Energy Development Program Implementation Act of 2009

Mr. President, today I am introducing comprehensive, bipartisan legislation to reduce deaths and injuries caused by drivers texting and holding cell phones, I am delighted to have four original cosponsors join me today: Senator Hutchison, the ranking member of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee; Senator Lautenberg, the chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee's Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, Safety and Security Subcommittee, Senator Schumer, and Mr. Thune, the ranking member of the Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Subcommittee.

According to the Department of Transportation, distracted drivers last year killed 5,800 people. Distraction was a factor in 16 percent of all traffic fatalities. In addition, distracted drivers injured 515,000 people, which accounted for 22 percent of all people injured in traffic accidents.

Distracted driving covers a range of activities: eating, reaching for an object, texting, or using a cell phone. An analysis of 5,471 passenger vehicle crashes investigated by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, NHTSA, found that 18 percent of drivers just prior to the crash were engaged in at least one non-driving activity, which included cell phone use.

We all know that the explosion of cell phone use and texting in the past three years has brought distracted driving to a new level of danger. Now we have the new data, provided by the same researchers who record seat belt use levels for NHTSA: at any given daylight hour, 11 percent of vehicles are driven by a person holding a hand-held electronic device. That translates into 812,000 drivers not paying full attention to driving at any given moment of the day, which makes our roads more dangerous for everyone.

The statistics regarding deaths and injuries caused by distracted drivers provide the foundation for us to act. But the tragic, individual stories of deaths and injuries to innocent people compel us to act.

In October 2008, 29-year-old Tiffany DeGroft was exchanging text messages with her boyfriend while driving her Jaguar on Braddock Road in Centreville, Virginia. The text messages indicate that her boyfriend was upset. His last text message read: ``Why aren't you answering me now?'' Tiffany DeGroft did not answer because her car had missed a curve in the road. She was killed on impact. A Fairfax County detective said, ``We found the phone on the floor in the open position. I suspect she was actually reading the text.''

While that story is tragic, it becomes even more so when the person texting doesn't kill himself or herself, but innocent persons instead.

In September 2008, 13-year-old Margay Schee in Marion County, FL, was riding home from school in a school bus. A truck driver, who by his own admission was distracted by a cell phone conversation, slammed into the back of the bus, which had its flashers on while stopped. The bus caught fire, killing Margay in a vehicle that is designed to protect children.

In September 2006, college student Reggie Shaw sent 11 text messages over 30 minutes to his girlfriend as he drove his truck along a two- lane highway in rural Utah. Shaw sent the last text message one minute before he called police about the accident. Investigators concluded that Shaw sent that last text message just as he crossed the yellow line of the rural highway, striking an oncoming car. James Furaro and Keith O'Dell, both rocket scientists, were killed instantly.

Unlike some highway safety issues that are complicated to address, this one is not. Writing and reading text messages while driving a 2,000-pound vehicle is dangerous--not only for the driver, but also for the driver's passengers and everyone else using the roads. Crashes involving commercial vehicles--such as trucks and buses--can result in even more catastrophic accidents than passenger cars. An 80,000-pound truck will crush a small car like a soda can.

Texting takes a driver's eyes off the road for at least four seconds at a time--long enough at high speeds to travel the length of a football field. Under those circumstances, there is no time to react to a stopped car, a stop sign, or another road hazard. In fact, a recent study by the Virginia Tech Transportation Instistitute on behalf of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, FMCSA, found that motor vehicle operators who are texting are 23 times more likely to cause a crash, or near-crash, than a non-distracted driver. Deaths and injuries to innocent people are the inevitable and tragically avoidable result.

In 2006, the National Transportation Safety Board, after investigating several accidents, made a recommendation to the FMCSA to ban cell phone use by commercial driver's license holders who have endorsements to carry passengers or drive school buses. I commend the Transportation Secretary's recent actions to begin addressing these recommendations. But I am concerned that the Department of Transportation should be doing more to eliminate these unsafe driver distractions.

Several States have taken action to ban texting while driving, and to limit cell phone use to hands-free devices.

But not enough states have done so. Since Constitutional considerations prohibit the federal government from directing states to enact traffic laws, we at the federal level can only give states funding incentives to act with regard to passenger vehicle drivers. That is why I am today introducing the Distracted Driving Prevention Act of 2009.

First, this legislation would create a grant program to send money to states that enact laws to prohibit texting and hand-held cell phone use while driving. While we wish the states would enact these common-sense safety measures on their own, the history of highway safety tells us that many states will fail to act unless we give them an incentive to do so.

