Indian School Bus Route Safety Reauthorization Act of 2011

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Interstate Horseracing Improvement Act. This legislation addresses an issue affecting interstate commerce and an iconic American animal. I am pleased to be working on this in a bipartisan manner with Representative Ed Whitfield of Kentucky.

Although many recognize the horse as an iconic American animal, particularly for the West, there are probably few who know how long horseracing has been a part of our nation's history. My colleagues in Kentucky, Maryland, and New York can boast of the Sport of Kings' long tradition in their States. Yet the first recorded horserace in what is now the United States took place in New Mexico. In 1541, the Spanish explorer Coronado challenged one of his officers to a match race while they were camped near Bernalillo.

The Spanish brought not only horses, but also horseracing to what is now the United States. Decades before the Pilgrims arrived at Plymouth Rock, Don Juan de Onate crossed into present day New Mexico with Spanish colonists who were not just settlers but caballeros, or ``horse'' men. Native American petroglyphs record early encounters with these new arrivals travelling on horseback. Horseracing became a tradition in the Southwest as it later did in Eastern states.

That tradition continues today at racetracks in New Mexico and over 30 other States across the nation. With the Kentucky Derby this Saturday,

many Americans will turn their attention to Churchill Downs for the most exciting two minutes in sports. Some of the best of horseracing will be on display. Away from the crowds, however, horseracing finds itself facing an unattractive reality. Too many of its equine athletes are overmedicated and doped. The Sport of Kings is no place for such a drug problem.

American horseracing stands apart from the rest of the world when it comes to permissive medication rules and tolerance of doping. Unlike other countries that ban race day medications, racing jurisdictions here allow injecting horses just hours before post time. There are trainers who violate medication rules multiple times, seemingly with impunity. According to a recent Racing Commissioners International, RCI, letter, one trainer has been sanctioned at least 64 times for various rule violations, including medication violations involving the class 2 painkiller mepivacaine and the class 3 drug clenbuterol. According to the New York Times, only two of the top 20 trainers, by racing purses won, have never been cited for a medication violation. This tolerance of doping represents a shameful abuse of an iconic American animal, and it is time to put an end to it.

Anyone who goes to the track outside of a Triple Crown or Breeders' Cup race knows that attendance is down across the country. The decline is especially stark considering that horseracing was once the No. 1 spectator sport in the United States. One poll of sports industry insiders found that most think horseracing is in decline or dying. With the loss of fans, comes the loss of revenue that ultimately sustains a $40 billion industry and 400,000 jobs nationwide, including 10,000 jobs in my home State. As current fans leave the sport, many potential new fans will probably never come to the track while doping is rampant.

Although a horse may need therapeutic medication from time to time, there is no excuse for injecting almost all thoroughbreds hours before they race. As RCI Chairman William Koester rightly noted, that just does not pass the smell test with the public or anyone else. While medicating sound horses on race day is concerning, the doping of sore horses is appalling. Sore and lame horses should not be raced. Feeling no pain, an injured horse on drugs may continue to charge down the track, endangering every horse and jockey in the race. Drugs may account for the fact that the U.S. horse fatality rate is more than three times higher than in comparable British flat racing. Trainers or anyone else caught doping racehorses should face stiff penalties, including fines and meaningful suspensions.

This is a matter of concern to me as a senator from a state where quarterhorse and thoroughbred racing is an important industry. But it should be of concern to all my Senate colleagues since Congress granted a special privilege to horseracing that no other U.S. gambling enterprise enjoys: interstate and online wagering. The Interstate Horseracing Act of 1978, IHA, allows off-track, or ``simulcast,'' wagering across state lines. Internet wagering on horseraces subject to the IHA was granted a special exemption from the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, UIGEA. Given the benefits of the IHA, the horse racing industry should not only protect the safety and welfare of its animals and jockeys, but also ensure the integrity of the sport.

I reluctantly believe that Congressional action is needed to address this critical challenge facing the industry. Unlike other sports, horseracing lacks a governing body that can issue uniform medication rules and ban performance enhancing drugs. That is why recent calls from the RCI and the Jockey Club to phase out race day medication are not enough to save American horseracing. Despite repeated pledges from the racing industry to address this issue, horseracing's drug problem has festered for decades.

The legislation Representative Whitfield and I are introducing today would amend the Interstate Horseracing Act to ban performance-enhancing drugs and require stiff penalties for doping. Under the Interstate Horseracing Improvement Act, anyone who knowingly provides or races a horse on performance enhancing drugs faces minimum fines and suspensions. The winner of each race plus one additional horse must be tested for performance enhancing drugs. To ensure quality testing, the bill requires that test labs are accredited to quality standards. This legislation envisions that individual state racing commissions would continue to enforce horseracing rules within their jurisdiction, including the new anti-doping rules. However, the Federal Trade Commission can also enforce the anti-doping rules if there is inadequate enforcement. The new rules would apply only to those races that are already governed by the IHA.

