Minority Serving Institution Digital and Wireless Technology Opportunity Act of 2003

Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the managers' amendment be agreed to on S. 196.

Mr. President, Senator McCain, the chairman of the Commerce Committee, is tied up right now, but I thank him for his thoughtful leadership and his continued effort and dedication on this important bipartisan measure.

I rise today to respectfully urge my colleagues to support S. 196, the minority-serving institution Digital and Wireless Technology Opportunity Act of 2003. This legislation will provide vital resources to address the technology gap that exists at many minority-serving institutions. It establishes a new grant program within the National Science Foundation that provides annually for 5 years up to $250 million to help historically black colleges and universities, Hispanic serving institutions, and tribal colleges to close what is often called the digital divide, when, in fact, what it really is is an ``economic opportunity divide.''

Since the days before I was elected to the Senate, my goal was to look for ways to improve education and empower all our young people, regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, religious beliefs, or their economic background, so that they can compete and succeed in life.

Additionally, I strongly believe we need to embrace the advancements and innovations in technology--especially as a means to provide greater opportunities or security for Americans.

In my view, increasing access to technology provides our young people with an important tool for success, both in the classroom and in the workforce.

We all know that the best jobs in the future will go to those who are the best prepared. However, I am increasingly concerned that when it comes to high-technology jobs, which pay higher wages, this country runs the risk of economically limiting many college students in our society. It is important for all Americans that we close this opportunity gap.

Now, we know the demand for workers with skills in science and technology continues to grow. Unfortunately, since 1996, the number of bachelor degrees awarded in the physical sciences has dropped 29 percent, mathematics is down 19 percent, and engineering is down 21 percent.

We also know that information technology companies are still relying on H-1B visas and using foreign workers to fill important IT jobs and positions. I want to be clear that I am not against legal immigration, but I say let's properly educate and train Americans so they can get those good high-technology jobs.

Now, minority-serving institutions, when one looks at them, still lack desired information and digital technology infrastructure in many cases. I encourage my colleagues to read the Commerce Committee report findings on minority-serving institutions' technology deficiencies.

I will share with you some of the pertinent facts from this report and, in particular, a study completed by the Department of Commerce and the National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education, which indicated, among other facts, that no historically black college or university requires computer ownership for their undergraduate students; 13 HBCUs reported having no students--not one--owning their own personal computer; over 70 percent of the students at historically black colleges and universities rely on the college or the university to provide computers, but only 50 percent of those universities can provide their students with access to computers and computer labs, libraries, classrooms, or other locations; most of these minority- serving colleges do not have the private foundation resources to provide financial support to upgrade their network infrastructure.

So it is not surprising that most HBCUs do not have high-speed Internet access, especially the desired ATM or asynchronous transfer mode technology and that only 3 percent of historically black colleges and universities have financial aid available to help students close the computer ownership gap.

Access to the Internet is no longer a luxury, it is a necessity. Because of the rapid advancement and growing dependence on technology, being technologically proficient has become more essential to educational achievement. The fact is, 60 percent of all jobs require information technology skills. Jobs in information technology pay significantly higher salaries than jobs in the noninformation technology fields. Thus, students who lack access to these information technology tools are at an increasing disadvantage. Consequently, it is vitally important that all institutions of higher education provide their students with access to the most current IT and digital equipment. It would also help those universities to attract professors if they have that equipment to help them impart that knowledge to their students.

This proposed technology program will allow eligible historically black colleges and universities, Hispanic-serving institutions, and tribal institutions the opportunity to acquire equipment, networking capability, hardware and software, digital network technology, and wireless technology and infrastructure, such as wireless fidelity, or Wi-Fi, to develop and provide educational services. Additionally, the funds in this bill could be used to offer students much needed universal access to campus networks, dramatically increasing their connectivity rates or make necessary infrastructure improvements.

At the request of some of my colleagues, we recently added provisions to assure that diversity among these minority serving institutions includes public and private colleges and universities, both 2-year and 4-year institutions, and public and private postsecondary technical institutions.

