Daniel Akaka

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Thursday, November 17, 2011, at 2:15 p.m. in Room 628 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing entitled ``The Future of Internet Gaming: What's at Stake for Tribes?'' Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at (202) 224-2251.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. I thank the Chair. (The remarks of Mr. AKAKA pertaining to the introduction of S. 1763 are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Stand Against Violence and Empower Native Women--SAVE Native Women--Act. I would like to thank the cosponsors of my bill, my good friends Senators Inouye, Murray, Udall of New Mexico, Begich, Franken, Johnson of South Dakota, Baucus, Tester, and Bingaman. Native women across the country suffer from severe threats to their safety. According to a safety study by the Department of Justice, two in five girls and women in Native communities will suffer domestic violence and one in three will be sexually assaulted in their lifetime. Can you imagine looking through the loving eyes of your daughter, sister, or mother and knowing one of them will probably be abused in her lifetime? This is a terrible reality of life for Native women and their families across the country. It is an epidemic, it is unacceptable, and we must stand against it. This is why I am introducing the SAVE Native Women Act. Most of those who commit these terrible crimes against Native women are not Native themselves. Yet, currently, tribes have no ability to prosecute non-Natives for domestic violence and sexual assault in their own communities. This has resulted in a sense of lawlessness and leaves Native women with few places to turn. My bill strengthens tribal jurisdiction over domestic violence and sexual assault so that all offenders, Native and non-Native, can be brought to justice. My bill strengthens existing programs that support Native victims of domestic violence and sexual assault. In many communities, these programs offer the only safety and support available for Native women. Yet these programs are greatly strained. This bill provides programs with more flexibility and tools to address their most critical needs. Finally, my bill addresses the disturbing trend of sex trafficking in many Native communities. I have included provisions that improve data gathering and strengthen programs that better understand and respond to sex trafficking of Native women. I have worked closely with tribes, tribal organizations, and Federal agencies to develop this bill. We should not let the next generation of young Native women grow up, as their mothers have, in unbearable situations that threaten their security, stability, and even their lives. I urge you to join me and my cosponsors and stand against violence and support passage of the SAVE Native Women Act. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Privacy Act Modernization for the Information Age Act of 2011. In 1974, Congress enacted the Privacy Act to protect Americans' personal information from improper disclosure by the Federal government. Broadly, the Privacy Act requires that government agencies allow individuals to see any records an agency keeps on him or her, with some exceptions for security and law enforcement, limits the extent to which the government may share data with and agencies and third parties, allows individuals to access and correct their records, requires agencies to provide notice of what data is collected and how it is used and to keep records of disclosures, and provides individuals the ability to enforce their rights under the act. With the expansion of technology and the proliferation of personally identifiable information in the hands of government agencies, the risk of losing, abusing, or misusing information has grown exponentially. In particular, over the last 10 years security needs have created pressure on agencies to use existing personal information in new ways, not contemplated when the information was collected. The growth in the business of buying and selling individuals' information also raises new questions about the extent to which the Privacy Act applies to these sources of data on individuals used by the government. Meanwhile, there have been few updates to the Privacy Act, leaving it better suited to file cabinets and clunky 30 year old databases than the modern information technology systems in use at agencies today. In 2008, the Government Accountability Office, GAO, released a report that I requested entitled, ``Privacy: Alternatives Exist for Enhancing Protection of Personally Identifiable Information'', GAO-08-536. GAO later testified about its findings at a Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing where it identified issues in three main areas that could be enhanced: applying privacy protections consistently to all Federal collection and use of personal information; ensuring that collection and use of personally identifiable information is limited to a stated purpose; and establishing effective mechanisms for informing the public about privacy protections. After examining these recommendations and consulting with outside privacy experts, working groups, and privacy and civil liberties advocates, I am introducing the Privacy Act Modernization for the Information Age Act of 2011. This bill addresses the issues raised by GAO, adds stronger privacy leadership at the Office of Management and Budget to ensure effective execution of the Privacy Act, and extends authority for privacy officers to investigate possible violations of privacy laws. This bill updates the Privacy Act in several ways. It simplifies some of the definitions to apply them to modern information technology management ideas that were in their infancy in 1974. It also tightens requirements for agency controls and maintenance of records to ensure their use is authorized, and that personally identifiable information is not misused. Agencies would also be more accountable to the public in protecting information. Notifications of systems with personally identifiable information would be more relevant, transparent, and accessible, allowing Americans to know which agencies may have what information about them and in what systems. Importantly, the bill would create a centralized privacy website containing System of Records Notices and other related privacy information. If civil or criminal violations of the Privacy Act do occur, the penalties have been updated to reflect similar penalties in other laws. The bill would also clarify Congress's intent in the statutory damages provision in the Privacy Act by overturning Doe v. Chao, in which the Supreme Court, I believe wrongly, held that an individual has to show actual damages resulted from an intentional or willful improper disclosure of personal information in order to receive an award. My bill also builds on important new privacy protections introduced in the E-Government Act of 2002, which established a requirement for a Privacy Impact Assessment on certain new systems developed at agencies that contain personally identifiable information. It also codifies the term ``personally identifiable information,'' which has been defined by the Office of Management and Budget, OMB, for years in conjunction with the Privacy Act. This will let us focus on protecting personally identifiable information rather than defining it. The Privacy Act Modernization for the Information Age Act of 2011 would expand a successful tool given to the Department of Homeland Security, DHS, Chief Privacy Officer, CPO, to other major agency CPOs. In 2008, I championed the POWER Act, which gave the DHS CPO the authority to investigate possible violations of privacy laws if an Inspector General declines to investigate. I am pleased to say this authority has not been abused, and in fact has been used only once at DHS where its Inspector General inadvertently experienced a minor data breach, and the CPO investigated the issue. This is a useful tool that I believe other privacy offices overseeing massive amounts of personally identifiable information could benefit from. Finally, my bill would create a strong Federal Chief Privacy Officer, FCPO, at OMB as well as a government-wide Chief Privacy Officers Council, to fill the wide gaps in government-wide privacy leadership and ensure consistent development of policies and guidance on the Privacy Act across agencies. The FCPO position existed under President Clinton, but it has not been replicated by subsequent administrations. I have been impressed with DHS's leadership on privacy issues, thanks to tools we have put into law and the resources we have provided. It is equally important to enhance government-wide leadership through the FCPO and the Chief Privacy Officers Council, which will create a better environment to share ideas across agencies. This bill would be an important step forward in modernizing how government agencies execute their obligations to protect the personal information provided to them by all Americans. With the proliferation of data about every one of us online, and possibly creeping into government databases, we need more transparency so the average person has a place to go to learn about what information the government is keeping and how they can access that information. I urge my colleagues to support this effort and to continue to work with me and the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee to produce legislation to improve Federal privacy before this Congress adjourns. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Privacy Act Modernization for the Information Age Act of 2011. In 1974, Congress enacted the Privacy Act to protect Americans' personal information from improper disclosure by the Federal government. Broadly, the Privacy Act requires that government agencies allow individuals to see any records an agency keeps on him or her, with some exceptions for security and law enforcement, limits the extent to which the government may share data with and agencies and third parties, allows individuals to access and correct their records, requires agencies to provide notice of what data is collected and how it is used and to keep records of disclosures, and provides individuals the ability to enforce their rights under the act. With the expansion of technology and the proliferation of personally identifiable information in the hands of government agencies, the risk of losing, abusing, or misusing information has grown exponentially. In particular, over the last 10 years security needs have created pressure on agencies to use existing personal information in new ways, not contemplated when the information was collected. The growth in the business of buying and selling individuals' information also raises new questions about the extent to which the Privacy Act applies to these sources of data on individuals used by the government. Meanwhile, there have been few updates to the Privacy Act, leaving it better suited to file cabinets and clunky 30 year old databases than the modern information technology systems in use at agencies today. In 2008, the Government Accountability Office, GAO, released a report that I requested entitled, ``Privacy: Alternatives Exist for Enhancing Protection of Personally Identifiable Information'', GAO-08-536. GAO later testified about its findings at a Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing where it identified issues in three main areas that could be enhanced: applying privacy protections consistently to all Federal collection and use of personal information; ensuring that collection and use of personally identifiable information is limited to a stated purpose; and establishing effective mechanisms for informing the public about privacy protections. After examining these recommendations and consulting with outside privacy experts, working groups, and privacy and civil liberties advocates, I am introducing the Privacy Act Modernization for the Information Age Act of 2011. This bill addresses the issues raised by GAO, adds stronger privacy leadership at the Office of Management and Budget to ensure effective execution of the Privacy Act, and extends authority for privacy officers to investigate possible violations of privacy laws. This bill updates the Privacy Act in several ways. It simplifies some of the definitions to apply them to modern information technology management ideas that were in their infancy in 1974. It also tightens requirements for agency controls and maintenance of records to ensure their use is authorized, and that personally identifiable information is not misused. Agencies would also be more accountable to the public in protecting information. Notifications of systems with personally identifiable information would be more relevant, transparent, and accessible, allowing Americans to know which agencies may have what information about them and in what systems. Importantly, the bill would create a centralized privacy website containing System of Records Notices and other related privacy information. If civil or criminal violations of the Privacy Act do occur, the penalties have been updated to reflect similar penalties in other laws. The bill would also clarify Congress's intent in the statutory damages provision in the Privacy Act by overturning Doe v. Chao, in which the Supreme Court, I believe wrongly, held that an individual has to show actual damages resulted from an intentional or willful improper disclosure of personal information in order to receive an award. My bill also builds on important new privacy protections introduced in the E-Government Act of 2002, which established a requirement for a Privacy Impact Assessment on certain new systems developed at agencies that contain personally identifiable information. It also codifies the term ``personally identifiable information,'' which has been defined by the Office of Management and Budget, OMB, for years in conjunction with the Privacy Act. This will let us focus on protecting personally identifiable information rather than defining it. The Privacy Act Modernization for the Information Age Act of 2011 would expand a successful tool given to the Department of Homeland Security, DHS, Chief Privacy Officer, CPO, to other major agency CPOs. In 2008, I championed the POWER Act, which gave the DHS CPO the authority to investigate possible violations of privacy laws if an Inspector General declines to investigate. I am pleased to say this authority has not been abused, and in fact has been used only once at DHS where its Inspector General inadvertently experienced a minor data breach, and the CPO investigated the issue. This is a useful tool that I believe other privacy offices overseeing massive amounts of personally identifiable information could benefit from. Finally, my bill would create a strong Federal Chief Privacy Officer, FCPO, at OMB as well as a government-wide Chief Privacy Officers Council, to fill the wide gaps in government-wide privacy leadership and ensure consistent development of policies and guidance on the Privacy Act across agencies. The FCPO position existed under President Clinton, but it has not been replicated by subsequent administrations. I have been impressed with DHS's leadership on privacy issues, thanks to tools we have put into law and the resources we have provided. It is equally important to enhance government-wide leadership through the FCPO and the Chief Privacy Officers Council, which will create a better environment to share ideas across agencies. This bill would be an important step forward in modernizing how government agencies execute their obligations to protect the personal information provided to them by all Americans. With the proliferation of data about every one of us online, and possibly creeping into government databases, we need more transparency so the average person has a place to go to learn about what information the government is keeping and how they can access that information. I urge my colleagues to support this effort and to continue to work with me and the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee to produce legislation to improve Federal privacy before this Congress adjourns. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Combined Federal Campaign, CFC. In 1961, President John F. Kennedy established the CFC, which has grown over the last 50 years to become the world's largest and most successful workplace charity campaign. Pledging to donate through the CFC gives charities steady streams of revenue throughout the next year, lowers overhead costs so more money goes directly to the charity's work, and is a convenient way for Federal employees to donate to their charities of choice. Federal employees have dedicated their lives to serving and protecting the American people, and that call to service extends far beyond their professional lives. Each year, Federal employees together give millions of dollars through the CFC to help support the work of over 20,000 non-profit, charitable organizations in the United States and around the world. Since 1961, Federal civilian, military, and Postal employees have donated nearly $7 billion through the CFC, including $282 million in 2010. In today's economy, contributions through the CFC are essential to many organizations that receive them. A great number of these organizations have seen an increase in the need for the important services they provide, while fewer Americans are able to give the financial support on which these organizations rely. I applaud the generosity of our Federal community and encourage each of you to consider what you can pledge to give in the upcoming year. Our combined efforts can ensure that Americans and others across the globe have access to the important support and services that these charities provide. The 50th anniversary CFC campaign season has already begun and runs until December 15. I thank my colleagues Senators Lieberman, Levin and Carper for cosponsoring this legislation and I encourage my colleagues to join me in celebrating the 50th anniversary of the CFC and highlighting the support these contributions bring to non-profit, charitable organizations throughout the world.