
business is unable, or likely to be unable, to meet its obligations as
they mature or to pay its ordinary and necessary operating expenses. To
be eligible to apply for an economic injury loan,
you must be a small business that has been the victim of some kind of
disaster,
you must have used all reasonably available funds,
and you must be unable to obtain credit elsewhere.
Under this program, the disaster must be declared by the President,
the SBA Administrator, or a governor at the discretion of the
Administrator. Small businesses will have nine months to apply from
October 1, 2004 or, for future disasters, from the day a disaster is
declared.
This bill differs from the legislation we put forward in 2001 in that
it uses a different trigger to define a disaster. For this legislation,
Senator Reed worked closely with the Department of Energy to identify
what would be considered extreme price jumps in the heating fuels of
heating oil, natural gas, and propane. Therefore, the assistance under
this bill would become available when the price jumps 40 percent, when
compared to the same period for the two previous years, when absorbing
the cost becomes nearly impossible.
Mr. President, I again ask that my colleagues get behind this bill
and make it law as soon as possible. I ask unanimous consent that a
copy of a bipartisan letter of support, a copy of the cosponsors from
the 107th Congress, and a copy of the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
November 16, 2004.
Hon. Ted Stevens,
Chairman, Committee on Appropriations, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Judd Gregg,
Chairman, Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice,
State, and the Judiciary, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Hon. Robert C. Byrd,
Ranking Member, Committee on Appropriations, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Fritz F. Hollings,
Ranking Member, Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce,
Justice, State, and the Judiciary, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senators Stevens, Byrd, Gregg and Hollings: We are
writing to request you include a provision in the fiscal year
2005 Omnibus Appropriations Conference Report to make heating
oil distributors and other small businesses harmed by
substantial increases in energy prices eligible for Small
Business Administration (SBA) disaster loans. Many small
businesses are being adversely affected by the substantial
increases in the prices of heating oil, propane, kerosene and
natural gas. The recent volatile and substantial increases in
the cost of these fuels is placing a tremendous burden on the
financial resources of small businesses, which typically have
small cash flows and narrow operating margins.
Heating oil and propane distributors, in particular, are
being impacted. Heating oil and propane distributors purchase
oil through wholesalers. Typically, the distributor has 10
days to pay for the oil. The money is pulled directly from a
line of credit either at a bank or with the wholesaler. Given
the high cost of heating oil, distributors' purchasing power
is much lower this year compared to previous years. In
addition, the distributors often do not receive payments from
customers until 30 days or more after delivery; therefore,
their financial resources for purchasing oil for customers
and running their business are limited. Heating oil and
propane dealers need to borrow money on a short-term basis to
maintain economic viability. Commercial lenders
[[Page S903]]
typically will not make loans to these small businesses
because they usually do not have the increased cash flows to
demonstrate the ability to repay the loan. Without sufficient
credit, these small businesses will struggle to purchase the
heating fuels they need to supply residential customers,
businesses and public facilities, such as schools. These
loans would provide affected small businesses with the
working capital needed until normal operations resume or
until they can restructure to address the market changes.
SBA's disaster loans are appropriate sources of funding to
address this problem. The hurricanes that caused significant
damage to the Gulf Coast along with the current instability
in Iraq, Nigeria and Russia caused a surge in the price of
oil and important refined products, especially heating fuels.
The conditions restricting these small businesses' access to
capital are beyond their control and SBA loans can fill this
gap when the private sector does not meet the credit needs of
small businesses.
A similar provision passed the Small Business Committee and
Senate with broad bipartisan support during the 10th Congress
when these small businesses faced a substantial increase in
energy prices. In addition, there is precedence for this
proposal, as a similar provision was enacted in the 104th
Congress to help commercial fisheries failures.
Thank you for your consideration. Please find enclosed
suggested draft language for the proposal. If your staff has
questions about the proposal or the impacts of the current
energy price increases on small businesses, please ask them
to contact Kris Sarri at 224-0606.
Sincerely,
Jack Reed,
John F. Kerry,
Arlen Specter,
Christopher J. Dodd,
Edward M. Kennedy,
James M. Jeffords,
Evan Bayh,
Susan M. Collins,
Jeff Bingaman,
Patrick J. Leahy,
Lincoln D. Chafee,
Frank Lautenberg,
Joseph I. Lieberman,
Charles E. Schumer,
Paul S. Sarbanes,
Hillary Rodham Clinton,
Barbara A. Mikulski.
