Small Business Disaster Loan Reauthorization and Improvements Act of 2006

Mr. President, I rise today with my colleagues--Senator Lincoln from Arkansas, Senator Charles Grassley from Iowa, and Senator Max Baucus from Montana--to introduce the Endangered Species Recovery Act or ESRA. Nearly a year ago, Senator Lincoln and I introduced the Collaboration for the Recovery of the Endangered Species Act, or CRESA, an earlier bill to amend the Endangered Species Act or ESA. This new bill, which does not amend the current ESA, builds on ideas set forth in CRESA. It creates new policies that finance the recovery of endangered species by private landowners. ESRA makes it simpler for landowners to get involved in conservation and reduces the conflict often emanating from the ESA. It will be an important codification of much-needed incentives to help recover endangered species.

Over 80 percent of endangered species live on private property. Under the current law, however, there are too few incentives and too many obstacles for

private landowners to participate in conservation agreements to help recover species under the ESA. ESRA, like the voluntary farm bill conservation programs that inspired its creation, will make it more attractive for private landowners to contribute to the recovery of species under the ESA.

This bill resulted from effective and inclusive collaboration among key stakeholders most affected by the implementation of the ESA. Landowner interests include farmers, ranchers, and those from the natural resource-using communities. For example, some current supporters of ESRA who contributed invaluable advice are the American Farm Bureau, the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, and the Society of American Foresters. This could not rightly be called a collaborative project without the vital and necessary input received from the Defenders of Wildlife, Environmental Defense and the National Wildlife Federation--key environmental groups that made significant contributions. And they further understand that landowners must be treated as allies to ensure success in the long-run for the conservation of habitat and species. Finally, while the genesis of this bill has many roots, a passionate catalyst was James Cummins of Mississippi Fish and Wildlife Foundation, whose passion for the outdoors provided inspiration to move these ideas forward.

This collaborative expertise worked together to craft the ESRA, which provides new tax incentives for private landowners who voluntarily contribute to the recovery of endangered species. The tax credits will reimburse landowners for property rights affected by agreements that include conservation easements and costs incurred by species management plans. For landowners who limit their property rights through conservation easements, there will be 100 percent compensation of all costs. That percentage declines to 75 percent for 30-year easements and 50 percent for cost-share agreements not encumbered by an easement.

It is worth noting that this is the same formula that works successfully for farm bill programs such as the Wetlands Reserve Program. Private property owners are appropriately rewarded for crucial ecological services that they provide with their property. The public benefits from those actions which ensure biodiversity; instead of placing the financial burdens on the landowner, we ought to find appropriate ways to compensate them. While the primary returns from this investment are protection and recovery of endangered species, the public will also undoubtedly gain additional benefits such as aesthetically pleasing open space, combating invasive species and enhanced water quality.

The legislation provides a list of options that give landowners a choice, and this is a crucial element for the success of this proposal. For some landowners, a conservation easement will be the most attractive option. Easements are flexible tools that can be tailored to each landowner and species' interests. An easement restricts certain activities, but it still works well with traditional rural activities such as ranching and farming. For agreements without easements, there is flexibility to do what is necessary for the concerned species without the need to sacrifice property rights into perpetuity.

The tax credits provide essential funding that is necessary to respect private property rights. Wildlife should be an asset rather than a liability; which is how it has sometimes been viewed under the ESA. With wildlife becoming valuable to a landowner, those who may been reluctant to participate in recovery efforts in the past will be more likely to contribute with these incentives. When people want to take part in the process and do not fear it, the likelihood of conflict and litigation is reduced. For years, this type of conflict has proven costly not only in dollars to individuals and the government, but also in terms of relationships between people who share the land and natural resources. With a new trust and new model for finding conservation solutions, we can do more and better conservation work.

Provisions have been made to accommodate landowners whose taxes may be less than the tax credit provides. Partnerships in the agreements will allow any party to an agreement to receive a credit as long as they pay or incur costs as a result of the agreement. This language will allow creative collaboration among governments, landowners, taxpayers and environmentalists, further increasing the number of people involved in finding new solutions for conservation.

Furthermore, this bill also expands tax deductions for any landowner who takes part in the recovery plans approved under the ESA, and allows landowners to exclude from taxable income certain federal payments under conservation costshare programs. This will allow both individuals and businesses to deduct the cost of recovery work without bureaucratic obstacles.

This bill not only sets forth the financing for private landowners, but it also makes it easier to implement the agreements. Landowners will receive technical assistance to implement the agreements. Also, to remove some legal disincentives to recover species, liability protection may be provided to protect the landowners from penalties under the ESA. This removes the fear of trying to help species; currently, more species usually just means more liability for a landowner.