In addition to the animal welfare issues that doping creates, I know how important drug reform is for those who make their living from the sport. Passing this legislation will help bring integrity back to racing, benefitting everyone involved and, most importantly, the health and safety of the horses at the center of it all.

I urge my colleagues to support the Interstate Horseracing Improvement Act.

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

Mr. President, I rise today with my distinguished colleague Senator Udall of New Mexico to introduce the Indian School Bus Route Safety Reauthorization Act of 2011. This bill continues an important federal program begun in 1998 that addresses a unique problem with the roads in and around the Nation's single largest Indian reservation and the neighboring counties. Through this program, Navajo children who had been prevented from getting to school by roads that were often impassable are now traveling safely to and from their schools. Because of the unusual nature of this situation, I believe it must continue to be addressed at the Federal level.

I would like to begin with some statistics on this unique problem and why

I believe a Federal solution continues to be necessary. The Navajo Nation is by far the nation's largest Indian Reservation, covering 25,000 square miles. Portions of the Navajo Nation are in three states: Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah. No other reservation comes anywhere close to the size of Navajo. To give you an idea of its size, the state of West Virginia is about 24,000 square miles. In fact, 10 states are smaller in size than the Navajo reservation.

According to the Bureau of Indian Affairs, about 9,700 miles of public roads serve the Navajo nation. Only about 1/3 of these roads are paved. The remaining 6,500 miles, 67 percent, are dirt roads. Every day school buses use nearly all of these roads to transport Navajo children to and from school.

About 6,200 miles of the roads on the Navajo reservation are BIA roads, and about 3,300 miles are State and county roads. All public roads within, adjacent to, or leading to the reservation, including BIA, State, and county roads are considered part of the Federal Indian Reservation Road System. However, only BIA and tribal roads are eligible for Federal maintenance funding from BIA. Moreover, the funding for road construction from the Federal Lands Highways Program in SAFETEA is generally applied only to BIA or tribal roads. Thus, the states and counties are responsible for maintenance and improvement of their 2,500 miles of roads that serve the reservation.

The counties in the three States that include the Navajo reservation are simply not in a position to maintain all of the roads on the reservation that carry children to and from school. Nearly all of the land area in these counties is under Federal or tribal jurisdiction.

For example, in my State of New Mexico, \3/4\ of McKinley County is either tribal or federal land, including BLM, Forest Service, and military land. The Indian land area alone comprises 61 percent of McKinley County. Consequently, the county can draw upon only a very limited tax base as a source of revenue for maintenance purposes. Of the nearly 600 miles of county-maintained roads in McKinley County, 512 miles serve Indian land.

In San Juan County, Utah, the Navajo Nation comprises 40 percent of the land area. The county maintains 611 miles of roads on the Navajo Nation. Of these, 357 miles are dirt, 164 miles are gravel and only 90 miles are paved. On the reservation, the county has three high schools, two elementary schools, two BIA boarding schools and four pre-schools.

The situation is similar in neighboring San Juan County, New Mexico, and Apache, Navajo, and Coconino Counties, Arizona. In light of the counties' limited resources, I do believe the Federal Government is asking the States and counties to bear too large a burden for road maintenance in this unique situation.

Families living in and around the reservation are no different from families anywhere else; their children are entitled to the same opportunity to get to school safely and to get a good education. However, the many miles of unpaved and deficient roads on the reservation are frequently impassable, especially when they are wet, muddy or snowy. If the school buses don't get through, the kids simply cannot get to school.

These children are literally being left behind.

Because of the vast size of the Navajo reservation, the cost of maintaining the county roads used by the school buses is more than the counties can bear without Federal assistance. I believe it is essential that the Federal Government help these counties deal with this one-of- a-kind situation.

In response to this unique situation, in 1998 Congress began providing direct annual funding to the counties that contain the Navajo reservation to help ensure that children on the reservation can get to and from their public schools. In 2005, the program was reauthorized in SAFETEA through 2009, and now extended through 2011.

Under this program, $1.8 million is made available each year to be shared equally among the three states. The funding is provided directly to the counties in Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah that contain the Navajo reservation. I want to be very clear: these Federal funds can be used only on roads that are located within or that lead to the reservation, that are on the State or county maintenance system, and that are used by school buses.

This program has been very successful. For 14 years, the counties have used the annual funding to help maintain the routes used by school buses to carry children to school and to Headstart programs. I have had an opportunity to see firsthand the importance of this funding when I rode in a school bus over some of the roads that are maintained using funds from this program.

