A bill to amend the Act of June 18, 1934, to reaffirm the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to take land into trust for Indian tribes.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce three pieces of legislation: the Water Efficiency and Conservation Investment Act, S. 1711, the Water Efficiency, Conservation and Adaptation Act, S. 1712, and the Water Efficiency via Carbon Harvesting and Restoration Act, S. 1713.

Water is our world's most precious and important limited natural resource--access to water is vital for every person and life form on this planet. Albert Szent-Gyorgyi, a Hungarian Nobel Prize winning doctor, once said that ``water is life's mater and matrix, mother and medium. There is no life without water.''

While Nevada is blessed with beautiful desert landscapes and tremendous clean energy resources, we are not blessed with abundant water supplies. That is why I am introducing legislation together with my friend Senator Ensign and others that will: encourage Americans to use water more efficiently; ensure that future generations have access to adequate supplies of clean water; and convert water stealing invasive weeds to sequestered carbon and clean-burning fuels.

A lengthy drought is taking its toll on the Colorado River Basin states, especially Nevada, Arizona, and California. More than 30 million people rely on water from the Colorado River, which supplies Southern Nevada with 90 percent of its water. Water levels at Lake Mead, where water used by 1.9 million Nevadans is stored, have dropped by roughly 100 feet. If the drought in the Southwest continues the lake could dry up in the next 12 years, according to a study by the Scripps Institution of Oceanography.

Growing population, rising water demand, climate change induced disruptions to the water cycle, aging infrastructure, and water disputes all necessitate early action so the water resources we rely on today can be enjoyed by the next generation.

Even without considering the effects of climate change, the U.S. Global Change Research Program has identified many serious water supply conflicts in the Colorado River Basin states by 2025. Factoring in the USGCRP's projection that precipitation runoff will decrease in the Southwest by up to 40 percent in some areas over the next half century as a result of a changing climate, it is clear that immediate and constant attention is and will be necessary to address these water supply problems.

Legislation is urgently needed to promote greater water efficiency and create better financing options for improving our infrastructure to save, recycle and reuse water. Strong tax incentives to make our homes and yards more water efficient and to increase investments in extending the life of our existing water supplies will help secure water scarce regions against the economic and health catastrophes that would occur if their water supplies were to run dry.

We need to invest meaningfully in planning for, adapting to and mitigating the effects of climate change on water supplies and water infrastructure with which Nevadans are becoming all too familiar. It is important that we start planning right away for a more secure water supply future.

Investing in water efficiency and adapting our water systems to a changing climate not only prepares us for the future, it also can save consumers hundreds of dollars on their water bills. Additionally, adequate funding for the legislation I am introducing today could create tens of thousands of jobs. A $1 million direct investment in water efficiency is estimated to create between 15 and 22 jobs--more than double the jobs created by coal or oil investments.

Together, the Water Efficiency and Conservation Investment Act and the Water Efficiency, Conservation and Adaptation Act provide the right balance of tax incentives, financing and grant programs to begin formulating a national strategy to address these pressing needs and ensure that current and future Nevadans will have greater and more sustainable economic growth opportunities.

The Water Efficiency via Carbon Harvesting and Restoration Act also helps protect our water resources, and does much more. Invasive weeds and dangerous fuels buildup in Western landscapes have become recipes for disaster on a seemingly annual basis. The Bureau of Land Management has estimated that a single acre of salt cedar robs our watersheds of nearly a million gallons of water each year. The National Park Service has found that the infestation at Lake Mead National Recreation Area alone covers almost 7,000 acres. Removing the salt cedar from this one area would restore enough water to satisfy the needs of 72,000 Las Vegas residents.

At the same time, expansion of pinyon and juniper now covers up to 9 million acres of the public lands in the Great Basin, forming dense thickets impenetrable to most wildlife, and creating enormous wildland fire hazards.