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I rise in support of the Indian Tribal Energy Development and Self-Determination Act Amendments of 2011. I am proud to co-sponsor this bill introduced by my friend, colleague, and Vice Chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs, Senator John Barrasso. I applaud his leadership and am proud to call him my full partner in our work on behalf of the Native peoples of the United States. Introduction of the Indian Tribal Energy Development and Self-Determination Act Amendments of 2011 is an important first step. I look forward to hearings on this measure and working with all of my colleagues to increase the ability of Native communities to develop energy resources on their lands and enhance self-determination. Indian lands hold great potential for traditional and renewable domestic energy production. Responsible development could help decrease our Nation's dependence on foreign energy sources and create much needed jobs in some of the most impoverished areas of the Nation. Today, Indian reservations make up approximately 5 percent of the United States land base, and it is estimated that those reservations contain about 10 percent of the country's energy resources. A number of Indian tribes are already working in the areas of traditional and renewable energy production, energy transmission, and energy planning. Yet, successfully tapping into the vast energy reserves in our Nation's Indian communities remains a difficult and complex task. It remains challenging for Indian tribes to develop adequate information about their energy resources, to obtain interconnection to the electric transmission grid, and to partner with private entities to engage in energy projects. Congress recognized the potential of tribes to develop energy sources on their lands by enacting tribal provisions in the Energy Policy Act of 2005. However, many of the programs and policies authorized by Title V of the act intended to benefit tribes have not been implemented or have only been partially implemented. The Committee on Indian Affairs has held a listening session, and we have solicited comments from stakeholders across the spectrum on the issue. Tribes have made it clear they wish to chart their own economic destinies, but that in order to do so modifications are needed to the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The legislation introduced today will address tribal concerns as well as private sector concerns and will help unlock the huge potential of Indian tribal energy development to create jobs, promote tribal self-determination, and decrease our dependence on foreign energy sources. This bill will set clear deadlines for Secretarial approval and streamline administrative processes related to tribal energy development which will help tribes and the United States ``win the future'' by enabling development of renewable energy sources from tribal lands. I encourage all of my colleagues to stand with me and Senator Barrasso in support of this legislative initiative.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I rise in support of the Indian Tribal Energy Development and Self-Determination Act Amendments of 2011. I am proud to co-sponsor this bill introduced by my friend, colleague, and Vice Chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs, Senator John Barrasso. I applaud his leadership and am proud to call him my full partner in our work on behalf of the Native peoples of the United States. Introduction of the Indian Tribal Energy Development and Self-Determination Act Amendments of 2011 is an important first step. I look forward to hearings on this measure and working with all of my colleagues to increase the ability of Native communities to develop energy resources on their lands and enhance self-determination. Indian lands hold great potential for traditional and renewable domestic energy production. Responsible development could help decrease our Nation's dependence on foreign energy sources and create much needed jobs in some of the most impoverished areas of the Nation. Today, Indian reservations make up approximately 5 percent of the United States land base, and it is estimated that those reservations contain about 10 percent of the country's energy resources. A number of Indian tribes are already working in the areas of traditional and renewable energy production, energy transmission, and energy planning. Yet, successfully tapping into the vast energy reserves in our Nation's Indian communities remains a difficult and complex task. It remains challenging for Indian tribes to develop adequate information about their energy resources, to obtain interconnection to the electric transmission grid, and to partner with private entities to engage in energy projects. Congress recognized the potential of tribes to develop energy sources on their lands by enacting tribal provisions in the Energy Policy Act of 2005. However, many of the programs and policies authorized by Title V of the act intended to benefit tribes have not been implemented or have only been partially implemented. The Committee on Indian Affairs has held a listening session, and we have solicited comments from stakeholders across the spectrum on the issue. Tribes have made it clear they wish to chart their own economic destinies, but that in order to do so modifications are needed to the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The legislation introduced today will address tribal concerns as well as private sector concerns and will help unlock the huge potential of Indian tribal energy development to create jobs, promote tribal self-determination, and decrease our dependence on foreign energy sources. This bill will set clear deadlines for Secretarial approval and streamline administrative processes related to tribal energy development which will help tribes and the United States ``win the future'' by enabling development of renewable energy sources from tribal lands. I encourage all of my colleagues to stand with me and Senator Barrasso in support of this legislative initiative.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Thursday, October 13, 2011, at 2:15 p.m. in Room 628 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing entitled ``Carcieri Crisis: The Ripple Effect on Jobs, Economic Development and Public Safety in Indian Country.'' Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at (202) 224-2251. committee on indian affairs

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Thursday, October 20, 2011, at 2:15 p.m. in Room 628 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building to conduct a meeting on S. 1262, the Native Culture, Language, and Access for Success in Schools Act to be followed immediately by a hearing on the following bills: S. 134, Mescalero Apache Tribe Leasing Authorization Act; S. 399, Blackfeet Water Rights Settlement Act of 2011; S. 1327, A bill to amend the Act of March 1, 1933, to transfer certain authority and resources to the Utah Dineh Corporation, and for other purposes; and S. 1345, Spokane Tribe of Indians of the Spokane Reservation Grand Coulee Dam Equitable Compensation Settlement Act. Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at (202) 224-2251.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Thursday, October 13, 2011, at 2:15 p.m. in room 628 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing entitled ``Carcieri Crisis: The Ripple Effect on Jobs, Economic Development and Public Safety in Indian Country.'' Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at (202) 224-2251. Committee on Indian Affairs

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Thursday, October 13, 2011, at 2:15 p.m. in room 628 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building to conduct a business meeting on S. 1262, the Native Culture, Language, and Access for Success in Schools Act to be followed immediately by a hearing entitled ``Carcieri Crisis: The Ripple Effect on Jobs, Economic Development and Public Safety in Indian Country.'' Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at (202) 224-2251.