As a result of these incentives, I expect to see a phenomenal increase in the number of success stories. These stories will sound familiar to those creative collaborators working on the ground now where we have learned that the types of tools provided in this bill can work if consistently offered.

The Endangered Species Recovery Act is very exciting to those of us who value protecting our natural resources. It provides collaborative, creative ways to balance resource conservation with economic uses of our natural resources and preserving rural ways of life. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the Senate and House to move ahead with this legislation which will allow better, more effective conservation work for future generations.

I am deeply grateful to my colleagues from Arkansas, Iowa and Montana for their essential expertise and support to create ESRA. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

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

Mr. President, today I am reintroducing the Government Credit Card Abuse Prevention Act to address, in a comprehensive way, the abuse, misuse, and fraud that has occurred with Government charge cards. Some people might ask, ``Why are you bothering with legislation? Is it that big of a problem?'' It is true that most Government employees who are entrusted with a travel card or a purchase card do not abuse it. It may also be true that the amount of money concerned is only a fraction of any agency's annual budget. Well, when you have agencies like the Department of Defense with an over $500 billion budget, even a small fraction means a lot of taxpayers' money. When I asked GAO to look into instances of waste, fraud, and abuse with Government charge cards, starting with the Department of Defense, we found that purchase cards were used to spend taxpayer money for a sapphire ring, LA-Z-Boy reclining rocking chairs, and a dinner party for a general at Treasure Island Hotel and Casino that included $800 for alcohol. Government travel cards were used for gambling, sporting events, concerts, cruises, and even gentlemen's clubs and legalized brothels. Government travel cards are for official travel-related expenses only, not tickets to a Dallas Cowboys game or a Janet Jackson concert, but these are real examples of improper purchases GAO uncovered in reports I had requested. While travel cards are not paid directly with taxpayers' money like purchase cards, failure by employees to repay these cards results in the loss of millions of dollars in rebates to the Federal Government. Also, when credit card companies are forced to charge off bad debt, they raise interest rates and fees on everyone else.

Based on what we found in DoD, I worked with GAO to uncover similar problems in the U.S. Forest Service where one employee purchased five digital cameras at a cost of $2,960, six computers for $6,019, three palm pilots totaling $736, jewelry worth $1,967, and $6,101 in other items like cordless telephones, figurines, and Sony Playstations, all for personal use and all at taxpayer expense. GAO subsequently found similar problems at

other agencies like the Federal Aviation Administration and the Department of Housing an Urban Development. I have cited just some of the extreme examples, but there are many more instances where employees purchased items that were not needed by the agency or where a cheaper alternative would meet the purpose just as well. This occurred because of weak internal controls within the agencies and is something that clearly needs to be addressed governmentwide. Based on oversight from Congress, GAO, and agency inspectors general, the situation has improved in many agencies and I am pleased that the Office of Management and Budget has begun to bring about an improved control environment through direction contained in OMB Circular 123. However, there is more to be done and my experience has convinced me that legislation is necessary.

The Government Credit Card Abuse Prevention Act is largely based on the recommendations by GAO regarding what controls are necessary to prevent the kinds of waste, fraud, and abuse we have uncovered. Since I originally introduced this legislation in the last Congress, I have collected input and ideas and worked to refine the bill to make it both comprehensive and workable. The provisions in my bill are simply commonsense internal controls that should be present in every Federal agency to prevent improper purchases. These include: performing credit checks for travel cardholders and issuing restricted cards for those with poor or no credit to reduce the potential for misuse; maintaining a record of each cardholder, including single transaction limits and total credit limits so agencies can effectively manage their cardholders; implementing periodic reviews to determine if cardholders have a need for a card; properly recording rebates to the Government based on prompt payment; providing training for cardholders and managers; utilizing available technologies to prevent or catch fraudulent purchases; establishing specific policies about the number of cards to be issued, the credit limits for certain categories of cardholders, and categories of employees eligible to be issued cards; invalidating cards when employees leave the agency or transfer; establishing an approving official other than the purchase cardholder so employees cannot approve their own purchases; reconciling purchase card charges on the bill with receipts and supporting documentation; submitting disputed purchase card charges to the bank according to the proper procedure; making purchase card payments promptly to avoid interest penalties; retaining records of purchase card transactions in accordance with standard Government recordkeeping polices; utilizing mandatory split disbursements when reimbursing employees for travel card purchases to ensure that travel card bills get paid; comparing items submitted on travel vouchers with items already paid for with centrally billed accounts to avoid reimbursing employees for items already paid for by the agency; and submitting refund requests for unused airline tickets so the taxpayers don't pay for tickets that were not used.