Using biochar production technology, we can restore these impacted landscapes, while producing valuable products that can help address climate change through long term carbon sequestration, benefit agriculture and the environment by reducing the need for chemical fertilizers, and produce cleaner-burning fuels to help meet our Nation's energy needs. All of this can be achieved while saving billions of gallons of water, reducing the risks of hotter and more difficult to extinguish wildfires, and creating rural economic development opportunities.

Let me offer a brief description of how biochar technology works: the

woody material in invasive plants is heated in the absence of oxygen to produce biochar, as well as bio-oil and syngas which can then be used to power the production process. Biochar is nearly pure carbon, and when applied to landscapes and agricultural fields it has long-lasting benefits. It significantly improves soil quality, decreases fertilizer runoff, and increases plant health and crop yields. Studies have found that biochar is stable for hundreds if not thousands of years, keeping this carbon from being released into the atmosphere where it would contribute to climate change.

These bills will do much to extend the life of our water resources in the face of growing water demand and climate disruptions, while improving the health of ecosystems. Under these bills, Nevadans would have new options to save money on their water bills and new ways to make money by eliminating water-hungry invasive species. And, the low- cost financing options that will help communities adapt to drought and water scarcity due to global climate change will ensure sustainable economic growth and stimulate more green job creation.

As these bills move through the legislative process, I look forward to working with my colleagues to ensure that adequate attention is paid to the tremendous work our Nation must do so that future generations may enjoy a more secure and predictable clean water future.

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

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

Mr. President, technology has transformed the way we work, the way we entertain ourselves, and the way we understand the world around us. But one area of our lives that has been more resistant to technological change has been the way we educate our children. And yet I see tremendous potential in technology to improve access to education and decrease its often high costs. One example of this is open educational resources. Today, I am introducing a bill that will provide a short-term federal investment in the development of one type of open educational resource--college textbooks. I believe this investment will improve learning in our college classrooms and help bring down the cost of college for students.

The growth of the Internet has enabled the creation and sharing of open content. A teacher or professor in Illinois can create a lecture, a lesson, a book, or an entire curriculum and share it online. A teacher across the country or even across the world can access that educational material, adapt it, and use it in his or her classroom. More and more often educators are utilizing technology in this way to improve student learning.

The President recognizes the potential of this new technology. He has proposed a significant new Federal investment in the creation of online open-source courses for community colleges. These courses will be made freely available online and widely distributed so that all colleges can make use of them. I believe this initiative will help make higher education more accessible for students, especially non-traditional students or students living in rural areas far away from brick-and- mortar institutions. Because the courses will be available for free, the initiative will also help bring down the high cost of a college education for students struggling to pay.

I think we can go even further. The high cost of textbooks continues to be a barrier for many students struggling to pay for college. The College Board reported that for the 2007 to 2008 school year, students spent an estimated $805 to $1,229 on books and supplies. A little over a year ago, the Higher Education Opportunity Act was signed into law. That law includes provisions that I authored to increase transparency in college textbook pricing for professors and students. I hope that new law will help decrease the high cost of textbooks when these provisions are enacted next year, but there is more that the Federal Government can do to provide cheap alternatives to professors and students.

The bill I am introducing today, the Open College Textbook Act, will create a grant program for the creation of freely-available, online open college textbooks. Making high-quality open textbooks freely available to the general public would significantly lower college textbook costs. Under my bill, the Secretary of Education would award grants to colleges, professors, nonprofit organizations or for-profit companies to create introductory-level college textbooks. Once produced, these books would be posted on an easily-accessible website and made available to students, professors, and the public for free. The result would be a set of high-quality college textbooks that could be adopted in any introductory course at any college in the country. This would be a limited investment of Federal grant funding over just a few years, not a permanent federal funding stream. The choice would ultimately still be the professor's. Each professor could choose whether to assign the open textbook to his class, but I hope that he would seriously consider this high-quality, free online option that would save his students $150 or $200 each at the college bookstore.