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Thursday, October 20, 2011, at 2:15 p.m. in room 628 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building to conduct a legislative hearing on the following bills: S. 134, Mescalero Apache Tribe Leasing Authorization Act; S. 399, Blackfeet Water Rights Settlement Act of 2011; S. 1298, Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium Land Transfer Act; S. 1327, A bill to amend the Act of March 1, 1933, to transfer certain authority and resources to the Utah Dineh Corporation, and for other purposes; and S. 1345, Spokane Tribe of Indians of the Spokane Reservation Grand Coulee Dam Equitable Compensation Settlement Act. Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at (202) 224-2251.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Safeguarding American Agriculture Act of 2011, with Senator Feinstein. With the recent ten-year anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks, it is appropriate to reflect on the significant changes our country has undertaken to strengthen our homeland defenses. We must examine how well we are protecting the American people and our way of life today, and, where vulnerabilities remain, take decisive action to bolster our defenses. The act we introduce today does just this, by seeking to strengthen our Nation's agricultural import and entry inspection functions to better safeguard American agriculture and natural resources against foreign pests and disease. Invasive species arrive at U.S. ports of entry every day, often hidden in the wooden crates, pallets, and shipping containers used to transport agricultural cargo, or concealed in the imported goods themselves. Failure to detect and intercept these non-native pests and diseases imposes serious economic and social costs on all Americans. The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that foreign pests and disease already cost the U.S. economy tens of billions of dollars annually in lower crop values, eradication programs, emergency payments to farmers, and increased costs for food and other natural resources. The invasive asian stink bug, for example, is ravaging mid-Atlantic crops, often destroying significant portions of apple, peach, blackberry, raspberry, strawberry, tomato, pepper, sweet corn, and soybean harvests. The bug continues to spread despite ongoing Federal, State, and local eradication efforts. Invasive species threaten our competitiveness in international trade when trading partners decide to stop importing U.S. agricultural products due to the presence of an invasive pest or disease. For example, Japan continues to ban the importation of fresh potatoes from Idaho due to a 2006 outbreak of Potato Cyst Nematode in the State. A research team comprised of biologists and economists from U.S. and Canadian universities and the U.S. Forest Service published a study last month finding that invasive wood-boring pests, such as the emerald ash borer and the asian longhorned beetle, cost homeowners an estimated $830 million a year in lost property values and cost local governments an estimated $1.7 billion a year as a result of damaged trees and woodlands. Worst of all, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office, the accidental or deliberate introduction of a foreign disease, such as avian influenza or foot-and-mouth disease, would likely result in catastrophic economic losses for our Nation and take lives. In light of the current and potential staggering economic costs of invasive species--which fall on businesses, taxpayers, and local governments that have no way to avoid the harm it is clear that focusing on prevention, specifically improving agricultural import and entry inspection operations at our ports of entry, is a very cost- effective strategy. Of course, economic costs are just one aspect of the severe consequences that can result from foreign pests and disease slipping through our ports. In my home State of Hawai'i, which is home to more endangered species per square mile than any other area on the planet, invasive species and disease could permanently devastate our fragile ecosystem. In many regions of the country, invasive species threaten native fish prized by fisherman, and destroy wetlands that support waterfowl hunting. Even an important part of our American tradition and pastime, baseball, is at stake. For the past 127 years in Kentucky, Louisville Slugger, the world's largest and oldest maker of baseball bats, has manufactured high quality baseball bats from northern white ash trees harvested in Pennsylvania and New York. However, the company is very concerned that the destructive emerald ash borer beetle, which has already destroyed millions of ash trees in several States, including Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York, could lead to the extinction of northern white ash trees, preventing Louisville Slugger from providing future generations with the company's famous ash bats. Following the attacks of September 11, Congress passed the Homeland Security Act of 2002, which unified Federal customs, immigration, and agriculture inspection officers under the new U.S. Department of Homeland Security. The decision to transfer frontline agricultural import and entry inspection functions from the Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, or APHIS, into the Department of Homeland Security's Customs and Border Protection, or CBP, was a controversial decision. I have long been concerned that the transfer resulted in significant disruptions to the agriculture mission and undermined the effectiveness of agricultural inspections. Other Members of Congress have expressed similar concerns, and there have even been efforts to remove agricultural inspection responsibilities from the Department of Homeland Security and return them to the Department of Agriculture. While I understand these sentiments, as Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, I understand that such drastic reorganizations are often costly and disruptive. In light of our Nation's fiscal challenges, I have concluded it is most efficient and effective to focus on strengthening the agricultural inspection mission within CBP, which in recent years, has made meaningful progress in stabilizing the agency's agricultural import and entry inspection operations. The Safeguarding American Agriculture Act seeks to build upon these gains and fully achieve important measures of success identified in the June 2007 Report of the APHIS-CBP Joint Task Force on Improved Agriculture Inspection, which stated ``Success will be accomplished when the agriculture function within CBP is positioned prominently throughout the organization. The potential introduction of plant and animal pest and diseases will be regarded with the same fervor as all other mission areas within CBP.'' The Act would enhance the priority of, and accountability for, the agriculture mission by establishing within CBP an Office of Agriculture Inspection led by an Assistant Commissioner responsible for improving agricultural inspections across the Nation. This provision would improve efficiency and coordination by unifying agriculture policy development with agriculture operations. An agricultural chain of command that extends from the Assistant Commissioner for Agriculture Inspection to frontline agriculture specialists at the ports would also effectively address a key issue the task force identified in its 2007 report: ``Management and leadership infrastructure supporting the agriculture mission in CBP should be staffed and empowered at levels equivalent to other functional mission areas in