Under Chairman McCain's leadership, and with the ranking member, Senator Hollings, and colleagues from across the aisle, the Commerce Committee heard testimony from the presidents of various colleges and universities representing each of the major national associations--the Hispanics Association of Colleges and Universities, the American Indian Higher Education Consortium, National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education, the United Negro College Fund, and also we heard specifically from former Congressman Floyd Flake, who is president of Wilberforce University; and Dr. Marie McDemmond, president of Norfolk State University; Dr. William DeLauder, president of Delaware State; Dr. Ricardo Fernandez, president of Herbert Lehman College in New York; and Dr. Cary Monette, president of Turtle Mountain Community College testified in support of S. 196.

In testimony before the committee, it was estimated that in 10 years minorities will comprise nearly 40 percent of all college-age Americans. One-third of all African Americans with undergraduate degrees, earned them from an HBCU. According to the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities, their institutions educate two-thirds of the 1.6 million Hispanic Americans enrolled in higher education today.

There are over 200 Hispanic Serving Institutions; over 100 Historically Black Colleges and Universities and 34 tribal colleges throughout our country.

It is clear that minority-serving institutions in the United States are providing a valuable service to the educational strength and future growth of our Nation. And these institutions must upgrade their technology capabilities for their students.

I am proud to say Virginia is home to 5 HBCUs--Norfolk State University, St. Paul's College, Virginia Union University, Hampton University, and Virginia State University.

I will continue to look for ways to improve education, create new jobs, and seek out new opportunities to benefit the people of my Commonwealth and indeed our entire Nation. By improving technology- education programs in minority-serving institutions, we can accomplish all three of these goals for students throughout our Nation.

S. 196 is also supported by the technology industry--The Information Technology Association of America; Computer Associates International; Oracle; Gateway Computers; BearingPoint Technologies; and Motorola all support this measure.

We all recognize the technology requirements on the 21st century workforce call for tangible action, not rhetoric. Our future economic and national security needs depend on and demand that all of our eager young students have the highly technical skills needed to compete and succeed in the workforce.

We must tap the underutilized talent of our minority serving institutions to ensure that America's workforce is prepared to lead the world.

I thank my colleagues for joining me today. I thank the chairman of our committee, Senator McCain, and other sponsors of this measure, including Senators Stevens, Hollings, Miller, Warner, DeWine, Santorum, Talent, Cochran, Grassley, Hutchison, Sessions, Graham of South Carolina, the occupant of the chair, Fitzgerald, Lott, Domenici, Campbell, Kerry, Bingaman, Daschle, Murkowski, and Johnson.

I also thank our former colleague, Max Cleland, for his work last year on a measure that is similar to what we will soon be voting on. I thank Floyd DesChamps of the Commerce Committee staff, who has done a great job, and my staff, Frank Cavaliere.

Indeed, this legislation is a significant, constructive, and positive action to ensure that many more of our college students are provided access to better technology and education; and most importantly, even greater opportunities in life. And, with the passage of this bill, we will close the opportunity gap. We will leave no college student behind.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, we were supposed to vote on this measure at noon. There is a question of whether or not we will be voting at noon. There is a Holocaust Memorial Service at noon. At this moment, until we determine how we are going to correlate all of that, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that all time be yielded back on S. 196. I believe all Senators--and I thank those who have spoken in favor of this legislation: Senators McCain, Talent, Durbin, and Lott, as well as myself--who wanted to speak on the legislation have.

Madam President, I yield back all time on S. 196. I also ask unanimous consent that the vote occur on passage at 1:30 p.m. today.

I say to the Senator from Nevada, that is correct. Due to the Holocaust Memorial and a variety of other things that have arisen at noon, the vote will be at 1:30. But it will be held open. It will not be a 15-minute vote. The vote will undoubtedly stay open for at least a half an hour. And at 2 o'clock there is the top-secret briefing with those officials from Defense.

Madam President, I think that would be the intention. It is not just a Republican or Democrat scheduling conflict, and it will not be a 15-minute vote as such. It will be held open until all Members who are going to be here have an opportunity to vote on this measure.

Madam President, I say to the Senator from Nevada, that is under consideration. I do not have the authority to make that decision. I suspect there will not be many people here. There are a variety of things people need to do. And I certainly want to listen to Secretary Wolfowitz, but at this point I do not have the authority to make that decision. All I can say is, being patron of this measure, I want to make sure everyone is allowed to vote on it, and the vote will be held open.

Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays on final passage.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill that represents an important step towards the goal of addressing the threats posed by global climate change. I am pleased to be joined on this bill by Senator Jeffords and Senator Lieberman. They were cosponsors of this legislation in the 107th Congress, they are recognized environmental leaders in the Senate, and are long-standing, outspoken advocates for taking action to mitigate climate change. I appreciate their help in introducing this legislation today.

Climate change is a complex issue. Scientifically. Economically. Politically. But complexity is no excuse for inattention or inaction. Because the health and viability of the global ecosystems upon which we all depend are at stake. And the time to act is now.

In 2001, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released its Third Assessment Report. That report shows that climate change science is increasingly clear and alarming. We know that human activities, primarily fossil fuel combustion, have raised the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide to the highest levels in the last 420,000 years. We know that the planet is warming, and that the balance of the scientific evidence suggests that most of the recent warming can be attributed to increased atmospheric greenhouse gas levels. We know that without concerted action by the U.S. and other countries, greenhouse gases will continue to increase.

These findings were echoed by a National Academy Sciences report published later in 2001, which concluded that: ``Greenhouse gases are accumulating in Earth's atmosphere as a result of human activities, causing surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures to rise. Temperatures are, in fact, rising. The changes observed over the last several decades are likely mostly due to human activities, but we cannot rule out that some significant part of these changes is also a reflection of natural variability. . . . ``Despite the uncertainties, there is general agreement that the observed warming is real and particularly strong within the past 20 years.''

Climate science and climate modeling have improved. These models predict warming under all scenarios that have been considered. Even the smallest warming predicted by current models, 2.5 degrees Fahrenheit over the next century, would represent the greatest rate of increase in global mean surface temperature in the last 10,000 years.

If these trends continue, the results may be devastating. People in my State of New Jersey treasure their Jersey Shore. With the exception of the 50 mile northern border with New York, New Jersey is surrounded by water. The State's Atlantic coastline stretches 127 miles. Fourteen of 21 counties have estuarine or marine shorelines. Rising sea level is already having adverse impacts, by exacerbating coastal erosion, and causing inundation, flooding, and saline intrusions into ground water. The NJ coastal area also supports one of New Jersey's largest industries, tourism.

Sea level is rising more rapidly along the US coast than worldwide. Studies by EPA and others have estimated that along the Gulf and Atlantic coasts, a one-foot rise in the sea level is likely by 2050 and could occur as soon as 2025. In the next century, a two-foot rise is most likely but a four-foot rise is possible. The implications for New Jersey and many other coastal States are potentially very significant. I am concerned about this impact. And I am concerned about other climate change impacts across New Jersey, the country and the globe.

The time for inaction and delay is over. We need to take steps today to start dealing with this issue. This bill is a modest step. But I think it's an important one, and it's one that I believe we should be able to act on during the 108th Congress.

The main provisions of the bill establish a system that would require companies to estimate and report their emissions of greenhouse gases, and a place where companies can register greenhouse gas emissions reductions. In addition, the bill would require an annual report on U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. I'd like to go through each of these components in more detail.

First, the bill requires EPA to work with the Secretaries of Energy, Commerce and Agriculture, as well as the private sector and non- governmental organizations to establish a greenhouse gas emission information system. For the purposes of the bill, greenhouse gases are carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride. EPA is directed to establish threshold quantities for each of these gases. The threshold quantities will trigger the requirement for a company to report to the system, and are included to enable EPA to exclude most small businesses from the reporting requirements.

Companies that emit more than a threshold quantity of each gas will be required to report their emissions on an annual basis to EPA. The requirements will be phased in, beginning with direct, stationary source emissions in 2004. The following year, in 2005, companies subject to the reporting requirements will need to submit to EPA estimates of other types of greenhouse gas

emissions, such as process emissions, fugitive emissions, mobile source emissions, forest product-sensor emissions, and indirect emissions from heat and steam. By reporting to the system, companies will be able to establish emissions baselines.

Perhaps more important than the reporting system is the greenhouse gas registry established by the bill. The bill requires EPA a greenhouse gas registry, which will enable companies to register greenhouse gas reductions. Many companies are voluntarily implementing projects to reduce emissions or sequester carbon. The registry would establish a place for companies to be able to put these projects on public record in a consistent and reliable way.