Along with the clear cost benefits, open textbooks can also improve teaching and learning. The content of an open textbook can be adapted, supplemented, and personalized by professors for their course. Instead of framing a course around a textbook, a professor can modify an open textbook to fit the needs of a particular course or group of students. When professors take advantage of the flexibility and adaptability of open textbooks, student learning improves.

The use of Federal funding for textbooks and curricula is not new. For years, the National Science Foundation has been awarding grants to professors for research into the improvement of learning in the classroom. Sometimes these grants have resulted in the creation of textbooks, which the author can then license for profit to a commercial publisher. I believe textbooks created with Federal funding should be made available for free so that all students and professors can benefit from our investment. This bill would also require that all future Federal grants that lead to the creation of a textbook or curriculum for use in the classroom be licensed openly and made freely available to all educators for their use.

Over the past decade, I have watched textbook publishers use technology to drive up the cost of textbooks through unnecessary online supplements and CD-ROMs. It is time that we use the potential of technology to improve college access, learning, and affordability for all students. I believe the Open College Textbook Act that I am introducing today will accomplish that goal.

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 World War II War Crimes Accountability Act of 2009. The bill seeks to hold the surviving Nazi war criminals accountable for their crimes by encouraging foreign governments to prosecute and extradite wanted criminals. I would like to thank my colleagues, Senators Snowe and Cardin, for supporting this important legislation.

The atrocities committed by the Nazis and their allies during the Second World War were vast and have helped shape the modern concept of crimes against humanity. After the war, some of the perpetrators of these heinous crimes escaped justice and have been living out their days as free men.

In an effort to bring these fugitives to justice, the Simon Wiesenthal Center and the Targum Shlishi Foundation of Miami, Florida launched ``Operation: Last Chance'' to help identify and facilitate the prosecution of the remaining unprosecuted Nazi war criminals and to assist governments in bringing Nazi war criminals to justice.

Among the Center's many open cases there is Alois Brunner, a key operative of Adolf Eichmann, who was responsible for the deportation of 47,000 Jews from Austria, 44,000 Jews from Greece, 23,500 Jews from France, and 14,000 Jews from Slovakia to Nazi death camps. He lived in Syria for decades and the Syrian government refused to

cooperate with international prosecution efforts. He was convicted in absentia for his crimes by France. He was born in 1912 and last seen in 2001. While is it doubtful that he is still alive, there is no conclusive evidence of his death.

Another case is that of Milivoj Asner, who served as the police chief of the city of Slavonska Pozega. During 1941 and 1942, Mr. Asner orchestrated the robbery, persecution and destruction of the local Serb, Jewish, and Gypsy communities, which culminated in the deportation of hundreds of civilians to Ustasha concentration camps, where most of the deportees were murdered. After his exposure in Operation: Last Chance, the former police chief later escaped once again to Klagenfurt, Austria where he currently resides.

Within our own government, the Office of Special Investigations at the Justice Department is tasked with identifying, investigating and denying refuge in the United States to the Nazi persecutors. As a result, the U.S. is the only country in the world to have won an ``A'' rating from the Simon Wiesenthal Center for effectiveness in pursuing justice for Holocaust crimes.

Yet despite the best efforts of the U.S. Government and tireless work of organizations like the Wiesenthal Center, some countries continue to harbor wanted Nazis and refuse to accept the extradition of Nazi criminals from other countries, including the U.S. This inaction is shameful.

It is incumbent upon us as Americans to honor the memory of those killed in the Holocaust and to pay tribute to the sacrifices of the men and women who fought and died in World War II. The last surviving Nazi war criminals are dying off. We must do everything in our power, including equipping our own government with important tools, to bring these war criminals to justice before it is too late.

The World War II War Crimes Accountability Act seeks to strengthen U.S. efforts by directing the Attorney General to assess a country's cooperation in prosecuting and extraditing war criminals when considering prospective countries for admission into the Visa Waiver Program. It also requires the President to issue an annual report describing such cooperation for countries seeking entry into or renewal of the Visa Waiver Program.

