S. 3431Senate110th Congress (2007-2009)In Committee

Time for Innovation Matters in Education Act of 2008

Legislative Activity

Stay on top of the latest movement without scrolling through every action

1 earlier action

SenateIntro Referral Latest Action

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.

Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee

August 1, 2008

View full timeline

SenateIntro Referral

Introduced in Senate

August 1, 2008

SenateIntro Referral

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.

Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee

August 1, 2008

Floor Debate

6 members

What members said about S. 3431 on the floor

6 Democrats

Sen. Mary L. LandrieuD-LA · Aug 1, 2008

Mr. President, I introduce this bill today to prevent misuse of the Antiquities. Act of 1906 to create very large marine monuments. The Antiquities Act was intended to protect landmarks, not create the largest protected areas in the United States unilaterally without congressional assent.

The Bush administration acted covertly to convey protected status to 139,000 square miles of the northwestern Hawaiian Islands. In so doing, the administration short-circuited the extensive Marine Sanctuaries process that was already underway and notified the delegation only after the press conference. Now they have turned their attention to the Gulf of Mexico.

We learned that the President, with mixed support from his top advisors, is considering using his authorities under the Antiquities Act to unilaterally and permanently declare ``marine monuments'' in various locations of the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone. Some of these areas are in my backyard--in the Gulf of Mexico--but other areas of the Atlantic and Pacific are also under consideration.

I certainly understand the need to conserve and appropriately manage our most sensitive and vulnerable marine areas, which can serve as nurseries for fish stocks and provide critical habitat for other important species. That is why I support the processes Congress established in the National Marine Sanctuaries Act. But any declarations of new or additional protected status to marine areas should continue to follow the scientific and public processes outlined in the Sanctuaries Act. This is a good process that allows all affected parties--from the environmental community to recreational fishermen to the oil and gas industries--to have a say.

Mr. President, I introduce this bill today to restore historic Jackson Barracks in New Orleans to its pre-Hurricane Katrina status as a national historic treasure. Jackson Barracks represents the rich military history of New Orleans, and indeed our great State. However, the rebuilding of the structures on this significant garrison has been hindered by bureaucratic roadblocks and gaps in funding. This bill directly addresses those challenges.

As you know, Hurricane Katrina brought torrential floods and driving

winds to New Orleans and the surrounding region. The devastation from the storm touched every structure at Jackson Barracks. The original Jackson Barracks consists of 14 Antebellum Garrison Structures built between 1834 and 1835. These historic buildings were not spared and suffered tremendous damage.

There is a pressing need to complete the restoration and renovation of the barracks. Jackson Barracks requires additional renovations and restorations that are not within the scope of the Federal Emergency Management Agency hurricane restoration funding. With the agreement of the Chief, National Guard Bureau and the Secretary of the Interior, this bill would reprogram the savings from several military construction projects elsewhere on Jackson Barracks to assist in the completion of historic preservation at the post.

I ask the support of my colleagues in enabling the National Park Service to aid in the restoration of Jackson Barracks through the Historic Preservation Fund. I am not asking for additional dollars, but rather that the money that was saved on previous projects be recommitted and used for this vital need.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to reauthorize the Cane River National Heritage Area Commission and modify the boundaries of the heritage area. In 1994, Congress recognized this area as one of the nation's cultural and historic treasures. In the 1700s, Creole culture flowered across the stunning landscapes of the Cane River, and the Creole culture continues to enliven the region to this day. In terms of beauty, it is not only the landscape but the Creole architecture from that time period that charms visitors. Today, the 35 mile region includes the Cane River Creole National Historical Park, seven national historic landmarks, three state historic sites, and 24 properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

Anchored by the city of Natchitoches, which traces its history to a French colonial settlement established in 1714 near the Natchitoches Indian village on the Red River, the region's colonial forts, Creole plantations, churches, cemeteries, archeological sites, historic transportation routes, and commercial centers provide a unique view into Louisiana's past.

I am proud to represent the people of Louisiana by asking the 110th Congress to reauthorize this National Heritage Area and reaffirm the importance of the Cane River Creole culture as a nationally significant element of American heritage.

This should not be a difficult task. Congress has once before agreed to establish a Cane River Creole National Historical Park to serve as the focus of interpretive and educational programs on the history of the Cane River area and to assist in the preservation of certain historic sites along the river. Now, I ask this Congress to do it again by reauthorizing the Cane River National Heritage Area.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation entitled the Lower Mississippi River National Historic Site Study Act. This bill will direct the Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability and feasibility of designating sites in Plaquemines Parish along the Lower Mississippi River Area as a unit of the National Park System. To be eligible for favorable consideration as a unit of the National Park System, an area must possess nationally significant natural, cultural or recreational resources. The Lower Mississippi River area in Plaquemines Parish meets and exceeds these criteria.

I am proud to come to the floor today to introduce this bill. Anyone who has visited Plaquemines Parish knows that it is one of the Nation's unique treasures. The natural beauty there at the mouth of the Mississippi is impossible to describe, but impossible not to love. The area is rich in history, and it is a preserve for one of the nation's most unique cultural melanges.

That mix began after the Native Americans in the region began to intermingle with the Spanish explorers who traveled along the banks of the river in the 1500s. In 1682, Rene-Robert Cavelier de LaSalle claimed all the land drained by the Mississippi for France area. In 1699, the area became the site of the first fortification on the Lower Mississippi River, known as Fort Mississippi. Since then, it has been the home to 10 different fortifications, including Fort St. Philip and Fort Jackson.

Fort St. Philip, originally built in 1749, proved to be instrumental during the Battle of New Orleans by blocking the British Navy from going up river. Fort Jackson was built at the request of General Andrew Jackson and partially constructed by famous local Civil War General P.G.T. Beauregard. This fort was the site of the famous Civil War battle know as the ``Battle of Forts'' which is also referred to as the ``night the war was lost.''

As this glimpse of the region's military history shows, the Lower Plaquemines region is of national cultural and historical significance.

There are also many other important and unique attributes to this area. This area is home to the longest continuous river road and levee system in the U.S. It is also home to the ancient Head of Passes site, Plaquemines Bend, geological features and two national wildlife refuges.

Finally, the area has a rich cultural heritage. Over the years, many different cultures have made this area home including Creoles, Europeans, Indians, Yugoslavs, African-Americans and Vietnamese. These cultures have worked together to create the infrastructure for transportation of our Nation's energy which is being produced by these same people out in the Gulf of Mexico off our shores. They have also created a fishing industry that contributes to Louisiana's economy.

I think it is easy to see why this area would make an excellent addition to the National Park Service. I hope that my colleagues will join me in supporting this bill which simply allows the National Park Service to study the suitability and feasibility of bringing this area into the system. I look forward to working with my colleagues to quickly enact this bill.

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

Sen. Jeff BingamanD-NM · Aug 1, 2008

Mr. President, I rise today, along with Senators Kennedy and Sanders, to introduce the Time for Innovation Matters in Education, or TIME Act, of 2008. This bill would improve and expand students'…

Mr. President, I rise today, along with Senators Kennedy and Sanders, to introduce the Time for Innovation Matters in Education, or TIME Act, of 2008. This bill would improve and expand students' instructional time, while ensuring rigorous standards, as a means to help close the academic achievement gap that exists for so many of our disadvantaged students.

The fundamental principle underlying this bill is that the amount of instructional time provided by the vast majority of school calendars is simply inadequate for today's students and teachers. Teachers need more time to plan and deliver instruction, and students need more time for 21st century learning.

