A bill to facilitate the part-time reemployment of annuitants, and for other purposes.

Mr. President, today I rise to discuss the All Students Can Achieve Act that I am introducing today with Senators Lieberman and Coleman.

I was proud to have been a part of developing the No Child Left Behind legislation 5 years ago, which made strides in holding schools accountable and drawing attention to the students who had fallen between the cracks. Senators Lieberman, Coleman, and I have come together to build upon the successes of No Child Left Behind, to improve it, and to help our Nation's schools take the next step to help all of our students to achieve and to succeed. Louisiana has made great progress in its standards and accountability, now ranking number one in the Nation. However, of the more than 650,000 students in Louisiana, many are not meeting academic achievement goals. We need to help all of our students meet and exceed achievement expectations.

The All Students Can Achieve Act focuses on the achievements of all students. Recognizing that quality data systems are crucial to measuring the progress of student achievement, we have included a requirement to establish data systems and provided funding authorizations and incentives to support the development of such systems. In order to ensure that all students are achieving, states must create comprehensive data systems that track students' academic progress and other factors that affect their success.

One of the most important factors in school and student achievement is teachers. The quality of teachers should be determined by their effect on students' learning, not just their qualifications. All students should have effective teachers. Thus, these data systems must link student achievement data to teachers, allowing states to

measure teacher effectiveness. In addition, this bill requires the equitable distribution of effective teachers and non-federal funding.

States should be held accountable for student achievement. However, students do not progress at the same pace. Louisiana has recognized this and has incorporated growth labels in its accountability system. Louisiana looks at the level of growth achieved by a school and each school's success in meeting its growth targets. The All Students Can Achieve Act allows states to use growth models in calculating adequate yearly progress. It allows states the flexibility to measure student academic growth, rather than strictly looking at test scores.

We must have high expectations for all students. To ensure that all elementary though secondary school students, regardless of where they live, are prepared for success in college or the workplace, states must set high expectations for all students. Academic standards must be designed to prepare students to succeed and assessments must be effective tools to measure students' progress toward meeting these standards. In addition, we need to continue to properly measure the achievement of all students. Thus, this bill will close current loopholes in the law that allow states to avoid counting students or skew achievement data.

The All Students Can Achieve Act aims to close the achievement gap. States need to focus resources on closing the achievement gap. This includes directing their attention to comprehensive interventions where more than 50% of students are not making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) or focused interventions where less than 50% of students are not making AYP. The All Students Can Achieve Act increases the amount of funding authorized for these interventions and focuses support where the need is greatest.

Another important measure of academic achievement is high school graduation rates, which should be tracked and reported for all groups of students. High school graduation rates are an important measure of academic achievement, but they must be calculated consistently and accurately. Like other assessments, these rates should be tracked and reported for all groups of students. Nearly 1.2 million students did not graduate from American high schools in 2006; the lost lifetime earnings in America for that class of dropouts alone totals more than $309 billion.

The All Students Can Achieve Act also increases focus on and support for high need students. For example, we have also included foster children and youth. There are over 800,000 foster children and youth. They face many of the same challenges as homeless children and youth. They go through numerous changes in where they live and go to school. They lack stability and permanency. Thus, we have added them to the McKinney-Vento Act, in order to ensure that they do not fall through the cracks. We hope that by giving them access to the services and protections of McKinney-Vento, their schools will become a safe and permanent place in their lives.

Public education is important to Senators Lieberman, Coleman, and me. We want our Nation's children to be prepared to compete and succeed once they graduate. We need to improve our schools and hold them accountable for the achievement of all students. Though there has been much discussion about No Child Left Behind Act, there has been little action toward the reauthorization of this law. We have heard from our constituents about the parts of NCLB that work and the parts that do not work for our students at home. Through a nationwide public process, the Aspen Institute has generated concrete, actionable recommendations that will improve schools for the Nation's children. We wanted to take this opportunity to help begin the process of improving this law. We have come together to take a bipartisan approach to improving the education of all students. We have pulled together the proposals that we think will best serve our students and improve public education in America. We want people to actively discuss our proposal. We hope that people will support what we have done or build upon it.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Home Ownership Made Easier Act, or the HOME Act. This bill will revitalize our Nation's rural communities by making it easier to become a homeowner and to provide opportunities to refinance high interest and subprime loans.