Taken together, these provisions of the bill will accomplish several important goals. First, they will create a reliable inventory of the sources of greenhouse gas emissions within our economy. But more importantly, these provisions will provide a powerful incentive for companies to continue to make voluntary greenhouse gas reductions. The reason is that the greenhouse registry will be a place where companies can register their greenhouse gas reductions in a consistent and uniform way. This will enable companies to publicly verify the actions they are taking to reduce their emissions. It also provides a place where farmers, ranchers and foresters can register their carbon sequestration projects. They can then trade these registered reductions with any companies that might wish to purchase them. This had the potential to create a new carbon market that our farmers can benefit from.

Prior efforts to provide ``future credits'' in a registry bill have run up against a Constitutional problem in that we cannot bind future Congresses in legislation. So the bill does not provide such credits, per se. But it does establish a robust and credible reporting system and registry. And if companies register their reductions in a strong registry, they will have as much assurance as we can provide them that their reductions will be taken into account if a mandatory greenhouse gas emission reduction program is enacted.

I believe that such a mandatory emissions reduction program will be necessary, and I already support such a program, for example, Senator Jeffords' Clean Power Act. I don't believe that a reporting and registry system such as I am proposing is a substitute for such a mandatory emissions reductions program. But a reporting and registry system is a necessary component of any such program, and is a step that Congress may be able to agree on now, despite differences of opinion about whether mandatory emissions reductions are necessary at this time. A greenhouse gas reporting system and registry is a step we ought to take now, because it would provide a structure that encourages companies to make voluntary reductions now. That's the main purpose of the bill.

In addition, the bill requires EPA to annually publish a U.S. greenhouse gas emissions inventory. This will be a national account of greenhouse gas emissions for our nation, and will incorporate the information submitted to the greenhouse gas information system and registry. EPA has issued a similar report for several years now, and this provision is intended to explicitly authorize and specify the scope of that report going forward.

I want to add that I think that many of the emissions measurement challenges have been worked out or are being worked out now. Many advances have been made in recent years, often in a cooperative way, with industry, environmental groups and governments at the table working towards measurement protocols, such as the GHG Protocol Initiative. It's my intent that in developing the systems and protocols developed under this bill that EPA take advantage of the best practices that have been and continue to be developed in this fashion.

I first introduced this bill in December 2001. Since that time, I think it's fair to say that the Bush Administration has done literally nothing of consequence to address the climate change threat. But I think that there are many in industry who disagree with the Bush policy. Last September 16, the Pew Center ran an ad in the Washington Post that was signed by 40 major companies, including energy producers such as American Electric Power, BP, Cinergy, Entergy, and Sunoco. In that ad, these companies stated their support for policies to ``disclose major sources of greenhouse gas emissions and recognize early action.'' In addition, ExxonMobil stated in their 2002 report, ``Corporate Citizenship in a Changing World,'' that they are ``working with governments and industry associations to promote development of procedures for mandatory reporting by all businesses, so that in the future we can report emissions for activities we operate and also those in which we share ownership with others.'' So there is a willingness on the part of many major U.S. corporations to move to emissions reporting. Congress needs to follow the leads of these companies.

I also want to note that I worked on a bipartisan greenhouse gas registry and reporting bill with Senator Brownback last year. That bill passed the Senate by voice vote as a Brownback-Corzine amendment to the Senate energy bill. While it did not require reporting immediately, it ensured robust participation in the reporting and registry system in the near future through a trigger mechanism. And while I preferred a mandatory system, and still do, I am primarily concerned with getting results. And the Brownback-Corzine approach had the support of the full Senate. So while I still prefer a mandatory system, as this bill would create, I remain willing and open to work with Senator Brownback on an alternative again in this Congress.

In closing, it's clear that it's up to Congress to lead on climate change. I urge my colleagues to work with me this Congress to create a credible greenhouse gas reporting and registry system that will encourage voluntary reductions. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I begin by congratulating Senator Allen for his very important work on this legislation. Senator Allen has long been an advocate of equal opportunity, but he has also displayed a great deal of expertise and knowledge on a number of

high-tech issues. As a member of the Commerce Committee, he has continuously displayed that leadership and worked actively, particularly on telecommunications and high-tech issues. So I commend him for his leadership and his commitment to this important legislation. He had a lot of help, but the fact is that Senator Allen was the leader in this legislation, and I thank him for his outstanding work. This legislation could provide an opportunity for those who would never have an opportunity in America to grow and to prosper and to take advantage of incredible opportunities that this legislation provides.