____
Bill Summary and Status for the 107th Congress
Title: A bill to provide emergency relief to small
businesses affected by significant increases in the prices of
heating oil, natural gas, propane, and kerosene, and for
other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Kerry, John F. [D-MA] (introduced 2/8/2001);
Cosponsors: 34.
Committees: Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship;
House Small Business; House Agriculture.
Senate Reports: 107-4.
Latest Major Action: 5/1712001--Referred to House
subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on
Conservation, Credit, Rural Development and Research.
COSPONSORS, ALPHABETICAL
Sen Akaka, Daniel K. [D-HI]
Sen Bayh, Evan [D-IN]
Sen Bond, Christopher S. [R-MO]
Sen Chafee, Lincoln D. [R-RI]
Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [D-NY]
Sen Corzine, Jon [D-NJ]
Sen Dodd, Christopher J. [D-CT]
Sen Edwards, John [D-NC]
Sen Harkin, Tom [D-IA]
Sen Jeffords, James M. [R-VT]
Sen Kennedy, Edward M. [D-MA]
Sen Landrieu, Mary [D-LA]
Sen Levin, Carl [D-MI]
Sen Murray, Patty [D-WA]
Sen Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY]
Sen Snowe, Olympia J. [R-ME]
Sen Torricelli, Robert G. [D-NJ]
Sen Baucus, Max [D-MT]
Sen Bingaman, Jeff [D-NM]
Sen Cantwell, Maria [D-WA]
Sen Cleland, Max [D-GA]
Sen Collins, Susan M. [R-ME]
Sen Daschle, Thomas A. [D-SD]
Sen Domenici, Pete V. [R-NM]
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [R-WY]
Sen Inouye, Daniel K. [D-HI]
Sen Johnson, Tim [D-SD]
Sen Kohl, Herb [D-WI]
Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [D-VT]
Sen Lieberman, Joseph I. [D-CT]
Sen Reed, John F. [D-RI]
Sen Smith, Bob [R-NH]
Sen Specter, Arlen [R-PA]
Sen Wellstone, Paul D. [D-MN]
S. 269
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 ``Small Business and Farm
Energy Emergency Relief Act of 2005''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that--
(1) a significant number of small businesses in the United
States, non-farm as well as agricultural producers, use
heating oil, natural gas, propane, or kerosene to heat their
facilities and for other purposes;
(2) a significant number of small business concerns in the
United States sell, distribute, market, or otherwise engage
in commerce directly related to heating oil, natural gas,
propane, and kerosene; and
(3) significant increases in the price of heating oil,
natural gas, propane, or kerosene--
(A) disproportionately harm small businesses dependent on
those fuels or that use, sell, or distribute those fuels in
the ordinary course of their business, and can cause them
substantial economic injury;
(B) can negatively affect the national economy and regional
economies;
(C) have occurred in the winters of 1983-1984, 1988-1989,
1996-1997, 1999-2000, 2000-2001, and 2004-2005; and
(D) can be caused by a host of factors, including
international conflicts, global or regional supply
difficulties, weather conditions, insufficient inventories,
refinery capacity, transportation, and competitive structures
in the markets, causes that are often unforeseeable to, and
beyond the control of, those who own and operate small
businesses.
SEC. 3. SMALL BUSINESS ENERGY EMERGENCY DISASTER LOAN
PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--Section 7(b) of the Small Business Act (15
U.S.C. 636(b)) is amended by inserting after paragraph (3)
the following:
``(4)(A) In this paragraph--
``(i) the term `base price index' means the moving average
of the closing unit price on the New York Mercantile Exchange
for heating oil, natural gas, or propane for the 10 days, in
each of the most recent 2 preceding years, which correspond
to the trading days described in clause (ii);
``(ii) the term `current price index' means the moving
average of the closing unit price on the New York Mercantile
Exchange, for the 10 most recent trading days, for contracts
to purchase heating oil, natural gas, or propane during the
subsequent calendar month, commonly known as the `front
month';
``(iii) the term `heating fuel' means heating oil, natural
gas, propane, or kerosene; and
``(iv) the term `significant increase' means--
``(I) with respect to the price of heating oil, natural
gas, or propane, any time the current price index exceeds the
base price index by not less than 40 percent; and
``(II) with respect to the price of kerosene, any increase
which the Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary
of Energy, determines to be significant.
``(B) The Administration may make such loans, either
directly or in cooperation with banks or other lending
institutions through agreements to participate on an
immediate or deferred basis, to assist a small business
concern that has suffered or that is likely to suffer
substantial economic injury as the result of a significant
increase in the price of heating fuel.