My bill would also provide that each agency inspector general will periodically conduct risk assessments of agency purchase card and travel card programs and perform periodic audits to identify potential fraudulent, improper, and abusive use of cards. We have had great success working with inspectors general using techniques like data mining to reveal instances of improper use of government charge cards. Having this information on an ongoing basis will help in strengthening and maintaining a rigorous system of internal controls to prevent future instances of waste, fraud, and abuse with government charge cards. In addition, my bill requires penalties so that employees who abuse Government charge cards cannot get away scotfree. In cases of serious misuse or fraud, the bill provides that employees must be dismissed and suspected cases of fraud will also be referred to the appropriate U.S. attorney for prosecution under Federal antifraud laws. Hopefully this will send a clear message that such activity will not be tolerated so as to act as a deterrent for others.

I am proud of the oversight work that I do to uncover waste, fraud, and abuse, but sometimes I feel like Sisyphus, doomed to eternally roll a boulder up a hill only to see it fall again. Instead of eternally looking over the shoulder of agencies to find waste that should never have occurred and then poking and prodding them to close the barn door after the horse has gotten out, we need to put the internal controls in place to make sure these problems don't happen in the first place. This bill will accomplish that for the Government charge card programs so that American taxpayers can sleep soundly knowing that their money isn't being charged away by some bureaucrat. I hope my colleagues will support this commonsense measure and that it will be enacted into law in short order.

Mr. President, as we all know, there was a tremendous amount of criticism of the Federal Government's response to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita last year. Things are better now and the region is slowly recovering. But having just finished the 2006 Hurricane season, and with the 2007 season a few months away, we must be sure that if we have another disaster, the Federal Government's response will be better this time around. Disaster response agencies have to be better organized, more efficient, and more responsive in order to avoid the problems, the delays, mismanagement, and the seeming incompetence that occurred last year.

Today, I am proud to be an original cosponsor of legislation to improve the disaster response of one agency that had a great deal of problems last year, the Small Business Administration, SBA. This bill, the Small Business Disaster Response and Loan Improvements Act, makes major improvements to the SBA's disaster response and provides them with essential tools to ensure that they are more efficient and better prepared for future disasters--big and small. I should also note that this bill is a result of intensive bipartisan work over the past few months. As such, it is reflective of the priorities from Senators Snowe and Kerry, respectively chair and ranking member of the Senate Small Business Committee, as well as Senator Landrieu. For my part, I have heard loud and clear from our impacted businesses that SBA reforms should be implemented as soon as possible. That is why in September, I sent a letter to the new SBA Administrator Steve Preston, expressing concerns on the lack of progress on SBA Disaster reforms, which were included in S. 3778, the fiscal year 2007 SBA reauthorization bill reported out of the Senate Small Business Committee. In this letter, I requested his cooperation, along with our committee, to pass this important legislation before Congress adjourns at the end of the year. The introduction of this bill today, shows the progress that the committee made since September on this issue. I hope that this spirit of bipartisanship continues well into the 110th Congress and that I can continue to work with my colleagues on the Senate Small Business Committee to reform SBA.

This legislation offers new tools to enhance SBA's disaster assistance programs. In every disaster, the SBA disaster loan program is a lifeline for businesses and homeowners who want to rebuild their lives after a catastrophe. When Katrina hit, our businesses and homeowners had to wait months for loan approvals. I do not know how many businesses we lost because help did not come in time. Because of the scale of this disaster, what these businesses needed was immediate, short-term assistance to hold them over until SBA was ready to process the tens of thousands of loan applications it received.

That is why this legislation provides the SBA Administrator with the ability to set up an expedited disaster assistance business loan program to make short-term, low-interest loans to keep them afloat. These loans will allow businesses to make payroll, begin making repairs, and address other immediate needs while they are awaiting insurance payouts or regular SBA disaster loans. However, I realize that every disaster is different and could range from a disaster on the scale of Hurricane Katrina or 911, to an ice storm or drought. This legislation gives the SBA additional options and flexibility in the kinds of relief they can offer a community. When a tornado destroys 20 businesses in a small town in the Midwest, SBA can get the regular disaster program up and running fairly quickly. You may not need short- term loans in this instance. But if you know that SBA's resources would be overwhelmed by a storm--just as they were initially with Katrina-- these expedited business loans would be very helpful.