I believe that giving the administration this added review process will help encourage foreign governments to prosecute and extradite wanted criminals. I hope that others will join me in cosponsoring this legislation and voting it into law.

Time is of the essence. Surviving Nazi war criminals are becoming increasingly rare. We must do all that we can before it is too late.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a technical amendment to the Act of June 18, 1934.

On February 24, 2009, the Supreme Court issued its decision in the Carcieri v. Salazar case. In that decision the Supreme Court held that the Secretary of the Interior exceeded his authority in taking land into trust for a tribe that was not under Federal jurisdiction, or recognized, at the time the Indian Reorganization Act was enacted in 1934.

The legislation I am introducing today is necessary to reaffirm the Secretary's authority to take lands into trust for Indian tribes, regardless of when they were recognized by the Federal government. The amendment ratifies the prior trust acquisitions of the Secretary, who for the past 75 years has been exercising his authority to take lands into trust, as intended by the Indian Reorganization Act.

On May 21, 2009, the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs held a hearing to examine the executive branch's authority to take land into trust for Indian tribes. At that hearing, it became clear that Congress needs to act to resolve the uncertainty created by the Supreme Court's decision. Therefore, this legislation was developed in consultation with interested parties to clarify the Secretary's authority.

Inaction by Congress could significantly impact planned development projects on Indian trust lands, including the building of homes and community centers; result in a loss of jobs in an already challenging economic environment; and create costly and unnecessary litigation.

Further, if the decision stands, it would have the effect of creating two classes of Indian tribes--those who were recognized as of 1934, for whom land may be taken into trust, and those recognized after 1934 that would be unable to have land taken into trust status. Creating two classes of tribes is unacceptable and is contrary to prior Acts of this Congress. In 1994, Congress passed the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act to ensure that all tribes are treated equally, regardless of their date of recognition.

I want to thank Senators Tester, Inouye, Akaka, Baucus, Udall, Bingaman, and Franken for their support on this legislation. My cosponsors are well aware of the resulting impact this decision could have on our Native American communities. Affected tribes deserve our timely consideration of this bill. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the passage of this legislation.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a technical amendment to the Act of June 18, 1934.

On February 24, 2009, the Supreme Court issued its decision in the Carcieri v. Salazar case. In that decision the Supreme Court held that the Secretary of the Interior exceeded his authority in taking land into trust for a tribe that was not under Federal jurisdiction, or recognized, at the time the Indian Reorganization Act was enacted in 1934.

The legislation I am introducing today is necessary to reaffirm the Secretary's authority to take lands into trust for Indian tribes, regardless of when they were recognized by the Federal government. The amendment ratifies the prior trust acquisitions of the Secretary, who for the past 75 years has been exercising his authority to take lands into trust, as intended by the Indian Reorganization Act.

On May 21, 2009, the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs held a hearing to examine the executive branch's authority to take land into trust for Indian tribes. At that hearing, it became clear that Congress needs to act to resolve the uncertainty created by the Supreme Court's decision. Therefore, this legislation was developed in consultation with interested parties to clarify the Secretary's authority.

Inaction by Congress could significantly impact planned development projects on Indian trust lands, including the building of homes and community centers; result in a loss of jobs in an already challenging economic environment; and create costly and unnecessary litigation.

Further, if the decision stands, it would have the effect of creating two classes of Indian tribes--those who were recognized as of 1934, for whom land may be taken into trust, and those recognized after 1934 that would be unable to have land taken into trust status. Creating two classes of tribes is unacceptable and is contrary to prior Acts of this Congress. In 1994, Congress passed the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act to ensure that all tribes are treated equally, regardless of their date of recognition.

I want to thank Senators Tester, Inouye, Akaka, Baucus, Udall, Bingaman, and Franken for their support on this legislation. My cosponsors are well aware of the resulting impact this decision could have on our Native American communities. Affected tribes deserve our timely consideration of this bill. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the passage of this legislation.

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