Jeff Bingaman

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Automatic IRA Act of 2010. When fully phased in, this bill will give nearly 42 million Americans nationwide an easy, effective way to take responsibility for their financial futures and plan for a secure retirement. The act incorporates the President's call, in his proposed fiscal year 2010 and fiscal year 2011 budgets, for Congress to enact automatic IRA legislation. Currently, about half of American workers have no opportunity to save for retirement at work. In my home State of New Mexico, that share is nearly 60 percent. Among those lacking coverage at work, only 1 in 10 contributes annually to an individual retirement account, IRA; the rest generally make no dedicated savings for retirement. The result? An alarming number of American workers are woefully unprepared for a financially secure retirement. According to Boston College's Center for Retirement Research, ``in 2009 half of today's households will not have enough retirement income to maintain their pre-retirement standard of living, even if they work to age 65, which is above the current average retirement age.'' Especially in this period of economic uncertainty, it is imperative that Congress focus on this retirement savings crisis. My bill takes a commonsense approach to doing so. Under this bill, most private sector employees working in establishments of 10 or more employees who are not currently covered by a workplace retirement plan would be given the opportunity to save through regular payroll deposits that continue automatically, unless they elect out. The savings will be deposited into the worker's own IRA, which will be subject to the laws already in place governing IRA accounts. Employers' administrative functions will be minimal. And the arrangement is market oriented; other than the smallest of accounts, automatic IRAs will be provided by the same banks, mutual funds, insurance carriers, and other institutions that currently provide them. The automatic IRA approach is intended to help these households overcome the barrier of inertia. It builds on the successful use-- encouraged by reforms I strongly supported the Pension Protection Act of 2006--of automatic features in 401(k) plans that encourage employees toward sensible decisions (while allowing them to make alternative choices). We have already seen evidence that automatic 401(k) enrollment can dramatically boost employee participation rates, from seven in ten eligible workers to nine in ten. And in the 401(k) context, the gains are even more striking for population groups least likely to save, including women, Latino, and low-income workers. Of the 75 million American workers who now are not covered by employment-based retirement plans, an estimated 42 million would be eligible to save and enroll under automatic IRA legislation. This includes more than 250,000 in my home State of New Mexico. Many of these individuals are familiar with IRAs. But when asked why they have not used the existing program, about half point to issues relating to setup and decisionmaking as the key barriers. The automatic IRA would eliminate these barriers, and the Retirement Security Project estimates that automatic IRA legislation could increase net national saving by nearly $15 billion annually. This is the third consecutive Congress in which I have introduced automatic IRA legislation. The concept was initially developed by scholars at the Brookings Institution and Heritage Foundation. Indeed, the automatic IRA concept has long enjoyed broad support across the political spectrum. For instance, Martin Feldstein, chief economic advisor to President Reagan, has described himself as ``a great enthusiast of automatic enrollment IRAs'' who thinks ``as a policy, it's a no-brainer'' and ``can't imagine why there would be any significant opposition from political players on either side of the aisle.'' Finally, this bill seeks to send a strong signal of preference for employers to offer qualified retirement plans, like 401(k)s. Among other features, it doubles the credit for employers that newly establish qualified plans and it directs the Secretaries of the Treasury and Labor to implement final regulations and establish a model plan for Multiple Employer Plans. I am grateful that my colleague on the Senate Finance Committee, Senator Kerry, is joining me in introducing this bill. I am also pleased to note the broad range of stakeholders supporting the automatic IRA concept, including AARP; the American Society of Pension Professionals & Actuaries; Aspen Institute's Initiative on Financial Security; the Business and Professional Women's Foundation; CFED; Consumers Union; FINRA; the Minority Business Roundtable; New Economics for Women; the United States Black Chamber; the United States Women's Chamber of Commerce; Women Impacting Public Policy; and the Women's Institute for a Secure Retirement. Ensuring easy access to a retirement account and the ability to have part of their wages go directly from their paycheck into this account are proven strategies to encourage retirement savings. I call on the Senate to take up this bill in the fall and to include it in legislation extending the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, today I am introducing two bills, S. 3746 and S. 3759, making improvements to the operation of the Department of Energy's loan guarantee program. The first makes a number of changes that will ease the administration of the program and allow for quicker processing of applications within the Department. In addition, the bill will add a fourth category to the subsidized loan guarantee program created and funded in the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act that would allow energy efficiency projects to gain access to the program. This bill is substantially similar to a provision that the House of Representatives passed last year as a portion of H.R. 2847 but which did not receive consideration in the Senate. The second bill institutes a time limit on consideration by the Office of Management and Budget of loan guarantee applications submitted by the Secretary. If the Secretary submits a term sheet for conditional commitment to OMB for review and comment, then OMB has 30 days to submit such comments. After 30 days the Secretary may issue a conditional commitment on the guarantee, taking into account any comments received from OMB, without further authorization from OMB. This provision would not affect the currently used OMB-approved subsidy cost model for loan guarantees or its application. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I yield myself 5 minutes off the Democratic time.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, let me first just commend all my colleagues for their eloquent statements in support of Solicitor General Elena Kagan's nomination, and I join them in that support of her nomination to be an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. I strongly believe Solicitor General Kagan has the skill set, the intellect, and the experience necessary to be an exceptional Justice. She has a diverse legal background, with a distinguished career in government and academia, and she has served as our Nation's top lawyer before the Court. After reviewing her record, as Senator Klobuchar pointed out, I believe Senator Hagan also--and others have pointed out in their comments as well--the American Bar Association unanimously voted that she was ``well qualified'' to serve on the Court, which is the highest ranking the American Bar Association bestows. I have also met with Ms. Kagan and closely followed her confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee. She clearly demonstrated that she has the right temperament for this position and that her legal views are well within the mainstream of judicial thought in this country. Ms. Kagan also affirmed her commitment to interpret the law with fidelity and demonstrated that she understands how the decisions of this High Court have a very real impact on the lives and liberties of Americans. Ms. Kagan's wide range of experience will serve the country well. She has served as a faculty member at the University of Chicago Law School, as a former dean of the Harvard Law School, as a clerk to former Justice Thurgood Marshall, as a White House aide to former President Bill Clinton, and in her current position as Solicitor General of the United States. In her current position as Solicitor General, she has filed approximately 100 briefs and argued six cases before the Supreme Court. Ms. Kagan has demonstrated sound judgment and has exhibited great skill in the cases she has handled before the Supreme Court. She has been lauded by individuals across the political spectrum for her ability to build consensus and for her respect for those with differing views. For example, she has received support from eight former Solicitors General from both parties, including Kenneth Starr and Ted Olsen. At Harvard she worked to hire a faculty representing diverse political views, including conservative faculty members in order to ensure that students received a broad perspective on the issues they were studying. While Ms. Kagan has a great deal of legal experience, much has been said about her lack of judicial experience. Although she has not served as a judge, Ms. Kagan is widely respected in the legal community. She will bring needed diversity to the bench with respect to her legal background. It is important to note that about 40 of the 111 previous Supreme Court Justices who have served did not have judicial experience prior to serving on the Supreme Court, including, I would point out, former Chief Justice William Rehnquist. I strongly believe Ms. Kagan has the qualifications necessary to be an excellent Justice of the Supreme Court. I urge my colleagues to support her nomination. Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a business meeting has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The business meeting will be held on Thursday, August 5, 2010, at 9:30 a.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of the business meeting is to consider pending legislation. For further information, please contact Sam Fowler at (202) 224-7571 or Amanda Kelly at (202) 224-6836.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that the hearing scheduled before the Senate Subcommittee on Energy has been postponed. The hearing was to be held on Tuesday, August 3, 2010, at 2:30 p.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of this hearing is to examine the role of strategic minerals in clean energy technologies and other applications as well as legislation to address the issue, including S. 3521 the ``Rare Earths Supply Technology and Resources Transformation Act of 2010''. For further information, please contact Allyson Anderson or Rosemarie Calabro.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Senate Subcommittee on Energy. The hearing will be held on Tuesday, August 3, 2010, at 2:30 p.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of this hearing is to examine the role of strategic minerals in clean energy technologies and other applications as well as legislation to address the issue, including S. 3521 the ``Rare Earths Supply Technology and Resources Transformation Act of 2010''. Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record may do so by sending it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, D.C. 20510-6150, or by e-mail to Rosemarie_Calabro @energy.senate.gov. For further information, please contact Allyson Anderson or Rosemarie Calabro. impeachment trial committee on the articles against judge g. thomas porteous, jr.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a business meeting scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, previously announced for July 15th, has been rescheduled and will not be held on Wednesday, July 21, 2010, at 9:30 a.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of the business meeting is to consider pending legislation. For further information, please contact Sam Fowler or Amanda Kelly.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a Business Meeting has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The business meeting will be held on Thursday, July 15, 2010, at 10:15 a.m., in room SE-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of the Business Meeting is to consider pending legislation. For further information, please contact Sam Fowler at (202) 224-7571 or Amanda Kelly at (202) 224-6836. impeachment trial committee on the articles against judge g. thomas porteous, jr.