[Pages S4795-S4805]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

By Mr. BIDEN (for himself and Mr. Lugar):
S. 3052. A bill to provide for the transfer of naval vessels to
certain foreign recipients; to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, today, Senator Lugar and I are introducing
the Naval Vessel Transfer Act of 2008, a bill to permit the transfer of
certain U.S. Navy vessels to particular foreign countries. All of the
proposed ship transfer authorizations have been requested by the U.S.
Navy, with the approval of the Office of Management and Budget.
Pursuant to section 824(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for fiscal year 1994, as amended, 10 U.S.C. 7307(a), a naval vessel
that is in excess of 3,000 tons or that is less than 20 years of age
may not be disposed of to another nation unless the disposition of that
vessel is approved by law enacted after August 5, 1974. The bill we
introduce today would provide that required approval for six transfers:
a guided missile frigate for Pakistan; two minehunter coastal ships for
Greece; an oiler for Chile; and two amphibious tank landing ships for
Peru. These would all be grant transfers under section 516 of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2321j). If any Member of this
body has questions or concerns regarding one or more of the proposed
ship transfers, please let us know.
The bill also contains provisions that are traditionally included in
ship transfer bills, relating to transfer costs and repair and
refurbishment of the ships, and exempting the value of a vessel
transferred on a grant basis from the aggregate value of excess defense
articles in a given fiscal year.
The authority provided by this bill would expire 2 years after the
date of enactment of the bill.
Finally, the Department of Defense has provided the following
information on this bill:

These proposed transfers would improve the United States'
political and military relationships with close allies. They
would support strategic engagement goals and regional
security cooperation objectives. Active use of former naval
vessels by coalition forces in support of regional priorities
is more advantageous than retaining vessels in the Navy's
inactive fleet and disposing of them by scrapping or another
method.
The United States would incur no costs in transferring
these naval vessels. The recipients would be responsible for
all costs associated with the transfers, including
maintenance, repairs, training, and fleet turnover costs.
This act does not alter the effect of the Toxic Substances
Control Act, or any other law, with regard to their
applicability to the transfer of ships by the U.S. to foreign
countries for military or humanitarian use. The laws and
regulations that apply today would apply in the same manner
if this section were enacted.

The Secretary of the Navy, the Honorable Donald C. Winter, has added:
``Expeditious enactment of the proposal is in the best interests of the
Navy's Maritime Strategy as it will allow us to strengthen the
capabilities of partner nations.''
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:

S. 3052

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 ``Naval Vessel Transfer Act of
2008''.

SEC. 2. TRANSFER OF NAVAL VESSELS TO CERTAIN FOREIGN
RECIPIENTS.

(a) Transfers by Grant.--The President is authorized to
transfer vessels to foreign recipients on a grant basis under
section 516 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C.
2321j), as follows:
(1) Pakistan.--To the Government of Pakistan, the OLIVER
HAZARD PERRY class guided missile frigate MCINERNEY (FFG-8).
(2) Greece.--To the Government of Greece, the OSPREY class
minehunter coastal ships OSPREY (MHC-51) and ROBIN (MHC-54).
(3) Chile.--To the Government of Chile, the KAISER class
oiler ANDREW J. HIGGINS (AO-190).
(4) Peru.--To the Government of Peru, the NEWPORT class
amphibious tank landing ships FRESNO (LST-1182) and RACINE
(LST-1191).
(b) Grants Not Counted in Annual Total of Transferred
Excess Defense Articles.--The value of a vessel transferred
to a recipient on a grant basis pursuant to authority
provided by subsection (a) shall not be counted against the
aggregate value of excess defense articles transferred in any
fiscal year under section 516 of the Foreign Assistance Act
of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2321j).
(c) Costs of Transfers.--Any expense incurred by the United
States in connection with a transfer authorized by this
section

[[Page S4796]]

shall be charged to the recipient (notwithstanding section
516(e) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C.
2321j(e))).
(d) Repair and Refurbishment in United States Shipyards.--
To the maximum extent practicable, the President shall
require, as a condition of the transfer of a vessel under
this section, that the recipient to which the vessel is
transferred have such repair or refurbishment of the vessel
as is needed, before the vessel joins the naval forces of the
recipient, performed at a shipyard located in the United
States, including a United States Navy shipyard.
(e) Expiration of Authority.--The authority to transfer a
vessel under this section shall expire at the end of the 2-
year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this
Act.
______

By Mr. SMITH (for himself and Ms. Cantwell):
S. 3053. A bill to amend title XI of the Social Security Act to
provide grants for eligible entities to provide services to improve
financial literacy among older individuals; to the Committee on
Finance.
Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Cantwell, I introduce
a bill to provide grants to Area Agencies on Aging to provide services
to improve financial literacy among older individuals.
A number of trends have occurred over the past few years that make
financial literacy a critical element of retirement security. The
personal savings rate in the United States has declined dramatically
over the last two decades. According to the Commerce Department, the
personal savings rate was 0.2 percent in March of this year. This means
for every $1,000 of after-tax income, the average person saved only $2.
In addition, the shift from defined benefit to defined contribution
retirement plans has generally placed the burden on employees to
effectively manage the investment of their pensions.
However, many Americans, including older Americans, lack financial
literacy skills. In the 2008 Retirement Confidence Survey by EBRI/
Matthew Greenwald & Associates, 40 percent of retirees surveyed
reported that they are not knowledgeable about investments and
investment strategies. In addition, a 2003 national survey by AARP of
consumers aged 45 and older found that they often lacked knowledge of
basic financial and investment terms. For example, only about half of
respondents reported knowing that diversification of investments
reduces risk.
The Smith-Cantwell bill will improve older Americans' financial
literacy and help them better prepare for and manage their assets in
retirement. Under the bill, grants will be provided to Area Agencies on
Aging to enable these organizations to provide services to improve
financial literacy among older individuals, especially older women.
These services include education, training and other assistance.
This bipartisan financial literacy bill will help increase older
Americans' financial literacy so they can make more informed and
prudent investment and retirement planning decisions. And I am pleased
that the Women's Institute for a Secure Retirement and the National
Association of Area Agencies on Aging have both endorsed this bill.
I look forward to working with my colleagues to enact this important
bill. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill
be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:

S. 3053

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

SECTION 1. FINANCIAL LITERACY SERVICES.

Part A of title XI of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1301 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following
new section:

``financial literacy services

``Sec. 1150A. (a) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Area agency on aging.--The term `area agency on
aging' has the meaning given that term in section 102 of the
Older Americans Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3002).
``(2) Financial literacy services.--The term `financial
literacy services' means the services described in subsection
(b)(1).
``(3) Older individual.--The term `older individual' has
the meaning given that term in such section 102.
``(b) Grants for Services.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall make grants to
eligible entities and other entities determined appropriate
by the Secretary to enable the entities to provide services
to improve financial literacy among older individuals,
including older individuals who are women, and the family
members and legal representatives of such individuals. The
Secretary shall make the grants on a competitive basis, and
nationwide.
``(2) Eligible entities.--To be eligible to receive a grant
under this subsection, an entity shall be an area agency on
aging or another entity that meets such requirements as the
Secretary may specify.
``(3) Application.--To be eligible to receive a grant under
this subsection, an entity shall submit an application to the
Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing such
information as the Secretary may require. In the case of an
entity who intends to provide the financial literacy services
jointly with other services as described in paragraph (4)(C),
the application shall include information demonstrating that
the entity has the capacity to provide the services jointly.
``(4) Use of funds.--
``(A) In general.--An entity that receives a grant under
this subsection shall use the funds made available through
the grant to provide financial literacy services, such as
financial literacy education, training, and assistance.
``(B) Provision through contracts.--The entity may provide
the services directly or by entering into a contract with an
organization that provides counseling, advice, or
representation to older individuals and the family members
and legal representatives of such individuals in a community
served by the entity.
``(C) Provision with other services.--The entity may
provide the services alone or jointly with other services
provided by or funded by the eligible entity, such as--
``(i) services provided through State Health Insurance
Assistance Programs;
``(ii) services provided through a Long-Term Care Ombudsman
program under section 307(a)(9) or 712 of the Older Americans
Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3027, 3058g);
``(iii) information and assistance services provided under
the Older Americans Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.);
``(iv) legal assistance services provided under the Older
Americans Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.);
``(v) services provided through Senior Medicare Patrol
Projects conducted by the Administration on Aging;
``(vi) case management services; and
``(vii) services provided through Aging and Disability
Resource Centers.
``(5) Report.--The Secretary shall submit to Congress an
annual report on the activities carried out by entities under
a grant under this subsection.
``(c) National Support Center for Financial Literacy
Grant.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary may make a grant to an
eligible center to coordinate the services provided through,
and support the grant recipients under, the grant program
carried out under subsection (b).
``(2) Eligible center.--To be eligible to receive a grant
under this subsection, a center shall--
``(A) be an entity that is housed within an organization
described in section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 that is exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of
such Code;
``(B) have a minimum of 10 years experience operating a
national program and support center with a focus on financial
literacy; and
``(C) be primarily engaged in outreach and training
activities designed to provide financial education and
retirement planning for low- and moderate-income individuals,
particularly with respect to women; and
``(D) have a demonstrated record of collaboration with
organizations that focus on the needs of low- and moderate-
income individuals and with national organizations serving
the elderly, including those working with area agencies on
aging and women, as well as organizations with expertise in
financial services and related fields.
``(3) Use of funds.--A center that receives a grant under
this subsection shall use the funds made available through
the grant to--
``(A) design and conduct training (which may include
providing training for trainers) related to financial
literacy services;
``(B) provide curricula for financial literacy services;
``(C) develop and disseminate relevant information about
financial literacy services;
``(D) conduct outreach to national, State, and community
organizations through a series of strategic partnerships in
order to improve financial literacy among older individuals
and the family members and legal representatives of such
individuals;
``(E) provide technical assistance to the grant recipients
under subsection (b) with respect to the program; and
``(F) collect data from such grant recipients about the
services provided under this section, and the impact of those
services.
``(4) Addressing challenges to women in securing adequate
retirement income.--In addition to the activities described
in paragraph (3), a center that receives a grant under this
subsection shall use the funds made available through the
grant to conduct activities that are focused on addressing
the challenges faced by older women, women of color, single
women, and women who are heads of households to securing an
adequate retirement income.
``(d) Coordination.--The Secretary shall ensure that the
activities carried out under the grant program under
subsection (b) and under a grant made under subsection (c)
are