CBP.'' Under the present organizational structure, the Deputy Executive Director for CBP's office of Agriculture Operational Oversight within the office of Agriculture Programs and Trade Liaison, which falls under the Office of Field Operations, is responsible for improving oversight of the agricultural mission across all CBP field offices by ensuring a more consistent application of agriculture inspection policy. However, the Deputy Executive Director lacks operational authority over the agriculture mission. Moreover, the dissemination and implementation of agricultural policy at the ports is ultimately at the discretion of CBP Officers who typically do not have agriculture expertise and are primarily focused on the critical mission of preventing terrorists and terrorist weapons from entering the country. To maintain a highly skilled and motivated agriculture specialist workforce, the Act would require CBP to create a comprehensive agriculture specialist career track that identifies appropriate career paths and ensures that agriculture specialists receive the training, experience, and assignments necessary for successful career. The bill also would require CBP to develop plans to improve agriculture specialist recruitment and retention and to make sure agriculture specialists have the necessary equipment and resources to effectively carry out their mission. To strengthen critical working relationships and promote interagency experience, the Act would authorize the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Agriculture to establish an interagency rotation program for CBP and APHIS personnel. Taken together, the enhancements contained in the Safeguarding American Agriculture Act of 2011 would elevate the stature of the agriculture mission in CBP to match the magnitude of the challenge posed by invasive pests and disease. I strongly urge my colleagues to support this important legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Safeguarding American Agriculture Act of 2011, with Senator Feinstein. With the recent ten-year anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks, it is appropriate to reflect on the significant changes our country has undertaken to strengthen our homeland defenses. We must examine how well we are protecting the American people and our way of life today, and, where vulnerabilities remain, take decisive action to bolster our defenses. The act we introduce today does just this, by seeking to strengthen our Nation's agricultural import and entry inspection functions to better safeguard American agriculture and natural resources against foreign pests and disease. Invasive species arrive at U.S. ports of entry every day, often hidden in the wooden crates, pallets, and shipping containers used to transport agricultural cargo, or concealed in the imported goods themselves. Failure to detect and intercept these non-native pests and diseases imposes serious economic and social costs on all Americans. The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that foreign pests and disease already cost the U.S. economy tens of billions of dollars annually in lower crop values, eradication programs, emergency payments to farmers, and increased costs for food and other natural resources. The invasive asian stink bug, for example, is ravaging mid-Atlantic crops, often destroying significant portions of apple, peach, blackberry, raspberry, strawberry, tomato, pepper, sweet corn, and soybean harvests. The bug continues to spread despite ongoing Federal, State, and local eradication efforts. Invasive species threaten our competitiveness in international trade when trading partners decide to stop importing U.S. agricultural products due to the presence of an invasive pest or disease. For example, Japan continues to ban the importation of fresh potatoes from Idaho due to a 2006 outbreak of Potato Cyst Nematode in the State. A research team comprised of biologists and economists from U.S. and Canadian universities and the U.S. Forest Service published a study last month finding that invasive wood-boring pests, such as the emerald ash borer and the asian longhorned beetle, cost homeowners an estimated $830 million a year in lost property values and cost local governments an estimated $1.7 billion a year as a result of damaged trees and woodlands. Worst of all, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office, the accidental or deliberate introduction of a foreign disease, such as avian influenza or foot-and-mouth disease, would likely result in catastrophic economic losses for our Nation and take lives. In light of the current and potential staggering economic costs of invasive species--which fall on businesses, taxpayers, and local governments that have no way to avoid the harm it is clear that focusing on prevention, specifically improving agricultural import and entry inspection operations at our ports of entry, is a very cost- effective strategy. Of course, economic costs are just one aspect of the severe consequences that can result from foreign pests and disease slipping through our ports. In my home State of Hawai'i, which is home to more endangered species per square mile than any other area on the planet, invasive species and disease could permanently devastate our fragile ecosystem. In many regions of the country, invasive species threaten native fish prized by fisherman, and destroy wetlands that support waterfowl hunting. Even an important part of our American tradition and pastime, baseball, is at stake. For the past 127 years in Kentucky, Louisville Slugger, the world's largest and oldest maker of baseball bats, has manufactured high quality baseball bats from northern white ash trees harvested in Pennsylvania and New York. However, the company is very concerned that the destructive emerald ash borer beetle, which has already destroyed millions of ash trees in several States, including Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York, could lead to the extinction of northern white ash trees, preventing Louisville Slugger from providing future generations with the company's famous ash bats. Following the attacks of September 11, Congress passed the Homeland Security Act of 2002, which unified Federal customs, immigration, and agriculture inspection officers under the new U.S. Department of Homeland Security. The decision to transfer frontline agricultural import and entry inspection functions from the Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, or APHIS, into the Department of Homeland Security's Customs and Border Protection, or CBP, was a controversial decision. I have long been concerned that the transfer resulted in significant disruptions to the agriculture mission and undermined the effectiveness of agricultural inspections. Other Members of Congress have expressed similar concerns, and there have even been efforts to remove agricultural inspection responsibilities from the Department of Homeland Security and return them to the Department of Agriculture. While I understand these sentiments, as Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, I understand that such drastic reorganizations are often costly and disruptive. In light of our Nation's fiscal challenges, I have concluded it is most efficient and effective to focus on strengthening the agricultural inspection mission within CBP, which in recent years, has made meaningful progress in stabilizing the agency's agricultural import and entry inspection operations. The Safeguarding American Agriculture Act seeks to build upon these gains and fully achieve important measures of success identified in the June 2007 Report of the