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that the hearing before the Subcommittee on Water and Power previously announced for July 1, has been rescheduled and will now be held on Wednesday, July 14, 2010, at 3:30 p.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of this oversight hearing is to examine the Federal response to the discovery of the aquatic invasive species Asian carp in Lake Calumet, Illinois. Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150, or by email to Gina_Weinstock@energy.senate.gov. For further information, please contact Tanya Trujillo or Gina Weinstock.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, today I wish to pay tribute to the extraordinary life of Polly Arango, who died on Saturday, June 26, 2010, in a tragic accident in Alamosa, CO. Her husband, children, grandchildren, family, and friends have lost a very special individual. And New Mexico and the Nation lost a tireless advocate for children, particularly those with disabilities. Polly spent her life working on behalf of the most vulnerable in our society. Early in her career, she organized programs that allowed American families to adopt orphans from Ecuador. She and her husband John later adopted themselves, providing loving care to a son who had severe developmental difficulties. Shortly thereafter, Polly began her lifelong to work to ensure that other families in similar situations had access to vital education, health care, and support services. To do so, she cofounded Parents Reaching Out, a nonprofit organization that works with parents, caregivers, educators and other professionals to promote healthy, positive and caring experiences for New Mexico families and children. Polly also founded and served as the executive director of Family Voices, an advocacy group that strives to bolster both the access and the quality of health care for children with special needs. In her work for Family Voices, she, more than any other leader in the advocacy world, fought for family-centered care for children with disabilities. Her efforts with officials in New Mexico led to many important successes such as establishing the Medically Fragile Children's Program and the New Mexico High Risk Insurance Pool, reducing the school age for children with disabilities, and increasing coverage and services for children in Medicaid Programs. Polly was very helpful to my staff and me over many years as we worked together on major health reform and education issues. She was in contact with us monthly and even weekly to inform us of developments in New Mexico and across the Nation and she had a wonderful ability to blend an understanding of complex policies with the practical needs of New Mexicans. I know she was particularly heartened by our recent passage of national health care reform. And, I know she would agree that we all must continue to fight to ensure that the needs of children remain central in our efforts to forge a more effective and equitable health care system. I extend my sincere condolences to Polly's husband and children, and the entire Arango family.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, my hometown of Silver City, NM, is in the southwestern corner of our State. It is the county seat, and the largest town for about a hundred miles around. Right on the edge of the Gila Wilderness, it has been called by others, not by just me, ``One of the 100 Best Small Towns in America.'' One of the reasons it is so outstanding is because of the tireless, thoughtful work of Susan Berry. For 36 years, she has been involved in historic preservation work in and around our town, and throughout the State of New Mexico. An early force of the MainStreet Project in Silver City and a longtime member of the Design Review Committee, she has done so much so well, that the New Mexico Historic Preservation Division recently gave her its Lifetime Achievement Award which she earned during a career of preserving the past for the future. On Saturday of this week, she will retire after decades of service as director of the Silver City Museum. Her accomplishments in that capacity are too numerous to list, but as a result of her vision and skill, that museum has been accredited by the American Association of Museums, one of only thirteen in New Mexico to be so designated. She has helped make Silver City a significant destination for travelers to the Southwest, and added to the list of reasons that 10,000 people like to call it ``home.'' We are so fortunate that she chose to make the town the focus of her considerable ability and vision for so many years.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that the oversight hearing scheduled before the Subcommittee on Water and Power for Thursday, July 1, 2010, at 2:30 p.m., has been postponed. The purpose of this oversight hearing is to examine the Federal response to the discovery of the aquatic invasive species Asian carp in Lake Calumet, Illinois. For further information, please contact Tanya Trujillo or Gina Weinstock.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that the hearing scheduled before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources previously announced for July 1, at 9:30 a.m., has been rescheduled and will now be held on Wednesday, June 30, 2010, at 2:30 p.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony on S. 3452, a bill to designate the Valles Caldera National Preserve as a unit of the National Park System, and for other purposes. Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150, or by email to testimony@energy.senate.gov. For further information, please contact David Brooks or Allison Seyferth.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a Business Meeting has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The business meeting will be held on Wednesday, June 30, 2010, at 9:30 a.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of the Business Meeting is to consider S. 3516, a bill to amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to reform the management of energy and mineral resources on the Outer Continental Shelf, and for other purposes. For further information, please contact Sam Fowler at (202) 224-7571 or Amanda Kelly at (202) 224-6836.