[[Page S4797]]

coordinated with the activities carried out by--
``(1) the Office of Financial Education of the Department
of the Treasury; and
``(2) the Financial Literacy and Education Commission
established under section 513 of the Financial Literacy and
Education Improvement Act (20 U.S.C. 9702).
``(e) Funding.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall
transfer to the Secretary of Health and Human Services from
the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund and
Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund established under
section 201 such funds as are necessary for making grants
under this section.''.
______

By Mr. WYDEN (for himself and Mr. Smith):
S. 3055. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify
the rate of the excise tax on certain wooden arrows designed for use by
children; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today, along with Senator Smith, I am
introducing a bill to exempt wooden practice arrows from the unfair
impact of an excise tax designed for much more expensive hunter and
professional arrows. The JOBS Act of 2004 changed the tax on all arrows
from 12.4 percent of an arrow's value to a fixed amount, adjusted for
inflation, that now stands at 39 cents per arrow. Under the prior law,
wooden practice arrows that cost 30 cents paid a tax of 3.6 cents.
Under the current fixed tax, the same practice arrows are now assessed
a tax of 39 cents per arrow, more than doubling the arrows' cost to the
camps, schools and Boy Scouts that use them. The fixed tax is suited to
the higher cost of hunter and professional arrows, which sell for up to
$100 apiece. It is not suited for the less costly practice arrows and
these should be made exempt as our legislation would do. The Archery
Trade Association, which represents arrow makers large and small,
supports this bill and agrees that the newer fixed tax unfairly and
unintentionally hurts the makers and users of wooden practice arrows.
Moreover, there is a precedent for exempting practice arrows, because
Code section 4161 exempts youth bows, defined by their draw weight,
from taxes. The Joint Committee on Taxation puts the cost of this
arrows bill as $2 million over 10 years. This seems a small price to
pay to help wooden arrow manufacturers struggling to stay in business
in Oregon and 9 other States: Washington, Wisconsin, Arizona,
Minnesota, Indiana, Virginia, New York, Utah and Texas. I urge my
colleagues to support reform of the arrow excise tax to help both the
makers and users of children's wooden practice arrows.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:

S. 3055

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

SECTION 1. MODIFICATION OF RATE OF EXCISE TAX ON CERTAIN
WOODEN ARROWS DESIGNED FOR USE BY CHILDREN.

(a) In General.--Paragraph (2) of section 4161(b) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to arrows) is amended
by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C) and by
inserting after subparagraph (A) the following new
subparagraph:
``(B) Exemption for certain wooden arrow shafts.--
Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to any shaft consisting of
all natural wood with no laminations or artificial means of
enhancing the spine of such shaft (whether sold separately or
incorporated as part of a finished or unfinished product) of
a type used in the manufacture of any arrow which after its
assembly--
``(i) measures \5/16\ of an inch or less in diameter, and
``(ii) is not suitable for use with a bow described in
paragraph (1)(A).''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to shafts first sold after the date of enactment
of this Act.
______

By Mr. SMITH (for himself and Mrs. Feinstein):
S. 3057. A bill to amend title 37, Unite States Code, to provide a
special displacement allowance for members of the uniformed services
without dependents, to provide for an annual percentage increase in the
amount of the family separation allowance for members of the uniformed
services, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Armed Services.
Mr SMITH. Mr. President, I rise today to honor our Nation's veterans
and their families. As we approach Memorial Day and reflect upon the
countless sacrifices of our service men and women, we must also take a
moment and remember our military families. These families have
shouldered the burden of our military engagements, going extended
periods, sometimes years, without seeing their spouse, their mother, or
their father. To help alleviate this burden, Senator Feinstein and I
are introducing the Military Family Separation Benefit Enhancement Act.
The Military Family Separation Benefit Enhancement Act would peg the
Family Separation Allowance to the Consumer Price Index, allowing for
increases in the benefit, providing some additional relief to military
families separated by deployments. The Family Separation Allowance is a
benefit awarded to our military families when a service man or woman
with dependents is deployed overseas for 30 days or more. The current
amount of the Family Separation Allowance is only $250, which does not
have much purchasing power in these days of high fuel and food prices.
The Family Separation Allowance remains at $250, regardless of economic
conditions.
When a service member is deployed, a family experiences new and
unexpected costs. Oftentimes, the deployed service member is a vital
part of a household, helping to raise children, perform various
community services and complete chores around the house. Therefore,
many of our military families are forced to seek additional help.
Families must pay for extra child care or for a lawn care service,
tasks that often are the deployed service member's responsibility.
Pegging the Family Separation Allowance to the Consumer Price Index
will better reflect the economic burdens our military families
encounter. The FSA will not be stuck at $250 a month when fuel costs
are skyrocketing and food prices continue to rise.
The Military Family Separation Benefit Enhancement Act also creates a
new Family Separation Allowance for those service members who do not
have dependents. Just because a service member does not have dependents
does not mean he or she will not need help at home while overseas. Many
still need help maintaining their lawn, ensuring the upkeep of their
house, or providing for the storage of their car.
Our bill is a means to help our military families and those who
serve. Deploying overseas is a difficult adjustment for our military
families and this legislation will provide some relief.
I ask my colleagues to join Senator Feinstein and me to pass the
Military Family Separation Benefit Enhancement Act.
______

By Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Ms. Snowe):
S. 3059. A bill to permit commercial trucks to use certain highways
of the Interstate System to provide significant savings in the
transportation of goods throughout the United States, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Commercial
Truck Fuel Savings Demonstration Act of 2008, which would help address
the growing crisis of energy costs for our Nation's trucking industry.
Our Nation faces record high energy prices, affecting almost every
aspect of daily life. The rapidly growing price of diesel is putting an
increasing strain on our trucking industry. The U.S. average on diesel
prices reached $3.50 a gallon in February 2008 and prices have not gone
below this amount since that time. The average price of diesel this
week is $4.50. Escalating fuel costs are especially devastating in
states where the cost of diesel fuel is exacerbated by Federal weight
limit restrictions that prohibit trucks that carry more than 80,000
pounds from traveling on the Federal interstate system.
For example, under current law, trucks weighing 100,000 pounds are
allowed to travel on the portion of Interstate 95 designated as the
Maine Turnpike, which runs from Maine's border with New Hampshire to
Augusta, our capital city. At Augusta, the State Turnpike designation
ends, but I-95 proceeds another 200 miles north to Houlton. At Augusta,
however, heavy trucks must exit the modern four-lane, limited-access
highway and are forced

