Protecting American Goods and Services Act of 2005

Mr. President, I want to take a moment to speak about H.R. 32, the Stop Counterfeiting in Manufactured Goods Act of 2005, sponsored by Representative Knollenberg and 59 House cosponsors. The counterfeiting of goods bearing American held trademarks is an important problem that I am committed to fighting, as reflected by my sponsoring S. 1699, the Senate companion bill to H.R. 32, earlier this year with Senator Leahy and Senators Alexander, Bayh, Brownback, Coburn, Cornyn, DeWine, Durbin, Feingold, Feinstein, Hatch, Kyl, Levin, Reed, Stabenow, and Voinovich.

H.R. 32, the Stop Counterfeiting in Manufactured Goods Act of 2005 addresses a problem that has reached epidemic proportions as a result of a loophole in our criminal code: the trafficking in counterfeit labels. Criminal law currently prohibits the trafficking in counterfeit trademarks ``on or in connection with goods or services.'' However, it does not prohibit the trafficking in the counterfeit marks themselves. As such, there is nothing in current law to prohibit an individual from selling counterfeit labels bearing otherwise protected trademarks within the United States.

This loophole was exposed by the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals in United States v. Giles, 213 F.3d 1247 (10th Cir. 2000). In this case, the United States prosecuted the defendant for manufacturing and selling counterfeit Dooney & Bourke labels that third parties could later affix to generic purses. Examining title 18, section 2320, of the United States Code, the Tenth Circuit held that persons who sell counterfeit trademarks that are not actually attached to any ``goods or services'' do not violate the Federal criminal trademark infringement statute. Since the defendant did not attach counterfeit marks to ``goods or services,'' the court found that the defendant did not run afoul of the criminal statute as a matter of law. Thus, someone caught redhanded with counterfeit trademarks walked free.

H.R. 32 closes this loophole by amending title 18, section 2320 of the United States Code to criminally prohibit the trafficking, or attempt to traffic, in ``labels, patches, stickers'' and generally any item to which a counterfeit mark has been applied. In so doing, H.R. 32 provides U.S. Department of Justice prosecutors with the means not only to prosecute individuals trafficking in counterfeit goods or services, but also individuals trafficking in labels, patches, and the like that are later applied to goods.

Congress must act expeditiously to protect U.S. held trademarks to the fullest extent of the law. The recent 10-count indictment of four Massachusetts residents of conspiracy to traffic in approximately $1.4 million of counterfeit luxury goods in the case of U.S. v. Luong et al., 2005 D. Mass. underscores the need for this legislation. According to the indictment, law enforcement officers raided self-storage units earlier this year and found the units to hold approximately 12,231 counterfeit handbags; 7,651 counterfeit wallets; more than 17,000 generic handbags and wallets; and enough counterfeit labels and medallions to turn more than

50,000 generic handbags and wallets into counterfeits. Although the U.S. Attorneys Office was able to pursue charges of trafficking and attempting to traffic in counterfeit handbags and wallets, they were not able to bring charges for trafficking and attempting to traffic in the more than 50,000 counterfeit labels and medallions. As such, these defendants will escape prosecution that would have otherwise been illegal if they had only been attached to an otherwise generic bag. This simply does not make sense. Had the Stop Counterfeiting in Manufactured Goods Act of 2005 been in effect at the time of indictment, U.S. prosecutors would have been able to bring charges against the defendants for trafficking and attempting to traffic in not only counterfeit goods, but also counterfeit labels.

As Assistant Attorney General Alice Fisher said:

Those who manufacture and sell counterfeit goods steal

business from honest merchants, confuse or defraud honest

consumers, and illegally profit on the backs of honest

American workers and entrepreneurs.

This point is underscored by the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection estimate that trafficking in counterfeit goods costs the United States approximately $200 to $250 million annually. With each passing year, the United States loses millions of dollars in tax revenues to the sale of counterfeit goods. Further, each counterfeit item that is manufactured overseas and distributed in the United States costs American workers tens of thousands of jobs. With counterfeit goods making up a growing 5 to 7 percent of world trade, this is a problem that we can no longer ignore.