The demands on 21st century learners reflect the rapid increase in technological advances that we have all experienced in the last 30 or 40 years. Twenty first century learning demands an increase in the rigor of mathematics and science education, and the acquisition of subject area knowledge in areas that simply did not exist years ago, such as computer literacy. These increased demands should not be met at the expense of ignoring other subjects such as social studies, art, and physical education. Yet, these other areas are often ignored to allow for time for some of the major academic subjects. That is the consequence of failing to match the gradual increase in educational demands with a corresponding increase in instructional time.

Instead, here we are in the 21st century, continuing to adhere to a school calendar that was established over 100 years ago, and which was designed to accommodate a predominantly agricultural society. In nearly every State, the school calendar is based on approximately 180 or fewer instructional days, or on approximately 1000 instructional hours, per school year. This means that American students are spending fewer than 20 percent of their waking hours in school.

In the recent National Research Council report entitled, How People Learn, the authors comment on the importance of being realistic about the amount of time it takes to learn complex subject matter. Simply put, they note that ``significant learning takes major investments of time.'' The TIME Act is an initial investment that will provide teachers and students with the expanded opportunities they need to achieve high quality instruction and learning. We know that time needs are significant if our students are to achieve a 21st century education.

Although all students are likely to benefit from expanded learning time, we must prioritize these opportunities for students who are most at risk for poor academic achievement. International reports like the PISA study demonstrate that although American students, as a group, have poor academic achievement relative to students in other industrialized nations, this disparity is most pronounced for students that are overrepresented among our Nation's poor. In fact, the 2006 PISA report shows that achievement scores for White, non-Hispanic students meet or exceed average scores reported across participating nations, whereas the average scores for Black or Hispanic students are well below that average.

Likewise, although research has demonstrated that all students are at risk for losing educational gains during the extended summer breaks that are currently the norm for most schools, children from low income households experience significantly greater achievement losses during summer breaks because they lack opportunities to attend the quality summer programs available to their less disadvantaged peers. Each year, this disparity contributes to the growing achievement gap. Researchers have shown us that these out-of-school experiences account for most of the achievement difference observed by 9th grade, which in turn influences when and whether students will graduate from high school and attend postsecondary school. Investing in more time during the school year can help to diminish these achievement gaps, improve graduation rates, and make a lasting difference in these students' lives.

But effective expanded learning opportunities require more than just more time. The time must be well spent. Students must be appropriately engaged in their learning, and teachers must have the training and support to use the longer school time effectively. Researchers have identified that expanded learning time benefits teachers, by providing more opportunities for cooperative planning and more time to individualize instruction. Involved students and teachers are critical to successful expanded learning time programs, and both benefit from effective programming.

States have begun to explore expanded learning programs, and have demonstrated their effectiveness. In Massachusetts, 10 schools converted their calendars to expand the mandatory number of school days and the number of hours within a school day. Outcomes include not only increased student achievement, but greater school satisfaction among parents, teachers, and students. In my own State of New Mexico, expanded learning initiatives have been pursued, in the form of longer school days or additional school days throughout the year. Early reports demonstrate increased achievement in math and reading, beyond grade-level expectations. Unfortunately, the funds available for these initiatives are limited to voluntary participation. We must make these programs become a regular part of the school day for all students and teachers, particularly those who are greatest risk for academic failure.

Most districts and State educational agencies do not have the capacity or infrastructure to guide, support, and fund expanded learning day programs, but good models for turning around low- performing schools do exist. Federal support can be used to build States' and schools' capacity based on evidence from such models.

Towards this goal, the TIME Act will: provide incentives for States and local educational agencies to develop plans for research-based, sustainable, and replicable expanded learning programs, for high- priority schools, with a focus on increasing rigorous and varied instructional opportunities for students and teachers; allow local educational agencies to determine appropriate objectives of their extended learning programs, such as increasing math and science scores for all students, enhance art or physical education, or increase academic English proficiency for English language learners; encourage States to take a leadership role and deliver technical assistance to schools that implement such programs; encourage schools to form partnerships with organizations that have successful track records in supporting or delivering effective expanded learning programs; and promote research on expanded learning program implementation, through local, State, and national data collection efforts. The results of these evaluations can inform best practices for future delivery of expanded learning models to additional schools.

I would like to thank Chairman Kennedy for his leadership on this legislation, and for his ongoing commitment to enhancing educational opportunities for all Americans; particularly our most disadvantaged youths. Moreover, Senator Kennedy's State of Massachusetts is a leader in school-wide expanded learning initiatives. Massachusetts has demonstrated that expanded

learning enhances students' success, and it has done so in formerly struggling schools in some of the State's poorest school districts.

The TIME Act expands upon these models of success by promoting similar initiatives across the country. I hope that this legislation will be incorporated into reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Like my colleagues Senator Kennedy and Sanders, I believe that all students deserve the time needed for a quality education. I also believe that all schools should expand well beyond their current limited calendar, especially if America is to maintain and increase its competitive edge in the global economy. We must invest in a systematic approach to improving schools so that every child graduates prepared for success. The TIME Act is an initial investment toward this goal.

Sen. Jeff BingamanD-NM · Aug 1, 2008

Mr. President, I rise today, along with Senators Kennedy and Sanders, to introduce the Time for Innovation Matters in Education, or TIME Act, of 2008. This bill would improve and expand students'…

learning enhances students' success, and it has done so in formerly struggling schools in some of the State's poorest school districts.

Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr.D-DE · Aug 1, 2008

Today I join a bipartisan group of Senators in introducing the Iraq Security Agreement Act of 2008. This bill, consistent with the Constitution of the United States, prohibits the Bush administration from entering into a binding security agreement with Iraq without the approval of Congress. It would also prohibit the obligation of any funds to implement such an agreement.

I regret that I am compelled to introduce this legislation. If the President had embarked on these negotiations in a more responsible manner--by being clear about the objective, by ensuring that the agreements would not tie the hands of the next administration, by actively consulting with Congress as a partner in the process--this bill would be unnecessary. But the Administration has done none of these things, and so my colleagues and I want to ensure that Congress, and thus the American people, is brought into the process.

Let me take a step back and summarize how we got to this point. From October 2003 until the present day, the American military presence in Iraq has been authorized under international law through a series of UN Security Council Resolutions. Last November, President Bush and Prime Minister Maliki signed a ``Declaration of Principles,'' which set out a framework for our countries to negotiate, by yesterday--July 31, 2008-- agreements governing cooperation in the political, economic and security spheres. The Declaration indicated that the two countries would not seek to renew the United Nations mandate for American troops in Iraq past December 31, 2008. Among other things, the Declaration contemplates ``providing security assurances and commitments to the Republic of Iraq to deter foreign aggression against Iraq'' and supporting Iraq ``in its efforts to combat all terrorist groups,'' including Al-Qaeda, Saddamists, and ``all other outlaw groups regardless of affiliation.'' In other words, all the folks fighting in Iraq and killing each other.

The Declaration may result in two pacts. One would be a ``Strategic Framework Agreement'' that will ``set the broad parameters of the overall bilateral relationship in every field,'' according to the U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker. This might be better titled ``What the United States will do for Iraq,'' because it consists mostly of a series of promises that flow in one direction--promises by the United States to a sectarian government that has thus far failed to reach the political compromises necessary to build a stable country.