[[Page S4798]]

onto smaller, two-lane secondary roads that pass through cities, towns,
and villages.
The Commercial Truck Fuel Savings Demonstration Act of 2008, which I
am introducing today, will provide immediate savings to our truckers.
My bill creates a 2-year year pilot program that would permit trucks
carrying up to 100,000 pounds to travel on the Federal interstate
system whenever diesel prices are at or above $3.50 a gallon. This
legislation does not mandate that each state participate in the pilot
program, but gives each state the opportunity, during this time of high
fuel costs, to offer relief to their trucking industries.
Permitting trucks to carry up to 100,000 pounds on Federal highways
would lessen the fuel cost burden on truckers in three ways: First,
raising the weight limit would allow trucking companies to put more
cargo in each truck, thereby reducing the numbers of trucks needed to
transport goods: Second, trucks carrying up to 100,000 pounds would no
longer need to move off the main Federal highways where trucks are
limited at 80,000 pounds and take less direct routes on local roads
requiring considerably more diesel fuel and extended periods of idling
during each trip; and third, trucks traveling on the interstate system
would save on fuel costs due to the much superior road design of the
interstate system as compared to the rural and urban state road
systems.
I recently met with Kurt Babineau, a small business owner and second
generation logger and trucker from my State who has been struggling
with the increasing costs of running his operation. Mr. Babineau's
operation works just east of central Maine on the outskirts of the town
of Mattawamkeag. All of the pulpwood his business produces, which is
roughly 50 percent of his total harvest, is transported to Verso Paper,
which is located in the southwestern part of the State, in the town of
Jay. The distance his trucks must travel is 165 miles and a round trip
takes approximately 8 hours to complete.
If Mr. Babineau's trucks were permitted to use Interstate 95, this
would reduce the distance his trucks must travel to approximately 100
miles and would shave one hour off the time it takes his trucks to make
their delivery to Verso Paper, saving his operation both time and fuel.
The results of less fuel consumption from decreased distance traveled
would create significant savings for Mr. Babineau's operation. His
trucks average 4 miles to the gallon, which calculates to approximately
11.8 gallons an hour. Permitting trucks to travel on Interstate 95
would save Mr. Babineau 118 gallons of fuel each week. The current cost
of diesel fuel in his area is approximately $4.42 per gallon, and
therefore, combined with time saved on wages for drivers, his savings
would estimate to nearly $697 a week.
If you applied this savings to one year of trucking for Mr.
Babineau's company alone, it would save his operation over $33,400 a
year and 5,664 gallons of fuel over the same period. These savings are
not only beneficial to Mr. Babineau's business, his employees, and the
consumer, but also to our Nation, as we look for ways to decrease on
our overall fuel consumption.
Trucking is the cornerstone of our economy as most of our goods are
transported by trucks at some point in the supply chain. Some
independent truckers in my state already have been forced out of
business due to rising fuel costs and more businesses are facing a
similar fate if Congress does not act soon to address our growing
energy crisis. The Commercial Truck Fuel Savings Demonstration Act
offers an immediate and cost effective way to help our Nation's
struggling trucking industry. I am pleased that Senator Snowe has
joined me as an original cosponsor of the bill, and I urge all my
colleagues to support this important legislation.
Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to commend my colleague from
Maine, Senator Collins, in introducing legislation critical to
rectifying not only a serious impediment to the movement of
international commerce, but more importantly, will improve safety on
our secondary roads and sustain a commercial trucking industry
suffering from an astonishing rise in diesel prices.
There are some of our colleagues who believe that expanding upon the
current Federal truck weight limitation of 80,000 pounds is dangerous,
compromising the safety of passenger vehicles driver who may be faced
with a truck weighing as much as 143,000 pounds, the limit on
Interstates in Massachusetts and New York. I certainly concur that
safety of such drivers is very important, and I have the record to back
that up. Yet, in some areas the imposition of this outdated patchwork
of weight limits puts the safety of pedestrians and the motor carrier
operators themselves at risk.
Take the situation we face in Maine, where we currently have a
limited exemption along the southern portion of the Maine turnpike.
Many trucks traveling to or from the Canadian border or into upstate
Maine are not able to travel on our Interstates as a result of the
80,000 pound weight limit. This forces many of them onto secondary
roads, many of which are two-lane roads running through small towns and
villages in Maine. Tanker trucks carrying fuel teeter past elementary
schools, libraries, and weaving through traffic to reach locations like
our Air National Guard station. Not only is that an inefficient method
of bringing necessary fuel to Guardsmen that provide our national
security, but imagine if you will one of those tanker trucks rupturing
on Main Street, potentially causing serious damage to property, causing
traffic chaos, and most importantly, killing or injuring drivers and
pedestrians.
This is not a far-fetched scenario. In fact, two pedestrians were
killed last year in Maine as a result of overweight trucks on local
roadways, one tragic instance occurring within sight of the nearby
Interstate. So I ask you, is the so-called safety argument truly a
legitimate reason for opposition as my constituents and many others
across small American communities are taking their lives in their hands
when merely crossing Main Street?
As laid out in this legislation, it is obvious Senator Collins has a
clear understanding of this safety issue, crafting a strategy that
quantifies any potential risks to safety, and places the gathering of
that data in the hands of the nonpartisan Government Accountability
Office. It is my expectation that, like earlier studies that have
indicated traffic fatalities involving trucks weighing 100,000 pounds
are ten times greater on secondary roads than on exempted Interstates,
the data collected by the GAO will point the way to a permanent
solution that will enable America to harmonize the myriad weight limits
across our Nation's highways.
This legislation also exhibits a true sensitivity to one of the
greatest problems facing the domestic trucking industry, particularly
our smaller operators: the cost of fuel. This is a problem that cannot
be ignored. The price of diesel nationally as I make this statement is
four dollars and 49 cents. One year ago today, it was two dollars and
82 cents! We must act.
As a result of this legislation, motor carriers will be able to
expand their ability to carry loads when the price of diesel surpasses
three dollars and fifty cents per gallon. While this will only affect
some states that face a federal interstate system without a weight
exemption, it will greatly facilitate the movement of goods across this
country. Given that volume of goods projected to enter this country is
forecast to increase by over 100 percent, we need a forward-thinking,
intermodal plan in place. Having a greater synergy in terms of our
weight limits will not only assist our Nation's struggling trucking
industry, but will simplify the flow of goods moving across our country
and augment our Nation's economy.
I would like to thank Senator Collins for her steadfast efforts and
innovative thinking on this legislation as, side-by-side, we will
continue to seek a resolution to this issue, which, to my eyes, is a
simple matter of fairness.
F_____

By Mr. BIDEN (for himself and Mr. Brownback):
S. 3061. A bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2008
through 2011 for the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, to
enhance measures to combat trafficking in persons, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the William
Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection

[[Page S4799]]

Reauthorization Act of 2008. The Trafficking Victims Protection Act was
authored 8 years ago by Senator Brownback and the late Senator
Wellstone, and since then, through two re-authorizations, has been a
tremendous asset in preventing and prosecuting human trafficking
crimes. Today, I am honored to be able to introduce legislation to
reauthorize these valuable programs with my distinguished colleague,
Senator Brownback.
Human trafficking is a major problem worldwide and the challenges
remain great. According to the most recent State Department report,
roughly 800,000 individuals are trafficked each year, the overwhelming
majority of them women and children. The FBI estimates approximately
$9.5 billion is generated annually for organized crime from trafficking
in persons. The International Labor Organization estimates that, at
present, 2.4 million persons have been trafficked into situations of
forced labor.
These victims are trafficked in a variety of ways. Sometimes they are
kidnapped outright, but many times they are lured with dubious job
offers, or false marriage opportunities. The traffickers capitalize on
the victims' desire to seek a better life, and trap them with lifetime
debt bondages that degrade and destroy their lives.
Since 2000, the Trafficking Victims Protection Act has provided us
effective tools, and in this reauthorization, our aim is to take the
successes and lessons of eight years of progress and expand our
abilities to combat human trafficking. In Title I, the legislation
focuses on combating human trafficking internationally by broadening
the U.S. interagency task force charged with monitoring and combating
trafficking, and increasing the authority to the State Department
Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking. Because of the difficulty in
accurately understanding the full scope of the problem globally, we
also include provisions to coordinate our multiple federal databases,
and set a reporting requirement to address forced labor and child
labor.
Today's reauthorization bill also expands our ability to combat
trafficking in the United States. We've provided for certain
improvements to the T-visa program, which protects trafficking victims
and their families from retaliation, so that we can have their help in
bringing traffickers to justice, without the victim fearing harm to
themselves or their loved ones. We also expand authority for U.S.
Government programs to help those who have been trafficked, and require
a study to outline any additional gaps in assistance that may exist.
Finally, we establish some powerful new legal tools, including
increasing the jurisdiction of the courts, enhancing penalties for
trafficking offenses, punishing those who profit from trafficked labor
and ensuring restitution of forfeited assets to victims.
Human trafficking is a daunting and critical global issue. I urge my
colleagues to support this reauthorization and work with Senator
Brownback and me to pass it in the Senate as quickly as possible.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a section-by-section
summary of the bill be printed in the Record.