To be sure, counterfeiting is not limited to the popular designer goods that we have all seen sold on corners of just about every major metropolitan city in the United States. Counterfeiting has a devastating impact on a broad range of industries. In fact, for almost every legitimate product manufactured and sold within the United States, there is a parallel counterfeit product being sold for no more than half the price. These counterfeit products range from children's toys to clothing to Christmas tree lights. More frightening are the thousands of counterfeit automobile parts, batteries, and electrical equipment that are being manufactured and placed into the stream of commerce with each passing day. I am told that the level of sophistication in counterfeiting has reached the point that you can no longer distinguish between the real and the counterfeit good or label with the naked eye. However, just because these products look the same does not mean that they have the same quality characteristics. The counterfeit products are not subject to the same quality controls of legitimate products, resulting in items that are lower in quality and likely to fall apart. In fact, counterfeit products could potentially kill unsuspecting American consumers.

In addition to closing the ``counterfeit label loophole,'' the Stop Counterfeiting in Manufactured Goods Act strengthens the criminal code and provides heightened penalties for those trafficking in counterfeit marks. Current law does not provide for the seizure and forfeiture of counterfeit trademarks, whether they are attached to goods or not. Therefore, many times such counterfeit goods are seized one day, only to be returned and sold to an unsuspecting public. To ensure that individuals engaging in the practice of trafficking in counterfeit marks cannot reopen their doors, H.R. 32 establishes procedures for the mandatory seizure, forfeiture, and destruction of counterfeit marks prior to a conviction. Further, it provides for procedures for the mandatory forfeiture and destruction of property derived from or used to engage in the trafficking of counterfeit marks.

When this legislation was sent over to the Senate from the House, concerns were raised to Senator Leahy and myself about the language in Section 2(bbb)(1)(B) of this bill pertaining to the forfeiture authority of the U.S. Department of Justice. In focusing our attention to this section, we discussed the scope of the facilitation language, which parallels the drug and money laundering forfeiture language in 21 U.S.C. 853 and 18 U.S.C. 982, respectively, and how it might relate to Internet marketplace companies, search engines, and ISPs. Specifically, we were aware of concerns regarding the potential misapplication of the facilitation language in Section 2(b)(1)(B) to pursue forfeiture and seizure proceedings against responsible Internet marketplace companies that serve as third-party intermediaries to online transactions.

I say to Senator Leahy, as the Senator is aware, periodically Congress directs the Sentencing Commission to update the Federal sentencing guidelines upon the periodic directive of Congress to reflect and account for changes in the manner in which intellectual property offenses are committed. The recent amendments to which you refer were promulgated by the Sentencing Commission pursuant to the authorization in the Family Entertainment and Copyright Act of 2005, also known as FECA. These amendments to the Federal sentencing guidelines, which took effect on October 24, 2005, address changes in penalties and definitions for intellectual property rights crimes, particularly those involving copyrighted pre-release works and issues surrounding ``uploading.'' For example, these guidelines provide for a 25 percent increase in sentences for offenses involving pre-release works. In addition, the Commission revised its definition of ``uploading'' to ensure that the guidelines are keeping up with technological advances in this area.

I would like to make it clear for the record that the directive to the Sentencing Commission in section 3 of H.R. 32 is not meant as disapproval of the Commission's recent actions in response to FECA. Rather, section 3 covers other intellectual property rights crimes that Congress believes it is time for the Commission to revisit. Specifically, section 3 directs the Commission to review the guidelines, and particularly the definition of ``infringement amount,'' to ensure that offenses involving low-cost items like labels, patches, medallions, or packaging that are used to make counterfeit goods that are much more expensive, are properly punished. It also directs the Commission to ensure that the penalty provisions for offenses involving all counterfeit goods or services, or devices used to facilitate counterfeiting, are properly addressed by the guidelines. As it did in response to the No

Electronic Theft Act of 1997 and FECA, I am confident that the Commission will ensure that the Federal sentencing guidelines provide adequate punishment and deterrence for these very serious offenses and I look forward to the Commission's response to this directive.