The bill we are introducing today provides a simple 6 year reauthorization of that program, for fiscal years 2012 through 2017, with a modest increase in the annual funding to allow for inflation and for additional roads to be maintained in each of the three states.

I believe that continuing this program for 6 more years is fully justified because of the vast area of the Navajo reservation, by far the nation's largest, and the unique nature of this need that only the Federal Government can deal with effectively.

I don't believe any child wanting to get to and from school should have to risk or tolerate unsafe roads. Kids today, particularly in rural and remote areas, face enough hurdles to getting a good education. I ask my colleagues to join me again this year in assuring that Navajo schoolchildren at least have a chance to get to school safely and get an education.

I look forward to working with Chairman Boxer and Ranking Member Inhofe of the Environment and Public Works Committee, and Chairman Baucus and Ranking Member Vitter of the Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee, to incorporate this legislation once again into the next comprehensive 6 year reauthorization of surface transportation programs.

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

Mr. President, I rise today with my distinguished colleague Senator Udall of New Mexico to introduce the Indian School Bus Route Safety Reauthorization Act of 2011. This bill continues an important federal program begun in 1998 that addresses a unique problem with the roads in and around the Nation's single largest Indian reservation and the neighboring counties. Through this program, Navajo children who had been prevented from getting to school by roads that were often impassable are now traveling safely to and from their schools. Because of the unusual nature of this situation, I believe it must continue to be addressed at the Federal level.

I would like to begin with some statistics on this unique problem and why

I believe a Federal solution continues to be necessary. The Navajo Nation is by far the nation's largest Indian Reservation, covering 25,000 square miles. Portions of the Navajo Nation are in three states: Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah. No other reservation comes anywhere close to the size of Navajo. To give you an idea of its size, the state of West Virginia is about 24,000 square miles. In fact, 10 states are smaller in size than the Navajo reservation.

According to the Bureau of Indian Affairs, about 9,700 miles of public roads serve the Navajo nation. Only about 1/3 of these roads are paved. The remaining 6,500 miles, 67 percent, are dirt roads. Every day school buses use nearly all of these roads to transport Navajo children to and from school.

About 6,200 miles of the roads on the Navajo reservation are BIA roads, and about 3,300 miles are State and county roads. All public roads within, adjacent to, or leading to the reservation, including BIA, State, and county roads are considered part of the Federal Indian Reservation Road System. However, only BIA and tribal roads are eligible for Federal maintenance funding from BIA. Moreover, the funding for road construction from the Federal Lands Highways Program in SAFETEA is generally applied only to BIA or tribal roads. Thus, the states and counties are responsible for maintenance and improvement of their 2,500 miles of roads that serve the reservation.

The counties in the three States that include the Navajo reservation are simply not in a position to maintain all of the roads on the reservation that carry children to and from school. Nearly all of the land area in these counties is under Federal or tribal jurisdiction.

For example, in my State of New Mexico, \3/4\ of McKinley County is either tribal or federal land, including BLM, Forest Service, and military land. The Indian land area alone comprises 61 percent of McKinley County. Consequently, the county can draw upon only a very limited tax base as a source of revenue for maintenance purposes. Of the nearly 600 miles of county-maintained roads in McKinley County, 512 miles serve Indian land.

In San Juan County, Utah, the Navajo Nation comprises 40 percent of the land area. The county maintains 611 miles of roads on the Navajo Nation. Of these, 357 miles are dirt, 164 miles are gravel and only 90 miles are paved. On the reservation, the county has three high schools, two elementary schools, two BIA boarding schools and four pre-schools.

The situation is similar in neighboring San Juan County, New Mexico, and Apache, Navajo, and Coconino Counties, Arizona. In light of the counties' limited resources, I do believe the Federal Government is asking the States and counties to bear too large a burden for road maintenance in this unique situation.

Families living in and around the reservation are no different from families anywhere else; their children are entitled to the same opportunity to get to school safely and to get a good education. However, the many miles of unpaved and deficient roads on the reservation are frequently impassable, especially when they are wet, muddy or snowy. If the school buses don't get through, the kids simply cannot get to school.

These children are literally being left behind.

Because of the vast size of the Navajo reservation, the cost of maintaining the county roads used by the school buses is more than the counties can bear without Federal assistance. I believe it is essential that the Federal Government help these counties deal with this one-of- a-kind situation.

In response to this unique situation, in 1998 Congress began providing direct annual funding to the counties that contain the Navajo reservation to help ensure that children on the reservation can get to and from their public schools. In 2005, the program was reauthorized in SAFETEA through 2009, and now extended through 2011.

Under this program, $1.8 million is made available each year to be shared equally among the three states. The funding is provided directly to the counties in Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah that contain the Navajo reservation. I want to be very clear: these Federal funds can be used only on roads that are located within or that lead to the reservation, that are on the State or county maintenance system, and that are used by school buses.