The second agreement is a ``Status of Forces Agreement'' or SOFA, governing the presence of U.S. forces in Iraq, including their entry into the country and the immunities to be granted to them under Iraqi law. The administration claims that this agreement is mostly ``routine'' because we have SOFAs with over 90 countries around the globe. But conditions our soldiers face in Iraq are far from ``routine,'' despite recent improvements in security. Moreover, this SOFA would be much broader than the typical SOFA, from what we know. It would provide us with access to bases from which our military would operate, provisions that are usually in a separate facilities or ``basing'' agreement. This SOFA would also deal with contractor immunity, would permit U.S. forces to engage in combat operations in Iraq, and would provide authority for detaining insurgents. This is not a typical SOFA.

One of these agreements will reportedly contain a ``security arrangement''--a pledge by the United States to consult on next steps if Iraq is threatened. The Administration suggests that such an agreement is unremarkable, and that it does not bind the United States. But at a time when we have over 100,000 troops on the ground, an expansive program to train and equip Iraqi forces, and multiple U.S. military facilities, the pledge is, in reality, little different from a binding security commitment. Certainly, the government of Iraq and its people will perceive that we are signing up to defend Iraq against external threats.

Yesterday's deadline has apparently not been met. The New York Times reports, however, that the Bush administration and Iraqi government are close to an agreement. But Congress still remains largely in the dark.

We have not seen draft language. We do not definitively know which portions of the agreement will be binding, and which will not be. We are not in a position to evaluate whether the agreement will create obligations--either legal or political--that will constrain the next administration, whether Democratic or Republican. The President cannot make such a sweeping commitment on his own authority. Congress must grant approval. The legislation we introduce today requires that Congress be made part of the process.

I have often stated that no foreign policy can be sustained without the informed consent of the American people. More than 5 years ago, President Bush went to war in Iraq without gaining that consent--by overstating the intelligence and understating the difficulty, cost and duration of the mission.

In the final months of his term, President Bush is once again acting without the informed consent of the American people, putting us on a course to commit the Nation to a new phase of a long war in Iraq, and thereby bind his successors to his vision of U.S. policy in Iraq. By these agreements, the President will make it harder for his successor to change course.

Let me be clear. I support the concept of a Status of Forces Agreement with Iraq. But not at the cost of limiting our operational latitude or making security commitments--legal or political--that are not approved by Congress.

Administration officials have indicated that the Iraqi government is resisting the inclusion of key provisions that U.S. forces need in order to operate in Iraq. Given the difficulty of securing Iraq's consent to the broad authorities that the United States now has by virtue of the U.N. Security Council Resolutions, I believe the best option for the United States at this juncture is to seek an extension of the current United Nations Security Counsel resolution for Iraq.

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

Sen. Christopher J. DoddD-CT · Aug 1, 2008

Mr. President, I rise today along with Senators Jack Reed, John Kerry, Tom Carper, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and Joe Biden to introduce the Sunscreen Labeling Protection Act of 2008, or the SUN Act. I thank them for their support of this legislation and have enjoyed working with them on the issue of sunscreen labeling. This is an issue I have been working on for more than a decade. I also want to thank the many outside organizations who support this legislation including the American Cancer Society, the Melanoma Research Foundation, and many others as well as the leading U.S. manufacturers of sunscreen, Banana Boat and Hawaiian Tropic.

As we head into yet another steamy, sweltering summer locally in Washington, DC, and as Americans throughout the country hit the outdoors to enjoy a relaxing time at beaches, backyard barbeques and parks, we cannot forget how important it is to protect our skin from the sun's damaging rays.

However, I am profoundly disappointed to report that yet another summer is passing us by without adequate sunscreen labeling to protect consumers from harmful ultraviolet radiation, including UVA and UVB. Americans are being left in the lurch by the inaction of the Food and Drug Administration, which has failed to issue comprehensive and consistent standards for measuring and labeling sunscreen products for their protective value and for guarding against false claims on sunscreen products.

Americans may be surprised to learn that the Sun Protection Factor, SPF, number on the sunscreen they buy at their local convenience store or supermarket measures only the level of UVB protection provided by the sunscreen. It does not include a measure of the level of UVA protection. UVB has long been associated with sunburn while UVA has been recognized as a deeper penetrating radiation that contributes to skin cancer. While many products claim to offer UVA protection, that claim is not backed by enforceable, FDA-recommended standards by which those claims can be substantiated.

The FDA's standards for sunscreen testing and labeling lag 30 years behind our knowledge of the dangers of sun exposure. Research tells us that individual risk of melanoma, the most serious form of skin cancer, is associated with the intensity of sunlight that a person receives over a lifetime. In 2008, it is estimated there will be more than 1 million new cases of skin cancers and 62,480 new cases of melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer. Tragically, there will be as many as 8,420 deaths from melanoma this year.

Many sunscreen products carry claims that they protect against cancer-causing UVA rays, but without FDA action to set standards for testing and labeling, these claims can't be validated. Indeed, an analysis released earlier this summer found that many sunscreen products have misleading labels that make unsubstantiated claims.

Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island and I, along with many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, have repeatedly urged the FDA-- for over a decade now--to follow through with its

development of standards. We have written letters to the FDA dating back more than ten years, we have made phone calls, we have asked questions at hearings, and we even directed the FDA to issue final labeling for UVA and UVB in the fiscal year 2006 Agriculture Appropriations bill.

The American Cancer Society, the American Academy of Dermatology, and numerous other organizations speak of the value of using sunscreen to protect our skin from damaging UVA and UVB rays as an important step in preventing skin cancer. For years, we have heard their repeated cries for industry-wide standards that will help Americans protect themselves from a preventable cause of cancer. And still there is no final action by the FDA.

The public deserves better. If you take one look at the startling numbers of Americans who will be diagnosed with skin cancer this year and who will likely die from this disease, it is clear that the public must know that what they read on the label of a sunscreen product represents a scientifically valid claim of protection from both UVA and UVB radiation.

Almost a year ago, the FDA issued a proposed rule that would set standards for testing and labeling sunscreen that includes UVA and UVB. I applaud this progress. It was a long time in coming. But I must reiterate that until the proposed rule is finalized, consumers and manufacturers lack an enforceable, consistent and comprehensive standard for testing and labeling of sunscreen products.

That is why I am introducing the SUNscreen Labeling Protection Act of 2008, or the SUN Act. This simple, straightforward bill gives the FDA 180 days from the date of enactment to finalize the proposed rule for comprehensive labeling, including formulation, testing and labeling requirements for both UVA and UVB, after which point the proposed rule would become effective.

I cannot emphasize enough the importance of this issue. The public continues to be misled by false claims that cannot be effectively challenged because there are no enforceable FDA standards for measuring and labeling UVA protection.

If the FDA would finalize its proposed rule including UVA and UVB protection, this legislation would not be necessary. But, a year and an entire summer season has nearly passed since the rule was proposed, as have decades of inaction prior to the proposed rule even being issued. All the while, consumers have gone without the information and protection they need which is what makes this legislation so critical.

I urge my colleagues to support this critically important bill.

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

Show 2 more

Sen. Dianne FeinsteinD-CA · Aug 1, 2008

Mr. President, today, Senators Rockefeller, Whitehouse, Hagel, Feingold and I introduce legislation to end coercive interrogations and secret detentions by the Central Intelligence Agency. These…

Mr. President, today, Senators Rockefeller, Whitehouse, Hagel, Feingold and I introduce legislation to end coercive interrogations and secret detentions by the Central Intelligence Agency.

These practices have brought shame to our Nation, have harmed our ability to fight the war on terror, and, I believe, violate U.S. law and international treaty obligations.