At this point, I would like to take this opportunity to thank Representative Jim Sensenbrenner, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and Representative Joe Knollenberg for their leadership in the House with regard to H.R. 32. In January of 2005, Representative Knollenberg introduced H.R. 32 in the House. When the bill was in committee, he fostered negotiations between the Department of Justice, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the International Trademark Association to ensure that it passed the House. I would also like to thank my colleague Senator Leahy, ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Senators Alexander, Bayh, Brownback, Coburn, Cornyn, DeWine, Durbin, Feingold, Feinstein, Hatch, Kyl, Levin, Reed, Stabenow, and Voinovich for their cosponsorship of S. 1699, the companion legislation to H.R. 32. It is through the hard work of all of these Members that we were able to achieve truly bipartisan support for language that will ensure the protection of American-held trademarks.

Mr. President, this week world leaders are meeting at the United Nations to reaffirm the commitments made five years ago under the United Nations Millennium Declaration, including the commitment to halt and begin to reverse by the year 2015 the spread of HIV/AIDs, malaria, and other major diseases that claim the lives of millions of people around the world every year. We still have a long way to go if we are going to meet this challenge.

AIDS, which has already claimed the lives of 20 million people, continues to be the leading cause of premature death in sub-Saharan Africa. An estimated 39 million people worldwide are infected with HIV. Last year alone, 4.9 million people were newly infected with HIV, and 3.1 million died. For years, the epidemic was focused on sub-Saharan Africa, but now HIV is spreading fastest in Central Europe and in parts of Asia.

Although the AIDS pandemic has gripped the world's notice, other diseases such as malaria and tuberculosis have drawn less attention-- but they too are deadly, particularly for those in the world's poorest countries. Malaria claims the lives of a million people annually, many of them young children; ninety percent of these deaths occur among people living in sub-Saharan Africa. Tuberculosis, once thought to be eradicated, has reemerged in new and more drug resistant strains. An estimated 1.7 million people now die annually from TB. Because those living

with HIV or AIDS are particularly vulnerable, the number of TB cases has been growing rapidly in sub-Saharan Africa and Central Europe.

Taken together HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria kill over 5 million people annually. A human crisis of this proportion demands that we respond with urgency and thoughtfulness. We must continue to support robust prevention, treatment and care programs. But we must also recognize that vaccines are the most effective weapons in the arsenal of modern medicine to stop the threat of AIDS and other infectious diseases that are decimating the developing world. Pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, however, are reluctant to invest in research for vaccines for these diseases because they fear that the market will not be lucrative enough to cover the costs of research and development

The bill that I am introducing today, Vaccines for the New Millennium Act of 2005, is designed to address this problem by providing incentives for these companies to accelerate their efforts to develop vaccines and microbicides to prevent HIV/AIDS, TB, malaria and other neglected diseases. It builds upon legislation that I introduced in 2001 with Senator Frist. I am pleased that the Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Lugar, is joining me in introducing this new, expanded bill.

The bill provides a variety of economic incentives. First, it mandates that the Secretary of the Treasury enter into negotiations with the World Bank, the International Development Association, the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunizations, and other interested parties in order to establish advanced market commitments, AMCs, for the purchase of vaccines and microbicides to combat neglected diseases. Research has shown that the major obstacle to the development of vaccines for these diseases is the absence of a market because these diseases hit hardest in poor countries that cannot afford to buy the vaccines. Advanced market commitments AMCs are designed to remove this obstacle by creating the market ahead of time. AMCs would be legally binding contracts to purchase a vaccine or microbicide at a fair market price for a guaranteed number of treatments, thereby creating a market incentive for a company to invest in the development and production of vaccines for these diseases. The international framework for the AMCs would also include clearly defined requirements for eligible vaccines to ensure that they are safe and effective as well as clearly defined and transparent rules of competition. The bill also mandates that the Secretary establish a purchase fund in the Treasury as soon as a vaccine to combat one of these diseases is available.

Second, the bill supplements the market incentive with a variety of tax incentives designed to provide appropriate and equitable incentives to both large pharmaceutical and small private sector companies to stimulate vaccine development. The bill provides a 30 percent tax credit each year on qualified research expenses to develop microbicides for HIV and vaccines for HIV, TB, malaria and other neglected diseases that kill more than 1 million people annually. This is an expansion of the existing R&D tax credit and can be applied to clinical trials outside of the United States, since the majority of those infected with these diseases are beyond our borders.