This legislation also would direct SBA to study ways to expedite disaster loans for those businesses in a disaster area that have a good, solid track record with the SBA or can provide vital recovery efforts. We had many businesses in the gulf coast that had paid off previous SBA loans, were major sources of employment in their communities, but had to wait months for decisions on their SBA disaster loan applications. I do not want to get rid of the SBA's current practice of reviewing applications on a first-come- first-served basis, but there should be some mechanism in place for major disasters to get expedited loans out the door to specific businesses that has a positive record with SBA or those that could serve a vital role in the recovery efforts. Expedited loans would jump- start impacted economies, get vital capital out to businesses, and retain essential jobs following future disasters.

This bill also makes an important modification to the collateral requirements for disaster loans. The SBA cannot disburse more than $10,000 for an approved loan without showing collateral. This is to limit the loss to the SBA in the event that a loan defaults. However, this disbursement amount has not been increased since 1998, and these days, $10,000 is not enough to get a business up and running. That is why this bill increases this collateral requirement to $14,000 and gives the Administrator the ability to increase that amount, in the event of another large-scale disaster. I believe this is a reasonable and fiscally responsible increase, and at the same time gives the Administrator flexibility for future disasters which will inevitably occur.

As you may know, pushed to get language in the last hurricane supplemental appropriations bill in June 2006 to require SBA to develop a disaster plan and report to Congress on its contents by July 15, 2006. SBA provided this status report in July, and I am pleased that, since then, SBA has been working on a comprehensive disaster response plan. That said, I believe that with the 2007 Atlantic hurricane season fast approaching, and other disasters possible before then, the SBA should be looking at additional ways to improve upon this plan. This legislation requires SBA to report to Congress, by March 15, 2007, on the current status of its response plan and to provide us with a snapshot of where they were with Katrina and where they are now. The report also requests SBA feedback on suggested improvements. These improvements include better incorporating State disaster assistance efforts into SBA's response, as well as better coordination with Federal response agencies like FEMA.

The Small Business Disaster Response and Loan Improvements Act will provide essential tools to make the SBA more proactive, flexible, and most important, more efficient during future disasters. Again, I look forward to working with both Senator Snowe and Senator Kerry during the 110th Congress to ensure that the SBA has everything it needs to meet these goals.

I thank the Chair and ask that my entire statement appear in the Record. I also ask unanimous consent that a copy of my September 27, 2006, letter to SBA be printed in the Record at the conclusion of my statement.

Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the Menu Education and Labeling Act of 2006, along with my colleague, Senator Cantwell of Washington. Our bill would extend the successful nutrition labeling that has been on packaged foods since the mid nineties to include foods at chain restaurants with 20 or more outlets and food sold in vending machines. The aim of this bill is to help Americans to take better charge of their health by giving them the tools that they need to make sound nutrition choices for themselves and their children.

It is no secret that poor health and the resulting health costs are major problems in the United States. According to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, total health care spending in the United States in 2004 was $1.8 trillion, and is expected to double by approximately 2014. Furthermore, chronic diseases, which are, in many cases preventable, account for approximately 75 percent of health care costs annually.

Poor nutrition, diet-related chronic diseases, overweight, and obesity are public health threats of the first order. Heart disease and stroke are the first and third leading causes of death in the United States and together, they account for about 40 percent of annual deaths in the United States. In addition, nearly two-thirds of adults are either overweight or obese.

But it is not just adults who are affected by poor diets. Kids are increasingly at risk as well. According to the National Academy of Sciences, over the last three decades, the obesity rate has doubled among preschoolers and adolescents, and tripled for kids between ages 6 and 11. For children born today, it is estimated that 30 percent of boys and 40 percent of girls will develop diabetes. Some scientists are predicting that the current generation of children may well be the first in American history to live shorter lives than their parents, largely because of poor diets and diet-related chronic disease.

The issues are economic as well. The economic impact of chronic disease can be seen in the annual costs associated with various conditions. Cardiovascular disease and stroke are estimated to cost $352 billion annually. The yearly economic impacts of obesity, cancer, and diabetes are estimated at $117 billion, $172 billion, and $132 billion, respectively. So we need to promote common-sense steps to prevent these conditions. Increasing consumer knowledge is one of them.

This bill will give consumers a much-needed tool to make wiser choices and achieve healthier lifestyles. Will individual steps like this, by themselves, be enough to turn the tide of chronic disease and poor health? Of course not. But we must look for opportunities to give consumers information they can use to take better control of their health.