The Digital and Wireless Network Technology Act of 2003 would establish a $250 million per year program within the National Science Foundation for fiscal years 2004 to 2008. The purpose of the grant program is to help strengthen the ability of minority-serving institutions, which includes Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic-Serving Institutions, and tribal colleges and universities, to provide educational instructions through digital and wireless network technologies.

As we look at the scenes of the war in Iraq, we are amazed at the technological capabilities of our Armed Forces. They are able to do things that we simply were not available to do just a few years ago. Nevertheless, this superiority must be supplied with a constant supply of new technologies, which are the result of the Nation's investment in a research and development infrastructure.

During these times of economic slowdown and global threat, it is imperative that our Nation's institutions of higher education are prepared to produce a technologically advanced workforce. As the demographics of the Nation become more and more diverse, minority institutions of higher education take on an even greater importance. It is estimated that in 10 years, minorities will comprise 40 percent of the college-age Americans, the pool from which the Nation's future engineers and scientist will emerge.

Rita Colwell, Director of the National Science Foundation, stated in a letter earlier this year to new members of Congress that, ``. . . American science and technology is failing to tap a vast pool of talent among our women and ethnic minorities.'' In an effort to enable the Nation to tap this underutilized pool of future engineers and scientists, it is essentially to provide assistance to minority institutions. The hundreds of MSI's should be provided with the resources to ensure that we are indeed utilizing their large student populations.

The legislation before us is not the result of any special interest groups or highly financed lobbying efforts. It is based upon data provided by 80 of the 118 HBCUs in a study entitled, ``HBCU Technology Assessment Study,'' funded by the U.S. Department of Commerce and conducted by a national black college association and a minority business.

The study assessed the computing resources, networking, and connectivity of HBCUs and other institutions that provide educational services to predominately African-American populations.

The study concluded that [During this era of continuous innovation and change, continual upgrading of networking and connectivity systems is critical if HBCUs are to continue to cross the digital divide and not fall victim to it. Failure to do this may result in what is a manageable digital divide today, evolving into an unmanageable digital gulf tomorrow. Based upon testimony provided during the February hearing held by the Commerce Committee, we concluded that the findings from the study also would apply to Hispanic-serving institutions, and tribal colleges and universities.

This legislation builds upon the work begun by Senator Cleland and many others during the last Congress. In testimony before the Commerce Committee last year, the President of the United Negro College Fund, Congressman William Gray, stated that we can ill afford to promote college graduates who enter the workforce without mastering the basic computer skills and understanding how information technology applies to their work or profession.

This point was further illuminated by the Dr. Marie McDemmond, President of Norfolk State University, when she testified at the Commerce Committee's February hearing that over 175,000 foreign nationals have come to our country in efforts to fill quality, high paying jobs in science and technology, mainly because our own workforce does not possess the skills and training necessary to fill these essential jobs.

At the same hearing, other college presidents from the Nation's HBCU's Hispanic-serving institutions and Native-American schools also testified about the daunting task of building their technology infrastructure. While these problems apply to all of our Nation's universities, they are more severe at many of our minority-serving institutions. Within the State of Arizona, for example, many of the tribal colleges and universities and Hispanic-serving institutions are facing daily technical challenges of the new millennium. They struggle, as do many other institutions, to keep up with an ever-changing networking technology environment.

I again thank Senator Allen for his leadership on this important issue. I think he had it right when he said this bill is about closing an economic opportunity divide. In this case, it is a divide that exists primarily because of the difference in the educational base of our citizens which affects economic opportunities.

I especially thank Senator Allen for including the Hispanic and tribal institutions in this legislation. I remind my friend from Virginia that in my State of Arizona, one of the poorest areas of our Nation exists in northern Arizona on the Navajo Reservation, the largest Indian reservation by far in America. These Native Americans have been left behind, as well as have African Americans and Hispanics. I thank the Senator for including especially our Native Americans but also our Hispanic populations and institutions in this legislation.

Again, I congratulate him for his commitment in this time of economic difficulties and perhaps less opportunities, and because of that, he is making, I believe, a significant step forward.