It is time to repudiate torture and secret disappearances. It is time to end the outsourcing of coercive interrogations to the lowest bidder. It is time to return to the norms and values that have driven the United States to greatness for decades, but have been tarnished in the past 7 years.

It is now public knowledge that the Bush administration, in the Vice President's words, turned to ``the dark side.'' The ``gloves came off.'' In the name of counterterrorism, the CIA resorted to waterboarding--an interrogation technique invented in the Spanish Inquisition to force false confessions and punish enemies.

In a mistaken effort to gain better intelligence, the CIA used this same technique that the Justice Department has prosecuted and the State Department has decried overseas. The administration used warped logic and faulty reasoning to say waterboarding technique was not torture. It is.

Waterboarding is the only technique to be publicly confirmed by this administration. There are others that have not been acknowledged but are still authorized for use. This has to end.

But we will never turn this sad page in our Nation's history until all coercive techniques are banned, and are replaced with a single, clear, uniform standard across the United States Government.

That standard is the one set out in the Army Field Manual. Its techniques work for the military and for the Federal Bureau of Investigation. If the CIA would abide by its terms, it would work for the CIA as well.

The first provision in this legislation requires the Intelligence Community to follow the Army Field Manual. That is already the law for the Department of Defense.

It is supported by 43 retired generals and admirals and by a bipartisan group of former Secretaries of State and Defense, Ambassadors, and national security advisors.

Majorities in both houses of Congress passed this provision earlier this year, sending a clear message that we do not support coercive interrogations. Regrettably, the President's veto stopped it from becoming law.

The second provision in this legislation requires that access to any detainee being held by the intelligence community be provided to members of the International Committee of the Red Cross.

Access by the ICRC is a hallmark of international law and is required by the Geneva Conventions. We believe that granting access to the ICRC is the best way to ensure that the same right will be afforded to U.S. forces if they are ever captured overseas.

But ICRC access has been denied at CIA black sites in the war on terror. This has, in part, opened the door to the abuses in detainee treatment. Independent access prevents abuses like we witnessed at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay. It is time that the same protection is in place for the CIA as well, in the well-established rules that the military has used for years.

Finally, this legislation contains a ban on contractor interrogators at the CIA. As General Hayden has testified, the CIA uses outside contractors to conduct these interrogations.

We should not be using coercive interrogation techniques at all. But I firmly believe that outsourcing these interrogations to private companies is a way to diminish accountability and to avoid getting the Agency's hands dirty. I also believe that the use of contractors leads to more brutal interrogations than if they were done by Government employees.

We remain a nation at war, and credible, actionable intelligence remains a cornerstone of our war effort. But that is not what the CIA detention and interrogation program has provided.

Every single experienced interrogator tells us that coercive techniques will get someone to say what the interrogator wants to hear. But that doesn't make it true.

In fact, coercive interrogations and the threat of torture produced the information that Saddam Hussein was providing al Qaeda with WMD training. That wasn't true, but it helped lead us to war in Iraq.

Military and FBI interrogators also tell us that when they build a rapport with a detainee, they get more information, and more valuable information, than when it is coerced.

Beyond that, our Nation has paid an enormous price because of these interrogations. They cast shadow and doubt over our ideals and our system of justice. Our enemies have used our practices to recruit more extremists. Our key global partnerships, crucial to winning the war on terror, have been strained.

Look at two of our closest allies in the world. The British Parliament no longer trusts U.S. assurances that we will not torture detainees. The Canadian Government recently added the United States to its list of nations that conduct torture.

This is not the country that we want to be. Torture and disappearances do not befit the nation that I know.

It is time to restore America's integrity.

It will take time to resume our place as the world's beacon of liberty and justice. This bill will put us on that path and start the process. I urge its passage.

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

Sen. Richard J. DurbinD-IL · Aug 1, 2008

Mr. President, I rise to discuss legislation that I am introducing today, the it Combating Organized Retail Crime Act of 2008. This bill addresses a persistent and growing problem that costs…

Mr. President, I rise to discuss legislation that I am introducing today, the it Combating Organized Retail Crime Act of 2008.

This bill addresses a persistent and growing problem that costs retailers billions of dollars and poses serious health and safety risks for consumers. Organized retail crime involves the coordinated theft of large numbers of items from retail stores with the intent to resell those items. Typically, crime organizations hire teams of professional shoplifters to steal over-the-counter drugs, health and beauty aids, designer clothing, razor blades, baby formula, electronic devices and other items from retail stores. Using sophisticated means for evading anti-theft measures, and often the assistance of employees at stores, the thieves target 10-15 stores per day. They steal thousands of dollars worth of items from each store and deliver the items to a processing and storage location. There, teams of workers sort the items, remove anti-theft tracking devices, and remove labels that identify the items with a particular store. In some instances, they change the expiration date, replace the label with that of a more expensive product, or dilute the product and repackage the modified contents in seemingly-authentic packaging. The items are then stored in a warehouse, often under poor conditions that result in the deterioration of the contents.

Organized retail crime rings typically sell their stolen merchandise in different markets, including flea markets, swap-meets, and online auction sites. Online sales are of particular concern, since the internet reaches a worldwide market and allows sellers to operate anonymously and maximize return. A growing number of multi-million dollar organized retail crime cases involve internet sales. For example, in Florida recently law enforcement agents arrested 20 people in a $100 million case involving the sale of stolen health and beauty aids on an online auction site and at flea markets.

Organized retail crime has a variety of harmful effects. Retailers and the FBI estimate that it costs retailers billions of dollars in revenues and costs states hundreds of millions of dollars in sales tax revenues. With respect to certain products, such as baby formula and diabetic test strips, improper storage and handling by thieves creates a serious public safety risk when the products are resold. The proceeds of organized retail crime are often used to finance other forms of criminal behavior, including gang activity and drug trafficking.

The Combating Organized Retail Crime Act would address this problem in several ways. First, it would toughen the criminal code's treatment of organized retail crime by refining certain offenses to capture conduct that is currently being committed by individuals engaged in organized retail crime, and by requiring the U.S. Sentencing Commission to consider relevant sentencing guideline enhancements.

Second, the bill would require physical retail marketplaces, such as flea markets, and online retail marketplaces, such as auction websites, to review the account of a seller and file a suspicious activity report with the Justice Department when presented with documentary evidence showing that the seller is selling items that were illegally obtained. If the physical or online retail marketplace is presented

with clear and convincing evidence that the seller is engaged in such illegal activity, it must terminate the activities of the seller. This requirement will lead to greater cooperation between retail marketplaces, retailers and law enforcement, and will result in an increased number of organized retail crime prosecutions.

Third, the bill would require high-volume sellers on online auction sites (meaning sellers that have obtained at least $10,000 in annual gross revenues on the site) to display a physical address, post office box, or private mail box registered with a commercial mail receiving agency. This requirement will help online buyers get in touch with sellers, and assist law enforcement agents who wish to identify people who may be selling stolen goods online. It is analogous to a provision in the federal CAN-SPAM Act, which also requires persons who send mass emails to disclose their physical addresses.

This legislation has broad support in the retail industry in my home state of Illinois and nationwide. It is supported by the Illinois Retail Merchants Association, the National Retail Federation, the Retail Industry Leaders Association, the Food Marketing Institute, the National Association of Chain Drug Stores, and the Coalition to Stop Organized Retail Crime, whose members include such retail giants as Home Depot, Target, Wal-Mart, Safeway, Walgreens, and Macy's.