Our country has provided many excellent opportunities over the years to individuals living in rural areas to become a homeowner. One of these programs is what is commonly referred to as the 502 program administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. This program administers guaranteed loans to low-income families that are backed by the U.S. Government. Families must be able to show that they are without adequate housing and not exceed certain income limits. Currently, these loans last 30 years and do not require a down payment, however the applicant must be able to afford mortgage payments, including taxes, and insurance.

I applaud the success of the 502 program. In Louisiana alone, the program has already administered 1,212 loans for 2007 and nationwide, the program has administered 27,643 loans. While the program does cost the taxpayer approximately $42 million a year, it administers over $3 billion in loans a year. Let me repeat that again, for $42 million a year, our Government is able to provide $3 billion in loans a year to low-income families to become homeowners. The risk extremely low. In 2006, the 502 program has a foreclosure rate of 1.36 percent. Again, I applaud the success of our Government to provide this much-needed help to rural Americans.

Some might ask why should the Federal Government help low-income families become homeowners? The answer is simple. Homeownership provides financial advantages to owners and to their communities. Individuals who own homes have an investment, of those that own homes, on average, one-half of the equity in their homes is one-half of their net worth. Homeowners enjoy tax benefits and they also enjoy financial stability if they are locked into a permanent interest rate. Communities also benefit, those that have a high percentage of homeownership see increased involvement with the community and with the local schools.

Also, maybe most importantly, homeownership by low-income households is linked to a child's educational advancement and future success.

My HOME Act will build upon the success of the 502 program and update the program to reflect current conditions. In some instances, this law hasn't been updated in nearly 30 years.

The HOME Act will do five things. First, it will increase the qualifying income limits for families and set out a three-tiered level of income standard instead of the current eight tiered standard. The first tier will be for families that have one to four individuals, the second tier is established for families of 5 to 8 persons and the third tier is for families larger than eight.

The second change will affect the qualifying population limit. Currently, the population limit is tied to communities of 10,000 or less in an areas contained within a standard metropolitan statistical area, MSA, and communities less than 20,000 if they are not contained within a MSA. My HOME Act will expand the qualifying population limit to encompass rural communities of 40,000 or less.

HOME Act legislation will maintain the guaranteed fee that an applicant is required to pay at 2 percent, instead of raising the fee to 3 percent. This is to keep costs low for the borrower. It will also reduce the redtape involved by allowing an applicant that qualifies for a 502 loan to receive that loan regardless of whether or not the applicant can qualify for another Federal Government housing loan.

Finally, my bill will provide opportunities for individuals inside and outside the 502 program to refinance their loans. These opportunities include refinancing to pay for a first or second purchase mortgage, for repairs to structural deficiencies, to pay for closing costs, and allow a borrower to consolidate debts up to the greater of $10,000 or 10 percent.

The 502 program is an excellent program that has helped many individuals and families afford to purchase a clean, affordable home that increases their quality of life. I want to expand this program and allow more opportunities for low-income rural Americans to become homeowners. This is a good bill and I look forward to working with my colleagues to make this bill a reality.

Mr. President, today, I am introducing the Secondhand Smoke Education and Outreach Act of 2007 to provide information to the public about the health consequences of secondhand smoke and support tobacco cessation education.

I want to thank Senators Sanders and Murray for cosponsoring the Secondhand Smoke Education and Outreach Act and recognize them as strong advocates for smoking cessation efforts.

I believe that tobacco use constitutes one of the greatest threats to public health, a conclusion that was also expressed in the 2000 Supreme Court ruling, and I also believe that we have a duty to safeguard our Nation's health against tobacco products.

Every year, an estimated 400,000 smokers die as a result of smoking- related diseases. But nonsmokers also suffer and die from exposure to tobacco smoke.

Last year, the Surgeon General issued the report, The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke, which found that there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke. The Surgeon General reported that nearly half of all nonsmoking Americans are still regularly exposed to secondhand smoke, which contains more than 50 carcinogens.

Living with a smoker increases a non-smoker's risk of developing lung cancer by 20 to 30 percent and, according to the California Environmental Protection Agency, exposure to secondhand smoke causes approximately 3,000 lung cancer deaths in the U.S. each year. Secondhand smoke also causes 46,000 cardiac deaths annually in our country.

Studies have shown that exposure to secondhand smoke has both immediate and long-term adverse health consequences on the adult cardiovascular system. Exposure to secondhand smoke for 30 minutes can damage coronary arteries, while sustained exposure can increase the risk of coronary heart disease by 20 to 30 percent.