I yield the floor.

It is all the same.

Mr. President, I want to take this opportunity to rise in support of what I consider to be very significant legislation, S. 196, the Minority Serving Institution Digital and Wireless Technology Opportunity Act of 2003.

We have a very important opportunity in this country to make sure our universities and colleges not only do a good job in education in general, but in particular in addressing the technology gap. We know in our Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Hispanic-serving Institutions and Tribal Colleges, our Native-Hawaiian-serving Institutions and Alaska-Native-serving Institutions, there is a digital divide. This legislation would create a new grant program within the National Science Foundation that provides up to $250 million to help these colleges and universities.

In my own State of Mississippi I decided a few years ago we were trying to shoot at too many targets and we were not hitting many of them. We were missing them or we were not doing enough to make a difference. So I concluded the best thing to do was try to get a targeted focus on where we were going to put our efforts and where we were going to put our money. Those areas have been education, transportation--which can also be referred to as infrastructure, and jobs. It is not just about highways and bridges, it is also about ports and harbors and railroads and aviation, the whole package, as well as industrial sites where you can have the physical and technological infrastructure and roads that lead to jobs.

So education, transportation, and jobs are critical all over this country and in my own State, which has been one that has struggled for years to have advancement in education and economic opportunity.

I think this legislation is really important in helping to provide the up-to-date technological education that today's society demands. As we focus on education, not only at the higher education level where the Federal Government plays a critical role, but also when you look at what we need to do in kindergarten, and elementary, and secondary education--if you are going to have the whole package, you have to make sure our young people have access to a good education that allows them to read and write and do basic arithmetic. Furthermore, they must be able to perform these basic skills at the fifth grade level, at the eighth grade level, and in high school, but then be able to get into a community college, some sort of a vocational training program, or our colleges and universities, and when they get there that they will have the tools and resources that they need.

It is fair to say I am from the generation that has been struggling with technology and computers. We are sort of computer illiterates. Yet we see our children who are able to do astonishing things because they have had the exposure to the new technology.

We have to make sure that the Nation's focus applies not only to our major colleges and universities in America that primarily get the students who make very high scores on the SATs, but we also have to make sure all students--whether they attend a private university or college or a State university or our historically Black or other minority institutions--have access to good education and what is needed in the technology field. Not just computers, but the whole high-tech area.

My own State of Mississippi is home to roughly 9 percent of the Nation's Historically Black Colleges and Universities. I am pleased to be able to recognize these great eight schools in Mississippi: Alcorn State University, Coahoma Community College, Hinds Community College-- Utica, Jackson State University, Mary Holmes College, Mississippi Valley State University, Rust College and Tougaloo College.

I am happy to be a cosponsor of the minority serving institution Digital and Wireless Technology Opportunity Act of 2003, because it provides another opportunity to help expand the digital and telecommunications infrastructure at the Historically Black Colleges and Universities in Mississippi. I always pay careful attention to legislation that could be beneficial for higher education institutions in my state. In fact, earlier this year, I cosponsored an amendment to the omnibus appropriations bill for fiscal year 2003 that authorizes additional funding for grants to preserve and restore historic buildings at Historically Black Colleges and Universities.

Additionally, I would like to note an example of my ongoing commitment to assist Mississippi's Historically Black Colleges and Universities in bridging the technology gap. In 2001, I worked with Allstate Insurance in their $17 million donation of a facility to establish the Mississippi e-Center at Jackson State. The e-Center is an impressive state-of-the-art complex with advanced computing and network infrastructure, and information technology faculty and support staff. Through the e-Center, Jackson State is able to fulfill its educational mission and leverage its unique strengths in the areas of remote sensing, engineering, and science and technology. I am also pleased to report that Jackson State is the only Historically Black College or University in the Nation with three supercomputers. We are making strides in Mississippi to provide all our students with access to information technology, but the Nation still has much progress to make when it comes to providing these opportunities to our minority serving institutions of higher learning and all Americans.

It is clear that while our minority serving institutions of higher learning stand ready to drive from the ``on ramp'' onto the Information Superhighway, they still lag far behind other universities in America when adjusting to the new technological innovations and changes on the forefront, such as third generation technology. I urge the passage of this legislation today so that we can hand some of America's best institutions of higher learning the technology keys they need to compete with their peers.