William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act
of 2008

Section-by-Section Description

Section 1. Short title; table of contents

TITLE I--COMBATING INTERNATIONAL TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS

Section 101. Interagency task force to monitor and combat
trafficking
Section 101 adds the Secretary of Education to the existing
interagency task force to monitor and combat trafficking.
Section 102. Office to monitor and combat trafficking
Section 102 provides for several amendments to Section
105(b) of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA)
related to the State Department's Office to Monitor and
Combat Trafficking (the TIP Office) including mandating the
office, conferring additional responsibility to the Director
to work on public-private partnerships to combat trafficking
and providing that the Director of the office have the
ability to review and concur in State Department anti-
trafficking programs that are not managed by the Office to
Monitor and Combat Trafficking (TIP Office).
Section 103. Assistance for victims of trafficking in other
countries
Section 103 amends section 107(a) of the TVPA, including
ensuring that programs take into account the transnational
aspects of trafficking, support increased protection for
refugees, internally displaced persons and trafficked
children and emphasize cooperative, regional efforts.
Section 104. Increasing effectiveness of anti-trafficking
programs
Section 104 creates a new section to the TVPA to increase
the effectiveness of anti-trafficking programs by providing
that solicitation of grants be made publicly available and
awarded by a transparent process with a review panel of
Federal and private sector experts, when appropriate. The
provision provides a mandated evaluation system for anti-
trafficking programs on a program-by-program basis. It
requires that priorities and country assessments contained in
the most recent annual Report on Human Trafficking shall
guide grant priorities. It provides that not more than 5
percent of the appropriations may be used for evaluations of
specific programs or for evaluations of emerging problems or
trends in the field of human trafficking.
Section 105. Minimum standards for the elimination of
trafficking
Section 105 amends section 108(b) of the TVPA by clarifying
that in evaluating whether a country's anti-trafficking
efforts convictions of principal actors that result in
suspended or significantly reduced sentences shall be
considered on a case-by-case basis.
Section 106. Actions against governments failing to meet
minimum standards
Section 106 amends Section 110 of the TVPA by providing
that if a country has been on the special watch list for
three consecutive years, such country shall be deemed to be
not making significant efforts to combat trafficking and
shall be included in the list of countries described in
paragraph (1)(C). The subsection includes a Presidential
waiver for up to one year if it would promote the purposes of
the act or is in the national interest of the United States.
Section 107. Research on domestic and international
trafficking in persons
Section 107 amends section 112A of the TVPA by requiring
the establishment and maintenance of an integrated database
within the Human Smuggling and Trafficking Center, details
the purposes of the database, and authorizes $3 million
annually to the Human Smuggling and Trafficking Center to
carry out these activities.
Section 108. Presidential award for extraordinary efforts to
combat trafficking in persons
Section 108 authorizes the President to establish a ``Paul
D. Wellstone Presidential Award for Extraordinary Efforts to
Combat Trafficking in Persons'' for persons who provided
extraordinary service in efforts to combat trafficking in
persons.
Section 109. Report on activities of the department of labor
to monitor and combat forced labor and child labor
Section 109 requires that the Secretary of Labor provide a
final report that describes the implementation of section 105
of the TVPRA of 2005, including a list of imported goods made
with forced and/or child labor.

TITLE II--COMBATING TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS IN THE UNITED STATES

Subtitle A--Ensuring Availability of Possible Witnesses and Informants

Section 201. Protecting trafficking victims against
retaliation
Subsection (a) of Section 201 amends section 101(1)(15)(T)
of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to provide for
certain changes to the T visa for trafficking victims.
Paragraph (1) allows persons who are brought into the
country,for investigations or as witnesses to apply for such
a visa. It also allows a T visa for persons who are not able
to assist law enforcement because of the physical or
psychological trauma; it also clarifies the existing language
in the T Visa authorization and eliminates the ``unusual and
severe harm'' standard.
Paragraph (2) allows parents and siblings who are in danger
of retaliation to join the trafficking victims safely in the
United States. Subsection (b) modifies certain requirements
of the T Visa contained in section 214(o) of the INA,
including allowing 2 the extension of time for a T Visa in
exceptional circumstances and providing that the Secretary
of Homeland Security may look at certain security and
other conditions in the applicant's home country in making
the determination that extreme hardship exists.
Subsection (d) provides for certain changes to section
245(1) of the INA relating to adjustment of status of T visa
holders, including providing that the Secretary of Homeland
Security may waive the restriction on disqualification for
good moral character for T visa holders applying for
permanent residence alien status if the actions that would
have led to the disqualification are caused by or incident to
the trafficking.
Section 202. Information for work-based non-immigrants on
legal rights and resources
Section 202 requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to
create an information pamphlet for work-based non-immigrant
visa applications. The pamphlet will detail the illegality of
human trafficking and reiterate worker rights and information
for related services.
Section 203. Domestic worker protections
Section 203 sets forth new protections for trafficked
domestic household workers and preventative measures to be
followed by the State Department. Subsection (b) states that

[[Page S4800]]

the Secretary of State shall develop an information pamphlet
for A-3 and G5 visa applicants and describes the required
information to be included in the pamphlets. It mandates that
the pamphlets be translated into at least ten languages and
mailed to each A-3 or G-5 visa applicant in his/her primary
language.
Subsection (c) provides the circumstances in which the
Secretary may suspend a visa or renew a visa, as well as when
the Secretary is not permitted to issue a visa.
Subsection (d) provides the protections and remedies for A-
3 and G-5 visa holders working in the United States.
Subsection (e) ensures protection from removal for visa
holders wanting to file a complaint regarding a violation of
contract or some Federal, State, or local law to allow time
sufficient to participate fully in all legal proceedings.
Subsection (f) requires that every two years the Secretary
of State shall submit a report on the implementation of this
section and describes the necessary content of the report.
Section 204. Relief for certain victims pending actions on
petitions and applications for relief
Section 204 allows the Secretary of Homeland Security to
stay the removal of an individual which has made a prima case
for approval of a T Visa.
Section 205. Expansion of authority to permit continued
presence in the United States
Section 205 expands the authority to permit the Secretary
of Homeland Security to permit continued presence of
trafficking victims, including if the alien has filed a civil
action against the trafficking perpetrators (unless the alien
is not showing due diligence in pursuing his civil action).
It also allows for parole into the United States of certain
relatives of trafficking victims with several limitations.
Section 206. Implementation of trafficking victims protection
reauthorization act of 2005
Section 206 amends the Immigration and Nationality act and
requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to issue interim
regulations on the adjustment of status to permanent
residence for T Visa holders.

Subtitle B--Assistance for Trafficking Victims

Section 211. Assistance for certain nonimmigrant status
applicants
Section 211 clarifies that T-visa applicants have access to
certain public benefits.
Section 212. Interim assistance for child victims of
trafficking
Subsection (a) of Section 212 provides that if credible
information is presented that a child has been a trafficking
victim, the Secretary of HHS may provide interim assistance
to the child for up to 90 days. Subsection (a) also provides
that any federal official must notify HHS within 48 hours of
coming into contact with such child and that State or local
officials must notify HHS within 48 hours of coming into
contact with such a child. Long term assistance
determinations are to be made by the Secretary of HHS, the
Attorney General and the Secretary of Department of Homeland
Security.
Subsection (b) provides for education on identification of
trafficking victims.
Section 213. Ensuring assistance for all victims of
trafficking in persons
Subsection (a) of Section 213 amends the TVPA of 2000 to
specifically authorize an assistance program for victims of
severe forms of trafficking of persons and provides for
establishing a system that refers such victims to existing
programs at the Department of Health and Human Services and
the Department of Justice.
Subsection (b) requires a study on the gaps for assistance
to women in prostitution victimized under chapter 117 of
title 18.

Subtitle C--Penalties Against Traffickers and Other Crimes

Section 221. Restitution of forfeited assets; enhancement of
civil action
Section 221 amends chapter 77 of title 18 by allowing the
Attorney General in a prosecution brought under Federal law
to grant restoration or remission of property to victims of
severe forms of trafficking.
Section 222. Enhancing trafficking offenses
Section 222 amends title 18 of the U.S. Code to enhance
existing penalties for trafficking offenses. Subsection (a)
permits pretrial detention for trafficking offenders.
Subsection (b) ensures that obstruction or attempts to
obstruct or in any way interfere with enforcement of the
trafficking statutes is a separate offense. Subsection (c)
ensures that trafficking conspirators are punished as
though they had completed a violation. Subsection (d)
amends the trafficking statutes to hold accountable those
who knowingly or in reckless disregard financially benefit
from participation in a trafficking venture; it also
amends the forced labor and sex trafficking statutes to
clarify the definition of ``harm'' and ``abuse of the law
or legal process.'' Subsection (e) tightens the
immigration law to ensure that committing or conspiring to
commit trafficking offenses are grounds of inadmissibility
and removability. The provision also creates a new crime
of sex tourism that punishes individuals who go abroad for
sex tourism and sex tour operators that benefit from such
promoting such travel.
Section 223. Jurisdiction in certain trafficking offenses
Section 223 amends chapter 77 of title 18 by increasing the
jurisdiction of the courts to include any trafficking case
found in or brought into the United States, even if the
conduct occurred in a different country, as long as no more
than ten years have passed.