In summary, the Combating Organized Retail Crime Act addresses a serious problem that hurts businesses that are struggling to survive in a weak economy, and that harms consumers who unknowingly purchase stolen items that have been subjected to tampering. It heightens the penalties for organized retail crime, shuts down criminals who are selling stolen goods, and places valuable information about illegal activity into the hands of law enforcement. This bill is a big step forward in the fight against a nationwide problem, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

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

Bill Text

Latest available legislative text

Reading Mode

Raw Text PDF

Introduced in SenateIssued August 1, 2008

        [Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]
[S. 3431 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

2d Session
S. 3431

To establish expanded learning time initiatives, and for other
purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

August 1, 2008

Mr. Reid (for Mr. Kennedy (for himself, Mr. Bingaman, and Mr. Sanders))
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

A BILL

To establish expanded learning time initiatives, and for other
purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Time for Innovation Matters in
Education Act of 2008''.

SEC. 2. PURPOSES.

The purposes of this Act are--
(1) to increase opportunities for students to participate
in expanded learning time initiatives with expanded school
days, expanded school weeks, or expanded school years, in order
to increase student academic achievement and student engagement
and success in schools by providing--
(A) students with more in-depth and rigorous
learning opportunities in reading or language arts,
mathematics, science, and other core academic subjects;
(B) students with more time for additional subjects
and enrichment activities that contribute to a well-
rounded education, which may include music and the
arts, physical education, drama, service-learning, and
experiential and work-based learning opportunities
(such as community service, learning apprenticeships,
internships, and job shadowing); and
(C) teachers with increased opportunities to work
collaboratively and to participate in professional
planning to improve instruction;
(2) to improve teaching and learning by--
(A) creating a seamless program or curriculum with
regular and expanded teaching and learning
opportunities within a school program that is
comprehensively redesigned for students and teachers;
and
(B) improving access to instructional supports for
struggling students;
(3) to encourage States, local educational agencies, and
schools to develop high-quality, innovative, replicable, and
sustainable initiatives to expand learning time; and
(4) to create partnerships between schools and local
educational agencies, and external organizations such as
community-based organizations, institutions of higher
education, community learning centers, cultural organizations,
and health and mental health agencies to provide expanded
learning and development opportunities for students.

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS AND REFERENCES.

(a) Definitions.--In this Act:
(1) Community learning center.--The term ``community
learning center'' means a community learning center, as defined
in section 4201(b) of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7171(b)), that receives assistance under
part B of title IV of that Act.
(2) Elementary and secondary education terms.--The terms
``community-based organization'', ``core academic subjects'',
``elementary school'', ``highly qualified'', ``institution of
higher education'', ``local educational agency'', ``other
staff'', ``parent'', ``professional development'', ``secondary
school'', ``Secretary'', ``State'', and ``State educational
agency'' have the meanings given the terms in section 9101 of
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
7801).
(3) Eligible entity.--The term ``eligible entity'' means--
(A) a local educational agency; or
(B) a partnership that includes a local educational
agency and 1 or more of the following:
(i) An additional local educational agency.
(ii) A nonprofit community-based
organization, such as an organization focused
on after-school learning, alternative learning,
or dropout prevention, or an organization with
demonstrated experience in expanding learning
opportunities and helping schools redesign
their educational programs to better meet
student needs.
(iii) An institution of higher education.
(iv) A community learning center.
(v) Any other public or nonprofit private
entity.
(4) Expanded learning time initiative.--The term ``expanded
learning time initiative'' means a program at a school that--
(A) has an expanded school day, expanded school
week, or expanded school year schedule, that increases
the total number of school hours for the school year by
not less than 30 percent, compared to the school year
that is standard in the school district in which the
school is located, for schools of the comparable level
(elementary school, middle school, or high school, as
defined under applicable State law);
(B) uses the expanded learning time schedule to
redesign the school's academic program in a manner that
includes additional time--
(i) for academic work to improve
participating students' proficiency in reading
or language arts, mathematics, science, and
other core academic subjects;
(ii) to advance student learning for
students who already meet or exceed student
academic achievement standards, as measured by
State academic assessments required under
section 1111(b)(3) of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
6311(b)(3));
(iii) for additional subjects and
enrichment activities that contribute to a
well-rounded education, which may include music
and the arts, physical education, drama,
service-learning, and experiential and work-
based learning opportunities (such as community
service, learning apprenticeships, internships,
and job shadowing); and
(iv) for teachers for collaboration within
and across grades and subjects and professional
planning; and
(C)(i) in the case of a school that is not a high
school, will expand learning time for all students in
all grade levels in the school; or
(ii) in the case of a high school, will expand
learning time for not less than 1 entire grade level of
students in the school, and if the school expands
learning time for additional students under this Act,
will expand learning time for additional entire grade
levels.
(5) Expanded learning time school.--The term ``expanded
learning time school'' means a school that has implemented an
expanded learning time initiative using funds received under
this Act.
(6) High-need school.--
(A) In general.--The term ``high-need school''
means--
(i) a public elementary school or secondary
school at which 50 percent or more of the
students are eligible to be counted under 1 of
the measures of poverty described in section
1113(a)(5) of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6313(a)(5));
or
(ii) a school for which an eligible entity
has obtained approval under subparagraph (B).
(B) Special rule for secondary schools.--An
eligible entity seeking a grant from the Secretary or a
subgrant from a State educational agency under this Act
may apply to the Secretary or State educational agency,
respectively, for approval to treat a public secondary
school as a high-need school under this Act. The
application shall include information, supplied by the
secondary school, explaining why the school should be
treated as a high-need school. Such information shall
include information on the number and percentage of
students attending such school who are low-income
students, the graduation rate for such school (as
defined in section 1111(b)(2)(C)(vi) of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
6311(b)(2)(C)(vi)), and information about the student
academic achievement of students at such school.
(7) High school.--The term ``high school'' means a public
high school, as defined under applicable State law.
(8) Low-income student.--The term ``low-income student''
means a student who is eligible to be counted under 1 of the
measures of poverty described in section 1113(a)(5) of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
6313(a)(5)).
(b) References.--In this Act--
(1) a reference to a school day, school week, or school
year includes a reference to a combination thereof; and
(2) a reference to a school day, school week, or school
year program (or schedule) includes a reference to a
combination thereof.

SEC. 4. PROGRAM AUTHORIZED.

(a) Grants to State Educational Agencies.--From the amount
appropriated under section 11, the Secretary is authorized to award
grants on a competitive basis under section 5 to State educational
agencies having applications approved pursuant to section 5(c) to
enable such agencies to award subgrants on a competitive basis to
eligible entities as described in sections 6 and 7.
(b) Reservation.--From the amount made available under this Act for
each fiscal year, the Secretary may reserve--
(1) 5 percent of the amount to carry out the activities
described in section 9; and
(2) from the remainder--
(A) not more than 10 percent of the remainder to
award grants under section 8; and
(B) not more than $1,000,000 to carry out the
review of applications for, selection of recipients of,
and distribution of, grants to State educational
agencies and eligible entities under sections 5 and 8.

SEC. 5. GRANTS TO STATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES.