Although more than 20 States have passed smoke-free laws, including laws that ban smoking in restaurants and bars, Americans of all age groups are involuntarily exposed to tobacco smoke through exposure in workplaces, homes, cars, apartments, and even outdoor public spaces. According to the National Cancer Institute, racial and ethnic minorities in the U.S. have higher rates of occupational exposure to secondhand smoke, with Latinos and Native Americans having the highest rates.

Therefore, it is critical that individuals, especially youth, should not be exposed to secondhand smoke. Further, parents should have access to information about the adverse health consequences so that they can better protect their children and themselves from secondhand smoke.

Education about the dangers of tobacco use and exposure to tobacco smoke is absolutely critical for combating the misleading messages that the tobacco industry propagates through savvy advertising campaigns.

There is strong evidence that tobacco advertisements cynically target advertising to adult and adolescent women. According to an analysis published by the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1994 and a 2001 report by the Surgeon General, the tobacco industry has targeted women with some form of this dangerous promotional strategy for almost a century, beginning in the 1920s. The latest example of this is chronicled in a recent New York Times editorial, entitled ``Don't Fall for Hot Pink Camels'', which discusses R.J. Reynolds's $25 million to $50 million investment in an advertising campaign behind the new female-friendly Camel No. 9.

In addition to targeting women, tobacco advertisements are also designed to appeal to our youth. In the August 2006 racketeering suit brought by the Justice Department against the tobacco industry, Judge Kessler's Final Opinion concluded that: ``. . . Defendants continue to engage in many practices which target youth, and deny that they do so. Despite the provisions of the MSA, Defendants continue to track youth behavior and preferences and market to youth using imagery which appeals to the needs and desires of adolescents.'' This is an unconscionable, but effective, practice. A study published this year in the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine concluded that youth are more likely to start smoking if exposed to retail cigarette advertising and that cigarette promotions also increase the probability of youth becoming regular smokers.

Finally, racial and ethnic minority communities are disproportionately targeted with advertising campaigns for tobacco products, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The tobacco industry has contributed to primary and secondary schools, funded universities and colleges, and supported scholarship programs targeting racial and ethnic minorities. Tobacco companies have also placed advertising in community publications and sponsored cultural events in racial and ethnic minority communities.

Despite the public's growing understanding of the health dangers posed by tobacco, too many still succumb to the lure of these deadly products. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, over 20 percent of adults currently smoke cigarettes in the U.S. Among racial and ethnic communities, approximately 16 percent of Hispanic adults, 13 percent of Asian American adults, 22 percent of Caucasians adults, 22 percent of African American adults, and 32 percent of American Indians and Alaska Natives currently smoke cigarettes.

As for our Nation's youth, a 2005 National Survey on Drug Use and Health reported that nearly 3 million Americans under the age of 18 currently smoke cigarettes. According to the CDC, unless current rates of youth smoking are reversed, more than 6.3 million children under the age of 18 will die from smoking-related diseases.

That is why health care professionals should have the opportunity to receive training in the delivery of evidence-based tobacco dependence and prevention treatment in order to assist smokers in overcoming their addiction and educating all patients about the harm of secondhand smoke.

That is why I, along with Senators Sanders and Murray, am introducing the Secondhand Smoke Education and Outreach Act. I am grateful to have developed this proposal with the American Lung Association, the American Cancer Society, the American Heart Association, and the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids.

This bill, through education and outreach, will help reverse the public's underestimation of the harm that secondhand smoke can wreck on one's health and will promote smoking cessation efforts across our nation.

This new legislation would establish grants and demonstration projects, awarded by the Secretary of HHS in consultation with the SAMHSA administrator, for educating the public about the health consequences of secondhand smoke in multi-unit dwellings and in public spaces, such as public parks, playgrounds, and national parks. Special consideration would be given to awarding grants to organizations whose participation includes secondary school or college-age individuals, and to organizations that reach racial or ethnic populations that experience a disproportionate share of the cancer burden.

The Secondhand Smoke Education and Outreach Act would also authorize and fund grants for regional or local tobacco cessation education and counseling for health care workers and providers. The training curricula would assist smokers in quitting through smoking cessation counseling, educate smokers and nonsmokers about the

health consequences of secondhand smoke, and help promote self- sustaining networks for the delivery of affordable, accessible, and effective cessation services.