Subtitle D--Activities of the United States Government

Section 231. Annual report by the Attorney General
Section 231 requires that the annual report by the Attorney
General include activities by the Department of Defense to
combat trafficking in persons, actions taken to enforce
policies relating to contractors and their employees, actions
by the Secretary of Homeland Security to waive restrictions
on section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930, and prohibitions on
procurement of items or services produced by slave labor.
Section 232. Defense Contract Audit Agency audit
Section 232 requires the Defense Contract Audit Agency to
conduct an audit of all Department of Defense contractors and
subcontractors where there is substantial evidence to suggest
trafficking in persons, notify congress of the findings of
each audit, and certify that the contractor is no longer
engaging in such activities.
Section 233. Senior policy operating group
Section 233 amends section 206 of the TVPRA of 2005 to
ensure that the Senior Policy Operating Group reviews all
anti-trafficking programs.
Section 234. Preventing United States travel by traffickers
Section 234 provides that the Secretary of State may
prohibit the entry into the United States of traffickers.
Section 235. Enhancing efforts to combat the trafficking of
children
Section 235 sets forth comprehensive protections for child
victims of trafficking and other unaccompanied alien
children, including the following the provisions: (1) Care
and Custody of Unaccompanied Children: Care and custody of
all unaccompanied alien children shall be the responsibility
of Health and Human Services; (2) Transfer of Custody:
Consistent with the Homeland Security Act of 2002, requires
all departments or agencies of the federal government to
notify the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
within 48 hours. The custody of most unaccompanied alien
children encountered by immigration authorities must be
transferred to the Secretary of Health and Human Services
within 72 hours with special rules for children who have
committed crimes or threaten national security; (3) Special
Repatriation Procedures and Safeguards for Mexican and
Canadian Nationals: Permits the Department of Homeland
Security to repatriate promptly certain unaccompanied alien
children from Canada or Mexico apprehended provided that
those Canadian and Mexican unaccompanied alien children who
are victims of severe forms of trafficking or have a fear of
persecution; (4) Safe and Secure Placements: An unaccompanied
alien child in the custody of HHS shall be placed in the
least restrictive setting that is in the best interests of
the child. Placement of child trafficking victims may include
placement with competent adult victims of the same
trafficking scheme in order to ensure continuity of support;
(5) Standards for Placement: An unaccompanied child may not
be placed with a person or entity unless HHS makes a
determination that the proposed custodian is capable of
providing for the child; (5) Representation: All
unaccompanied alien children who are or have been in
government custody, must have competent counsel to represent
them in legal proceedings or matters and protect them from
mistreatment, exploitation, and trafficking; (6) Special
Immigrant Juvenile Status: Revises procedures for obtaining
special immigrant juvenile status provided for under the
Immigration and Nationality Act.
Section 236. Temporary increase in fee for certain consular
services
Section 236 allows the Secretary of State to increase the
fee for processing machine readable non-immigrant visas by
two dollars. This increase shall be deposited in the Treasury
and will terminate two years following the initial increase.

TITLE III--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

This title and the sections within it provide authorization
of appropriations for various trafficking programs.

TITLE IV--CHILD SOLDIERS PREVENTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY

Section 401. Short title
Section 401 provides that this title may be referred to as
the ``Child Soldier Prevention and Accountability Act of
2008''.
Section 402. Definitions
Section 402 provides for various definitions used
throughout the Act.
Section 403. Prohibition
Subsection (a) of Section 403 prohibits military
assistance, the transfer of excess defense articles, or
licenses for direct sales of military equipment to
governments that the State Department's annual human rights
report indicates have governmental armed forces or
government-supported armed forces, including paramilitaries,
militias or civil defense forces that recruit or use child
soldiers.

[[Page S4801]]

Subsection (b) provides that the Secretary of State
formally notify any government of such prohibitions.
Subsection (c) provides that the President may waive the
restriction in subsection (a) if doing so is in the national
interest of the United States. The President must publish
each waiver granted, and its justification, within 45
calendar days.
Subsection (d) provides that the President may reinstate
assistance which is restricted if the Government has
implemented measures to come into compliance with this title
and has implemented policies to prohibit and prevent future
governmentsupported use of child soldiers.
Subsection (e) provides that notwithstanding the
restriction in subsection (a), assistance for international
military education and training and nonlethal supplies may be
provided for up to two years s/he certifies that the
government of that country is taking steps to implement
effective measures to demobilize child soldiers and the
assistance is provided to directly support
professionalization of the military.
Section 404. Reports
Subsection (a) of Section 404 provides that the Secretary
of State and U.S. missions abroad thoroughly investigate
reports of the use of child soldiers.
Subsection (b) clarifies that the Secretary of State, in
the annual Human Rights Report, must include a description of
the use of child soldiers, including trends toward
improvement or the continued or increased tolerance of such
practices and the role of the government in engaging in or
tolerating the use of child soldiers.
Subsection (c) requires that the President submit an annual
report to the appropriate congressional committees that
contains a list of countries in violation of standards under
this subtitle, a list of any waivers or exceptions,
justification for any such waivers and exceptions, and a
description of any assistance provided under this subtitle.
Subsection (d) provides that not less than 180 days after
implementation of the Act, the Secretaries of State and
Defense shall submit a strategy and a coordination plan for
achieving the policy objectives described in this Act.
Section 405. Training for foreign service officers
Section 405 establishes a requirement for training relevant
Foreign Service officers in the assessment of child soldier
use and other matters related to child soldiers.
Section 406. Effective date; Applicability
Section 406 states that the amendments made under this
section shall take effect 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
Sec. 407. Accountability for the recruitment and use of child
soldiers
Subsection (a)(l) of Section 407 amends chapter 118 of
title 18 by adding the offense of recruiting persons less
than 15 years of age into an armed force or knowingly using a
person under 15 in hostilities, and provides for terms of
imprisonment. This subsection also provides that anyone
attempting or conspiring to commit an offense under this
section shall be punished in the same manner as someone who
completes the offense, establishes the jurisdiction of the
code, and provides for definitions used in this section.
Subsection (a)(2) establishes a statute of limitations of
10 years for prosecution under this code.
Subsection (b) makes participation in recruiting or using
child soldiers grounds for inadmissibility or deportation
under U.S. immigration law.
______

By Mr. ALLARD:
S. 3062. A bill to amend the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to modify
certain provisions relating to oil shale leasing; to the Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, this weekend is the unofficial beginning
of summer and the start of the summer driving season. This is as oil
hits $135 per barrel and more and more cities and towns all over the
country are seeing gasoline prices over $4 per gallon. In the face of
these challenges to the American economy and consumer, we have failed
to take the steps that are necessary to address this problem either in
the short term or the long term.
Last week, the House and Senate voted to suspend filling the
Strategic Petroleum Reserve. I voted against that effort as many on the
other side hailed it as a major move that would help to alleviate
``pain at the pump.'' Instead, oil prices have continued to increase
every day since that measure passed. I think this demonstrates that
adding a mere 70,000 barrels a day to the marketplace means little when
we consume 21 million barrels of oil per day in this country alone.
Oil shale can be a major part of addressing rising oil prices by
potentially bringing over 1 trillion barrels of oil to the domestic
market. There are enormous oil shale reserves located in Colorado,
Wyoming, and Utah. Oil shale is energy we can develop here at home to
lower gas prices, increase our Nation's security, and improve our
balance of trade by keeping money and investment in the United States
rather than sending hundreds of billions of dollars overseas--
frequently to governments, I might add, that are unstable or whose
interests are counter to those of this country. It will also bring in
billions of dollars to the States and the Federal Treasury in the form
of future royalties.
This bill is necessary because the fiscal year 2008 Interior,
Environment, and Related Agencies bill has language prohibiting funds
from being used by the Department of the Interior to prepare final
regulations and will set forth the requirements for a commercial
leasing program for oil shale resources or to conduct an oil shale
lease sale as provided in the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Without
removing this moratorium--and it is a moratorium--companies will not
know the rules of the road so they can make investment decisions,
things such as what the length of the oil shale leases will be, the
royalty rate, and reclamation and bonding requirements.
I have a letter from the Assistant Secretary for Lands and Minerals
at the Department of the Interior, Stephen Allred, dated May 14 in
support of removing the prohibition contained in last year's Interior
bill on the Department of the Interior issuing oil shale regulations. I
ask unanimous consent at this time to have the letter printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Department of the Interior,