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, before the Senate votes on Senate Resolution 548, I wish to speak briefly in opposition to it. This resolution speaks to this so-called ``flotilla incident'' that occurred a few weeks ago near Gaza. I am concerned that this resolution does not help either the United States or Israel. I support Israel. I have done so during all my years here in the Senate. But I also believe that the only way to ensure Israel's long-term security is to have a genuine peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. This resolution does not bring us closer to that peace. No one questions Israel's right to defend itself. I know that questions have been raised about the relationship between the Humanitarian Relief Foundation and Hamas, and I am concerned about those questions and they need to be answered. But I am also concerned that Israel's response to the flotilla and the deaths onboard the Mavi Marmara once again shows to Israel's enemies that they can provoke Israel into taking actions that undermine international support for Israel. Israel was able to board five of the ships with no loss of life, as my colleague from Texas indicated, and that needs to be acknowledged. But this incident has distracted the attention of the international community away from the peace process. It has overshadowed the kidnapping of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, which occurred nearly 4 years ago today--in fact, on June 25, 2006. Hamas should immediately release Gilad Shalit. Unfortunately, I do not believe this resolution will help to make that happen. Nor does this resolution talk about the humanitarian situation in Gaza. Israel has allowed humanitarian supplies into Gaza, but it is evident from the conditions in Gaza that those supplies have not been sufficient. One U.S. charity estimates that 400 trucks of basic food supplies are needed in Gaza every day, but on average only 171 trucks of basic nutritional aid enter Gaza each week. Israel has a right to prevent arms from entering Gaza, but I do not see a reason for the Senate to pass a resolution supporting a policy that has the effect of restricting humanitarian supplies. Moreover, Israel itself has decided to change that policy. I am encouraged by Israel's decision last week to ease the restrictions on the flow of goods into Gaza. I agree with the White House that this new policy, once implemented, will significantly improve the conditions for the Palestinians in Gaza. As Prime Minister Netanyahu told the Knesset: This new policy is the best one for Israel because it eliminates Hamas' main propaganda claim and allows us and our international allies to face our real concerns in the realm of security. The resolution the Senate is considering at this point would put the Senate on record in support of a policy that Israel itself has determined to change. One more obvious point is the Senate has not fully debated this resolution. There have been no hearings on the flotilla incident or any version of this resolution in either the Senate or in the House. To my knowledge, the administration has not expressed its views on this resolution either. I believe with regard to foreign policy matters, the administration should always be consulted. Let me close by saying no one should question the U.S. support for Israel. I do not believe anyone seriously questions that. I say again that I do not believe this resolution furthers the effort to bring peace between Israel and the Palestinians, which is the only way to ensure Israel's long-term security. For those reasons I would like to be recorded in opposition to enactment of the resolution.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Thursday, July 1, 2010, at 2:30 p.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington, DC. The purpose of this oversight hearing is to examine the Federal response to the discovery of the aquatic invasive species Asian carp in Lake Calumet, Illinois. Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150, or by e-mail to Gina_Weinstock@energy.senate.gov. For further information, please contact Tanya Trujillo at (202) 224- 5479 or Gina Weinstock at (202) 224-5684.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Kevin Wenderoth and Leah Paisner of my office be granted the privilege of the floor for today, June 23.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I wish to speak briefly about the issue of unemployment insurance benefits. We, the Congress, allowed these benefits to expire 21 days ago. I believe there is a major misperception on the part of some about what the effect of this is. This proposal to extend these benefits is talked about as a so-called extension of unemployment insurance. That suggests that the provision simply provides additional weeks of unemployment compensation payments to people who have used up all their benefits. Understandably, there are people in my State and around the country who say: Wait a minute. At some point you don't want to keep adding more and more weeks of unemployment benefits. What we need to understand is that is not what we are proposing to do here. What we have been trying to do is not to add more weeks but merely to allow the unemployed to continue drawing the same number of weeks of benefits that they were able to draw prior to the expiration of the program we are trying to extend. The provision does not provide additional payments to anyone who has exhausted his or her Federal and State benefits before the authorization of this program expired on June 2. It does not extend the number of weeks of benefits under the programs. Rather, it simply allows the programs to continue operating for people who use up the weeks of State-provided unemployment benefits that are available to them. In plain language, what this provision will do is give a person who lost his or her job last month the same unemployment compensation benefits as someone who lost his or her job a full year ago. What are we talking about as far as the amount of