In 1990, Congress passed the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act, NLEA, requiring food manufacturers to provide nutrition information on nearly all packaged foods. The impact has been extremely positive. Not only do nearly three-quarters of adults read and use the food labels on packaged foods, but studies indicate that consumers who read labels have healthier diets. It's time to extend this same opportunity to consumers who want to make smart nutrition choices in restaurants and at vending machines.

More and more of Americans' food dollars are spent in restaurants. Restaurants play an increasingly important role in Americans' diet and health. But restaurants were excluded from the NLEA.

Today, American adults and children consume a third of their calories at restaurants. Nutrition and health experts say that rising caloric consumption and growing portion sizes are causes of overweight and obesity. We also know that when children eat in restaurants, they consume twice as many calories as when they eat at home. Consumers say that they would like nutrition information provided when they order their food at restaurants. However, while they are fully informed about the nutrition content of food available in supermarkets, consumers at restaurants are almost totally in the dark, left to guess about what is in the foods they are ordering. This legislation seeks to remedy this so that consumers can make the same informed choices in a restaurant that they are currently able to make in the grocery store.

This legislation requires restaurants to convey only minimal but essential information, including calories, grams of fat and trans fat, and milligrams of sodium for each serving. In addition, it recognizes there may be inadvertent human errors that affect things such as variations in serving sizes and food preparation, so the bill directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services,

in promulgating regulations, to allow for some reasonable leeway. And finally, it recognizes that menus change from time to time, so the labeling requirements would not apply to daily specials or to temporary menu items. In short, we are not trying to require information for every individual thing that is made available at restaurants, but we are asking restaurants to provide clear and consistent information on those menu items that are broadly and consistently available.

There are some who will say this is impractical and an extraordinary burden on restaurants. I disagree. I have been through this debate before, when Congress was considering the NLEA. We heard the same parade of arguments and horror stories. But the law was passed anyway and, lo and behold, the sky did not fall. To the contrary, businesses made simple adjustments. Americans got access to the necessary information. It had positive health benefits. And at the end of the day, things worked out just fine.

In fact, you can even look at the Senate to see the potential success of this law. A couple of years ago, I wrote to the administrator of the Senate cafeteria, to which I often send out for lunch. I simply requested that the cafeteria, if possible, provide nutrition information on standard menu items. Not more than a couple of months later, printed handouts were available in the cafeteria with detailed nutrition information on the daily menu. This is not McDonald's, Burger King or Arby's. This is the Senate cafeteria. And by gosh, if the Senate cafeteria can do this without an undue burden, then surely so can the largest restaurant chains in the country.

I believe that most Americans want to take more charge of their health. They want to make the best decisions for both themselves and for their children. But it is hard to do so without nutrition information upon which they can base their informed decisions. This legislation seeks to give Americans the information they want and need. This will be a simple but very important step in the right direction, helping ourselves and our children to live healthier, happier, and more productive lives. I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting the Menu Education and Labeling Act of 2006.

Mr. President, today I am introducing the Stop the Online Exploitation of Our Children Act of 2006. This legislation would reduce the sexual exploitation of our children, and punish those who cause them physical and emotional harm through sex crimes.

Twenty-two years ago, President Ronald Reagan inaugurated the opening of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, known as NCMEC. At a White House ceremony, he called on the center to ``wake up America and attack the crisis of child victimization.'' Today, thanks to the efforts of NCMEC and many others in the public and private sectors, America is more conscious of the dangers of child exploitation, but our children still face significant threats from those who see their innocence as an opportunity to do harm. The continuing victimization of our children is readily and all too painfully apparent in the resurgence of child pornography in our world.

In recent years, technology has contributed to the greater distribution and availability, and, some believe, desire for child pornography. I say child pornography, but that label does not describe accurately what is at issue. As emphasized by a recent Department of Justice report, ``child pornography'' does not come close to describing these images, which are nothing short of recorded images of child sexual abuse. These images are, quite literally, digital evidence of violent sexual crimes perpetrated against the most vulnerable among us.

Experts are also finding that the images of child sexual exploitation produced and distributed today involve younger and younger children. As emphasized by NCMEC, 83 percent of offenders surveyed in a recent study were caught with images of children younger than 12 years old. Thirty- nine percent had images of children younger than 6. Almost 20 percent had images of children younger than 3. These are not normal criminals, and I cannot fathom the extent of the physical and emotional harm they cause their victims.

The violence of the images continues to increase as well. Dr. Sharon Cooper, a nationally recognized expert on this subject, stated before a September Senate Commerce Committee hearing that the images often depict ``sadistic gross sexual assault and sodomy.'' This view was underscored by Mike Brown, the sheriff of Bedford County, VA, and the director of the Blue Ridge Thunder Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force, who also testified to his direct experience with increasingly violent and disturbing images of child sexual exploitation.