The U.S. spends more on health care than any other industrialized nation and yet we struggle to provide adequate health care for all our citizens. We literally cannot afford the myriad of health problems that we know result from tobacco use: bladder, esophageal, laryngeal, lung, oral, and throat cancers, chronic lung diseases, coronary heart and cardiovascular diseases, as well as reproductive effects and sudden infant death syndrome.

The Secondhand Smoke Education and Outreach Act is an important step in ensuring that our nation's communities have the knowledge they need to keep themselves and their environments healthy, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to enact this legislation during the upcoming reauthorization of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration at the Department of Health and Human Services.

I ask unanimous consent that letters of support be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce, together with my colleagues Senator Mary Landrieu and Senator Norm Coleman, the All Students Can Achieve Act. This bill represents a comprehensive bipartisan proposal to strengthen and improve No Child Left Behind, NCLB. We hope that many of the ideas contained in our proposal will be considered by the HELP Committee as it tackles NCLB reauthorization, and we look forward to working with the committee to that end.

Over 5 years ago, the President and Congress created a watershed moment in American education when we enacted the No Child Left Behind Act. We worked together across party lines and from both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue to address an ongoing crisis in our public schools, especially schools in minority and low-income communities, where students' reading and math achievement was far below that of peers in better off white communities.

Closing these student achievement gaps may be the most important civil rights movement of our time. In No Child Left Behind we made a national commitment to reject as unacceptable a system in which low- income minority students were reading at a grade level 4 years below that of their higher-income peers. We made a national commitment to bring an end to that intolerable gap and to ensure that each and every child, regardless of race, nationality or family income, could develop his or her talents to the fullest.

No Child Left Behind had the goal of bringing all minority and disadvantaged children, including children with disabilities, the attention and support they need to succeed, by holding schools and States accountable for delivering results to all of their students. With passage of NCLB, we made a good start. Progress has occurred but there is much more to be done to close the persistent gaps in student achievement.

No Child Left Behind, which Congress must now reauthorize, provides a foundation, but we now must take new, bold steps to fulfill the national commitments we first made 5 years ago. So that is why today we are presenting a significant reform proposal, which we are calling the All Students Can Achieve Act, and which we ask our colleagues and the President to give serious consideration as we work to reauthorize No Child Left Behind.

I want to touch briefly on some of the key features in this bill that build upon the reforms of the No Child Left Behind Act, and will attach a more detailed summary at the conclusion of my remarks.

Central to our strategy for closing the achievement gap is the pathway our bill creates for getting the very best teachers, teachers who are the best at bringing real learning and real growth in achievement to their students, into the schools and classrooms where they are most needed. No one does more important work in our society today than good teachers. We must attract, train and pay them as the critical professionals that they are. In our proposal, we ask States to move to a ``teacher effectiveness'' evaluation system. This system would evaluate teacher performance based on results in the classroom. To get to this point, States must develop comprehensive data systems that can track individual student growth and performance, and link student performance to individual teachers. We require and fund the data systems, and permit development of so-called growth models for compliance with Adequate Yearly Progress, AYP. Growth models give schools credit for boosting student performance over time, even where absolute test results are not at required levels. By linking student growth to individual teachers, States can measure teacher effectiveness by determining which teachers demonstrate learning gains in the classroom.

Our proposal allows those States that have developed meritorious teacher effectiveness systems to opt out of the

Federal Highly Qualified Teacher requirements, and to benefit from additional flexibilities in the use of Federal funds. Further, since we want to make sure that we can get the best teachers to the students most in need, our bill requires an equitable distribution of effective teachers across all schools and ultimately, after teacher professional development, if teachers are still not effective, we assign them away from our most needy schools. Our bill includes a provision to ensure that future collective bargaining agreements allow this to happen. In fact, because we recognize that there is nobody more important than a teacher, especially the most effective teachers, our bill puts the option of merit pay on the radar screen through a discretionary grant program to support new ideas for teacher professional development, tenure, assignment and compensation policies. We also seek to enrich the quality of education by, among other things, giving schools the option to bring in experienced professionals in math, science and critical foreign languages, as members of an Adjunct Teacher Corps.