``(C) Any loan or guarantee extended pursuant to this
paragraph shall be made at the same interest rate as economic
injury loans under paragraph (2).
``(D) No loan may be made under this paragraph, either
directly or in cooperation with banks or other lending
institutions through agreements to participate on an
immediate or deferred basis, if the total amount outstanding
and committed to the borrower under this subsection would
exceed $1,500,000, unless such borrower constitutes a major
source of employment in its surrounding area, as determined
by the Administration, in which case the Administration, in
its discretion, may waive the $1,500,000 limitation.
``(E) For purposes of assistance under this paragraph--
``(i) a declaration of a disaster area based on conditions
specified in this paragraph shall be required, and shall be
made by the President or the Administrator; or
``(ii) if no declaration has been made pursuant to clause
(i), the Governor of a State in which a significant increase
in the price of heating fuel has occurred may certify to the
Administration that small business concerns have suffered
economic injury as a result of such increase and are in need
of financial assistance which is not otherwise available on
reasonable terms in that State, and upon receipt of such
certification, the Administration may make such loans as
would have been available under this paragraph if a disaster
declaration had been issued.
``(F) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, loans
made under this paragraph may be used by a small business
concern described in subparagraph (B) to convert from the use
of heating fuel to a renewable or alternative energy source,
including agriculture and urban waste, geothermal energy,
cogeneration, solar energy, wind energy, or fuel cells.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments Relating to Heating Fuel.--
Section 3(k) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632(k)) is
amended--
(1) by inserting ``, significant increase in the price of
heating fuel'' after ``civil disorders''; and
(2) by inserting ``other'' before ``economic''.
SEC. 4. AGRICULTURAL PRODUCER EMERGENCY LOANS.
(a) In General.--Section 321(a) of the Consolidated Farm
and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1961(a)) is amended--
(1) in the first sentence--
(A) by striking ``operations have'' and inserting
``operations (i) have''; and
(B) by inserting before ``: Provided,'' the following: ``,
or (ii)(I) are owned or operated by such an applicant that is
also a small business concern (as defined in section 3 of the
Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632)), and
[[Page S904]]
(II) have suffered or are likely to suffer substantial
economic injury on or after October 1, 2004, as the result of
a significant increase in energy costs or input costs from
energy sources occurring on or after October 1, 2004, in
connection with an energy emergency declared by the President
or the Secretary'';
(2) in the third sentence, by inserting before the period
at the end the following: ``or by an energy emergency
declared by the President or the Secretary''; and
(3) in the fourth sentence--
(A) by inserting ``or energy emergency'' after ``natural
disaster'' each place that term appears; and
(B) by inserting ``or declaration'' after ``emergency
designation''.
(b) Funding.--Funds available on the date of enactment of
this Act for emergency loans under subtitle C of the
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1961 et
seq.) shall be available to carry out the amendments made by
subsection (a) to meet the needs resulting from natural
disasters .
SEC. 5. GUIDELINES AND RULEMAKING.
(a) Guidelines.--Not later than 30 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Small
Business Administration and the Secretary of Agriculture
shall each issue such guidelines as the Administrator or the
Secretary, as applicable, determines to be necessary to carry
out this Act and the amendments made by this Act.
(b) Rulemaking.--Not later than 30 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Small
Business Administration, after consultation with the
Secretary of Energy, shall promulgate regulations specifying
the method for determining a significant increase in the
price of kerosene under section 7(b)(4)(A)(iv)(II) of the
Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(b)(4)(A)(iv)(II)).
SEC. 6. REPORTS.
(a) Small Business Administration.--Not later than 12
months after the date on which the Administrator of the Small
Business Administration issues guidelines under section 5,
and annually thereafter, the Administrator shall submit to
the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship of the
Senate and the Committee on Small Business of the House of
Representatives, a report on the effectiveness of the
assistance made available under section 7(b)(4) of the Small
Business Act, as added by this Act, including--
(1) the number of small business concerns that applied for
a loan under such section and the number of those that
received such loans;
(2) the dollar value of those loans;
(3) the States in which the small business concerns that
received such loans are located;
(4) the type of heating fuel or energy that caused the
significant increase in the cost for the participating small
business concerns; and
(5) recommendations for ways to improve the assistance
provided under such section 7(b)(4), if any.