Office of the Secretary,

Washington, DC.
Hon. Wayne Allard,
Ranking Minority, Subcommittee on Interior, Environment and
Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, U.S.
Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Allard: Section 433 of the FY 2008 Interior,
Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Act prohibits
our Department from issuing regulations related to oil shale
leasing. This letter is to communicate our opposition to this
prohibition and to urge its removal, so that the
Administration can move forward and issue regulations.
As you know, in Section 369 of the Energy Policy Act of
2005, the Congress directed the Department to take the steps
necessary to meet future requests for a commercial oil shale
leasing program on Federal lands. In 2007, the Bureau of Land
Management authorized six oil shale research, development,
and demonstration projects on public lands in northwestern
Colorado and northeastern Utah. These projects provide
industry access to oil shale resources to further their
development of oil shale technologies.
This type of research will require significant private
capital, with an uncertain return on this investment in the
immediate future. Part of the wisdom of Section 369 is that
it envisions the private sector will lead this investment--
not the American taxpayer. However, for these projects to be
successful, companies will require a level playing field and
a clear set of regulations or ``rules of the road.''
Developing a regulatory framework now will aid in
facilitating a producing program in the future should oil
shale development prove to be economic. Impeding the Federal
Government's efforts at this stage could have serious
consequences.
Moving forward with these regulations does not mean
commercial oil shale production will take place immediately.
To the contrary, with thoughtfully developed regulations,
thoroughly vetted through a public process, we have only set
the groundwork for the future commercial development of this
resource in an environmentally sound manner. With the
administrative and regulatory certainty that regulations will
provide, energy companies will be encouraged to commit the
financial resources needed to fund their RD&D projects, and
the development of viable technology will continue to
advance. Actual commercial development and production will be
dependent upon the results of the RD&D efforts and more site-
specific environmental evaluations.
Consistent with the language in the Consolidated
Appropriations Act for FY 2008, the BLM is not spending FY
2008 funds to develop and publish final oil shale
regulations; however, the agency is moving forward in a
thoughtful, deliberative manner to publish proposed
regulations on oil shale. These proposed regulations will
reflect input already received from our partners in the
states. The publication of the draft regulations will provide
an opportunity for the public and interested parties to
remain engaged on this important issue.
Given the Nation's projected future energy needs, it is
incumbent on us to promote the development of oil shale for
our national security and energy security. Declining domestic
oil production and rising U.S. demand for oil increase the
Nation's dependence on imports, and leave us vulnerable to
rising energy costs. Households across America are struggling
to deal with these additional costs and experts predict that
the trend is

[[Page S4802]]

set to continue. In looking beyond traditional energy
resources to unconventional and alternative fuels, the
Department of the Interior has a key role to play in the
development of oil shale.
I ask for your support for removal of the prohibition on
issuing oil shale regulations in order that we may move
forward with the public process of finalizing regulations for
commercial oil shale development on Federal lands. I commit
to working closely with the Congress throughout the
development of this program.
A similar letter has been sent to the Honorable Dianne
Feinstein, Chairman, Subcommittee on Interior, Environment,
and Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, United
States Senate, the Honorable Norman D. Dicks, Chairman,
Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies,
Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives, and
the Honorable Todd Tiahrt, Ranking Minority Member,
Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies,
Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives.
Sincerely,

C. Stephen Allred,

Assistant Secretary,
Land and Minerals Management.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, Allred points out that issuing these
regulations is critical to providing regulatory certainty for these oil
shale projects to go forward. With the regulatory certainty these
regulations will provide, companies will have an incentive to commit
the resources necessary to develop this technology.
I also have a letter from Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne
dated December 12, 2007, objecting to the inclusion of this moratorium
that was in the House version of the fiscal year 2008 Interior
appropriations. I ask unanimous consent to have this letter printed in
the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

The Secretary of the Interior,

Washington, DC, December 12, 2007.
Hon. Wayne Allard,
Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Interior, Environment and
Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, U.S.
Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Allard: As the House and Senate consider the
Fiscal Year 2008 Interior, Environment and Related Agencies
Appropriations bill, I would like to voice my concern
regarding efforts to prohibit our Department from issuing
regulations related to oil shale leasing.
Section 606 of the House-passed Interior appropriations
bill would prohibit the use of funds to prepare or publish
final regulations regarding a commercial leasing program for
oil shale resources on public lands. The Energy Policy Act of
2005 (EPAct) was enacted with broad bipartisan support. The
EPAct included substantive and significant authorities for
the development of alternative and emerging energy sources.
Oil shale is one important potential energy source. The
United States holds significant oil shale resources, the
largest known concentration of oil shale in the world, and
the energy equivalent of 2.6 trillion barrels of oil. Even if
only a portion were recoverable, that source could be
important in the future as energy demands increase worldwide
and the competition for energy resources increases.
The Energy Policy Act sets the timeframe for program
development, including the completion of final regulations.
The Department must be able to prepare final regulations in
FY 2008 in order to meet the statutorily-imposed schedule.
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) issued a draft
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in August 2007. The
final EIS is scheduled for release in May 2008 and the
effective date of the final rule is anticipated in November
2008. The final regulations will consider all pertinent
components of the final EIS. Throughout this process BLM will
seek public input and work closely with the States and other
stakeholders to ensure that concerns are adequately
addressed. The Department is willing to consider an extended
comment period after the publication of the draft regulations
in order to assure that all of the stakeholders have adequate
time and opportunity to review and comment before publication
of the final regulations.
The successful development of economically viable and
environmentally responsible oil shale extraction technology
requires significant capital investments and substantial
commitments of time and expertise by those undertaking this
important research. Our Nation relies on private investment
to develop new energy technologies such as this one. Even
though commercial leasing is not anticipated until after
2010, it is vitally important that private investors know
what will be expected of them regarding the development of
this resource. The regulations that Section 606 would
disallow represent the critical ``rules of the road'' upon
which private investors will rely in determining whether to
make future financial commitments. Accordingly, any delay or
failure to publish these regulations in a timely manner is
likely to discourage continued private investment in these
vital research and development efforts.
The Administration opposes the House provision that would
prohibit the Department from completing its oil shale
regulations. I would urge the Congress to let the
administrative process work. It is premature to impose
restrictions on the development of oil shale regulations
before the public has had an opportunity to provide input.
Identical letters are being sent to Congressman Norm Dicks,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related
Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, House of
Representatives; Congressman Todd Tiahrt, Subcommittee on
Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies, Committee on
Appropriations, House of Representatives; and Senator Dianne
Feinstein, Chairman, Subcommittee on Interior, Environment,
and Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, United
States Senate.
Sincerely,
Dirk Kempthorne.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, Secretary Kempthorne also indicates the
critical nature of allowing the Department to issue these regulations
in order to attract the private investment necessary to develop the oil
shale resource.
Let me emphasize that this is not an environmental issue. No
commercial lease sales are permitted under the provisions of this bill.
In fact, commercial oil shale leases are banned for 2\1/2\ years
because the technology for oil shale extraction is not yet economically
viable on a wide scale. But, as I have said, the companies that
invested tens of millions of dollars in this technology already need to
have the Department of Interior issue the leasing ground rules so that
they know what their costs will be for taking part in the Federal
commercial leasing program when the time for leasing comes.
My bill also makes sure there is adequate public comment by requiring
that final regulations not be issued for at least 90 days after they
have been published in draft form.
When I offered this as an amendment in the Appropriations Committee,
it was defeated by one vote and strictly along party lines. I heard
from the other side of the aisle that because the Governor of Colorado
and the junior Senator from Colorado opposed lifting this moratorium,
Congress should not do so. I find this curious and incredibly
inconsistent with prior debates over public lands policy. When we have
debated drilling in the section 1002 area of ANWR, the other side seems
to have little or no regard for the desires of Alaska's Governor, the
people of the State of Alaska, or the entire congressional delegation
about how they want their public lands managed.
On this side of the aisle--that is, the Republican side of the
aisle--we have offered proposals to bring to market billions of barrels
of domestic supply that are continually blocked. If we don't begin to
put in place policies to enhance our domestic production, prices are
only going to go higher and the American people are going to pay the
price at the pump as well as suffer the consequences of a further drag
on the economy.
In closing, I wish to state that increasing domestic energy
production, including from oil shale, will strengthen this country's
national security, lower gas prices, keep jobs and investments right
here at home, and, in these tight budgetary times, bring in hundreds of
billions of dollars to the States and the Federal Treasury through
royalty collections.
Congress needs to take a good, hard look at what it has done as far
as encouraging further supply of energy for this country. As was
mentioned in a number of editorials that have shown up in the papers,
it is easy to blame companies and the stock market, and it is easy to
blame the futures market, but really the problem starts right here in
the Congress. The Congress needs to come up with a solution to relieve
the inadequate supply of oil and gas. If that solution is not arrived
at soon, Americans are going to be put out of business. We already hear
about airlines having to cut back on the number of employees they have
because of the high cost of gasoline. So it is going to have a dramatic
impact on the economy of this country.
Just think about how much land we have tied up because of previous
action by this Congress--the billions of barrels of oil that
potentially would be available in ANWR; the huge amount of reserves
that we think is in the deep-sea portions that would be available off
the coast of this country. We