To qualify for a federal grant, a state must enact an absolute ban on texting while driving. No exceptions. There should be no exception for a driver taking his or her eyes off the road. For states to receive the grant, the prohibition on texting must have significant penalties, including increased fines and other penalties for a driver who causes an accident while texting.

The second requirement for a State to receive a grant is to enact a law that bans holding a cell phone while driving. When people drive, both hands should be on the wheel. The grant program does not ask states to completely ban cell phone use by drivers; our legislation would allow the use of a hands-free device during a phone call. We also allow states to make exceptions for holding a cell phone to call for emergency services.

States qualifying for the grant must completely ban cell phone use by drivers under the age of 18. A driver under 18 years old may not even use a hands-free device. For these inexperienced drivers, the additional distraction of using a cell phone can be deadly. Many parents already encourage their teenage drivers to not use a cell phone while driving. But having the police enforce this law will be even more effective.

With more States enacting a ban on texting and hand-held cell phone use, we need to get the message out so that drivers obey the law. Our legislation would create a new national education campaign based upon the tremendous success of the recent drunk driving and seat belt advertising campaigns. These advertising campaigns are not only an opportunity to remind people of the law, but also a means by which to educate drivers about the dangers of texting and cell phone use. This education can change driver behavior even when law enforcement might not be present.

In addition to nationwide advertising, we also will direct NHTSA to target some local markets with advertising in states and cities that have already passed texting and cell phone use laws.

Unlike passenger vehicle drivers, a truck driver's vehicle is also his or her office space. Devices to receive directions, follow-up on orders, or maintain contact with dispatchers are necessary to perform a truck driver's duties. These devices, too, can become distractions, as they require eyes and attention to be removed from the roadway. Therefore, this legislation would require the Secretary of Transportation to issue regulations within one year specifically on the use of electronic and wireless devices by commercial motor vehicle drivers and those who operate certain school buses. The Secretary would be authorized to ban the use of certain devices if the Secretary determines that they interfere with the safe operation of a commercial motor vehicle. The bill also would allow the Secretary to permit exceptions for emergency uses. We need to make sure that commercial motor vehicle drivers are operating their trucks and buses in the safest manner possible.

Furthermore, this legislation will require that states, as part of their federal grant for data collection, begin collecting distracted driving data about each vehicle crash, starting with the police reports of the crash. By requiring law enforcement officers to inquire about the possible role that texting or cell phone use might have played in a crash, and requiring states to collect that data, we can better understand the scope and causes of the distracted driving problem.

To bolster the new data collection at the state level, this legislation would require the Transportation Secretary to establish a dedicated program at the Transportation Department to study all forms of distracted driving across all modes of transportation. Better research is essential to finding the best strategies for reducing deaths and injuries caused by distracted driving.

This legislation also charges the Federal Communications Commission with studying potential initiatives to raise awareness and reduce the problems caused by distracted driving. By bringing aboard the agency with oversight of wireless carriers, we add another stakeholder that can help us develop creative solutions to address this problem.

One last note about this legislation: it is paid for. The grant program that encourages states to enact a primary seat belt law has run a surplus in recent years as the number of states enacting a new primary seat belt law has slowed. Any state that enacts a new primary seat belt law in 2010 and 2011 would still receive their safety belt grant. But the remainder of the funding for that program will be redirected for the nationwide distracted driving advertising campaigns, and sent as grants to states that prohibit texting and hand-held cell phone use.

Creating incentives for states to take action against distracted driving, launching a nationwide campaign to educate drivers about the dangers of texting and cell phone use, and collecting better data about driver behavior will result in fewer deaths and injuries on our nation's roads.

I ask my colleagues to support this comprehensive bill that will save lives and prevent injuries by reducing distracted driving.

Mr. President, today I am introducing the Natural Resources Climate Adaptation Act. I am pleased that Senators Whitehouse, Baucus, and Tom Udall have joined me as original cosponsors.

The science is clear that climate change is happening and numerous scientific reports as well as the everyday experience of many Americans--demonstrate that the impacts have already begun to affect ecosystems across the country. This bill recognizes that quick action is needed to insure the long-term viability of ecosystems on which our communities as well as our fish and wildlife depend. It will support and enable Federal and State agencies and other interested parties to address the negative impacts of climate change on our natural resources in the most effective possible ways.

We know that healthy, functioning ecosystems are vital to human health, economic viability, and fish and wildlife populations. I believe that we are at a critical juncture in protecting our valuable natural resources. In solving the climate change problem we must ensure the well-being of our natural world if we are to have a thriving economy and a healthy environment. This is the reason I am introducing this bill.

This is not a problem that is hypothetical. Climate change impacts are irrevocably affecting our natural world and the health of our communities today, and these impacts will increase. We must act now.