The Federal Government has in place a system for online companies such as Internet service providers to report these images to NCMEC. The center is directed by law to relay that information to Federal and State law enforcement agencies. This reporting system has been successful, but it is in need of several vital improvements.

The bill would enhance the current reporting system by expanding the range of companies obligated to report child pornography to NCMEC; stating specifically what information must be reported to the center; moving the reporting obligations into the Federal

criminal code; imposing higher penalties on companies that do not report child pornography to NCMEC in the manner required by law; and providing greater legal certainty around the child pornography reporting requirement.

As suggested by NCMEC, the reporting of child pornography should be more widespread. To that end, the bill would expand and clarify the types of online companies that would be obligated to report child pornography to the center. Today, Federal law requires electronic communication service providers and providers of remote computing services to report child pornography they discover to NCMEC through the center's CyberTipline. However, what types of companies fall into each category is sometimes unclear. To better define and expand the types of online companies obligated to report child pornography, the legislation would require a broad range of online service providers--including Web hosting companies, domain name registrars, and social networking sites--to report child pornography to NCMEC.

Another weakness in the current reporting system is that the law does not say exactly what information should be reported to NCMEC. This failure to set forth specific reporting requirements makes the current statute both difficult to comply with and tough to enforce, and this omission may have led to less effective prosecution of child pornographers. According to testimony submitted by the center to the Senate Commerce Committee, ``because there are no guidelines for the contents of these reports, some [companies] do not send customer information that allows NCMEC to identify a law enforcement jurisdiction. So potentially valuable investigative leads are left to sit in the CyberTipline database with no action taken.'' This is unacceptable.

The bill would cure this problem by requiring that reporting companies convey to the center a defined set of information, which is in large part the information that is provided to NCMEC today by the Nation's leading Internet service providers. Among other things, the bill would require online service providers to report specific information about the individual involved in producing, distributing, or receiving child pornography such as that individual's e-mail address. In addition, it would require reporting companies to NCMEC geographic location of the involved individual such as the individual's physical address and the IP address from which the individual connected to the Internet.

To ensure that law enforcement officials have better odds of prosecuting involved individuals, the bill would also require online service providers to preserve all data that they report to NCMEC for at least 180 days, and to not knowingly destroy any other information that they possess that relates to a child pornography incident reported to

Mr. President, in the 15 months since Hurricane Katrina decimated gulf coast communities, Senators Snowe, Landrieu, Vitter, and I have worked to produce a comprehensive package to reform the SBA's disaster loan program. The SBA's failed response in a time of unmatched need demonstrated to everyone that this program is broken and needs fixing.

Immediately after Hurricane Katrina hit, I introduced an amendment with Senator Landrieu to the fiscal year 2006 Commerce, Justice and Science appropriations bill to address the needs of gulf region small business and homeowners. The amendment was adapted with input from Chair Snowe, and a subsequent bipartisan amendment passed the Senate with a vote of 96 to 0. Although the entire Senate supported the amendment, it was stripped out of the bill conference.

On September 30, 2005, I again worked with Chair Snowe and Senators Landrieu and Vitter to introduce the Small Business Hurricane Relief and Reconstruction Act of 2006, S. 1807. Although this bill presented a bipartisan, comprehensive approach to hurricane relief, it stalled in the face of the Administration's opposition. In June, I introduced the Small Business Disaster Loan Reauthorization and Improvements Act of 2006, S. 3487, which once again attempted to comprehensively address the shortcomings of this program. Finally, in August, and with continued opposition from the administration, the, committee unanimously reported S. 3778, the Small Business Reauthorization and Improvements Act of 2006, which again put forward a bipartisan, comprehensive fix for this program.

Many of the provisions included in the bill we are introducing today were included in one or more of these previous proposals. The bill includes directives for the SBA to create a private disaster loan program, to allow for lenders to issue disaster loans. To ensure that these loans are borrower friendly, we provide authorization for appropriations so that the agency can subsidize the interest rates. In addition, the administrator is authorized to enter into agreements with private contractors in order to expedite loan application processing for direct disaster loans.

The bill also includes language directing SBA to create an expedited disaster assistance loan program to provide businesses with short-term loans so that they may keep their doors open until they receive alternative forms of assistance. The days immediately following a disaster are crucial for business owners--statistics show that once they close their doors, they likely will not open them again. These short-term loans should help prevent those doors from closing.

A Presidential declaration of catastrophic national disaster will allow the administrator to offer economic injury disaster loans to adversely affected business owners beyond the geographic reach of the disaster area.