It provides a refundable tax credit to small biotechnology companies based on the amount of qualified research that they do in a given year. This credit is designed to stimulate research among the firms that are the most innovative and to ensure that assistance is given to those small companies that need it the most. Increased research efforts by these firms could be instrumental to the effort to develop effective vaccines for neglected diseases, particularly for HIV/AIDS.

And it provides a 100 percent tax credit on contracts and other arrangements for research and development of these vaccines and microbicides. This credit, which is an increase over the 65 percent credit now in the tax code, is designed to serve as an incentive to larger pharmaceutical companies to work hand in hand with the smaller biotech companies to pick up the pace of vaccine development.

Once vaccines are developed, it is imperative that they be widely distributed. The bill that I am introducing today with Senator Lugar also addresses the distribution side of the equation. It provides a 100 percent tax credit to companies on the sales of new vaccines and microbicides as long as those sales are made to a qualified international health organization or foreign government for distribution in developing countries

Finally, the bill sets up a pilot program under the Small Business Act to encourage the development of vaccines and microbicides by eligible companies under the auspices of the Small Business Innovation Research, SBIR, and the Small Business Technology Transfer, STTR, programs in US government agencies with a global health or disease prevention mission. Under this pilot program, these agencies have new authority to undertake outreach activities to eligible biotech firms and other small business to promote the objectives of the pilot program.

In recent years, a number of pharmaceutical companies have taken steps to help in the treatment of those infected with AIDS by providing life-extending therapies to the developing world at reduced costs. These drugs are critically important but the war against AIDS cannot be won unless we develop vaccines against the HIV virus and other neglected diseases. The pharmaceutical and biotech companies hold the key

Many steps need to be taken in the war against these diseases. This bill focuses on only one area but a critically important one: vaccine development and distribution. If the public and private sectors work together with energy and commitment, I believe we can develop the vaccines, and once developed, we will win the war against these deadly diseases that victimize so many in the developing world.

I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

There being no objection the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record as follows:

Mr. President, today I am introducing the Communications Security Act of 2005. The events of 9/11 uncovered manifest structural weaknesses in our communications system, which were then highlighted by the 9/11 Commission. At the time, public safety and emergency response officials were not able to communicate at a basic level. We have not taken adequate steps to fix that dangerous problem, and Hurricane Katrina has bluntly demonstrated that. Much of the communications system was knocked off-line along the Gulf Coast. It was remarkable to watch as the television news crews had better luck communicating than our first responders. As the disaster unfolded, our first responders and emergency officials repeatedly cited communications failures as a major obstacle to the disaster response effort.

We need a redundant communications system that will work in times of emergency. Dramatic advances in technology and the availability of new spectrum as part of the DTV transition offer opportunities to address this problem. The Communications Security Act of 2005 requires the technical experts at the Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Communications Commission evaluate the feasibility and cost of deploying a back-up emergency communications system. The agencies will evaluate all reasonable options, including satellites, wireless and terrestrial-based systems. They will evaluate all available public and private resources that could provide such a system and submit a report to Congress detailing the findings. The DHS is then authorized to request appropriations to implement the system. Congress would then be in position to put in place whatever programs and funding are needed to get the job done.

This proposal will not resolve all of our long-term needs in preparedness and interoperability, and I am pleased that many of my colleagues are working on the various pieces of this puzzle. However, in the interim, we must ensure that we can respond in emergency situations with an eye toward building a reliable, redundant system for the long term.

I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, Section 2(b)(1)(B) authorizes U.S. Attorneys to pursue civil in rem forfeiture proceedings against ``any property used, in any manner or part, to commit or to facilitate the commission of a violation of subsection (a).'' The intent of this language is to provide attorneys and prosecutors with the authority to bring a civil forfeiture action against the property of bad actors who are facilitating trafficking or attempts to traffic in counterfeit marks. The forfeiture authority in Section 2(b)(1)(B) cannot be used to pursue forfeiture and seizure proceedings against the computer equipment, website or network of responsible Internet marketplace companies, who serve solely as a third party to transactions and do not tailor their services or their facilities to the furtherance of trafficking or attempts to traffic in counterfeit marks. However, these Internet marketplace companies must make demonstrable good-faith efforts to combat the use of their systems and services to traffic in counterfeit marks. Companies must establish and implement procedures to take down postings that contain or offer to sell goods, services, labels, and the like in violation of this act upon being made aware of the illegal nature of these items or services.