(b) Department of Agriculture.--Not later than 12 months
after the date on which the Secretary of Agriculture issues
guidelines under section 5, and annually thereafter, the
Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Small Business and
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate and the
Committee on Small Business and Agriculture of the House of
Representatives, a report that--
(1) describes the effectiveness of the assistance made
available under section 7(b)(4) of the Small Business Act (15
U.S.C. 636(b)(4)); and
(2) contains recommendations for ways to improve the
assistance provided under such section 7(b)(4), if any.
SEC. 7. EFFECTIVE DATE.
(a) Small Business.--The amendments made by this Act shall
apply during the 4-year period beginning on the date on which
guidelines are published by the Administrator of the Small
Business Administration under section 5, with respect to
assistance under section 7(b)(4) of the Small Business Act,
as added by this Act, to economic injury suffered or likely
to be suffered as the result of a significant increase in the
price of heating fuel occurring on or after October 1, 2004;
or
(b) Agriculture.--The amendments made by section 4 shall
apply during the 4-year period beginning on the date on which
guidelines are published by the Secretary of Agriculture
under section 5.
______
By Mr. LUGAR:
S. 270. A bill to provide a framework for consideration by the
legislative and executive branches of proposed unilateral economic
sanctions in order to ensure coordination of United States policy with
respect to trade, security, and human rights; to the Committee on
Foreign Relations.
Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Sanctions Policy
Reform Act.
The fundamental purpose of my bill is to promote good governance
through thoughtful deliberation on those proposals involving unilateral
economic sanctions directed against other countries. My bill lays out a
set of guidelines and requirements for a careful and deliberative
process in both branches of government when considering new unilateral
sanctions. It does not preclude the use of economic sanctions nor does
it change those sanctions already in force. It is based on the
principle that if we improve the quality of our policy process and
public discourse, we can improve the quality of the policy itself.
Numerous studies have shown that unilateral sanctions rarely succeed
and often harm the United States more than the target country.
Sanctions can jeopardize billions of dollars in U.S. export earnings
and hundreds of thousands of American jobs. They frequently weaken our
international competitiveness by yielding to other countries those
markets and opportunities that we abandon. They also can undermine our
ability to provide humanitarian assistance abroad.
Unilateral sanctions often appear to be cost-free, but they have many
unintended victims--the poor in the target countries, American
companies, American labor, American consumers and, quite frankly,
American foreign policy. Sanctions can weaken our international
competitiveness, lower our global market share, abandon our established
market to others and jeopardize billions in export earnings--the key to
our economic growth. They may also impair our ability to provide
humanitarian assistance. They sometimes anger our friends and call our
international leadership into question. In many cases, unilateral
sanctions are well-intentioned, but impotent, serving only to create
the illusion of U.S. action. In the worst cases, unilateral sanctions
are actually undermining our own interests in the world.
Unilateral sanctions do have a place in our foreign policy. There
will always be situations in which the actions of other countries are
so egregious or so threatening to the United States that some response
by the United States, short of the use of military force, is needed and
justified. In these instances, sanctions can be helpful in getting the
attention of another country, in showing U.S. determination to change
behaviors we find objectionable, or in stimulating a search for
creative solutions to difficult foreign policy problems.
But decisions to impose them must be fully considered and debated.
Too frequently, this does not happen. Unilateral sanctions are often
the result of a knee-jerk impulse to take action, combined with a timid
desire to avoid the risks and commitments involved in more potent
foreign policy steps that have greater potential to protect American
interests. We must avoid putting U.S. national security in a straight-
jacket, and we must have a clear idea of the consequences of sanctions
on our own security and prosperity before we enact them.
To this end, I am offering this bill to reform the U.S. sanctions
decision-making process. The bill will establish procedural guidelines
and informational requirements that must be met prior to the imposition
of unilateral economic sanctions. For example, before imposing
unilateral sanctions, Congress would be required to consider findings
by executive branch officials that evaluate the impact of the proposed
sanctions on American agriculture, energy requirements, and capital
markets. The bill mandates that we be better informed about the
prospects that our sanctions will succeed, about the economic costs to
the United States, and about the sanctions' impact on other American
objectives.
In addition, this sanctions policy reform bill provides for more
active consultation between the Congress and the President and for
Presidential waiver authority if the President determines it is in our
national security interests. It also establishes an executive branch
Sanctions Review Committee, which will be tasked with evaluating the
effect of any proposed sanctions and providing appropriate
recommendations to the President prior to the imposition of such
sanctions.