these benefits? There is an editorial in the New York Times this morning indicating that the average unemployment check is $309 a week. It is not that high in my State. Mr. President, $295 a week is the average. We are not talking about a vast amount of money, particularly if a person is trying to support a family and trying to pay some portion of their bills while they seek another job. People need to understand also that you cannot draw unemployment benefits under the State programs or the Federal programs unless you continue to be actively seeking employment. In plain language, what this provision would do is give a person who lost his or her job just recently the same opportunity that people who lost their jobs some time ago have had. The bill we are debating would allow what we call the Emergency Unemployment Compensation Program to continue operating. A person who loses his job is eligible to receive up to 26 weeks of benefits through the State unemployment compensation program. When those benefits are exhausted, some States add additional benefits through what they call the extended benefit program, and many do not. Once all the State benefits have been exhausted, the person may be eligible to receive additional benefits through this Emergency Unemployment Compensation Program, which is the subject of our discussion. That program is what we are debating today as part of this extenders package. Clearly, the date on which a person becomes eligible for the Emergency Unemployment Compensation Program depends on when that person lost his or her job. Moreover, the number of payments for which that person is eligible also depends on when he lost that job because the benefits are paid in a series of four tiers, with each tier lasting a certain number of weeks. Because this program has been forced to stop operating, people who lost their job recently will not receive as much unemployment compensation or as many weeks of unemployment compensation as people who lost their jobs months ago. Continuing the Emergency Unemployment Compensation Program is simply a matter of fairness to those people if they continue to seek employment. From the week of June 2--21 days ago when this program expired--until the end of last week, there were right at 4,000 people in my State who had run out of State benefits. Those individuals then would find they did not have the benefit they could have had had they run out of State benefits and lost their jobs a few weeks earlier. Until the Congress acts, none of these people will be eligible for the Emergency Unemployment Compensation Program. An additional 4,600 people who are in one of the lower tiers of the Emergency Unemployment Compensation Program will exhaust their tier of benefits and be unable to receive the next tier of benefit. That is roughly 8,000 New Mexicans who will be affected by the expiration of this Federal program. In my view, the obstruction that has forced this program to stop is not fair to those New Mexicans. It is not fair to many Americans. These are people who worked for companies that were able to hang on to their employees longer than other companies once the recession hit. Cutting the benefits of these individuals is not fair. These individuals are ones who primarily live in States such as my home State of New Mexico where the recession hit hardest a few months later than it had hit in other parts of the country. It is not fair that the people in these States should be eligible for fewer weeks of benefits when they have paid into the unemployment insurance system just like everybody else. It is easy to find maps on the Internet to show States that are disadvantaged by what the Senate has failed to do. There are animated maps that show how high unemployment spread across the country. It started on the east coast and the west coast. It crept toward the middle of the country. States such as New Mexico, Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, Wyoming, South Dakota, and Colorado, I say to the Presiding Officer, were among the last to be affected by the recession. It is the people of these States who are being disadvantaged because the Emergency Unemployment Compensation Program has been allowed to lapse. I want to be clear that I do not believe this program needs to be continued indefinitely, not least because of the substantial cost involved. When the job market improves, we need to find a way to phase out these costs. In my view, the fair thing to do would be to choose a date and say people who lose their job after that date and begin drawing unemployment benefits after that date will not be eligible to receive the extra weeks of benefits that the Federal Government is adding to what the States are providing. The economy is much better than it was last year when the country was losing 750,000 jobs every month. The free-fall has stopped. The private sector is once again creating jobs at a very modest level. But the unemployment rate is still at 8.7 percent in my State of New Mexico and at 9.7 nationally. Now is not the time to eliminate the assistance this program has been providing to the many people who have been forced to lose their jobs during this recession. I urge my colleagues to support the continuation of this Emergency Unemployment Compensation Program until we can find a fairer way to phase it out and terminate these extra Federal benefits. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I see a colleague seeking recognition.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to add two bills for the previously announced hearing scheduled before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Thursday, June 24, 2010, at 9:30 a.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of the hearing is to hear testimony on the following bills: S. 3497, a bill to amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to require leases entered into under that Act to include a plan that describes the means and timeline for containment and termination of an ongoing discharge of oil, and for other purposes; and, S. 3431, a bill to improve the administration of the Minerals Management Service, and for other purposes. Adding bills: S. 3509, a bill to amend the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to promote the research and development of technologies and best practices for the safe development and extraction of natural gas and other petroleum resources, and for other purposes; and, S. 3516, a bill to amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to reform the management of energy and mineral resources on the Outer Continental Shelf, and for other purposes. Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record may do so by sending it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150, or by e-mail to Abigail_Campbell@energy.senate.gov. For further information, please contact Linda Lance at (202) 224-7556 or Abigail Campbell at (202) 224-1219.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the Outer Continental Shelf Reform Act of 2010. This act takes a number of important steps to ensure that the Outer Continental Shelf will be managed in a balanced, prudent, and vigilant way, to ensure energy production, safety, and protection of the environment. Its goal is to create a culture of excellence in this endeavor that benefits those who work in the oil industry, those who depend on other marine resources, and all Americans who care deeply about our oceans and coastal environment. This legislation is being introduced against the backdrop of oil still gushing into the Gulf of Mexico more than 60 days after the initial explosion of the Deepwater Horizon rig. As the Congress formulates its overall response to this disaster, its first order of business must be to continue to care for the families of those who lost their lives in the rig explosion and those Gulf residents who are suffering every day through loss of livelihood and of places and wildlife that they love. Several Senate committees have important roles to play in formulating legislation in that regard. At the same time, it also is essential that we look to the future, and to creating a better structure and system within the regulatory agency. That is a particular responsibility of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. One goal must be, of course, to prevent future disasters. But we can and must do more than that. Congress should create organizational resources and a set of principles and requirements that will have safety, environmental protection, and innovation at its core. We should require that both industry and agency employees have the expertise, experience, and commitment to quality necessary to handle the complex issues involved. If we do this right, it is my hope that we can see tangible results on all fronts, and a shift away from the cascade of failures that led to the Deepwater Horizon accident and towards work of the highest quality. Thus, this bill clarifies the multiple responsibilities of the Department of the Interior in managing the Outer Continental Shelf-- appropriate energy and other economic development and the protection of human health and safety and the marine and coastal environment. It reforms the structure of the regulatory apparatus of the Department consistent with these responsibilities. The new organizational structure requires that the Department avoid organizational conflicts of interest between its revenue-raising missions and its planning, permitting, and regulatory missions. The bill increases the safety requirements for drilling wells, focusing on best available technology, a systems analysis, risk assessment, an evidentiary safety case, and a full engineering review. In furtherance of the development of these standards and their evolution of new and better technology, it requires new research programs within the Department, independent of the leasing program, whose data must be considered by the regulators. It provides dedicated funding for the highest priority research, including in the areas of well control and spill response, and an independent science advisory board outside the agency to provide oversight. It establishes new requirements for investigation of all accidents and the public sharing of data from those reviews so that all can learn from mistakes before they become major problems. It allows the National Transportation Safety Board to provide an independent and highly skilled investigation of any accident at the request of the Secretary. In order to fully enforce the safety requirements, the bill imposes an inspection fee on industry participants to fully fund enough well- trained inspectors to perform real and meaningful inspections more often. It also increases the sanctions on poor operators, including increased civil and criminal penalties applicable to those who violate the law, and the financial responsibility requirements to ensure that those who participate in development of the Outer Continental Shelf can afford to pay for any damage they cause. The bill provides the Department of the Interior with adequate time to carry out necessary reviews, clarifies the issues that need to be addressed, and makes the input of other Federal agencies occur in a transparent way. In this way, the process will have more predictability and all stakeholders will have greater understanding of what is under consideration. The result will be better decisions that will be capable of being implemented with greater certainty. Finally, the bill takes steps to ensure that the taxpayers will get a fair return for development of energy resources. The Secretary will be required to regularly review the amounts of royalties and other charges applicable to those developing the Outer Continental Shelf, compare them to charges levied by States and other countries, and consider whether adjustments are necessary to achieve fair fiscal policies. I believe these policies and resources can set us on a new and constructive path toward managing the incredible natural resources of the Outer Continental Shelf. I welcome ideas from others that may enhance our ability in this regard. We must commit ourselves to the goal of excellence in this important endeavor. We start today. I am pleased to be joined by Senator Murkowski, ranking Republican on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, and Senator Dorgan, as original cosponsors of this bill. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the Outer Continental Shelf Reform Act of 2010. This act takes a number of important steps to ensure that the Outer Continental Shelf will be managed in a balanced, prudent, and vigilant way, to ensure energy production, safety, and protection of the environment. Its goal is to create a culture of excellence in this endeavor that benefits those who work in the oil industry, those who depend on other marine resources, and all Americans who care deeply about our oceans and coastal environment. This legislation is being introduced against the backdrop of oil still gushing into the Gulf of Mexico more than 60 days after the initial explosion of the Deepwater Horizon rig. As the Congress formulates its overall response to this disaster, its first order of business must be to continue to care for the families of those who lost their lives in the rig explosion and those Gulf residents who are suffering every day through loss of livelihood and of places and wildlife that they love. Several Senate committees have important roles to play in formulating legislation in that regard. At the same time, it also is essential that we look to the future, and to creating a better structure and system within the regulatory agency. That is a particular responsibility of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. One goal must be, of course, to prevent future disasters. But we can and must do more than that. Congress should create organizational resources and a set of principles and requirements that will have safety, environmental protection, and innovation at its core. We should require that both industry and agency employees have the expertise, experience, and commitment to quality necessary to handle the complex issues involved. If we do this right, it is my hope that we can see tangible results on all fronts, and a shift away from the cascade of failures that led to the Deepwater Horizon accident and towards work of the highest quality. Thus, this bill clarifies the multiple responsibilities of the Department of the Interior in managing the Outer Continental Shelf-- appropriate energy and other economic development and the protection of human health and safety and the marine and coastal environment. It reforms the structure of the regulatory apparatus of the Department consistent with these responsibilities. The new organizational structure requires that the Department avoid organizational conflicts of interest between its revenue-raising missions and its planning, permitting, and regulatory missions. The bill increases the safety requirements for drilling wells, focusing on best available technology, a systems analysis, risk assessment, an evidentiary safety case, and a full engineering review. In furtherance of the development of these standards and their evolution of new and better technology, it requires new research programs within the Department, independent of the leasing program, whose data must be considered by the regulators. It provides dedicated funding for the highest priority research, including in the areas of well control and spill response, and an independent science advisory board outside the agency to provide oversight. It establishes new requirements for investigation of all accidents and the public sharing of data from those reviews so that all can learn from mistakes before they become major problems. It allows the National Transportation Safety Board to provide an independent and highly skilled investigation of any accident at the request of the Secretary. In order to fully enforce the safety requirements, the bill imposes an inspection fee on industry participants to fully fund enough well- trained inspectors to perform real and meaningful inspections more often. It also increases the sanctions on poor operators, including increased civil and criminal penalties applicable to those who violate the law, and the financial responsibility requirements to ensure that those who participate in development of the Outer Continental Shelf can afford to pay for any damage they cause. The bill provides the Department of the Interior with adequate time to carry out necessary reviews, clarifies the issues that need to be addressed, and makes the input of other Federal agencies occur in a transparent way. In this way, the process will have more predictability and all stakeholders will have greater understanding of what is under consideration. The result will be better decisions that will be capable of being implemented with greater certainty. Finally, the bill takes steps to ensure that the taxpayers will get a fair return for development of energy resources. The Secretary will be required to regularly review the amounts of royalties and other charges applicable to those developing the Outer Continental Shelf, compare them to charges levied by States and other countries, and consider whether adjustments are necessary to achieve fair fiscal policies. I believe these policies and resources can set us on a new and constructive path toward managing the incredible natural resources of the Outer Continental Shelf. I welcome ideas from others that may enhance our ability in this regard. We must commit ourselves to the goal of excellence in this important endeavor. We start today. I am pleased to be joined by Senator Murkowski, ranking Republican on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, and Senator Dorgan, as original cosponsors of this bill. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that the hearing scheduled before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources previously announced for June 24, 2010, at 9:30 a.m., has been rescheduled and will now be held on Thursday, July 1, 2010, at 9:30 a.m., in room SD- 366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony on S. 3452, a bill to designate the Valles Caldera National Preserve as a unit of the National Park System, and for other purposes. Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150, or by e-mail to testimony@energy.senate.gov. For further information, please contact David Brooks or Allison Seyferth. committee on rules and administration