We strengthen accountability by closing the existing loopholes that often prevent States and schools from truly measuring the actual achievement of minority students. Instead of allowing minority students to fall through the cracks of underachievement, this will force schools to take the steps needed to close the achievement gap for those students. Our bill gives parents the option of transferring their children in failing schools to other public schools, including schools across district lines if there is not an acceptable option within the original school district. In addition, our bill provides a two-track system for schools missing AYP. Schools missing AYP due to one or more subgroups, but less than 50 percent of the student population, would go through a more targeted attention program to address the problem areas.

Finally, we call for the development of voluntary American standards and assessments. Here we seek to address the need to promote rigorous standards and assessment of student learning to ensure that all students, no matter where they are schooled, are taught the skills they need to succeed in life. We call on the National Assessment Governing Board, with an expanded membership to include more teachers and business leaders, to develop these world class standards. States may choose to adopt these standards, thereby freeing up State resources. Alternatively, states could build their own assessments and standards based on the American standards, keep their own standards and tests, or team together in regional censorial to develop standards and assessments. The Department of Education would report to Congress on the variance between the rigor of state assessments and the American standards and assessments in cases where the voluntary standards are not used. It should be apparent that nothing in our bill would interfere with State flexibility to determine teaching format and substance.

In sum, No Child Left Behind is not just the name of an education law. It remains a solemn and urgent commitment that we made to America's children and parents. Because far too many children are still left behind and denied the opportunity to succeed in our society, we have renewed that commitment by offering this bill.

I want to thank my colleagues and cosponsors, Senators Mary Landrieu and Norm Coleman, and their staffs for their help in shaping this bill.

I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and a detailed summary be printed in the Record

There being no objection the material was ordered to be printed in

Mr. President, I rise to introduce Senate Bill 2003, a measure that will enhance the Federal Government's ability to perform its duties capably and economically as it faces a wave of retirement of highly experienced Federal employees.

When we think about the coming demographic shock of millions of baby boomers reaching retirement age, we usually focus on the cash-flow implications for the Social Security and Medicare programs. But their aging will also have a profound effect on the Federal workforce.

On average, retirements from the Federal workforce have exceeded 50,000 a year for a decade. The numbers will certainly rise in the near future. The Office of Personnel Management calculates that 60 percent of the current Federal workforce, whose civilian component approaches 3 million people, will be eligible to retire during the coming 10 years.

Federal agencies, which already must hire more than 250,000 new employees each year, will need to work hard to replace those retirees, as the private sector and State and local governments will be facing the same problem and competing for qualified replacements.

The baby boom retirement wave will have another impact. It will cause a sudden acceleration in the loss of accumulated skills and mentoring capabilities that experienced workers uniquely possess.

Human-resources research has repeatedly shown that, in general, older workers equal or outperform younger workers in organizational knowledge, ability to work independently, commitment, productivity, flexibility, and mentoring ability.

Making good use of their talents is, therefore, not charity. It is common sense and sound management.

Federal agencies recognize the value of older workers, as witnessed by the fact that nearly 4,500 retirees have been allowed to return to full-time work on a waiver basis.

Agencies could make use of even more Federal annuitants for short- term projects or part-time work, but for a disincentive embedded in current law.

Title 5 of the United States Code currently mandates that annuitants who return to work for the Federal Government must have their salary reduced by the amount of their annuity during the period of reemployment. The bill I introduce today with the welcome cosponsorship of Senators Warner and Voinovich would provide a limited but vital measure of relief to agencies who could benefit from the skills and knowledge of Federal retirees. It provides a limited opportunity for Federal agencies to reemploy retirees without requiring them to take pay cuts based on their annuity payment.

This simple but powerful reform is a priority item for the Federal Office of Personnel Management. As OPM Director Linda Springer has said, ``Modifying the rules to bring talented retirees back to the Government on a part-time basis without penalizing their annuity would allow Federal agencies to rehire recently retired employees to assist with short-term projects, fill critical skill gaps and train the next generation of Federal employees.''

Organizations endorsing the reform contemplated in my bill include the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association, the Federal Managers Association, the Partnership for Public Service, and the Council for Excellence in Government.

I would note two important points about the bill.

First, it will not materially affect the necessary flow of younger workers into Federal agencies. The bill contemplates reemployment for part-time or project work of not more than 520 hours in the first 6 months following the start of annuity payments, not more than 1,040 hours in any 12-month period, and not more than 6,240 hours total for the annuitant's lifetime. In terms of 8-hour days, those figures are equivalent to 65, 130, and 780 days, respectively.