The bill would have no effect on existing sanctions. It would apply
only to new sanctions that are enacted after this bill became law. It
also would apply only to sanctions that are unilateral and that are
intended to achieve foreign policy goals. As such, it excludes trade
remedies or trade sanctions imposed because of market access
restrictions, unfair trade practices, or violations of U.S. commercial
or trade laws.
Let me suggest a number of fundamental principles that I believe
should
[[Page S905]]
shape our approach to unilateral economic sanctions: unilateral
economic sanctions should not be the policy of first resort (to the
extent possible, other means of persuasion ought to be exhausted
first); if harm is to be done or is intended, we must follow the
cardinal principle that we plan to harm our adversary more than we harm
ourselves; when possible, multilateral economic sanctions and
international cooperation are preferable to unilateral sanctions and
are more likely to succeed, even though they may be more difficult to
obtain; we ought to avoid double standards and be as consistent as
possible in the application of our sanctions policy; to the extent
possible, we ought to avoid disproportionate harm to the civilian
population (we should avoid the use of food as a weapon of foreign
policy and we should permit humanitarian assistance programs to
function); our foreign policy goals ought to be clear, specific and
achievable within a reasonable period of time; we ought to keep to a
minimum the adverse affects of our sanctions on our friends and allies;
we should keep in mind that unilateral sanctions can cause adverse
consequences that may be more problematic than the actions that
prompted the sanctions--a regime collapse, a humanitarian disaster, a
mass exodus of people, or more repression and isolation in the target
country, for example; we should explore options for solving problems
through dialogue, public diplomacy, and positive inducements or
rewards; the President of the United States should always have options
that include both sticks and carrots that can be adjusted according to
circumstance and nuance (the Congress should be vigilant by ensuring
that his options are consistent with Congressional intent and the law);
and in those cases where we do impose sanctions unilaterally, our
actions must be part of a coherent and coordinated foreign policy that
is coupled with diplomacy and consistent with our international
obligations and objectives.
An unexamined reliance on unilateral sanctions may be appropriate for
a third-rate power whose foreign policy interests lie primarily in
satisfying domestic constituencies or cultivating a self-righteous
posture. But the United States is the world's only superpower. Our own
prosperity and security, as well as the future of the world, depend on
a vigorous and effective assertion of our international interests.
The United States should never abandon its leadership role in the
world, nor forsake the basic values we cherish. We must ask, however,
whether we are always able to change the actions of other countries
whose behavior we find disagreeable or threatening. If we are able to
influence those actions, we need to ponder how best to proceed. In my
judgment, unilateral economic sanctions will not always be the best
answer. But, if they are the answer, they should be structured so that
they do as little harm as possible to our global interests. By
improving upon our procedures and the quality and timeliness of our
information when considering new sanctions, I believe U.S. foreign
policy will be more effective.
______
By Mr. McCAIN (for himself, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Lott, Mr.
Lieberman, Mr. Schumer, Ms. Snowe, Ms. Collins, and Mr.
Salazar):
S. 271. A bill to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to
clarify when organizations described in section 527 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 must register as political committees, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to be joined by my good
friends and colleagues Senators Feingold from Wisconsin, and Lott from
Mississippi, and our good friends who lead the campaign finance reform
fight in the House, Representatives Shays and Meehan, in introducing a
bill to end the illegal practice of 527 groups spending soft money on
ads and other activities to influence Federal elections.
As my colleagues know, a number of 527 groups raised and spent a
substantial amount of soft money in a blatant effort to influence the
outcome of last year's Presidential election. These activities are
illegal under existing laws, and yet once again, the Federal Election
Commission, FEC, has failed to do its job and has refused to do
anything to stop these illegal activities. Therefore, we must pursue
all possible steps to overturn the FEC's misinterpretation of the
campaign finance laws, which is improperly allowing 527 groups whose
purpose is to influence Federal elections to spend soft money on these
efforts.
According to an analysis by campaign finance scholar Tony Corrado,
Federally oriented 527s spent $423 million on the 2004 elections. The
same analysis shows that ten donors gave at least $4 million each to
527s involved in the 2004 elections and two donors each contributed
over $20 million.
In September, we filed a lawsuit to overturn the FEC's failure to
issue regulations to stop these illegal practices by 527 groups.
President Bush and his campaign filed a similar lawsuit against the FEC
as well, and I also appreciate President Bush's support for the
legislative effort we begin today on 527s. Today, we are introducing
legislation that will accomplish the same result. We are going to
follow every possible avenue to stop 527 groups from effectively
breaking the law, and doing what they are already prohibited from doing
by longstanding laws.