(a) Grants.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary is authorized to award
grants to State educational agencies on a competitive basis to
assist the agencies in developing State expanded learning time
and school redesign grant programs in accordance with this Act,
which shall involve awarding subgrants on a competitive basis
to eligible entities in accordance with this Act, to plan and
implement expanded learning time initiatives.
(2) Distribution.--The Secretary shall ensure that grants
awarded under this section and section 8 are distributed to
State educational agencies and eligible entities from diverse
geographical regions and from a diverse group of States with a
range of sizes and populations.
(b) Duration.--The Secretary shall award each grant described in
subsection (a) for a period of 6 years, and may renew each grant for
additional periods of not more than 6 years.
(c) Applications.--A State educational agency that desires to
receive a grant under this section shall submit an application to the
Secretary at such time and in such manner as the Secretary may require,
containing--
(1) a description of how the State educational agency will
use grant funds under this section;
(2) a description of the peer review process and selection
criteria the State educational agency will use to evaluate
applications from, and select, eligible entities to receive
expanded learning time and school redesign planning and
implementation subgrants, which shall include a description of
how the State educational agency will assess the capacity of
eligible entities to plan and implement, and the effectiveness
of eligible entities in planning and implementing, expanded
learning time initiatives;
(3) a description of the process the State educational
agency will use to encourage local educational agencies and
schools to implement expanded learning time initiatives;
(4) a description of how the State educational agency will
provide technical assistance and support to eligible entities,
local educational agencies, and schools receiving funds through
the State educational agency under this Act, in implementing
expanded learning time initiatives, including--
(A) assisting the local educational agencies in
identifying potential partners that are external
organizations with demonstrated experience in expanding
learning opportunities and helping schools redesign
their educational programs to better meet student
needs; and
(B) assisting the eligible entities, local
educational agencies, and schools in collecting,
reviewing, and analyzing data on student academic
achievement;
(5) an assurance that each school receiving funds through
the State educational agency under this Act--
(A) will implement an expanded learning time
initiative that meets the requirements in the
definition in section 3(a)(4); and
(B)(i) in the case of a school that is not a high
school, will expand learning time for all students in
all grade levels in the school; or
(ii) in the case of a high school, will expand
learning time for not less than 1 entire grade level of
students in the school, and if the school expands
learning time for additional students under this Act,
will expand learning time for additional entire grade
levels;
(6) a description of how the State educational agency will
use the expanded learning time and school redesign grant
program involved, and lessons learned from such program, to
improve student academic achievement in schools that have not
made adequate yearly progress under section 1111(b)(2) of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
6311(b)(2)) for 2 or more years;
(7) a description of how the State educational agency will
evaluate, on a regular basis, activities carried out by
eligible entities receiving funds through the State educational
agency under this Act, including a description of any measures,
in addition to those described in section 9(b)(3)--
(A) on which the State educational agency will
require eligible entities to report results; and
(B) that the State educational agency will use for
its evaluation;
(8) a description of how the State educational agency will
collect, analyze, and disseminate, to local educational
agencies and other schools within the State, information on
best practices learned from schools receiving funding under
this Act;
(9) an assurance that the State educational agency, and any
eligible entity receiving funds through the State educational
agency under this Act will, if requested, participate in the
evaluation under section 9(b)(4); and
(10) any other information that the Secretary may
reasonably require.
(d) Authorized Activities.--
(1) Distribution.--A State educational agency that receives
a grant under this section--
(A) may reserve not more than 15 percent of the
grant funds to carry out the activities described in
paragraphs (2) through (4); and
(B) shall use an amount consisting of not less than
85 percent of the grant funds to award subgrants, on a
competitive basis, to eligible entities under section 6
or 7 to enable the eligible entities to carry out the
authorized activities described in section 6(e) or
7(f), except that not more than 10 percent of that
amount shall be used for subgrants under section 6.
(2) State-level planning and administration.--A State
educational agency that receives a grant under this section may
use grant funds reserved under paragraph (1)(A) for planning
and administration, including--
(A) evaluating applications from eligible entities;
(B) administering the distribution of subgrants to
eligible entities; and
(C) assessing and evaluating, on a regular basis,
activities carried out by eligible entities receiving
funds through the State educational agency under this
Act.
(3) Technical assistance for eligible entities.--A State
educational agency that receives a grant under this section may
use grant funds reserved under paragraph (1)(A) for technical
assistance, including--
(A) assisting eligible entities in planning and
implementing expanded learning time initiatives,
including assisting local educational agencies in
identifying potential partners that are external
organizations with demonstrated experience in expanding
learning opportunities and helping schools redesign
their educational programs to better meet student
needs; and
(B) implementing a program of professional
development for teachers and administrators, in schools
that receive funding under this Act, that prepares
teachers and administrators to implement the authorized
activities described in section 7(f).
(4) Reporting.--A State educational agency that receives a
grant under this section shall annually prepare and submit to
the Secretary a report on the implementation of expanded
learning time initiatives under this Act, which shall include
reports submitted under section 7(h).
(e) Match.--
(1) In general.--Each State educational agency that
receives a grant under this section shall provide matching
funds to carry out the activities supported by the grant in an
amount not less than--
(A) for the first year of an initial grant under
this section, 10 percent of the cost of the activities;
(B) for the second year of such a grant, 20 percent
of the cost of the activities;
(C) for the third or fourth year of such a grant,
25 percent of the cost of the activities; and
(D) for the fifth year of such a grant or any year
of a subsequent grant under this section, 30 percent of
the cost of the activities.
(2) Matching funds.--The State educational agency may
provide the matching funds in cash or in kind, fairly
evaluated, including plant, equipment, or services, but may not
provide more than 50 percent of the matching funds in kind. The
State educational agency may provide the matching funds from
State, local, or private sources.
(f) Supplement Not Supplant.--Funds used to make grants under this
Act shall be used to supplement and not supplant other Federal, State,
and local public funds expended to plan or implement expanded learning
time initiatives.

SEC. 6. EXPANDED LEARNING TIME AND SCHOOL REDESIGN PLANNING SUBGRANTS.

(a) Subgrants Authorized.--A State educational agency receiving a
grant under section 5 is authorized to award expanded learning time and
school redesign planning subgrants, on a competitive basis, to eligible
entities.
(b) Duration.--The State educational agency shall award each
subgrant described in subsection (a) for a period of not more than 1
year. Such grants shall be nonrenewable.
(c) Subgrant Amount.--The State educational agency shall award each
subgrant described in subsection (a) in an amount that is not less than
$15,000 and not more than $60,000.
(d) Applications.--An eligible entity that desires to receive an
expanded learning time and school redesign planning subgrant pursuant
to this section shall submit an application to the State educational
agency at such time and in such manner as the agency may require,
containing--
(1) a description of the eligible entity's proposal to
establish expanded learning time initiatives at high-need
schools served by the eligible entity;
(2) information identifying the number of high-need schools
the eligible entity proposes to serve using funds made
available under this Act, and a description of the process,
considerations, and criteria the eligible entity will use to
select schools to implement the expanded learning time
initiatives--
(A) which considerations shall include the
percentage of low-income students attending each
school; and
(B) which criteria shall include the local
educational agency's determination of the capacity of
each school to implement successfully a proposed
expanded learning time initiative;
(3) if the eligible entity receives a subgrant under
section 7, an assurance that each school receiving funding
through the subgrant will implement an expanded school day,
expanded school week, or expanded school year schedule;
(4) if the eligible entity receives a subgrant under
section 7, an assurance that each school receiving funding
through the subgrant--
(A) in the case of a school that is not a high
school, will expand learning time for all students in
all grade levels in the school; or
(B) in the case of a high school, will expand
learning time for not less than 1 entire grade level of
students in the school, and if the school expands
learning time for additional students under this Act,
will expand learning time for additional entire grade
levels;
(5) a description of the process by which the eligible
entity will ensure the meaningful involvement of teachers,
teacher organizations, parents, and community-based
organizations in the development of the expanded learning time
initiatives;
(6) a description of how the local educational agency
involved and participating high-need schools will work with
external organizations that comprise the eligible entity
involved, and any other external organizations as applicable,
such as a community-based organization, an institution of
higher education, a community learning center, an entity
carrying out an after-school program, or an organization that
will provide students with internships and work-based learning
opportunities, to develop and implement expanded learning time
initiatives;
(7) an assurance that the eligible entity has the
infrastructure in place to collect the data necessary for an
evaluation of the impact of the expanded learning time
initiatives on measures of student academic achievement and
student engagement and success, and other measures described in
section 9(b)(3), to be submitted in the report described in
section 7(h); and
(8) an assurance that each participating local educational
agency will use the subgrant period to negotiate and reach an
agreement with the exclusive recognized representatives of the
employees of each participating high-need school served by the
agency or, where there is no such representative, with the
employees of each participating high-need school served by the
agency.
(e) Authorized Activities.--An eligible entity receiving a subgrant
under this section shall use the subgrant funds to develop a detailed
plan to implement expanded learning time initiatives at high-need
schools served by the eligible entities as specified in this section.
(f) Priority.--In awarding subgrants under this section, a State
educational agency shall give priority to an application from an
eligible entity if--
(1) for each local educational agency in the eligible
entity, a high percentage of the students served by the local
educational agency are eligible to be counted under section
1124(c)(1)(A) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965 (20 U.S.C. 6333(c)(1)(A)); and
(2) the eligible entity includes a community-based
organization, an institution of higher education, a community
learning center, or an entity carrying out an after-school
program.