[[Page S4803]]

are the only country in the world that restricts drilling out in the
deep sea. There are potential reserves that would be available for
consumers of this country with oil shale in Utah and Colorado and
Wyoming. Now we have that tied up with a strict moratorium that tells
the oil producers of this country: We want you to shut down. We don't
want you to be able to move forward.
I think these are huge reserves, and if we had acted, actually, 10
years ago, we wouldn't now have a problem. We are going to have a
problem for the next 10 years unless we do something quickly and
drastically, and we need to do something more than just saying that the
Strategic Oil Reserve can't purchase oil for 6 months or we wait until
it drops to less than $75 a barrel.
I am calling on my colleagues to join us because this is a serious
problem we are facing in this country, and the Congress needs to do
something about it.
______

By Mrs. LINCOLN (for herself, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Cardin, and Mr.
Smith):
S. 3063. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide
for S corporation reform, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Finance.
Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I am very pleased to rise today to
introduce the S Corporation Modernization Act of 2008 with my good
friend, Senator Orrin Hatch. I also want to say a special thanks to our
cosponsors, Senators Gordon Smith of Oregon and Ben Cardin of Maryland.
This legislation makes needed changes to the tax code to help small and
family-owned businesses across this Nation. It is my hope that these
policy changes will provide them the opportunity to grow their
businesses, create jobs and stimulate the economy.
In my home State of Arkansas, as in so many rural States across the
country, the vast majority of our businesse are small businesses. They
are the local insurance agency, the flower shop, the coffee shop--and
they are most often organized as so-called ``S corporations.'' In fact,
our country has more than four million S corporations nationwide. These
businesses and their employees are truly the engines of our rural
economies. We must do all we can to ensure they can continue to compete
in a global economy that is becoming steadily more competitive.
Because Congress has not updated many of the rules governing S
corporations--such as allowing better access to capital--I am concerned
that these privately-held businesses are not in the best position to
deal with the current downturn in the economy. We must modify our
outdated rules so that these businesses that are starved for capital
have the means to expand and create jobs. Current law--particularly the
punitive built-in gains tax penalty--not only limits the ability of S
corporations to attract new equity investors, but also effectively
forces businesses to sit on `locked-up' capital that they cannot access
and put to use to grow their business.
The S Corporation Modernization Act would update and simplify our S
corporation tax rules. It increases access to capital, encourages
family-owned businesses to stay in the family, eliminates tax traps
that penalize unwary but well-meaning business owners, and encourages
charitable giving.
A strong economic recovery will depend on the health and strength of
our small business sector--our S corporations. It is absolutely
imperative that we work to ensure our tax rules that govern this sector
are fair, simple and encourage growth. I look forward to working with
my colleagues on the Senate Finance Committee to ensure these important
changes are made.
______

By Ms. COLLINS (for herself, Mr. Feingold, and Mr. Cardin):
S. 3067. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize
the Dental Health Improvement Act; to the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleagues from
Wisconsin and Maryland in introducing legislation to reauthorize the
Collins-Feingold Dental Health Improvement Act, which was first signed
into law as part of the Health Care Safety Net Act Amendments of 2002.
The legislation we are introducing today will extend the authorization
of this program, which provides grant funding to States to strengthen
the dental workforce in our Nation's rural and underserved communities,
for an additional 5 years.
While oral health in America has improved dramatically over the last
50 years, these improvements have not occurred evenly across our
population, particularly among low-income individuals and families. Too
many Americans today lack access to dental care. While there are
clinically proven techniques to prevent or delay the progression of
dental health problems, an estimated 47 million Americans live in areas
lacking adequate dental services. As a consequence, these effective
treatment and prevention programs are not being implemented in many of
our communities. Astoundingly, as many as 11 percent of our Nation's
rural population has never been to a dentist.
The situation is exacerbated by the fact that our dental workforce is
graying. More than 20 percent of dentists nationwide will retire in the
next 10 years, and the number of dental graduates may not be enough to
replace their retirees. As a consequence, many states are facing a
serious shortage of dentists, particularly in rural areas.
In Maine, there is one general practice dentist for every 2,300
people in the Portland area. The numbers drop off dramatically,
however, in other parts of our state. In Aroostook County, for example,
where I am from, there is only one dentist for every 5,500 people. Of
the 23 dentists practicing in Aroostook County, only a few are taking
on any new cases.
The Collins-Feingold Dental Health Improvement Act, which is now
Section 340G of the Public Health Service Act, authorized a State grant
program administered by the Health Resources and Services
Administration at the Department of Health and Human services that is
designed to improve access to oral health services in rural and
underserved areas. States can use these grants to fund a wide variety
of programs. For example, they can use the funds for loan forgiveness
and repayment programs for dentists practicing in underserved areas.
They can also use the grant funds to establish or expand community or
school-based dental facilities or to set up mobile or portable dental
clinics. To assist in their recruitment and retention efforts, States
can use the funds for placement and support of dental students,
residents and advanced dentistry trainees. Or, they can use the grant
funds for continuing dental education, through distance-based education
and practice support through teledentistry.

Congress appropriated $2 million for this program for fiscal year
2006 and fiscal year 2007 and just under $5 million for fiscal year
2008.
Thirty-six States have applied for grants from this program, but so
far, the funding available has only been sufficient to fund programs in
18 States. Clearly there is sufficient interest and need for this
program to justify its extension, particularly given all of the recent
reports documenting the very serious need to improve access to oral
health care.
Those 18 States that have been awarded funding under this program are
doing great things to improve access to oral health services. Colorado,
Georgia and Massachusetts are using the grant funds for loan
forgiveness and repayment programs for dentists who practice in
underserved areas and who agree to provide services to patients
regardless of their ability to pay. Arkansas, Maine, Michigan,
Mississippi and a number of other states are using the funds for
recruitment and retention efforts. Delaware, Rhode Island and Vermont,
which, like Maine, don't have dental schools, are using the funds to
expand dental residency programs in their States.
The legislation we are introducing today will authorize an additional
$50 million over the next 5 years for this important program. The
American Dental Association, the American Dental Education Association,
and the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry have all endorsed the
legislation, and I encourage all of our colleagues to join us as
cosponsors.
______

By Ms. SNOWE (for herself, Mr. Reid, Ms. Collins, Mr. Durbin, Mr.
Warner, Mr. Kerry, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Lautenberg, Mrs.
Lincoln, and Mr. Menendez):

[[Page S4804]]

S. 3068. A bill to require equitable coverage of prescription
contraceptive drugs and devices, and contraceptive services under
health plans; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and
Pensions.
Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Equity in
Prescription Insurance and Contraceptive Coverage Act. I am pleased to
be joined by my colleague from Nevada, Majority Leader Reid. I
originally authored this legislation in 1997, and I stand today to
resolve the issue of inequity in prescription drug coverage and to make
certain that all American women have access to contraception methods.
Without question, we have made remarkable progress in the number of
employer sponsored health plans covering contraception. According to a
study released in 2004, between 1993 and 2002, contraceptive coverage
in employer-purchased plans covering the full range of reversible
contraceptive methods tripled from 28 percent to 86 percent.
Conversely, the proportion of employer plans covering no method at all
dropped dramatically, from 28 percent to 2 percent. Yet despite these
gains, women of reproductive age currently spend 68 percent more in
out-of-pocket health care costs than men. Not surprisingly, this
discrepancy is due in large part to reproductive health-related costs.
Women whose health plans do not cover the full range of reversible
contraceptive methods often face high out-of-pocket costs. Yet covering
prescription contraceptives results in cost-savings not only for women,
but for society as a whole. There are three million unintended
pregnancies every year in the United States, and almost half of these
pregnancies result from women who do not use contraceptives. Equal
treatment of prescription contraceptives will reduce costs to Americans
by preventing these unintended pregnancies, which can range anywhere
from $5,000 to almost $9,000 in medical costs.
The Equity in Prescription Insurance and Contraceptive Coverage Act
will eliminate the disparate treatment of prescription contraception
coverage. Simply put, if an employer provides insurance coverage for
all other prescription drugs, they must also provide coverage for FDA
approved prescription contraceptives. Our bill will ensure that women
have comprehensive reproductive health coverage, and lower costs to
society by preventing unintended pregnancies and thus reducing the need
for abortion.
I urge my colleagues to join with me in fixing the inequity in
prescription contraception coverage to make certain that all American
women have access to this most basic health need.
______