The bill we introduce today is simple. It would require that all 527s
register as political committees and comply with Federal campaign
finance laws, including Federal limits on the contributions they
receive, unless the money they raise and spend is only in connection
with non-Federal candidate elections, State or local ballot
initiatives, or the nomination or confirmation of individuals to non-
elected offices.
Additionally, this legislation would set new rules for Federal
political committees that spend funds on voter mobilization efforts
effecting both Federal and local races and, therefore, use both a
Federal and a non-Federal account under FEC regulations. The new rules
would prevent unlimited soft money from being channeled into Federal
election activities by these Federal political committees.
Under the new rules, at least half of the funds spent on these voter
mobilization activities by Federal political committees would have to
be hard money from their Federal account. More importantly, the funds
raised for their non-Federal account would have to come from
individuals and would be limited to no more than $25,000 per year per
donor. Corporations and labor unions could not contribute to these non-
Federal accounts. To put it in simple terms, a George Soros could give
$25,000 per year as opposed to $10 million to finance these activities.
Let me be perfectly clear on one point here. Our proposal will not
shut down 527s, it will simply require them to abide by the same
Federal regulations every other Federal political committee must abide
by in spending money to influence Federal elections.
It is unfortunate that we even need to be here introducing this bill
today. This legislation would not be necessary if it weren't for the
abject failure of the FEC to enforce existing law. As my colleagues
well know, some organizations, registered under section 527 of the
Internal Revenue Code, had a major impact on last year's presidential
election by raising and spending illegal soft money to run ads
attacking both President Bush and Senator Kerry. The use of soft money
to finance these activities is clearly illegal under current statute,
and the fact that they have been allowed to continue unchecked is
unconscionable.
The blame for this lack of enforcement does not lie with the
Congress, nor with the Administration. The blame for this continuing
illegal activity lies squarely with the FEC. This agency has a duty to
issue regulations to properly implement and enforce the Nation's
campaign laws--and the FEC has failed, and it has failed miserably to
carry out that responsibility. The Supreme Court found that to be the
case in its McConnell decision, and Judge Kollar-Kotelly found that to
be the case in her decision overturning 15 regulations incorrectly
adopted by the FEC to implement the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of
2002, BCRA. That is why a Los Angeles Times editorial stated that,
``her decision would make a fitting obituary for an agency that
deserves to die.'' We are not going to allow the destructive FEC to
continue
[[Page S906]]
to undermine the Nation's campaign finance laws as it has been
consistently doing for the past two decades.
Opponents of campaign reform like to point out that the activities of
these 527s serve as proof that BCRA has failed in its stated purpose to
eliminate the corrupting influence of soft money in our political
campaigns. Let me be perfectly clear on this. The 527 issue has nothing
to do with BCRA, it has everything to do with the 1974 law and the
failure of the FEC to do its job and properly regulate the activities
of these groups.
As further evidence of the FEC's lack of capability, let me quote
from a couple of court decisions which highlight this agency's
shortcomings. First, in its decision upholding the constitutionality of
BCRA in McConnell v. FEC, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that the FEC
had ``subverted'' the law, issued regulations that ``permitted more
than Congress had ever intended,'' and ``invited widespread
circumvention'' of FECA's limits on contributions. Additionally, in
September, a Federal district court judge threw out 15 of the FEC's
regulations implementing BCRA. Among the reasons for her actions were
that one provision ``severely undermines FECA'' and would ``foster
corruption'', another ``runs completely afoul'' of current law, another
would ``render the statute largely meaningless'' and, finally, that
another had ``no rational basis.''
The track record of the FEC is clear and, by their continued
stonewalling, the Commission has proven itself to be nothing more than
a bureaucratic nightmare, and the time has come to put an end to its
destructive tactics. The FEC has had ample, and well documented,
opportunities to address the issue of the 527's illegal activities, and
each time they have taken a pass, choosing instead to delay, postpone,
and refuse to act.
Enough is enough. It is time to stop wasting taxpayer's dollars on an
agency that runs roughshod over the will of the Congress, the Supreme
Court, the American people, and the Constitution. We've fought too long
and too hard to sit back and allow this worthless agency to undermine
the law.
So, here is the bottom line: If the FEC won't do its job, and its
commissioners have proven time and time again that they won't, then
we'll do it for them. The bill Senators Feingold, Lott and I introduce
today will put an end to the abusive, illegal practices of these 527s.
I urge my colleagues to support swift passage of this bill and put an
end to this problem once and for all.
____________________