APHIS-CBP Joint Task Force on Improved Agriculture Inspection, which stated ``Success will be accomplished when the agriculture function within CBP is positioned prominently throughout the organization. The potential introduction of plant and animal pest and diseases will be regarded with the same fervor as all other mission areas within CBP.'' The Act would enhance the priority of, and accountability for, the agriculture mission by establishing within CBP an Office of Agriculture Inspection led by an Assistant Commissioner responsible for improving agricultural inspections across the Nation. This provision would improve efficiency and coordination by unifying agriculture policy development with agriculture operations. An agricultural chain of command that extends from the Assistant Commissioner for Agriculture Inspection to frontline agriculture specialists at the ports would also effectively address a key issue the task force identified in its 2007 report: ``Management and leadership infrastructure supporting the agriculture mission in CBP should be staffed and empowered at levels equivalent to other functional mission areas in CBP.'' Under the present organizational structure, the Deputy Executive Director for CBP's office of Agriculture Operational Oversight within the office of Agriculture Programs and Trade Liaison, which falls under the Office of Field Operations, is responsible for improving oversight of the agricultural mission across all CBP field offices by ensuring a more consistent application of agriculture inspection policy. However, the Deputy Executive Director lacks operational authority over the agriculture mission. Moreover, the dissemination and implementation of agricultural policy at the ports is ultimately at the discretion of CBP Officers who typically do not have agriculture expertise and are primarily focused on the critical mission of preventing terrorists and terrorist weapons from entering the country. To maintain a highly skilled and motivated agriculture specialist workforce, the Act would require CBP to create a comprehensive agriculture specialist career track that identifies appropriate career paths and ensures that agriculture specialists receive the training, experience, and assignments necessary for successful career. The bill also would require CBP to develop plans to improve agriculture specialist recruitment and retention and to make sure agriculture specialists have the necessary equipment and resources to effectively carry out their mission. To strengthen critical working relationships and promote interagency experience, the Act would authorize the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Agriculture to establish an interagency rotation program for CBP and APHIS personnel. Taken together, the enhancements contained in the Safeguarding American Agriculture Act of 2011 would elevate the stature of the agriculture mission in CBP to match the magnitude of the challenge posed by invasive pests and disease. I strongly urge my colleagues to support this important legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Thursday, October 6, 2011, at 2:15 p.m. in room 628 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing entitled ``Internet Infrastructure in Native Communities: Equal Access to E-Commerce, Jobs and the Global Marketplace.'' Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at (202) 224-2251.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today, along with Senators Carper, Cardin, and Coons, I am introducing the Federal Hiring Process Improvement Act of 2011. This bill will help agencies fix the broken recruitment and hiring process in the Federal Government. I am pleased that Representative Sarbanes is also introducing a companion bill in the House today and I thank him for his work and his commitment to the Federal workforce. Every day, talented people interested in working for their government are turned away from Federal service because of the frustrating and antiquated hiring process. Too many Federal agencies have built barriers for new workers, done too little to recruit the right candidates, and invented an evaluation process that discourages qualified candidates. In the past, many agencies have tried to find exceptions to the competitive hiring process, rather than making sure the competitive process works. The competitive hiring process should be our most effective tool to ensure that the Federal workforce is composed of the most qualified and able individuals, who are appointed through a fair and open process that is free from political interference. As agencies face budget reductions and restricted hiring, it is critical that they are able to attract top-notch candidates who are up to the challenge of meeting agency missions with limited resources. We must strengthen the competitive hiring process so that agencies do not look for ways to avoid it. As Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia, I have held multiple hearings on the hiring process and worked closely with the administration on its reform efforts. While the administration has been making some good progress, we still hear stories of talented individuals who seek employment with the Federal Government, only to grow frustrated with the archaic hiring process and find work elsewhere. Applying for a job in the Federal Government should be accessible and straightforward. Agencies still require too much information upfront from candidates instead of an approach that requires more information as the employee moves through the process. The Federal Hiring Process Improvement Act will require agencies to streamline their hiring practices. Agencies will be required to stop using the dreaded ``knowledge, skills, and ability'' essays and accept resumes and cover letters, as is standard in the private sector. Additionally, the bill requires job postings to be written in plain writing, so that candidates can readily understand what the job is and how to apply, and candidates would be notified of their status at key points in the process. Agencies will have to speed their hiring processes to average no more than 80 days. Agencies need to continuously reassess their needs and strategies in order to maximize their recruitment and hiring efforts. This bill requires agencies to develop strategic workforce plans that include hiring projections and identify critical skills gaps. It also requires agencies to measure the effectiveness of hiring efforts and reforms. The Federal Government is the largest employer in the United States, and Federal service is a noble profession. Within the next 5 years, the Federal Government is expected to face one of the largest retirement waves in the Nation's history, making the development of a new generation of workers even more vital. Agency leadership must make reforming the recruitment and hiring process a top priority. I urge my colleagues to support this important bill. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today, along with Senators Carper, Cardin, and Coons, I am introducing the Federal Hiring Process Improvement Act of 2011. This bill will help agencies fix the broken recruitment and hiring process in the Federal Government. I am pleased that Representative Sarbanes is also introducing a companion bill in the House today and I thank him for his work and his commitment to the Federal workforce. Every day, talented people interested in working for their government are turned away from Federal service because of the frustrating and antiquated hiring process. Too many Federal agencies have built barriers for new workers, done too little to recruit the right candidates, and invented an evaluation process that discourages qualified candidates. In the past, many agencies have tried to find exceptions to the competitive hiring process, rather than making sure the competitive process works. The competitive hiring process should be our most effective tool to ensure that the Federal workforce is composed of the most qualified and able individuals, who are appointed through a fair and open process that is free from political interference. As agencies face budget reductions and restricted hiring, it is critical that they are able to attract top-notch candidates who are up to the challenge of meeting agency missions with limited resources. We must strengthen the competitive hiring process so that agencies do not look for ways to avoid it. As Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia, I have held multiple hearings on the hiring process and worked closely with the administration on its reform efforts. While the administration has been making some good progress, we still hear stories of talented individuals who seek employment with the Federal Government, only to grow frustrated with the archaic hiring process and find work elsewhere. Applying for a job in the Federal Government should be accessible and straightforward. Agencies still require too much information upfront from candidates instead of an approach that requires more information as the employee moves through the process. The Federal Hiring Process Improvement Act will require agencies to streamline their hiring practices. Agencies will be required to stop using the dreaded ``knowledge, skills, and ability'' essays and accept resumes and cover letters, as is standard in the private sector. Additionally, the bill requires job postings to be written in plain writing, so that candidates can readily understand what the job is and how to apply, and candidates would be notified of their status at key points in the process. Agencies will have to speed their hiring processes to average no more than 80 days. Agencies need to continuously reassess their needs and strategies in order to maximize their recruitment and hiring efforts. This bill requires agencies to develop strategic workforce plans that include hiring projections and identify critical skills gaps. It also requires agencies to measure the effectiveness of hiring efforts and reforms. The Federal Government is the largest employer in the United States, and Federal service is a noble profession. Within the next 5 years, the Federal Government is expected to face one of the largest retirement waves in the Nation's history, making the development of a new generation of workers even more vital. Agency leadership must make reforming the recruitment and hiring process a top priority. I urge my colleagues to support this important bill. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Thursday, September 22, 2011, at 2:15 p.m. in room 628 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing entitled ``Tribal Law and Order Act One Year Later: Have We Improved Public Safety and Justice Throughout Indian Country?'' Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at (202) 224-2251.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Retirement Equity for Pentagon Police Heroes Act, a bill to place Pentagon Police on par with Federal law enforcement officers government wide. As we remember the tragic events of September 11, 2001, and the bravery of those who rushed into burning buildings as most ran away, it is particularly fitting to recognize the bravery of Pentagon Force Protection Agency Officers with this legislation. Ten years ago, unthinkable acts of terrorism were perpetrated against America, resulting in the loss of thousands of innocent lives at the World Trade Center in New York, the Pentagon in Virginia, and the final landing site of flight 93 in Pennsylvania. The men and women of the Pentagon Force Protection Agency were among the first to respond in the chaotic minutes after flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. On the morning of September 11, Isaac Ho`opi`i, a Pentagon Police officer from my home state of Hawai`i, rushed into the Pentagon and carried eight people out of the rubble, many of whom were badly burned. Many others made it out of the Pentagon thanks to Mr. Ho`opi`i, who became known as ``the voice,'' because survivors remember him calling out for those lost in the smoke and debris to crawl towards the sound of his voice. In 2002, Mr. Ho`opi`i was awarded a Medal of Valor for his bravery and quick thinking on that fateful day. Threats to the Pentagon continue to mount in the time since 9/11. Just last year, an armed gunman stormed the Pentagon, shooting at officers while attempting to enter the building. Officers Jeffery Amos and Marvin Carraway, Jr. were wounded during the shootout, but managed to neutralize the perpetrator, ensuring that no other officers or bystanders were harmed in the process. Despite their heroic actions and the dangerous nature of their job, Pentagon Police officers do not accrue retirement benefits at the same rate as Federal law enforcement officers. This bill would add Pentagon Police to the list of employees under the Civil Service Retirement System and Federal Employees' Retirement System who make larger retirement contributions than most Federal employees, and accrue retirement benefits at an enhanced rate. The higher accrual rate is an important recognition that police work is dangerous and physically demanding, so law enforcement officers are required to retire earlier than others. The time has come to recognize the courage of these brave men and women who everyday protect thousands of military personnel and civilians at the Pentagon. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Retirement Equity for Pentagon Police Heroes Act, a bill to place Pentagon Police on par with Federal law enforcement officers government wide. As we remember the tragic events of September 11, 2001, and the bravery of those who rushed into burning buildings as most ran away, it is particularly fitting to recognize the bravery of Pentagon Force Protection Agency Officers with this legislation. Ten years ago, unthinkable acts of terrorism were perpetrated against America, resulting in the loss of thousands of innocent lives at the World Trade Center in New York, the Pentagon in Virginia, and the final landing site of flight 93 in Pennsylvania. The men and women of the Pentagon Force Protection Agency were among the first to respond in the chaotic minutes after flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. On the morning of September 11, Isaac Ho`opi`i, a Pentagon Police officer from my home state of Hawai`i, rushed into the Pentagon and carried eight people out of the rubble, many of whom were badly burned. Many others made it out of the Pentagon thanks to Mr. Ho`opi`i, who became known as ``the voice,'' because survivors remember him calling out for those lost in the smoke and debris to crawl towards the sound of his voice. In 2002, Mr. Ho`opi`i was awarded a Medal of Valor for his bravery and quick thinking on that fateful day. Threats to the Pentagon continue to mount in the time since 9/11. Just last year, an armed gunman stormed the Pentagon, shooting at officers while attempting to enter the building. Officers Jeffery Amos and Marvin Carraway, Jr. were wounded during the shootout, but managed to neutralize the perpetrator, ensuring that no other officers or bystanders were harmed in the process. Despite their heroic actions and the dangerous nature of their job, Pentagon Police officers do not accrue retirement benefits at the same rate as Federal law enforcement officers. This bill would add Pentagon Police to the list of employees under the Civil Service Retirement System and Federal Employees' Retirement System who make larger retirement contributions than most Federal employees, and accrue retirement benefits at an enhanced rate. The higher accrual rate is an important recognition that police work is dangerous and physically demanding, so law enforcement officers are required to retire earlier than others. The time has come to recognize the courage of these brave men and women who everyday protect thousands of military personnel and civilians at the Pentagon. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Medicaid Restoration for Citizens of Freely Associated States Act of 2011. This bill would reinstate eligibility for critical Federal health benefits for citizens of certain Pacific Island nations who have been invited by the Federal Government to live in the United States, but for whom the costs of services have fallen to individual states, Hawaii in particular. I would like to thank Senators Inouye and Bingaman for joining me in introducing this bill. The Freely Associated States, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of Palau, are island nations that have a unique political relationship with the United States. At the end of World War II, the United Nations established the ``Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands,'' which was administered by the United States between 1947 and 1986. It included the islands that now make up the FAS nations, as well as other Pacific islands liberated from Japan after World War II. This U.S. Trusteeship presented the Federal Government with new strategic and military opportunities, allowing the United States to establish military bases and station forces in the Trust Territory and close off areas for security reasons. It also bestowed upon the United States the responsibility to promote economic development and self- reliance for the territory. In the 1980s, the United States entered into a new phase in its relationship with the FAS through the Compact of Free Association and the Palau Compact of Free Association. The Compacts allow FAS citizens to freely enter, reside, and work in the United States and authorize their participation in certain Federal programs. As a part of the Compacts, FAS citizens were extended Medicaid eligibility. Unfortunately, when the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 was enacted, FAS citizens lost many of their public benefits, including Medicaid coverage. Subsequently, state and territorial governments have been the sole sources of funding for meeting the social service and public health needs of this ever growing population. And FAS migrants to Hawaii often arrive with serious medical needs, requiring costly health care services such as dialysis and chemotherapy. These costs will continue to rise, even as the State's resources are increasingly constrained. Restoration of Medicaid eligibility for these individuals is crucial for states where many FAS citizens reside. In the Pacific, this includes Hawaii, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands. In the continental U.S., this includes California, Oregon, Washington, and Arkansas. Health care providers that operate in areas with high rates of uninsured are having difficulties meeting the health care needs of their communities. Uninsured FAS citizens who seek health care services contribute to the uncompensated costs that are creating an ever-greater burden on health care providers. I ask my colleagues for their support of the Medicaid Restoration for Citizens of Freely Associated States Act of 2011. The decision to allow citizens of the Freely Associated States to come to the United States was a federal decision, with national benefits. That we also accept the cost of that decision is a matter of fairness and responsibility. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Medicaid Restoration for Citizens of Freely Associated States Act of 2011. This bill would reinstate eligibility for critical Federal health benefits for citizens of certain Pacific Island nations who have been invited by the Federal Government to live in the United States, but for whom the costs of services have fallen to individual states, Hawaii in particular. I would like to thank Senators Inouye and Bingaman for joining me in introducing this bill. The Freely Associated States, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of Palau, are island nations that have a unique political relationship with the United States. At the end of World War II, the United Nations established the ``Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands,'' which was administered by the United States between 1947 and 1986. It included the islands that now make up the FAS nations, as well as other Pacific islands liberated from Japan after World War II. This U.S. Trusteeship presented the Federal Government with new strategic and military opportunities, allowing the United States to establish military bases and station forces in the Trust Territory and close off areas for security reasons. It also bestowed upon the United States the responsibility to promote economic development and self- reliance for the territory. In the 1980s, the United States entered into a new phase in its relationship with the FAS through the Compact of Free Association and the Palau Compact of Free Association. The Compacts allow FAS citizens to freely enter, reside, and work in the United States and authorize their participation in certain Federal programs. As a part of the Compacts, FAS citizens were extended Medicaid eligibility. Unfortunately, when the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 was enacted, FAS citizens lost many of their public benefits, including Medicaid coverage. Subsequently, state and territorial governments have been the sole sources of funding for meeting the social service and public health needs of this ever growing population. And FAS migrants to Hawaii often arrive with serious medical needs, requiring costly health care services such as dialysis and chemotherapy. These costs will continue to rise, even as the State's resources are increasingly constrained. Restoration of Medicaid eligibility for these individuals is crucial for states where many FAS citizens reside. In the Pacific, this includes Hawaii, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands. In the continental U.S., this includes California, Oregon, Washington, and Arkansas. Health care providers that operate in areas with high rates of uninsured are having difficulties meeting the health care needs of their communities. Uninsured FAS citizens who seek health care services contribute to the uncompensated costs that are creating an ever-greater burden on health care providers. I ask my colleagues for their support of the Medicaid Restoration for Citizens of Freely Associated States Act of 2011. The decision to allow citizens of the Freely Associated States to come to the United States was a federal decision, with national benefits. That we also accept the cost of that decision is a matter of fairness and responsibility. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I would like to announce that the Committee on Indian Affairs will meet on Thursday, August 4, 2011, at 2:15 p.m. in room 628 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing entitled ``The American Indian Probate Reform Act: Empowering Indian Land Owners''. Those wishing additional information may contact the Indian Affairs Committee at (202) 224-2251.