Nonprofit entities working to provide services to victims should be rewarded and given access to the capital they require to continue their services. To this end, the administrator is authorized to make disaster loans to nonprofit entities, including religious organizations.

Construction and rebuilding contracts being awarded are likely to be larger than the current $2 million threshold currently applied to the SBA Surety Bond Program which helps small construction firms gain access to contracts. This bill increases the guarantee against loss for small business contracts up to $5 million and allows the administrator to increase that level to $10 million, if deemed necessary.

The bill also provides for small business development centers to offer business counseling in disaster areas and to travel beyond traditional geographic

boundaries to provide services during declared disasters. To encourage small business development centers located in disaster areas to keep their doors open, the maximum grant amount is waived.

So that Congress may remain better aware of the status of the administration's disaster loan program, this bill directs the administration to report to the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship of the Senate and to the Committee on Small Business of the House of Representatives regularly on the fiscal status of the disaster loan program as well as the need for supplemental funding. The administration is also directed to report on the number of Federal contracts awarded to small businesses, minority-owned small businesses, women-owned businesses, and local businesses during a disaster declaration.

Finally, gas prices continue to fluctuate, and fuel-dependent small businesses are struggling with the cost of energy. This bill provides relief to small business owners during times of above average energy price increases, authorizing energy disaster loans through the Small Business Administration and the Department of Agriculture to companies that depend on fuel.

Residents of the gulf coast continue to rebuild from last year's hurricane season. By all accounts, Administrator Preston has implemented policies that are helping gulf coast victims get back on their feet. However, the SBA needs the tools offered in this bill in order to comprehensively address the needs of business owners following a large-scale disaster. As the 109th Congress prepares to adjourn, it is unconscionable that we have not yet put in place the reforms needed for this program to function effectively. I urge my colleagues in the final days of this session to support this legislation, so that God forbid another region has to deal with a disaster the size and scope of the 2005 gulf coast hurricanes, the SBA will be fully able to provide the assistance that homeowners and business owners require.

Mr. President, today's headline is sad and stunning. The VA Secretary now reports that 2.2 million active-duty military personnel were also exposed in the massive security breach at VA on May 3. This means that 1.1 million active-duty military personnel, 430,000 National Guard members and 645,000 reservists are exposed to potential identity theft. The brave men and women, who are serving and protecting our country, are not being protected by their own government.

This is deeply disturbing and we owe each servicemember and veteran real support to protect their financial information.

I have revised my legislation, S. 3176, the Veterans' Privacy Protection Act, to expand coverage to our military personnel. I am proud to have the cosponsorship of Senators Jeffords and Baucus.

Every American has the justifiable expectation that the Federal Government will protect their private personal information--information that they are required to provide to Federal agencies. It is a basic and fundamental responsibility of government to make sure that this sensitive data is handled appropriately, accessed only by authorized personal, and used only for intended purposes.

On May 22, the Department of Veterans Affairs, VA, announced that computer disks containing as many as 26.5 million veterans' personal information were stolen from an employee who had taken the information home. I, along with many of my colleagues, am outraged at this enormous lapse in security. The VA has an obligation to make sure that veterans and military personnel are not harmed because of the agency's failure to protect sensitive personal data.

This information includes social security numbers and dates of birth, the underpinnings of almost all of our financial information. In the wrong hands, this information can be used to steal a person's identity causing substantial harm. All of us have constituents who have been victims of identity theft. When a person's identity is stolen, it can have devastating financial consequences for that person and that family. Even if the financial harm is minimal, it often takes years to clear your name. Plus, veterans and military families must live with the uncertainty about the financial records.

I understand that the VA, FBI and local law enforcement are working on the investigation, but Congress must also conduct a thorough investigation into how this security breach occurred. I want to know why the VA waited almost three weeks for its first announcement. I want to know why it took another two weeks to compare files and realize that 2.2 million military personnel were also exposed.

In my opinion, it is inexcusable that veterans and military were not notified immediately that their personal information had been stolen and were not given any guidance as to the steps they should take to protect themselves from identity theft. I understand the VA inspector general has cited the agency for poor security policies and procedures. Congress must also begin a comprehensive review of the agency's security protocols and policies and force the agency to adopt stricter security measures to make sure that the personal data our veterans are required to provide the agency is not ever again at risk.

It is for this reason that I am reintroducing the Veterans' and Military Privacy Protection Act today. Although all Federal agencies need comprehensive data privacy policies, this is a targeted bill to address the security breach at the VA on an urgent basis.