We often forget that healthy ecosystems are essential to human as well as wildlife needs. They are necessary to provide us, for example, with a clean and abundant drinking water supply, clean air to breathe, and a well-functioning economy in addition to habitat for a diversity of fish, wildlife, and plant species. Not to mention a place to take our children fishing, and to enjoy the personal inspiration of the natural world.

My home State of New Mexico is a dry State and the challenges associated with climate change are already impacting our land and our water supplies. There are already many competing demands for our limited water resources which will only be heightened by the effects of climate change. Existing threats to our public lands such as wildfires and deforestation may become more prevalent. New Mexico's Bandelier National Park has recently been identified as one of the ``25 National Parks in Peril'' due to climate change related impacts and other treasures within our State may also be in jeopardy of degradation if actions are not taken to protect them.

Our landowners, ranchers, water managers, and State officials are working to evaluate and mitigate the current and expected impacts of a warming climate on our State's natural resources and water supply. For instance, in 2005 the New Mexico Climate Change Council and Advisory Group prepared a report summarizing the potential impacts of climate change in New Mexico

and the State Engineer's office prepared an additional report on the impacts of climate change on the water supply and water management strategies. These reports are being used to guide State officials in addressing these issues. In addition, New Mexico has joined other western States to form the Western Regional Climate Initiative to coordinate efforts at reducing greenhouse gases.

The legislation introduced today seeks to complement existing natural resources-related programs in New Mexico and other States across the country. This legislation supports and facilitates the development and dissemination of scientific research on climate change between Federal agencies, States, Indian tribes and interested stakeholders. This ongoing research will in turn play a significant role in guiding these entities in the management of our natural resources.

This bill also establishes several forums to encourage effective coordination and communication in creating a Federal strategy and subsequent Federal and State adaptation plans that will help natural resources adjust to a changing climate. Finally, the Act provides additional funding for existing Federal and State wildlife conservation programs to be used exclusively for adaptation-related activities.

The Natural Resources Climate Adaptation Act follows on the good work of several of my colleagues in both the House and the Senate. Chairman Rahall and Subcommittee Chairman Grijalva have developed legislation in this area, and their own adaptation bill, H.R. 2192, was incorporated into the broader cap-and-trade legislation that passed the House of Representatives earlier this year.

Senators Kerry and Boxer have adopted provisions similar to this bill in their climate legislation at the request of two leaders on the Environment and Public Works Committee: Senators Baucus and Whitehouse. The legislation I am introducing today is complementary to the work that has already been done. My cosponsors and I share the same goal of making sure natural resources adaptation is included in any climate change legislation that comes before the Senate.

Many Americans already recognize the critical need for this legislation. A coalition of over 600 diverse groups has written to Congress describing the current and potential negative impacts of climate change on our natural resources and urging us to include language in any climate bill to address those impacts. By way of example, the groups in this coalition include environmental organizations, local Rod & Gun Clubs, fisheries coalitions, scientific research groups, and religious groups.

If we fail to act to address the impacts of climate change on our American landscape, the negative effects will be felt by all of us. I am committed to working through this legislation and other means to ensure that we do what is necessary to protect our precious natural resources from one of the greatest challenges ever faced.

I would like to thank Senators Baucus, Whitehouse, and Tom Udall for their leadership on this issue and their cosponsorship of this bill. I look forward to working with them and our colleagues to pass legislation to carry out this important purpose.

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

Mr. President, I rise to introduce a bill to extend the current first-time home buyers' tax credit for 6 months to June 1, 2010. I am pleased to have Senators Ensign, Harry Reid, Isakson, and Stabenow as original cosponsors of this legislation.

I know my colleagues remember that it was housing that led us into this recession. Remember how in the housing market the values fell, there were mortgage foreclosures, and housing starts stopped. Well, housing can help lead us out of this recession.

The Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 initially established a credit at $7,500, and that was repayable over 15 years. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 increased that credit to $8,000, dropped the repayment obligation, and extended the credit to December 1, 2009.

The legislation I am introducing today with my colleagues Senators Ensign, Harry Reid, Isakson, and Stabenow would change the expiration date from December 1, 2009, to June 1, 2010. I know my colleagues understand the time delay here which requires that the houses go through settlement in order to qualify for the credit. So I think it is important that we act timely, not waiting until November 1, but to try to get this bill moving quickly. It has been an incredibly important tool to help the housing market to help restore our economy.

This is a direct extension, a clean extension. It basically extends it for 6 months. I have talked with my colleagues about ways this credit perhaps could be improved, and I know we will get into that debate. But I want to make sure we don't have a lapse in this credit being available to help first-time home buyers. It has been very valuable. As we work to perhaps modify this proposal, let us make sure we continue it so as we are fighting to get our economy back on track, we don't regress and lose this tool that is available to help the housing market.