These limits will give agencies flexibility in assigning retirees to limited-time or limited-scope projects, including mentoring and collaboration, without evading or undermining the waiver requirement for substantial or full-time employment. of annuitants.

I would also note that this bill gives no cause for concern about financial impact. Reemployed annuitants would be performing work that the agencies needed to do in any case, but would not require any additional contributions to pension or savings plans. Meanwhile, their retiree health and life insurance benefits would be costs unaffected by their part-time work. Even without making any allowance for the positive

effects of their organizational knowledge, commitment, productivity, and mentoring potential, their reemployment is likely to produce net savings.

This measure offers benefits for Federal agencies, for Federal retirees who would welcome the opportunity to perform part-time work, and for taxpayers. I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. President, I rise to introduce Senate Bill 2003, a measure that will enhance the Federal Government's ability to perform its duties capably and economically as it faces a wave of retirement of highly experienced Federal employees.

When we think about the coming demographic shock of millions of baby boomers reaching retirement age, we usually focus on the cash-flow implications for the Social Security and Medicare programs. But their aging will also have a profound effect on the Federal workforce.

On average, retirements from the Federal workforce have exceeded 50,000 a year for a decade. The numbers will certainly rise in the near future. The Office of Personnel Management calculates that 60 percent of the current Federal workforce, whose civilian component approaches 3 million people, will be eligible to retire during the coming 10 years.

Federal agencies, which already must hire more than 250,000 new employees each year, will need to work hard to replace those retirees, as the private sector and State and local governments will be facing the same problem and competing for qualified replacements.

The baby boom retirement wave will have another impact. It will cause a sudden acceleration in the loss of accumulated skills and mentoring capabilities that experienced workers uniquely possess.

Human-resources research has repeatedly shown that, in general, older workers equal or outperform younger workers in organizational knowledge, ability to work independently, commitment, productivity, flexibility, and mentoring ability.

Making good use of their talents is, therefore, not charity. It is common sense and sound management.

Federal agencies recognize the value of older workers, as witnessed by the fact that nearly 4,500 retirees have been allowed to return to full-time work on a waiver basis.

Agencies could make use of even more Federal annuitants for short- term projects or part-time work, but for a disincentive embedded in current law.

Title 5 of the United States Code currently mandates that annuitants who return to work for the Federal Government must have their salary reduced by the amount of their annuity during the period of reemployment. The bill I introduce today with the welcome cosponsorship of Senators Warner and Voinovich would provide a limited but vital measure of relief to agencies who could benefit from the skills and knowledge of Federal retirees. It provides a limited opportunity for Federal agencies to reemploy retirees without requiring them to take pay cuts based on their annuity payment.

This simple but powerful reform is a priority item for the Federal Office of Personnel Management. As OPM Director Linda Springer has said, ``Modifying the rules to bring talented retirees back to the Government on a part-time basis without penalizing their annuity would allow Federal agencies to rehire recently retired employees to assist with short-term projects, fill critical skill gaps and train the next generation of Federal employees.''

Organizations endorsing the reform contemplated in my bill include the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association, the Federal Managers Association, the Partnership for Public Service, and the Council for Excellence in Government.

I would note two important points about the bill.

First, it will not materially affect the necessary flow of younger workers into Federal agencies. The bill contemplates reemployment for part-time or project work of not more than 520 hours in the first 6 months following the start of annuity payments, not more than 1,040 hours in any 12-month period, and not more than 6,240 hours total for the annuitant's lifetime. In terms of 8-hour days, those figures are equivalent to 65, 130, and 780 days, respectively.

These limits will give agencies flexibility in assigning retirees to limited-time or limited-scope projects, including mentoring and collaboration, without evading or undermining the waiver requirement for substantial or full-time employment. of annuitants.

I would also note that this bill gives no cause for concern about financial impact. Reemployed annuitants would be performing work that the agencies needed to do in any case, but would not require any additional contributions to pension or savings plans. Meanwhile, their retiree health and life insurance benefits would be costs unaffected by their part-time work. Even without making any allowance for the positive

effects of their organizational knowledge, commitment, productivity, and mentoring potential, their reemployment is likely to produce net savings.

This measure offers benefits for Federal agencies, for Federal retirees who would welcome the opportunity to perform part-time work, and for taxpayers. I urge my colleagues to support it.