By Mr. BARRASSO:
S. 3071. A bill to amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to
temporarily prohibit the Secretary of the Interior from considering
global climate change as a natural or manmade factor in determining
whether a species is a threatened or endangered species, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to
address the reality of the needs of species and the global nature of
climate change.
Recently, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service decided to list the
polar bear as a threatened species. The reason for the listing is the
loss of sea ice habitat. They say the ice will be subjected to
``increased temperatures, earlier melt periods, increased rain-snow
events, and shifts in atmospheric and marine surface patterns.''
Essentially, they are saying it is due to the effects of global climate
change.
Without the cooperation of other countries, the United States cannot
reverse global climate change. If we are truly going to recover
species--species that are being impacted by climate change--we would
need to have an international agreement in place, an international
agreement among all of the major emitting countries. All of those
countries would have to comply with the treaty in order for species to
receive any tangible environmental benefit. This is what people who
care about the polar bear need to see happen.
Unfortunately, global warming activists are looking to the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service and to the Endangered Species Act as a means for
widespread regulation. This would be a complete departure from the
intent of the law.
The Secretary of Interior, Secretary Kempthorne, has stated that he
is providing additional guidance to ensure that there are no negative,
unintended consequences to the legislation.
Unfortunately, such guidance will likely not survive judicial
challenge or perhaps even the next administration.
For the first time ever, lawsuits could be filed to block economic
growth and the creation of jobs all across America.
It has been suggested that any economic activity that emits
greenhouse gases which then contributes to global warming and to the
melting of the polar icecaps must be stopped. Why? Because it might
cause polar bears to become extinct.
Think about that for a minute: Buildings could not be expanded or
built; new roads could not be built or improved; local governments
would be forced up to adopt onerous new zoning requirements; energy
development projects would be brought to a standstill; and virtually
any economic development activity one can think of could be challenged
by anyone. Volumes of new rules and regulations from Washington, DC,
would control everything we do.
This action would harm individual freedom, would raise energy costs,
and would affect consumers across the board in all 50 States. This
action would dramatically hurt our economy.
Frankly, when I see groups publicly stating that they intend to use
the polar bear listing as a hammer to stop fossil fuel use, such as
even driving your car to work, I am skeptical about their real concern
for the polar bear.
In a recent Baltimore Sun article, the Center for Biological
Diversity said:

Once protection for the polar bear is finalized, federal
agencies and other large greenhouse gas emitters will be
required by law to ensure that their emissions do not
jeopardize the species.

Some want to limit how much we drive or how we heat our homes.
Wyoming residents and Americans in general do not believe in such a
culture of limits. That is perhaps why activists need to use and choose
to use the courts to impose them.
We can provide cleaner cars and be more efficient in heating our
homes, but there is a line of individual liberty and personal choice
that we should not cross.
Yes, we are all concerned about protecting the environment, and as a
Senator, I am also concerned about placing dramatic burdens on our
economy and on our American citizens.
Very soon, without legislative action by Congress, the Endangered
Species Act will be transformed from a tool to recover species into a
climate change bill. This will not only shortchange truly endangered
species, it will also impact working families who are already
struggling with high energy bills.
The beneficiaries will not be the polar bears. Instead, it will be
environmental lawyers who will reap the financial windfall through
endless lawsuits.
That is why today I have introduced legislation that says that the
Secretary of Interior cannot consider global climate change as a
natural or a manmade factor in terms of listing species as endangered.
Under this bill, no species would be listed as threatened and
endangered because of global warming until an international agreement
is signed by all the major emitting nations.
The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency would have
to certify that such an agreement is in place and that countries are in
compliance with the treaty for such a listing to occur. This bill
specifies that China and India would both have to be part of the
agreement.
This is not designed to give the power of legislating or listing
species into the hands of foreign nations. The bottom line is, species
will not receive the help they need until other countries comply. Plain
and simple. To assert otherwise is to give false hope that those who
care most about protecting species actually get protection.
We do not need symbolic gestures in addressing climate change. While
the symbolism may appease some, it does not address the very real
impact of ordinary folks in my home State of Wyoming or anywhere across
the Nation.

[[Page S4805]]

We are saddled with high gas prices and high energy prices already.
Lawsuits blocking any new coal-fired powerplants can wreak havoc on
Wyoming's economy before we have had a chance to finish developing the
clean coal technologies of the 21st century. Clean coal technologies
truly will address climate change.
Mr. President, all regions that depend on coal, particularly the
Midwest, the South, and the Rocky Mountain West, would be the hardest
hit. But we need real solutions to address species issues, while at the
same time ensuring that we protect working Americans.
You want to drive your family to the beach or drive them to the
mountains? Don't be surprised that in the not too distant future you
need to get a government permit to do so.
I urge all Members of this body to consider cosponsoring this
important bill.
F_____

By Mr. CORNYN (for himself, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Allard, Mr. Craig,
Mrs. Dole, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Ensign, Mr. Martinez,
Mr. Grassley, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Chambliss, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Kyl,
Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Wicker, Mr. Coburn, Mr. Coleman,
Mr. Isakson, Mr. Bond, Mr. Lugar, and Mr. Thune):
S. 3073. A bill to amend the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee
Voting Act to improve procedures for the collection and delivery of
absentee ballots of absent overseas uniformed services voters, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, the right to participate in democratic
elections and vote for candidates of your choice is fundamental to the
American experience. That right to vote is safeguarded by our men and
women in uniform, often at great personal cost to them and their loved
ones.
As the Global War on Terror continues, the need for overseas service
by our troops is unlikely to let up any time soon. They routinely find
themselves deployed to far-away battlefields in the Middle East, on
ships at sea all across the globe, or assigned to overseas postings in
Korea, Europe, or elsewhere.
What's more, the decisions of elected leaders of the Federal
Government impact our troops often in a very direct and personal way.
As a result of decisions made by those elected leaders, our troops can
be called to deploy to a combat zone at virtually any time.
Statistics on overseas military voting in the 2006 election, compiled
by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, show that there is clearly
a problem of disenfranchisement of our troops. It is absolutely
despicable that, of our overseas troops who asked for mail-in ballots
for 2006, less than half, 47.6, percent of their completed ballots
actually arrived at the local election office. Many of those arrived
too late, and were therefore not even counted.
To me, that is an appalling failure of our current absentee voting
system. We need to take action now, before the problem rears its ugly
head again, to safeguard the right of our troops to vote and have their
votes count.
I believe Congress has a duty to ensure these men and women in
uniform, selflessly serving abroad, have a voice in choosing their
elected leaders. They serve not only in the defense of freedom and the
American way of life, but also in defense of the very system of
government in which I and my Senate colleagues have the honor to serve.
These military service members have already given up so much for this
country--often being apart from their families, living in the face of
constant danger, and standing on the front lines of our defense. We
must not allow one of their most fundamental rights as Americans to
fall victim to an antiquated and inefficient system of absentee voting
and slow--sometimes painfully slow--methods of delivering their marked
ballots.
One of the biggest problems in absentee balloting for our overseas
troops has been this inadequate delivery system for completed ballots.
The simple fact is that, for many overseas military voters, their
marked ballots arrived at the local election office too late to be
counted. There is no excuse for allowing inefficiency to disenfranchise
our military men and women serving abroad.
That is why I have decided to introduce the Military Voting
Protection Act of 2008, or MVP Act. This bill will improve the absentee
voting system for our overseas troops by expediting the delivery of
their marked ballots to ensure they are delivered in a timely manner
and, at the same time, electronically tracked to provide accountability
and allow for verification that completed ballots actually arrived at
their local election office.
First and foremost, this bill would expedite the process by directing
the Pentagon to make use of express delivery services, which many of us
use on a regular basis, to get the completed absentee ballots of our
overseas troops to election officials here at home. At the same time,
it would require the DOD to take a more active role in organizing the
collection, transportation, and tracking of these ballots.
We have at our disposal the tools necessary to more efficiently
collect and deliver our troops' ballots to help make their votes count.
We simply need to start utilizing more capable and expedited delivery
methods to ensure that our troops' voices are heard.
This bill also urges the DOD to make better use of modern technology
to improve the ability of our troops to participate in elections. At
the same time, the bill recognizes the clear importance of preserving
the privacy and integrity of the voting system by calling on DOD to
focus its efforts on secure, efficient systems that would also achieve
these important goals.
In this day and age, it is inexcusable for our troops to be shut out
of the democratic process merely because they are far away from their
homes as a result of their military service. We should not sit idly by
and watch another election pass with a large portion of our brave
military men and women being left out of our democratic process.
For far too long in this country we have failed to adequately
safeguard the right of our troops to participate in our democratic
process. We have allowed slow delivery methods, confusing absentee
voting procedures, and myriad other obstacles to disenfranchise many of
our overseas troops. We must put those days behind us.
I urge all of my colleagues to join me in addressing this important
issue and protecting for our troops the very rights they fight to
safeguard for us. Join me in cosponsoring the MVP Act. I look forward
to working with my colleagues to pass this important bill quickly.

____________________