It is the irresponsible culprits that must be held accountable. Those who profit from another's innovation have proved their creativity only at escaping responsibility for their actions. As legislators it is important that we provide law enforcement with the tools needed to capture these thieves.

I say to Senator Specter, it is also my understanding that the U.S. Sentencing Commission recently promulgated new Federal sentencing guidelines to account for the changes in how intellectual property crimes are committed. Could the Senator clarify for the record why we have authorized the U.S. Sentencing Commission to further amend the Federal sentencing guidelines and policy statements for crimes committed in violation of title 18, section 2318 or 2320, of the United States Code?

I say to Senator Specter, thank you for that clarification. As you are aware, there has been overwhelming support for this legislation. It has been very heartening to see such overwhelming support for this important bill. Counterfeiting is a threat to America. It wreaks real harm on our economy, our workers, and our consumers. This bill is a tough bill that will give law enforcement improved tools to fight this form of theft. The bill is short and straightforward, but its impact should be profound and far reaching.

Some of our most important legislation is produced not only when we reach across the aisle in the name of bipartisanship, but when we work across Chambers and reach true consensus. I would also like to thank Senators Alexander, Bayh, Brownback, Coburn, Cornyn, DeWine, Durbin, Feingold, Feinstein, Hatch, Kyl, Levin, Reed, Stabenow, and Voinovich for their cosponsorship of the Senate companion legislation. Counterfeiting is a serious problem that does not lend itself to a quick and easy solution. This legislation is an important step towards fighting counterfeiting. I hope we can build on the success of this law.

Mr. President, I am pleased to join with Senator Cornyn in another of our bipartisan efforts to improve the lives of Americans through effective and efficient Government. The Protecting American Goods and Services Act of 2005, which was passed unanimously out of the Senate last November as S. 1095, is now part of a package that includes the Stop Counterfeiting in Manufactured Goods Act, which I co-sponsored with Senator Specter as S. 1699. The Protecting American Goods and Services Act strengthens our ability to combat the escalating problem of counterfeiting worldwide. In order to effectively fight intellectual property theft, we need stiff penalties for counterfeiters and those who are caught with counterfeit goods with the intent to traffic their false wares. Ours is a short bill--indeed, it is only two pages long-- but it will have global implications in the fight against piracy.

Counterfeiting is a growing problem that costs our economy hundreds of billions of dollars every year and has been linked to organized crime, including terrorist organizations. According to the International Anti-Counterfeiting Coalition, counterfeit parts have been discovered in helicopters sold to NATO, in jet engines, bridge joints, brake pads, and fasteners in equipment designed to prevent nuclear reactor meltdowns. The World Health Organization estimates that the market for counterfeit drugs is about $32 billion each year.

Several years ago, Senator Hatch joined me in sponsoring the Anti- Counterfeiting Consumer Protection Act of 1996, which addressed counterfeiting by amending several sections of our criminal and tariff codes. That law made important changes, particularly by expanding RICO, the Federal antiracketeering law, to cover crimes involving counterfeiting and copyright and trademark infringement: Then, as now, trafficking in counterfeit goods hurts purchasers, State and Federal Governments, and economies at every level.

Perhaps most disturbingly, the U.S. Customs Service reports that terrorists have used transnational counterfeiting operations to fund their activities: The sale of counterfeit and pirated music, movies, software, T-shirts, clothing, and fake drugs ``accounts for much of the money the international terrorist network depends on to feed its operations.''

Last year, as in years past, I worked with Senator Allen on an amendment to the Foreign Operations bill that provides the State Department with vital resources to combat piracy of U.S. goods abroad. The bill we ultimately passed included $3 million for this important purpose. Yet more work both at home and abroad remains. When you consider that the economic impact of tangible piracy in counterfeit goods is estimated to be roughly $350 billion a year and to constitute between 5 percent and 7 percent of worldwide trade, a few million dollars is a worthwhile investment.