SEC. 7. EXPANDED LEARNING TIME AND SCHOOL REDESIGN IMPLEMENTATION
SUBGRANTS.

(a) Subgrants Authorized.--A State educational agency receiving a
grant under section 5 is authorized to award expanded learning time and
school redesign implementation subgrants, on a competitive basis, to
eligible entities that have received subgrants pursuant to section 6.
(b) Duration.--The State educational agency shall award each
subgrant described in subsection (a) for a period of not less than 5
years, and may renew each subgrant for additional periods of not more
than 5 years.
(c) Subgrant Amount.--In awarding a subgrant described in
subsection (a) to an eligible entity, a State educational agency shall
determine the amount of the subgrant by taking into account the number
of students expected to participate in the expanded learning time
initiatives involved, as specified in the application submitted by the
eligible entity under subsection (d), and the approximate per student
cost of implementing a high-quality expanded learning time initiative.
(d) Applications.--An eligible entity that desires to receive an
expanded learning time and school redesign implementation subgrant
pursuant to this section shall submit an application to the State
educational agency at such time and in such manner as the agency may
require, containing--
(1) an identification and description of each high-need
school (selected in accordance with the process,
considerations, and criteria described in section 6(d)(2)) that
will receive funding from the eligible entity to participate in
an expanded learning time initiative, including information
identifying the grade levels at the school for which the
expanded learning time initiative will be implemented (which
shall be the grade levels described in paragraph (1) or (2), as
appropriate, of subsection (g)), the number of students that
will be served through the initiative at the school, and
student academic achievement, demographic, and socioeconomic
data for students at the school;
(2) a description of how the eligible entity will implement
at each such school an expanded learning time initiative that
involves an expanded school day, expanded school week, or
expanded school year schedule, and that involves comprehensive
redesigning of the school day, school week, or school year, as
applicable, consistent with section 3(a)(4), which description
shall include--
(A) a description of how the expanded learning time
schedule will expand learning time by not less than 30
percent, consistent with section 3(a)(4); and
(B) a description of how the eligible entity will
meet each of the other requirements of the definition
in section 3(a)(4);
(3) a description of the plan the eligible entity will use
to evaluate, on an annual basis, the impact of each expanded
learning time initiative on measures of student academic
achievement and student engagement and success, and other
appropriate measures;
(4) a description of the additional subjects and enrichment
activities that will be offered at each such school that
contribute to a well-rounded education, which may include music
and the arts, physical education, drama, service-learning, and
experiential and work-based learning opportunities (such as
community service, learning apprenticeships, internships, and
job shadowing);
(5) a comprehensive plan, developed in collaboration with
teachers and, as appropriate, other staff, for professional
development at each such school that includes a description of
intended changes in teaching practices and curriculum delivery
that will result in improved student academic achievement and
student engagement and success;
(6) a description of how the eligible entity will use the
expanded learning time initiatives, and lessons learned from
such initiatives, to improve student academic achievement in
schools that have not made adequate yearly progress under
section 1111(b)(2) of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)) for 2 or more consecutive
years;
(7) a description of school staffing for each such school,
including an assurance that the local educational agency is
implementing a plan sufficient to meet the goal of ensuring all
teachers of core academic subjects are highly qualified;
(8) evidence of an agreement reached between each
participating local educational agency and the exclusive
recognized representatives of the employees of each
participating high-need school served by the agency, for
employees to work the expanded learning time schedules involved
or, where there is no such representative, evidence of an
agreement supported by at least two-thirds of the employees of
each participating high-need school served by the agency, to
work the expanded learning time schedules involved;
(9) a description of how the local educational agency
involved and participating high-need schools will work with
external organizations that comprise the eligible entity
involved, and any other external organizations as applicable,
such as a community-based organization, an institution of
higher education, a community learning center, an entity
carrying out an after-school program, or an organization that
will provide students with internships and work-based learning
opportunities, to implement expanded learning time initiatives,
including a description of the specific roles and
responsibilities of such external organizations;
(10) a description of the process by which the eligible
entity ensured the meaningful involvement of teachers, teacher
organizations where applicable, administrators, parents, and
community-based organizations in the development (including the
design) of the expanded learning time initiatives;
(11) an assurance that the eligible entity will work with a
community learning center, or an entity carrying out an after-
school program, where appropriate, to provide after-school
programs for students participating in the expanded learning
time initiatives after the conclusion of the school day; and
(12) an assurance that the eligible entity will report to
the State educational agency all data necessary for the State
educational agency's report, under section 5(d)(4).
(e) Priority.--In awarding subgrants under this section, a State
educational agency shall give priority to an application from an
eligible entity that meets the criteria described in section 6(f).
(f) Authorized Activities.--An eligible entity receiving a subgrant
under this section shall use the subgrant funds to implement high-
quality expanded learning time initiatives, at high-need schools served
by such eligible entity, that are consistent with section 3(a)(4).
(g) Student Participation in the Initiatives.--For each school
receiving funding under this Act--
(1) in the case of a school that is not a high school, all
students in all grade levels in the school shall be required to
attend the school on the expanded learning time schedule; and
(2) in the case of a high school, all students in the grade
levels in which the school expands learning time shall be
required to attend the school on the expanded learning time
schedule.
(h) Reports by Eligible Entities.--Each eligible entity receiving a
subgrant under this section for expanded learning time initiatives
shall, not later than 1 year after the first day of the first school
year in which the expanded learning time initiatives were implemented,
prepare and submit to the State educational agency a report regarding--
(1) the extent to which the proposal for the expanded
learning time initiatives was carried out;
(2) the technical assistance the eligible entity provided
to expanded learning time schools;
(3) for each expanded learning time school--
(A) the budget for, and actual expenses associated
with carrying out, the expanded learning time
initiatives in the first school year; and
(B) the amount of time by which the school day,
school week, or school year, was expanded in the
school; and
(4) information on the impact of the expanded learning time
initiatives, including data on the measures described in
section 9(b)(3) and (for secondary schools) graduation rates
(and any additional measures developed by the eligible entity
or associated State educational agency under section 5(c)(7) or
this subsection, with respect to the eligible entity), for
students participating in the expanded learning time
initiatives and for similar students in schools, sewed by the
local educational agencies involved, that did not implement
expanded learning time initiatives.
(i) Publication and Availability of Report Summaries.--The
Secretary shall publish and make widely available to the public,
including through a website or other means, a summary of the eligible
entity reports received under section 5(d)(4) and subsection (h).

SEC. 8. GRANTS TO ELIGIBLE ENTITIES.

(a) In General.--The Secretary may award a grant under this section
to an eligible entity that serves 1 or more areas within 1 or more
States.
(b) Planning and Implementation Grants.--The Secretary may award a
planning grant under subsection (a), to the eligible entity, to carry
out the activities described in section 6(e). In the case of an
eligible entity that has received a planning grant under subsection
(a), the Secretary may award an implementation grant under subsection
(a) to the eligible entity, to carry out the activities described in
section 7(f).
(c) Applications.--To be qualified to receive a grant under
subsection (a), an eligible entity shall submit to the Secretary an
application that contains (for a planning grant) information describing
how the entity will undertake the activities described in section
5(c)(8) and the information described in section 6(d) and (for an
implementation grant) the information described in section 7(d), other
than paragraph (12) of that section. In determining whether to award a
grant under subsection (a) to an eligible entity, the Secretary shall
give priority to an eligible entity that meets the criteria described
in section 6(f).
(d) Period; Amount.--The subgrant period and amount described in
subsections (b) and (c) of section 6 or 7, as appropriate, shall apply
to the grant.
(e) Authorities; Responsibilities.--The eligible entity shall have
the same authorities and responsibilities under this Act as an eligible
entity that receives a subgrant under section 6 or 7, as appropriate.
In carrying out the report responsibilities described in section 7(h),
the eligible entity shall submit the reports to the Secretary.
(f) Match.--
(1) In general.--Each eligible entity that receives an
implementation grant under this section shall comply with the
matching requirements described in section 5(e)(1), except that
references in that section to a grant under section 5 shall be
considered to be references to an implementation grant under
this section.
(2) Matching funds.--The eligible entity may provide the
matching funds in cash or in kind, fairly evaluated, including
plant, equipment, or services, but may not provide more than 50
percent of the matching funds in kind. The eligible entity may
provide the matching funds from State, local, or private
sources, or Federal sources under the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.).

SEC. 9. NATIONAL ACTIVITIES.

(a) Technical Assistance and Support.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary is authorized to provide,
directly or by entering into a contract with an independent
organization, technical assistance to State educational
agencies, eligible entities, including eligible entities
receiving grants under section 8, local educational agencies,
and schools in developing and implementing expanded learning
time initiatives under this Act.
(2) Provision of assistance.--The Secretary or such
organization shall provide technical assistance that shall
include--
(A) assisting State educational agencies (and
eligible entities receiving grants under section 8, at
the election of the Secretary) with developing expanded
learning time initiatives, including disseminating
information and research on existing State and local
expanded learning time efforts;
(B) annually convening participating State
educational agencies, eligible entities, and
organizations providing support to State educational
agencies and eligible entities to provide technical
assistance to the agencies, entities, and organizations
on best practices, for expanding learning time, that
relate to finance, educational programming,
partnerships with community-based organizations, and
measures of student academic achievement and student
engagement and success and other appropriate measures;
(C) identifying and disseminating information about
eligible entities, local educational agencies, and
schools that have effectively planned and implemented
expanded learning time initiatives; and
(D) supporting the continued identification and
dissemination of information on expanded learning time
initiatives that can lead to improved teaching and
learning outcomes for children, youth, and adults.
(b) Evaluation and Dissemination.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall enter into a contract
with an independent organization with expertise in school
improvement, program evaluation, and measurement (such as an
institution of higher education or other research organization)
to assist with the provision of the technical assistance, and
conduct the evaluation and analyses, described in this
subsection.
(2) Technical assistance on data collection and measures.--
The independent organization shall provide technical assistance
to State educational agencies and eligible entities receiving
funds under this Act with data collection and analysis of the
measures described in paragraph (3), including data collection
and analysis to enable State educational agencies to prepare
reports pursuant to section 5(d)(4) and eligible entities to
prepare reports pursuant to sections 7(h) (including reports
described in section 8(e)).
(3) Types of measures.--
(A) In general.--A State educational agency shall
establish measures to assess the success of eligible
entities and schools receiving funds through such State
educational agency under this Act, which shall
include--
(i) measures of student academic
achievement and student engagement and success;
(ii) measures of teacher collaboration and
professional planning; and
(iii) detailed measures of the amount of
time devoted to core academic subjects and
additional subjects and enrichment activities.
(B) Special rule for eligible entities receiving
grants under section 8.--If an eligible entity receives
a grant under section 8, the eligible entity shall
establish measures in lieu of a State educational
agency under subparagraph (A) to assess the success of
the eligible entity and schools receiving funds through
the eligible entity under this Act.
(4) Report.--
(A) In general.--The independent organization shall
prepare a report that shall include the evaluation
described in subparagraph (B), including the analyses
described in subparagraph (C), and the analyses
described in subparagraph (D).
(B) Evaluation.--The independent organization shall
conduct an evaluation of the impact and implementation
of the program funded under this Act, which evaluation
shall rely in part on the reports prepared by States
under section 5(d)(4) and eligible entities pursuant to
sections 7(h) (including reports described in section
8(e)).
(C) Contents.--In conducting the evaluation, the
independent organization shall conduct an analysis of
the impact of the expanded learning time initiatives
funded under this Act, by analyzing data on the
measures described in paragraph (3) and other
appropriate measures for students participating in
expanded learning time initiatives in all expanded
learning time schools, with results from that analysis
disaggregated by expanded school day, expanded school
week, or expanded school year program, as appropriate.
(D) Analyses.--The independent organization shall
conduct--
(i) an analysis of how variation in school
design, instructional practices, and other
conditions influence the success of the
implementation of the expanded learning time
initiatives;
(ii) an analysis of the conditions and
activities that impact the planning and
implementation of the expanded learning time
initiatives, including teaching and leadership
practices at a school, student and teacher
schedules, the additional costs of operating an
expanded learning time school, how the
additional school hours required for the
initiative involved are used to enhance
teaching and learning, and how external
organizations are utilized for the initiative;
(iii) an analysis of the similarities and
differences in the ways in which schools
implemented an expanded school day, expanded
school week, or expanded school year schedule;
and
(iv) any other analysis requested by the
Secretary.
(5) Dissemination.--The independent organization shall
submit the report described in paragraph (4) to Congress and
the Secretary, and disseminate the report to the general
public. The Secretary shall ensure that the report described in
paragraph (4) is provided to eligible entities and local
educational agencies on a periodic basis for use in improving
initiatives.

SEC. 10. CONSTRUCTION.

Nothing in this Act shall be construed to alter or otherwise affect
the rights, remedies, and procedures afforded to the employees of local
educational agencies under Federal, State, or local law (including
applicable regulations or court orders) or under the terms of
collective bargaining agreements, memoranda of understanding, or other
agreements between such employees and their employers.

SEC. 11. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this Act
$350,000,000 for fiscal year 2009, $380,000,000 for fiscal year 2010,
$420,000,000 for fiscal year 2011, $460,000,000 for fiscal year 2012,
and $500,000,000 for fiscal year 2013.
<all>