Congress has required the Federal Trade Commission to address identity theft and its consequences. The agency has taken an aggressive approach in combating this devastating crime. My bill would require the Federal Trade Commission to develop a hotline explicitly for veterans and military personnel to provide the information, counseling, and help necessary to allow each person to protect himself from the loss of personal data.

At this point, our legislative response must cover all 28.7 million veterans and servicemembers that the VA believes may have had their personal information compromise. My bill would make it easier for them to request a long-term credit alert for their records so credit agencies are aware that their personal information could be being used by others. It is my understanding that a security freeze on an individual's record can have a modest cost, and VA has the obligation to cover the costs of this enormous security breach.

Finally, my bill requires the General Accountability Office to evaluate the VA response to this incident and to analyze the agency's security protocols. I believe that an independent investigation could generate a number of recommendations to improve the security of personal information not just in the VA but in all Federal agencies.

The VA has exposed millions of veterans and military to identity theft and potential financial problems. It is inconceivable to me how any Federal agency could have let this happen, and how the investigation and followup could be so haphazard. We all have heard the stories during the past year regarding massive breaches of private and confidential data by private entities. The Federal Government acted quickly to respond to these breaches and now it must act just as quickly if not more so to address its own failings. My bill is a critical step in providing the necessary assistance that millions of veterans and servicemembers may require, and I urge my colleagues to act on it with the urgency this situation demands.

Mr. President, I rise today with Senators Kerry, Landrieu and Vitter to introduce The Small Business Disaster Response and Loan Improvements Act of 2006, a bill that would provide a comprehensive; package of reforms to improve the Small Business Administration's, SBA, disaster loan program.

As you know, the entire gulf coast of the United States was ravaged in 2005 by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. These natural disasters, unprecedented in scope and economic impact, presented a prime opportunity for the SBA to showcase its programs and resources for small businesses. Unfortunately, SBA's response was subpar at best, leaving some disaster victims waiting three months or more for disaster loans to be processed.

As chair of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I remain committed to doing everything in my power to provide small businesses and homeowners with the tools they need to recover from disasters. The SBA is and must be at the forefront of disaster relief efforts. We must ensure that victims of future disasters have access to the resources they need to restore their lives, their businesses, and their dreams.

Many of the provisions in this bid have already passed unanimously through the Small Business Committee this year as part of the Small Business Reauthorization and Improvements Act of 2006 S. 3778, bipartisan legislation I authored that features sweeping reforms to help the SBA lead with the same dedication to excellence found in the entrepreneurs it serves. The committee unanimously approved this legislation and reported it to the full Senate, where it awaits consideration.

This bill before the Senate today includes essential provisions that would better assist victims applying for SBA disaster loans. Among other items, this legislation would increase the maximum size of an SBA disaster loan from $1.5 million per loan to $5 million per loan and would make it possible for non-profit institutions to be eligible for disaster loans.

Recognizing the increased demand disasters place on all small business lending programs, the legislation establishes a private disaster loan PDL program that allows for PDLs to be made to disaster victims by private banks, which would have to apply to the SBA for eligibility. A business would be eligible for a PDL if the county in which the business is located was

declared a disaster area anytime in the last 24 months. The business would not have to show a nexus between its need for a loan, and the disaster that occurred. It would be enough to be located in that county. The SBA would provide an 85 percent guarantee for the loans.

In addition, our legislation would provide authorization for the SBA to enter into agreements with qualified private contractors to process disaster loans. It also would require the SBA to provide Congress with a report on how the disaster loan application process can be improved, including methods to expedite loan processing and verification for sources vital to rebuilding efforts.

This legislation would also require the SBA to promulgate rules within 6 months that would create a new ``expedited disaster assistance business loan program.'' These short-term loans would have low interest rates similar to regular disaster loans. The program is intended to respond to major disasters, but at the discretion of the SBA Administrator, it can be implemented in the event of any disaster.

I firmly believe the product before us is the best package to aid families, businesses, and communities through challenging times following disasters. We must not forget their pain, their determination, and their resolute refusal to walk away from the communities and small businesses they cherish.

When a disaster strikes, the spirit, determination, and will of America's small businesses help to create the firm economic foundation, propelling our nation's economic growth forward. Therefore, we in turn must create an atmosphere favorable for small businesses and provide this assistance package to the SBA. We must allow our Nation's small businesses to do what they do best--create jobs.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill. Too much is at stake for small businesses, and the economy as a whole, to allow this critical legislation to languish. Clearly, if we strive for anything less, we fail to support the backbone of our economy, our hope for new innovation, and the entrepreneurs reach for the American dream.