We have certainly seen how this form of theft touches the lives of hard-working Vermonters. Burton Snowboards is a small company, whose innovation has made it an industry leader in snowboarding equipment and apparel. Unfortunately, knock-off products carrying Burton's name have been found across the globe. Vanessa Price, a representative of Burton, testified about counterfeiting at the Judiciary Committee's March 23, 2004, hearing on this topic. In addition to learning about the economic costs of counterfeiting, I asked her after the hearing about the risks posed to consumers by these goods. Her answer was chilling:

In the weeks since my Senate testimony, I discovered a

shipment of counterfeit Burton boots for sale through a

discount sports outfit . . . After examining the poor quality

of the counterfeit boots, we determined that anyone using the

boots for snowboarding risks injury due to a lack of

reinforcement and support in the product's construction.

Customers and businesses lose out to counterfeiters in other ways, too. SB Electronics in Barre, VT, has seen its capacitors reverse engineered and its customers lost to inferior copycat models. Vermont Tubbs, a furniture manufacturer in Rutland, has seen its designs copied, produced offshore with inferior craftsmanship and materials, and then reimported, so that the company is competing against cheaper versions of its own products. And Hubbardton Forge in Castleton, VT, has seen its beautiful and original lamps counterfeited and then sold within the United States at prices--and quality--far below their own. This is wrong. It is unfair to consumers who deserve the high quality goods they think they are paying for, and it is unfair to innovators who play by the rules and deserve to profit from their labor.

This bill helps to combat this growing scourge.

S. 1095 criminalizes the possession of counterfeit goods with the intent to sell or traffic in those goods, and it expands the definition of ``traffic'' to include any distribution of counterfeits with the expectation of gaining something of value--criminals should not be able to skirt the law simply because they barter illegal goods and services in exchange for their illicit wares. Finally, the bill will criminalize the importation and exportation of counterfeit goods, as well as of bootleg copies of copyrighted works into and out of the United States.

By tying off these loopholes and improving U.S. laws on counterfeiting, we are sending a powerful message to the criminals who belong in jail, and to our innovators.

Mr. President, I ask Unanimous consent that the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry be authorized to conduct a business meeting during the session of the Senate on Thursday, October 6, 2005 at 9:30 a.m. in SR-328A, Russell Senate Office Building. The purpose of this meeting will be to review spending levels to meet reconciliation expenditures as imposed by H. Con. Res. 95, establishing the Congressional Budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2006, revising appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal year 2005, and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2007 through 2010, and to agree on recommendations with it will make to the Committee on the Budget thereon.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on October 6, 2005, at 10 a.m. to conduct a hearing on ``A Review of the CFIUS Process for Implementing the Exon-Florio Amendment.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, October 6 at 3 p.m. The purpose of this hearing is to receive testimony on S. 1025, to amend the act entitled ``An Act to Provide for the Construction of the Cheney Division, Wichita Federal Reclamation Project, KS, and for Other Purposes'' to authorize the EQUUS Beds Division of the Wichita Project; S. 1498, to direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey certain water distribution facilities to the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District; S. 1529, to provide for the conveyance of certain Federal land in the City of Yuma, AZ; S. 1578, to preauthorize the Upper Colorado and San Juan River Basin Endangered Fish Recovery Implementation Programs; and S. 1760, to authorize early repayment of obligations to the Bureau of Reclamation within the Rogue River Valley Irrigation District or within the Medford Irrigation District, and for other purposes.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, October 6 at 10 a.m.