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, the U.S. Virgin Islands is an unincorporated territory of the United States that was acquired from Denmark in 1917. It is one of only two United States territories which does not have a locally adopted constitution to provide for basic governmental organization and operations. Instead, the Virgin Islands government operates under the Revised Organic Act of 1954, as amended, a Federal law written by Congress (48 U.S.C. 1541-1645). In 1976, to enhance local self-government, Congress enacted Public Law 94-584, which, as amended, authorizes the people of the Virgin Islands to convene a constitutional convention and draft a constitution. The law provides for two consecutive 60-day periods for Presidential and Congressional review. Upon receiving a proposed constitution from the President, Congress may approve, modify, or amend the document by joint resolution, but if Congress does not act within its 60 legislative day review period, then the constitution is deemed approved by Congress. If Congress approves the proposed constitution, or passes modifications or amendments, it then goes before the Virgin Islands voters to be accepted or rejected in a referendum. Since 1964, the people of the Virgin Islands have attempted five times to write a constitution, but previous efforts have been unsuccessful. On December 31, 2009, the Governor of the Virgin Islands submitted a proposed constitution drafted by the Fifth Constitutional Convention to President Obama, and it was transmitted to Congress with administration comments. The end of the 60 legislative day Congressional review period is June 30. In his February 26, 2010, message to Congress, President Obama attached the proposed constitution and a memorandum of the Justice Department which noted that several features of the proposed constitution warranted comment: 1, the absence of an express recognition of United States sovereignty and the supremacy of Federal law; 2, provisions for a special election on the Virgin Islands territorial status; 3, provisions conferring legal advantages on certain groups defined by place and timing of birth, timing of residency, or ancestry; 4, residence requirements for certain offices; 5, provisions guaranteeing legislative representation of certain geographic areas; 6, provisions addressing territorial waters and marine resources; 7, imprecise language on certain provisions of the proposed constitution's bill of rights; 8, the possible need to repeal of certain Federal laws if the proposed United States Virgin Islands constitution is adopted; and 9, the effect of congressional action or inaction on the proposed constitution. I refer you to the President's message and DOJ memorandum in the March 1, 2010, Congressional Record, page S856. Both in the memorandum and in testimony on May 19 before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, the Justice Department recommended that ``the provisions conferring legal advantages on certain groups defined by place and timing of birth, timing of residency, or ancestry. . .'' Item 3 above--be removed from the constitution and that consideration be given to shortening the resilence requirements for certain officers--item 4--and to revising the provisions concerning territorial waters and marine resources--item 6. I am pleased to join with the ranking member of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Senator Murkowski, in introducing this resolution to provide for the reconsideration and revision of the proposed constitution of the Virgin Islands to correct provisions that are inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution and Federal law. More specifically, the resolution would amend P.L. 94-584, as amended, to provide that Congress may urge the convention to reconvene, but following reconsideration and revision of the proposed constitution, it would not be sent back to Congress for review. Instead, the U.S. President would have 60 calendar days to provide administration comments to the Governor and Congress, and to publish those comments in the Federal Register. Then, the revised proposed constitution would be submitted to the voters for approval or disapproval. If the Constitutional Convention fails to reconvene, or if the convention fails to make revisions, then there will be no referendum of approval or disapproval of the proposed constitution by the voters of the Virgin Islands, and this process ends. It is challenging for Congress to act within the 60 legislative day review period as established by P.L. 94-584, as amended, ending June 30. The approach taken in this resolution to respond to the Federal concerns raised with the proposed constitution has been reached in consultation with counsel for the Virgin Islands Convention, and with the Delegate and Governor of the Virgin Islands. While there were differing views on how Congress should proceed, I appreciate the cooperation and commitment of all involved in working out this consensus approach. There are few more solemn duties in government than that of developing and adopting a constitution. I commend the delegates to the Virgin Islands Constitutional Convention for their effort and their commitment to this solemn duty. I also urge them to carefully consider the issues raised by the President and Congress and to revise the proposed constitution by removing or amending those provisions that are in conflict with the U.S. Constitution. For generations, the people of the Virgin Islands have been a part of the United States political family and together we share allegiance to our Nation and to the principles enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. Under this resolution, the delegates will have the choice of conforming the proposed constitution to these shared principles or of endorsing the conflicts between the proposed constitution and the U.S. Constitution. Endorsing these conflicts will most certainly result in either disapproval of the proposed constitution by the voters of the Virgin Islands, or years of litigation that will eventually strike down these provisions. I urge the delegates to take this rare opportunity to bring closure to the process--to make the needed revisions and to be remembered for their leadership in bringing a constitution to the people of the Virgin Islands.