This program has been very successful. For 14 years, the counties have used the annual funding to help maintain the routes used by school buses to carry children to school and to Headstart programs. I have had an opportunity to see firsthand the importance of this funding when I rode in a school bus over some of the roads that are maintained using funds from this program.

The bill we are introducing today provides a simple 6 year reauthorization of that program, for fiscal years 2012 through 2017, with a modest increase in the annual funding to allow for inflation and for additional roads to be maintained in each of the three states.

I believe that continuing this program for 6 more years is fully justified because of the vast area of the Navajo reservation, by far the nation's largest, and the unique nature of this need that only the Federal Government can deal with effectively.

I don't believe any child wanting to get to and from school should have to risk or tolerate unsafe roads. Kids today, particularly in rural and remote areas, face enough hurdles to getting a good education. I ask my colleagues to join me again this year in assuring that Navajo schoolchildren at least have a chance to get to school safely and get an education.

I look forward to working with Chairman Boxer and Ranking Member Inhofe of the Environment and Public Works Committee, and Chairman Baucus and Ranking Member Vitter of the Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee, to incorporate this legislation once again into the next comprehensive 6 year reauthorization of surface transportation programs.

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

Mr. President, I am pleased today to be joined by a number of my colleagues in introducing the Domestic Energy Promotion Act of 2011, an important piece of legislation that I believe is a good starting point in how tax policies for ethanol should evolve. I am joined in this effort by Senators Conrad, Johanns, Klobuchar, Franken, Tim Johnson, Harkin and Ben Nelson.

Over the years, I have supported domestic ethanol production as a means to improve the environment, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, increase our national security, and bring economic activity to rural America. Those efforts have undoubtedly been an enormous success. Domestic biofuels now supply more than 13 billion gallons of homegrown fuel, accounting for nearly 10 percent of our Nation's transportation fuel needs.

In 2010, Congress enacted a one-year extension of the Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit, or VEETC, also known as the blenders' credit. This 1-year extension has allowed Congress and the domestic biofuels industry to determine the best path forward for Federal support for biofuels. The legislation we are introducing today is a serious, responsible first step to reducing and redirecting Federal tax incentives for biofuels.

This legislation will reduce VEETC to a fixed rate of 20 cents in 2012, and 15 cents in 2013. It will then convert to a variable tax incentive for the remaining 3 years, based on the price of crude oil. When crude oil is more than $90 a barrel, there will be no blenders' credit. When crude oil is $50 and below, the blenders' credit will be 30 cents. The rate will vary when the price of crude is between $50 and $90 a barrel. When oil prices are high, a natural incentive should exist in the market to drive ethanol use.

It also would extend, through 2016, the alternative fuel refueling property credit; the cellulosic producers' tax credit; and the special depreciation allowance for cellulosic biofuel plant property. The bill would modify the alternative fuel refueling property credit to allow the credit for ethanol blends from E20 to E85. The credit would apply to 100 percent of the cost of the property, so long as dual-use pumps are used partly for alternative fuels. Finally, the bill would extend the ethanol import tariff, through 2016, stepping it down to 20 cents for 2012 and 15 cents for 2013 through 2016.

This legislation is a responsible approach that will reduce the existing blenders' credit and put those valuable resources into investing in alternative fuel infrastructure, including alternative fuel pumps. It would responsibly and predictably reduce the existing tax incentive, and help get alternative fuel infrastructure in place so consumers can decide which fuel they would prefer. I know that when American consumers have the choice, they will choose domestic, clean, affordable renewable fuel. They will choose fuel from America's farmers and ranchers, rather than oil sheiks and foreign dictators.

Some of my colleagues have argued that it is time to end the incentives for biofuels immediately and entirely. Not only is this bad energy policy, poor tax policy, and dangerous to our national security, it is also intellectually dishonest. I believe a discussion concerning our Nation's energy and tax policy should be debated in a comprehensive manner. Biofuels are not the only form of energy that receives incentives or supportive policies from the Federal Government.

How about the incentives for wind, oil, natural gas, nuclear, and geothermal? If the Senate intends to consider reforms to biofuels incentives, it should be in the context of a comprehensive review of all energy tax incentives. This bill is meant to serve as a first step in the process. This bill demonstrates a significant reduction in biofuels incentives over the next 5 years. I challenge my colleagues to find any other energy source that is contributing as much to our economy and energy supply that is willing to step up and do that in the current legislative debate.

Now is not the time to pull the rug out from under the only domestic renewable energy source that is making significant contributions to our energy supply. I thank my colleagues for their support, and I look forward to a comprehensive discussion to advance sensible, responsible energy tax policies.