The purpose of this hearing is to receive an update on Hurricanes Katrina and Rita's effects on energy infrastructure and the status of recovery efforts in the gulf coast region.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet on October 6th, 2005 at 9:30 a.m. for a business meeting to consider the following nominations: Santanu K. Baruah, of Oregon, to be Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Economic Development; George M. Gray, of Massachusetts, to be an Assistant Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency; Lyons Gray, of North Carolina, to be Chief Financial Officer, Environmental Protection Agency; H. Dale Hall, of New Mexico, to be Director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service; and Edward McGaffigan, Jr., of Virginia, to be a Member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for the term of five years expiring June 30, 2010.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet on October 6, 2005 at 9:35 a.m. to conduct a hearing to receive testimony on the actions of EPA, the Army Corps of Engineers and the Federal Highway Administration as they relate to Hurricane Katrina.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session on Thursday, October 6, 2005, at 10 a.m., to hear testimony on ``The Future of the Gulf Coast: Using Tax Policy to Help Rebuild Businesses and Communities and Support Families After Disasters.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session on Thursday, October 6, 2005, at 2:30 p.m., to hear testimony on ``U.S.- Bahrain Free Trade Agreement.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, October 6, 2005, at 11 a.m., to hold a hearing on Nominations.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, October 6, 2005, at 2:30 p.m., to hold a hearing on Nominations.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet on Thursday, October 6, 2005, at 9 a.m., for a hearing titled; ``Hurricane Katrina: How Is FEMA Performing Its Mission at This Stage of Recovery?''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet on Thursday, October 6, 2005, at 10 a.m., for a hearing titled; ``FEMA Status Report on Recovery Efforts in the Gulf States''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet to conduct a markup on Thursday, October 6, 2005, at 9:30 a.m. in Senate Dirksen Office Building Room 226.

Agenda

I. Nominations: Timothy Flanigan to be Deputy Attorney General; and Susan Neilson to be U.S. Circuit Judge for the Sixth Circuit.

II. Bills: S. 1088 Streamlined Procedures Act of 2005. Kyl, Cornyn, Grassley, Hatch; S. 1789 Personal Data Privacy and Security Act of 2005. Specter, Leahy, Feinstein, Feingold; S. 751 Notification of Risk to Personal Data Act. Feinstein, Kyl; S. 1326 Notification of Risk to Personal Data Act. Sessions; S. 1086 A Bill to Improve the National Program to Register and Monitor Individuals Who Commit Crimes Against Children or Sex Offenses. Hatch, Biden, Schumer; S. 956 Jetseta Gage Prevention and Deterrence of Crimes Against Children Act of 2005. Grassley, Kyl, Cornyn; S. 1699 Stop Counterfeiting in Manufactured Goods Act. Specter, Leahy, Hatch, DeWine, Cornyn, Brownback, Feingold; S. 1095 Protecting American Goods and Services Act of 2005. Cornyn, Leahy; H.R. 683 Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2005. Smith-TX; S. 443 Antitrust Criminal Investigative Improvements Act of 2005. DeWine, Kohl, Leahy; S. 1787 Relief to Victims of Hurricane Katrina and Other Natural Disasters Act of 2005. Vitter, Grassley, Cornyn, DeWine; and S. 1647 Hurricane Katrina Bankruptcy Relief and Community Protection Act of 2005. Feingold, Leahy, Durbin, Kennedy, Feinstein.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized

to meet to conduct a hearing on ``Executive Nominations'' on Thursday, October 6, 2005, at 2:30 p.m., in the Dirksen Senate Office Building Room 226.

Witness List

Panel I: Members of Congress.

Panel II: Wan Kim to be an Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Division; Steven G. Bradbury to be an Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel; Sue Ellen Wooldridge to be an Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division; and Thomas O. Barnett to be an Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust Division.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on October 6, 2005, at 2:30 p.m., to hold a closed briefing.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, and International Security be authorized to meet on Thursday, October 6, 2005, at 2:30 p.m., for a hearing regarding ``How Does the Federal Government Lease Needed Space?''

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

subcommittee on oversight of government management, the federal

workforce and the district of columbia

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia be authorized to meet on Thursday, October 6, at 2:30 p.m., for a hearing entitled, ``From Factory to Foxhole: Improving DoD Logistics.''