The credit has been a huge success in helping to revive a depressed housing market. As of March 6, 2009, the Treasury inspector general for tax administration identified nearly 530,000 returns claiming more than $3.9 billion in the first-time homeowners' tax credit.

As many as 40 percent of all home buyers this year will qualify for a credit. That tells us this credit is working. It is getting people who have never owned a home before into the home-buying market, knowing that the Federal Government is providing an incentive. It is estimated the credit is directly responsible for roughly 300,000 to 400,000 purchases this year. According to the National Association of Realtors, those additional sales have pumped approximately $22 billion into the economy. This is a modest tax incentive to help an industry that is vital to our economy, that produces an incredible amount of economic activity and jobs. Mortgage applications increased nearly 10 percent for the week ending September 3 from late August, the largest gain since early April.

Economists such as Mark Zandi of Moody's and James Glassman of JPMorgan Chase support extending this credit. While there are signs that the housing market is stabilizing, we are not out of the woods yet. The industry and part of the economy still needs help. I have talked to many of the realtors in my community in Maryland and they tell me the inventory of property on the market is at high levels. There is a lot of inventory out there. More people are wanting to sell than people willing to buy. The number of new housing starts for residential homes is at a very low level. Each

housing start creates jobs. It creates jobs in the material industry. It creates all types of ripples in our economy. So getting the housing market back on track will not only help in getting more homeowners into homes and helping the economy that direct way, it also creates the jobs and maintains the jobs of those who supply the network which will create new housing stock for America.

Dean Baker, the codirector for the Center for Economic and Policy Research, notes that price declines could resume later this fall. I quote:

The uptick in sales driven by the credit has led to a

substantial increase in the number of homes offered for sale

at just the time that the boost from the credit is dwindling.

The inventory will also be a much larger drag in the slow-

selling winter months. . . .

So we now have a large inventory, and if the credit is not available, I think it will have a very negative impact on the ability to continue housing sales at a level of recovery for our economy.

Extending the credit is prudent and a fiscally responsible measure. It provides the help. We know it works. We know what has happened. We know we are still in difficult times. It is not the time to eliminate this tool that we have available. That is why I am recommending an extension, not a permanent extension, because we want this credit to be available to get us out of our current economic problems. We know we still need it. A 6-month extension is the minimum we should do. At the same time, we should look at other ways to improve and help the housing industry and to help the recovery of our Nation.

I appreciate my colleagues who have joined me in this effort. I hope my colleagues in this body will help us with moving this legislation as promptly as possible.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce The Energy Development Program Implementation Act

of 2009. This legislation provides a mechanism to guide the implementation of title V of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 1978, which requires the United States to work with developing countries in assessing and finding ways to meet their energy needs through non- nuclear, alternative energy sources.

Although title V of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act was passed into law more than 30 years ago, Congress did not put an implementation framework into place, and the Executive Branch never implemented the provisions. Back then, there may have been skepticism about the economic viability of alternative energy resources, but in the past 30 years there have been significant advances in the technology supporting alternative energy resources, and today there is broader agreement that the development of these resources is important for economic development, environmental sustainability, and national security.

This bill provides economic and environmental benefits to developing countries and diplomatic benefits for the U.S. Through the implementation of the Energy Development Program supported by this bill, developing countries will be provided energy assessments, receive support in evaluating energy alternatives, and be able to work on cooperative projects with United States energy experts on resource exploration, production, training, and research and development. This bill will further international collaboration around alternative energy sources and allow the United States to take on a stronger leadership role in this effort.

In addition to providing economic and environmental benefits, this bill supports international efforts to prevent nuclear proliferation. The bipartisan Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism recently recommended the implementation of title V because it will lower the risk of nuclear proliferation as developing countries are encouraged to focus more on non-nuclear, alternative energy sources. Providing concrete technical assistance to promote those energy sources in developing countries reduces the inherent risk that accompanies the wider proliferation of nuclear technology and materials.

We should remain mindful that the same nuclear technology that can be used for peaceful, civilian uses may in some cases be used to support covert or potentially dangerous nuclear programs. At my request, the Government Accountability Office, GAO, reviewed the International Atomic Energy Agency's, IAEA, Technical Cooperation, TC, Program, which supports peaceful uses of nuclear energy, including nuclear power, by providing nuclear equipment, training, and fellowships to IAEA member states. The U.S. provides approximately 25 percent of its annual budget. GAO found that the U.S. faces difficulty in assessing the nature of the nuclear assistance provided under that program, and that state sponsors of terrorism, including Iran, Syria, Sudan, and Cuba had received funding under the program. For instance, GAO reported that Iran requested assistance to complete a research reactor that could have been used for both civilian and military applications. Fortunately, IAEA denied this assistance, but this example highlights the inherent proliferation risks of nuclear power and the benefit of focusing more on alternative energy sources.

This bill puts into place an implementation mechanism to support this effort. It requires the Secretary of Energy, in cooperation with the Secretary of State and the administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development, to develop strategic and implementation plans for the Energy Development Program. The Secretary of Energy will then be required to carry out the implementation of the program according to those plans.

The Energy Development Program would be supported by the exchange of energy experts, scientists, and technicians with developing countries. Federal employees will have an opportunity to work with developing countries on energy assessments and projects focused on finding and developing non-nuclear, alternative sources of energy, while retaining their seniority and other rights and benefits within their home agencies. They will be able to share their expertise with professionals in developing countries and also bring back new ideas and perspectives from overseas that could help us in our own efforts to develop alternative energy sources.

The time has come to implement title V of the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Act. This legislation will put that process in motion. The benefits of this program have global impact as we assist developing countries in meeting their energy needs with alternative energy sources, reduce the risk of nuclear proliferation, and take a more prominent leadership role in developing alternative energy sources.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce The Energy Development Program Implementation Act

of 2009. This legislation provides a mechanism to guide the implementation of title V of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 1978, which requires the United States to work with developing countries in assessing and finding ways to meet their energy needs through non- nuclear, alternative energy sources.

Although title V of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act was passed into law more than 30 years ago, Congress did not put an implementation framework into place, and the Executive Branch never implemented the provisions. Back then, there may have been skepticism about the economic viability of alternative energy resources, but in the past 30 years there have been significant advances in the technology supporting alternative energy resources, and today there is broader agreement that the development of these resources is important for economic development, environmental sustainability, and national security.

This bill provides economic and environmental benefits to developing countries and diplomatic benefits for the U.S. Through the implementation of the Energy Development Program supported by this bill, developing countries will be provided energy assessments, receive support in evaluating energy alternatives, and be able to work on cooperative projects with United States energy experts on resource exploration, production, training, and research and development. This bill will further international collaboration around alternative energy sources and allow the United States to take on a stronger leadership role in this effort.

In addition to providing economic and environmental benefits, this bill supports international efforts to prevent nuclear proliferation. The bipartisan Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism recently recommended the implementation of title V because it will lower the risk of nuclear proliferation as developing countries are encouraged to focus more on non-nuclear, alternative energy sources. Providing concrete technical assistance to promote those energy sources in developing countries reduces the inherent risk that accompanies the wider proliferation of nuclear technology and materials.

We should remain mindful that the same nuclear technology that can be used for peaceful, civilian uses may in some cases be used to support covert or potentially dangerous nuclear programs. At my request, the Government Accountability Office, GAO, reviewed the International Atomic Energy Agency's, IAEA, Technical Cooperation, TC, Program, which supports peaceful uses of nuclear energy, including nuclear power, by providing nuclear equipment, training, and fellowships to IAEA member states. The U.S. provides approximately 25 percent of its annual budget. GAO found that the U.S. faces difficulty in assessing the nature of the nuclear assistance provided under that program, and that state sponsors of terrorism, including Iran, Syria, Sudan, and Cuba had received funding under the program. For instance, GAO reported that Iran requested assistance to complete a research reactor that could have been used for both civilian and military applications. Fortunately, IAEA denied this assistance, but this example highlights the inherent proliferation risks of nuclear power and the benefit of focusing more on alternative energy sources.

This bill puts into place an implementation mechanism to support this effort. It requires the Secretary of Energy, in cooperation with the Secretary of State and the administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development, to develop strategic and implementation plans for the Energy Development Program. The Secretary of Energy will then be required to carry out the implementation of the program according to those plans.

The Energy Development Program would be supported by the exchange of energy experts, scientists, and technicians with developing countries. Federal employees will have an opportunity to work with developing countries on energy assessments and projects focused on finding and developing non-nuclear, alternative sources of energy, while retaining their seniority and other rights and benefits within their home agencies. They will be able to share their expertise with professionals in developing countries and also bring back new ideas and perspectives from overseas that could help us in our own efforts to develop alternative energy sources.

The time has come to implement title V of the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Act. This legislation will put that process in motion. The benefits of this program have global impact as we assist developing countries in meeting their energy needs with alternative energy sources, reduce the risk of nuclear proliferation, and take a more prominent leadership role in developing alternative energy sources.

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