I yield the floor.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Murkowski.) Who yields time?

Mr. President, I would like to thank Senator Allen for bringing this legislation, S. 196, to the floor today. As many of you know, this bill had its genesis with our former colleague, Senator Max Cleland.

Senator Cleland knew that access to the Internet is no longer a luxury, but a necessity, and he wanted to make sure that all of our institutions of higher learning could provide their students with access to the most current technologies. That is why he introduced this legislation last Congress and I am glad that Senator Allen and I can bring Senator Cleland's vision to fruition today.

After all, according to a 2000 study, African Americans, Hispanics, and Native Americans constitute one-quarter of the total U.S. workforce and 30 percent of the college-age population. Yet, members of these minorities comprise only 7 percent of the U.S. computer and information science labor force; 6 percent of the engineering workforce; and less than 2 percent of the computer science faculty. These statistics are all the more important because 60 percent of all jobs require information technology skills. Furthermore, jobs in information technology pay significantly higher salaries than jobs in noninformation technology fields.

So you can see, technology is rapidly advancing and we are increasingly growing dependent on it. Being digitally connected is becoming ever more critical to economic and educational advancement. Now that a multitude of Americans regularly use the Internet to conduct daily activities, people who lack access to these tools are at an increasing disadvantage. Consequently, it is crucial that all institutions of higher education provide their students with access to the most current information technology.

Unfortunately, however, due to economic constraints, many minority- serving institutions are unable to provide adequate access to the Internet and other information technology tools and applications. According to a 2000 study completed by the Department of Commerce and the National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education, while 98 percent of Historically Black Colleges and Universities, HBCUs, have a campus network, half of

those surveyed did not have computers available in the location most accessible to students, their dormitories. Additionally, most HBCUs do not have high-speed connectivity to the Internet, and only 3 percent of these colleges and university indicated that financial aid was available to help their students close the computer ownership gap.

While minority-serving institutions are making progress in upgrading their network capacity, progress is not quick enough. In his testimony before the Commerce Committee on February 13, 2003, Dr. Ricardo Fernandez, president of Herbert H. Lehman College in New York City explained the challenge these institutions face:

At my own institution . . . we are struggling to provide

network access to students and faculty. Providing fiber and

copper cabling, switches, and routers to every building and

classroom is simply very expensive for us and cost

prohibitive. . . . At the pace that we are moving, the

technology we are installing may well be obsolete before the

project is finished.

S. 196, the Digital and Wireless Technology Program Act of 2003, seeks to help institutions such as Lehman College or the eight eligible South Carolina colleges and universities by authorizing a program at the National Science Foundation to bring digital technologies to minority-serving institutions. These funds could be used for a variety of activities from campus wiring, to equipment upgrades, and to technology training. We need to pass this bill now so these colleges and universities--and their students--don't have to wait until the technology is obsolete before they get it.

Working with Senator Allen and Senator McCain, we have made several changes to the bill before we brought it to the floor. At the request of the HELP Committee, we have clarified that training grants under S. 196 would be used for technology-related training and professional development. By narrowing the scope of the training, however, we do not think we would narrow the scope of the bill. Infrastructure projects like wiring classrooms or dorms could still be eligible for funding under this bill if they fit into an overall program to strengthen an institution's technological capacity.

We have also tried to address some concerns about the NSF's peer review process. I have said it before, peer review is all well and good--if you are one of the peers. Too often, the institutions that S. 196 is trying to serve are left out of NSF's peer review process. We hope that NSF, working with the advisory council established under section 4, will develop a fair and equitable process for reviewing these grants. To that end, we have added a requirement that any peer review panel should include members from eligible institutions.

Finally, we have instructed NSF to review the program with an eye toward insuring that grant recipients have demonstrated the need for this assistance so that we can address the most trenchant problems first. In addition, the grants should go to a wide variety of institutions, large and small, throughout the country.

I thank Senator Allen and Senator McCain for helping us move this legislation. I thank the staff who worked on this bill, particularly Allison McMahan, Chan Lieu, and Jean Toal Eisen of my Commerce Committee staff and Floyd DesChamps of the majority staff. Moreover, I commend my friend Max Cleland for bringing this issue to the Senate's attention. I look forward to the passage of S. 196.