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on October 20, 2005, at 10 a.m. to conduct a hearing on ``Implementation of the Exon-Florio Amendment and the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet on Thursday, October 20, 2005, at 10 a.m., on Domestic Passenger and Freight Rail Safety.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet on Thursday, October 20, 2005, at 2 p.m., on pending Committee business. Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, and Co- Chairman Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, have rescheduled this week's Full Committee mark-up for Thursday, October 20, 2005 at 2 p.m., previously scheduled for Wednesday, October 19, 2005, at 2:30 p.m. The mark-up is open to the public. A location for this mark-up will be announced when available. Following is the agenda, not necessarily in order of

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, October 20 at 2:30 p.m. The purpose of this hearing is to receive testimony on S. 1016, to direct the Secretary of Energy to make incentive payments to the owners or operators of qualified desalination facilities to partially offset the cost of electrical energy required to operate the facilities, and for other purposes; and S. 1860, to amend the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to improve energy production and reduce energy demand through improved use of reclaimed waters, and for other purposes.

committee on foreign relations

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, October 20, 2005, at 9:30 a.m. to hold a hearing on Nominations.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be authorized to hold a hearing during the session of the Senate on Thursday, October 20, 2005 at 2 p.m. in SD-430.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet on Thursday, October 20, 2005, at 9:30 a.m. for a hearing titled, ``Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans: A Flooded City, a Chaotic Response.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet to conduct a markup on Thursday, October 20, 2005, at 9:30 a.m. in Senate Dirksen Office Building Room 226.

Agenda

I. Nominations

Susan Neilson to be U.S. Circuit Judge for the Sixth Circuit;

John Richard Smoak to be U.S. District Judge for the Northern District of Florida;

Brian Edward Sandoval to be U.S. District Judge for the District of Nevada.

Harry Sandlin Mattice, Jr. to be U.S. District Judge for the Eastern District of Tennessee;

Margaret Mary Sweeney to be a Judge of the United States Court of Federal Claims;

Thomas Craig Wheeler to be a Judge of the United States Court of Federal Claims;

Wan Kim to be an Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Division;

Steven G. Bradbury to be an Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel;

Sue Ellen Wooldridge to be an Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division; and

Thomas O. Barnett to be an Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust Division.

II. Bills

S. 1088, Streamlined Procedures Act of 2005, Kyl, Cornyn, Grassley, Hatch;

S. 1789, Personal Data Privacy and Security Act of 2005, Specter, Leahy, Feinstein, Feingold;

S. 751, Notification of Risk to Personal Data Act, Feinstein, Kyl;

S. 1326, Notification of Risk to Personal Data Act, Sessions;

S. 1086, A Bill to Improve the National Program to Register and Monitor Individuals Who Commit Crimes Against Children or Sex Offenses, Hatch, Biden, Schumer;

S. 956, Jetseta Gage Prevention and Deterrence of Crimes Against Children Act of 2005, Grassley, Kyl, Cornyn;

S. 1699, Stop Counterfeiting in Manufactured Goods Act, Specter, Leahy, Hatch, DeWine, Cornyn, Brownback, Feingold;

S. 1095, Protecting American Goods and Services Act of 2005, Cornyn, Leahy;

H.R. 683, Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2005, Smith--TX;

S. 443, Antitrust Criminal Investigative Improvements Act of 2005, DeWine, Kohl, Leahy;

S. 1787, Relief to Victims of Hurricane Katrina and Other Natural Disasters Act of 2005, Vitter, Grassley, Cornyn, DeWine;

S. 1647, Hurricane Katrina Bankruptcy Relief and Community Protection Act of 2005, Feingold, Leahy, Durbin, Kennedy, Feinstein; and

S. , Budget Reconciliation [Chairman's Mark].

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Veterans' Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, October 20, 2005, for a committee hearing titled ``IT Management by the VA: Is it Ready for the 21st Century?''

The hearing will take place in room 418 of the Russell Senate Office Building at 10 a.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on October 20, 2005 at 2:30 p.m. to hold a closed briefing.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs be authorized to meeting during the session of the Senate on Thursday, October 20, 2005, at 2:30 p.m. to hold a hearing on U.S. Foreign Policy, Petroleum, and the Middle East.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Property Rights be authorized to meet to conduct a hearing on ``An Examination of the Constitutional Amendment on Marriage'' on Thursday, October 20, 2005 at 2 p.m. in SD226.

Witness List:

Panel I: Scott FitzGibbon, Professor of Law, Boston College, Boston, MA; Christopher E. Harris, M.D., Assistant Professor of Pediatrics, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN; Louis Michael Seidman, John Carroll Research Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center, Washington, DC; Richard Wilkins, Professor of Law, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT; Christopher Wolfe, Professor of Political Science, Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI.