Floor Statements

Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that the business meeting of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources that reconvened on Thursday, June 11, 2009, will resume in SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, on Tuesday, June 16, 2009, at 10:15 a.m., until 11 a.m.

The business meeting will then reconvene on Wednesday, June 17, 2009, at 9 a.m. until 10 a.m.

The purpose of the business meeting is to consider pending energy legislation.

For further information, please contact Sam Fowler at (202) 224-7571 or Amanda Kelly at (202) 224-6836.

Mr. President, I come to the floor today, as I did on June 2, to urge quick action on the nomination of Hillary Tompkins to be the Solicitor in the Department of the Interior. That is an important job in this country and in the Department of the Interior, and the President has chosen well in choosing Miss Tompkins to be the Solicitor. She has broad experience in natural resource issues. She is extremely well qualified in all respects. She was chief counsel to the Governor of New Mexico, Governor Richardson, until recently, where she demonstrated her ability to lead a team of lawyers in that position and to provide sound legal counsel. So it is unclear to me why anyone would be objecting to her being approved as our Solicitor.

When I came to the floor on June 2, about 8 days ago, and talked about this subject, I asked unanimous consent that we proceed to executive session, that her nomination be confirmed, and that we advise the President of our action and the Senate go back to other business. Senator McConnell, on behalf of the Republican Members in the Senate, objected and said that--I think his specific response was they were still working on this. Let me quote him. He said:

We have not been able to get that nomination cleared yet on

this side, but we will be consulting with the Republican

colleagues, and at some point let him know whether it is

possible to go forward.

I assume the word ``him'' in that quote refers to me. At any rate, he objected. That was disappointing. But I am even more disappointed to announce or to call attention to the fact that we still are not able to clear Miss Tompkins for this important position. I think it is unfair to her, I think it is unfair to our former colleague, now Secretary of the Interior Salazar, who needs a capable person in this position. We should not be standing in the way of that occurring. I think his ability to serve the people of the country will be improved by having a good solicitor in that office and we should get on with the job of confirming that nomination.

At the time I was urging action on her nomination before, I was advised that there were two Senators who had objections. Senator Coburn had put a hold on the nominee because of concerns of one kind or another--I don't know the specifics--and I believe Senator Bunning had concerns as well. I have now been advised that both of

those Senators have withdrawn their holds and are now satisfied.

Senator Bunning had written a letter to Secretary Salazar raising concerns about coal mining and mountaintop-removal-related issues. Secretary Salazar responded to that letter on June 4. As I understand it, Senator Coburn also wrote. His letter was to Miss Tompkins, raising questions about whether she was in fact committed to enforcing the law when she was the Solicitor. She wrote him back and said she is clearly committed to enforcing the law, which of course would be part of her oath of office.

Based on those exchanges of letters, I am informed that both Senator Bunning and Senator Coburn are satisfied that her nomination can go forward at this time.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the correspondence between those two Senators and Secretary Salazar and the nominee Hillary Tompkins, following my remarks.

Those concerns have been resolved. I am not clear as to what the continued problem is, why we cannot get this nomination cleared. I raise it at this point. I put people on notice, or the Senate on notice, if we are not able to get it cleared I will once again come to the floor and ask unanimous consent later this week for us to proceed to executive session and to confirm that nomination.

I think this is a highly irregular process to just hold someone hostage for some totally unrelated concern which she has no ability to control. If there were some problem with this nominee, if there were some objection to her qualifications, clearly that would be a different matter. But as far as I know there is no objection to her qualifications. There is no problem with this nominee or any statements she has made or any action she has taken. On that ground, I think we need to move quickly to confirm her nomination. I hope my colleagues will agree and will allow that to happen later today.

I yield the floor.

Exhibit 1

U.S. Senate,

Washington, DC, June 3, 2009.

Hilary Tompkins,

Department of the Interior,

Washington, DC.

Dear Ms. Tompkins, As you know, on May 22, 2009, President

Obama signed into law the Protecting Americans from Violent

Crime Act. This act was overwhelmingly approved in a

bipartisan fashion in both the Senate and the House of

Representatives as an amendment to the Credit Card

Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009, and

will take effect in February, 2010.

The act states, ``The Secretary of the Interior shall not

promulgate or enforce any regulation that prohibits an

individual from possessing a firearm including an assembled

or functional firearm in any unit of the National Park System

or the National Wildlife Refuge System if--

(1) the individual is not otherwise prohibited by law from

possessing the firearm; and

(2) the possession of the firearm is in compliance with the

law of the State in which the unit of the National Park

System or the National Wildlife Refuge System is located.''

Forty-eight states protect the rights of their residents to

carry a concealed weapon. Properly implemented, the

Protecting Americans from Violent Crime Act should, for the

first time, also protect the individual's right to carry and

possess firearms in all national parks and wildlife refuges,

in accordance with state and federal law.

As Solicitor of the Department of the Interior, will you

commit to ensuring the law is implemented in a way that

robustly protects the rights of law-abiding gun owners, as

Congress clearly intended? Will you also commit to vigorously

defend this law against hostile litigation?

Thank you for your desire to serve our great country. I

look forward to receiving your response by Friday, June 5,

2009.

Sincerely,

Tom Coburn,

U.S. Senator.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a the business meeting of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources that convened on Tuesday, June 9, 2009, will resume on Thursday, June 11, 2009, at 2 p.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

The purpose of the business meeting is to consider pending energy legislation.

For further information, please contact Sam Fowler at (202) 224-7571 or Amanda Kelly at (202) 224-6836.

Mr. President, I rise along with Senators Begich and Stabenow today to introduce important legislation that will ensure that low-income seniors have full access to the benefits available to them under the Medicare Drug Benefit. Helping Fill the Medicare Rx Gap Act of 2009 will ensure that low-income seniors and other low-income beneficiaries do not get caught in the Medicare Part D coverage gap, or ``doughnut hole,'' simply because of where they choose to purchase their Part D pharmaceuticals.

Under current regulation and guidance, individuals who are in the doughnut hole and receive Part D drugs from commercial pharmacies are permitted to count waivers or reductions in Part D cost-sharing to count towards their true out of pocket expenses, TrOOP. However, low- income individuals who may receive Part D drugs from safety-net pharmacies and other safety-net providers are not permitted to count similar waivers or reductions in Part D cost-sharing by safety-net providers towards their TrOOP. Thus, current law penalizes low-income individuals and makes it easier for them to get stuck in the doughnut hole--never accessing the catastrophic coverage to which they are entitled.

My legislation would undo this inequity and permit waivers and reductions for beneficiaries receiving care from safety-net providers to count towards beneficiaries' TrOOP. Specifically, the legislation will count waivers and reductions by certain safety-net hospitals and pharmacies, Federally Qualified Health Centers, AIDS Drug Assistance Programs, Pharmacy Assistance Programs and the Indian Health Service toward TrOOP.

I would like to express my gratitude for the assistance of several key senior citizen advocates in crafting this legislation, including: Howard Bedlin from the National Council on Aging, Lena O'Rourke and Marc Steinberg from Families USA, Patricia Nemore and Vicki Gottlich from the Center for Medicare Advocacy and Paul Precht and Rachel Shiffrin, from the Medicare Rights Center.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important piece of legislation, which will ensure that life saving pharmaceuticals are available to low-income Americans.

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

Mr. President, I rise along with Senators Begich and Stabenow today to introduce important legislation that will ensure that low-income seniors have full access to the benefits available to them under the Medicare Drug Benefit. Helping Fill the Medicare Rx Gap Act of 2009 will ensure that low-income seniors and other low-income beneficiaries do not get caught in the Medicare Part D coverage gap, or ``doughnut hole,'' simply because of where they choose to purchase their Part D pharmaceuticals.

Under current regulation and guidance, individuals who are in the doughnut hole and receive Part D drugs from commercial pharmacies are permitted to count waivers or reductions in Part D cost-sharing to count towards their true out of pocket expenses, TrOOP. However, low- income individuals who may receive Part D drugs from safety-net pharmacies and other safety-net providers are not permitted to count similar waivers or reductions in Part D cost-sharing by safety-net providers towards their TrOOP. Thus, current law penalizes low-income individuals and makes it easier for them to get stuck in the doughnut hole--never accessing the catastrophic coverage to which they are entitled.

My legislation would undo this inequity and permit waivers and reductions for beneficiaries receiving care from safety-net providers to count towards beneficiaries' TrOOP. Specifically, the legislation will count waivers and reductions by certain safety-net hospitals and pharmacies, Federally Qualified Health Centers, AIDS Drug Assistance Programs, Pharmacy Assistance Programs and the Indian Health Service toward TrOOP.

I would like to express my gratitude for the assistance of several key senior citizen advocates in crafting this legislation, including: Howard Bedlin from the National Council on Aging, Lena O'Rourke and Marc Steinberg from Families USA, Patricia Nemore and Vicki Gottlich from the Center for Medicare Advocacy and Paul Precht and Rachel Shiffrin, from the Medicare Rights Center.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important piece of legislation, which will ensure that life saving pharmaceuticals are available to low-income Americans.

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

Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks.

The hearing will be held on Tuesday, June 16, 2009, at 2:30 p.m. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony on the President's proposed fiscal year 2010 budget for the National Park Service and proposed expenditures under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150, or by email to [email protected].

For further information, please contact David Brooks at (202) 224- 9863 or Anna Fox at (202) 224-1219.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Medicare Financial Stability for Beneficiaries Act of 2009.

This legislation would ensure that low-income Medicare beneficiaries can access the benefits to which they are entitled through one of the Medicare Savings Programs, MSP, and/or the Part D Low-Income Subsidy,

Mr. President, I rise today along with Senators Collins, Lieberman and Harkin to introduce the Medicare Independent Living Act of 2009. This legislation would eliminate Medicare's ``in the home'' restriction for the coverage of mobility devices, including wheelchairs and scooters, for those with disabilities and expected long-term needs. This includes people with multiple sclerosis, paraplegia, osteoarthritis, and cerebrovascular disease including acute stroke and conditions like aneurysms.

As currently interpreted by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, CMS, the ``in the home'' restriction only permits beneficiaries to obtain wheelchairs that are necessary for use inside the home. As a result, seriously disabled beneficiaries who would primarily utilize a wheelchair outside the home are prevented from receiving this critical and basic equipment through Medicare. For example, this restriction prevents beneficiaries from receiving wheelchairs to access their work, the community-at-large, place of worship, school, physician's offices, or pharmacies.

As the Medicare Rights Center in a report entitled ``Forced Isolation: Medicare's `In The home' Coverage Standards for Wheelchairs'' in March 2004 notes, ``This effectively disqualifies you from leaving your home without the assistance of others.''

Furthermore, in a Kansas City Star article dated July 3, 2005, Mike Oxford with the National Council on Independent Living noted, ``You look at mobility assistance as a way to liberate yourself.'' He added that the restriction ``is just backward.''

In fact, policies such as these are not only backward but directly contradict numerous initiatives aimed at increasing community integration of people with disabilities, including the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Ticket-to-Work Program, the New Freedom Initiative, and the Olmstead Supreme Court decision.

According to the Medicare Rights Center update dated March 23, 2006, ``This results in arbitrary denials. People with apartments too small for a power wheelchair are denied a device that could also get them down the street. Those in more spacious quarters get coverage, allowing them to scoot from room to room and to the grocery store. People who summon all their willpower and strength to hobble around a small apartment get no help for tasks that are beyond them and their front door.''

In New Mexico, I have heard this complaint about the law repeatedly from our State's most vulnerable disabled and senior citizens. People argue the provision is being misinterpreted by the administration and results in Medicare beneficiaries being trapped in their home.

The Independence Through Enhancement of Medicare and Medicaid, ITEM, Coalition adds in a letter to CMS on this issue in November 25, 2005, ``There continues to be no clinical basis for the `in the home' restriction and by asking treating practitioners to document medical need only within the home setting, CMS is severely restricting patients from receiving the most appropriate devices to meet their mobility needs.''

My legislation would clarify that this restriction does not apply to mobility devices, including wheelchairs, for people with disabilities in the Medicare Program. The language change is fairly simple and simply clarifies that the ``in the home'' restriction for durable medical equipment does not apply in the case of mobility devices needed by Medicare beneficiaries with expected long-term needs for use ``in customary settings such as normal domestic, vocational, and community activities.''

This legislation is certainly not intended to discourage CMS from dedicating its resources to reducing waste, fraud, and abuse in the Medicare system, as those efforts are critical to ensuring that Medicare remains financially viable and strong in the future. However, it should be noted that neither Medicaid nor the Department of Veterans Affairs impose such ``in the home'' restrictions on mobility devices.

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 Medicare Financial Stability for Beneficiaries Act of 2009.

This legislation would ensure that low-income Medicare beneficiaries can access the benefits to which they are entitled through one of the Medicare Savings Programs, MSP, and/or the Part D Low-Income Subsidy,

Mr. President, I rise today along with Senators Collins, Lieberman and Harkin to introduce the Medicare Independent Living Act of 2009. This legislation would eliminate Medicare's ``in the home'' restriction for the coverage of mobility devices, including wheelchairs and scooters, for those with disabilities and expected long-term needs. This includes people with multiple sclerosis, paraplegia, osteoarthritis, and cerebrovascular disease including acute stroke and conditions like aneurysms.

As currently interpreted by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, CMS, the ``in the home'' restriction only permits beneficiaries to obtain wheelchairs that are necessary for use inside the home. As a result, seriously disabled beneficiaries who would primarily utilize a wheelchair outside the home are prevented from receiving this critical and basic equipment through Medicare. For example, this restriction prevents beneficiaries from receiving wheelchairs to access their work, the community-at-large, place of worship, school, physician's offices, or pharmacies.

As the Medicare Rights Center in a report entitled ``Forced Isolation: Medicare's `In The home' Coverage Standards for Wheelchairs'' in March 2004 notes, ``This effectively disqualifies you from leaving your home without the assistance of others.''

Furthermore, in a Kansas City Star article dated July 3, 2005, Mike Oxford with the National Council on Independent Living noted, ``You look at mobility assistance as a way to liberate yourself.'' He added that the restriction ``is just backward.''

In fact, policies such as these are not only backward but directly contradict numerous initiatives aimed at increasing community integration of people with disabilities, including the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Ticket-to-Work Program, the New Freedom Initiative, and the Olmstead Supreme Court decision.

According to the Medicare Rights Center update dated March 23, 2006, ``This results in arbitrary denials. People with apartments too small for a power wheelchair are denied a device that could also get them down the street. Those in more spacious quarters get coverage, allowing them to scoot from room to room and to the grocery store. People who summon all their willpower and strength to hobble around a small apartment get no help for tasks that are beyond them and their front door.''

In New Mexico, I have heard this complaint about the law repeatedly from our State's most vulnerable disabled and senior citizens. People argue the provision is being misinterpreted by the administration and results in Medicare beneficiaries being trapped in their home.

The Independence Through Enhancement of Medicare and Medicaid, ITEM, Coalition adds in a letter to CMS on this issue in November 25, 2005, ``There continues to be no clinical basis for the `in the home' restriction and by asking treating practitioners to document medical need only within the home setting, CMS is severely restricting patients from receiving the most appropriate devices to meet their mobility needs.''

My legislation would clarify that this restriction does not apply to mobility devices, including wheelchairs, for people with disabilities in the Medicare Program. The language change is fairly simple and simply clarifies that the ``in the home'' restriction for durable medical equipment does not apply in the case of mobility devices needed by Medicare beneficiaries with expected long-term needs for use ``in customary settings such as normal domestic, vocational, and community activities.''

This legislation is certainly not intended to discourage CMS from dedicating its resources to reducing waste, fraud, and abuse in the Medicare system, as those efforts are critical to ensuring that Medicare remains financially viable and strong in the future. However, it should be noted that neither Medicaid nor the Department of Veterans Affairs impose such ``in the home'' restrictions on mobility devices.

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

Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a business meeting has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The business meeting will be held on Tuesday, June 9, 2009, at 10 a.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate office building.

The purpose of the business meeting is to consider pending energy legislation.

For further information, please contact Sam Fowler at (202) 224-7571 or Amanda Kelly at (202) 224-6836.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 97, the nomination of Hillary Chandler Tompkins to be Solicitor of the Department of the Interior; that the nomination be confirmed; that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table; that no further motions be in order; that any statements related to the nomination be printed in the Record; that upon confirmation, the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action; and that the Senate then resume legislative session.

Mr. President, let me briefly describe the circumstances that caused me to make this unanimous-consent request. I am obviously disappointed there has been an objection raised to the confirmation of Ms. Tompkins. I am advised that one or more Republican Members have placed an anonymous hold on her nomination.

The Solicitor of the Department of the Interior--the office to which the President has nominated Ms. Tompkins--is one of the most important posts in the Department of the Interior and one of the most important legal positions in our government. The Department of the Interior has broad authority over the administration and care of our public lands and natural resources. Its many offices and bureaus face daily a broad range of legal issues requiring special expertise in public land law, mining law, water rights law, Indian law, and wildlife law. The Solicitor is the Department's general counsel. She is solely responsible for the legal work of the Department. By law, all the legal work of the Department is performed under the supervision and direction of the Solicitor. She is responsible for the interpretation and application of the legal authority affecting all of the actions taken under the Department of the Interior's programs and operations.

The job requires a deep knowledge of the law, professional experience, and sound judgment. In my view, the President has nominated such a person--a person with demonstrated ability and stature in this field in the person of Hillary Tompkins. She earned a law degree at Stanford University Law School in 1996. She served as a trial attorney in the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the Department of Justice, as a special Assistant U.S. Attorney in Brooklyn, as an associate in Sonosky Chambers, one of the Nation's leading law firms specializing in Native American law, as chief counsel to the Governor of New Mexico, and as an adjunct law professor at the University of New Mexico Law School.

As chief counsel to Governor Bill Richardson, Ms. Tompkins demonstrated her ability to lead and manage a team of lawyers, to oversee the general counsels of multiple agencies, and to render sound legal advice and counsel.

She will bring to the Solicitor's office considerable expertise in the areas of environmental, natural resources, water, and Indian law, as well as experience in the areas of constitutional law, administrative law, and the legislative process.

In addition, Ms. Tompkins has a compelling personal story. She was born on the Navajo reservation, and although she was raised in New Jersey, she has not lost touch with her Navajo heritage. If confirmed, she will be the first Native American, and only the second woman, to hold the office of Solicitor.

It is unclear to me why anyone would object to confirming Ms. Tompkins. She is clearly well qualified for the position. At her hearing in April and in the weeks since then, Senators on the other side of the aisle have expressed their concerns about departmental policies, over which Ms. Tompkins has had no control and no responsibility. Secretary Salazar has bent over backwards to address those concerns, and it is my understanding all of those concerns now have been addressed.

In any event, Senators had chosen to place holds on David Hayes's nomination to be the Deputy Secretary of the Interior, rather than on Ms. Tompkins' nomination, pending resolution of their concerns. The holds on Mr. Hayes's nomination were lifted before the recess, and he and all of the other Department of the Interior nominees have now been confirmed. Only Ms. Tompkins' nomination is still being blocked.

Many of the most pressing problems facing the Department of the Interior

are legal ones. During its final weeks, the previous administration took a number of controversial actions. In its rush to lock in those actions before it left office, the previous administration failed to give adequate consideration to various legal requirements. As a result, several of those actions have been overturned by the courts.

Secretary Salazar has inherited this legacy and is doing his best to address these problems. But he needs a Solicitor. More than 4 months into the new administration, the Department of the Interior should not still be without its top legal officer. And Ms. Tompkins should not still be the victim of anonymous holds.

Mr. President, I was deeply sorry to learn this morning of the death of a long-time Senate employee and friend, ``Mr. Tass.'' An integral part of the Senate Resataurants staff for many years, he was a great friend to me and to my office.

He died on Sunday from injuries received when he was hit by a car in Silver Spring. All of us who knew him and appreciated his service to the Senate join his family and friends in mourning his loss. He--and they--are in our thoughts and prayers.

Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague Senator Lincoln to introduce the Nurse Faculty and Physical Therapist Education Act of 2009. This legislation will help to address the critical shortage of nurse faculty and physical therapists that is facing our Nation. The nationwide nursing shortage is growing rapidly, because the average age of the nursing workforce is near retirement and because the aging population has increased health care needs. The shortage is one that affects the entire Nation. A 2006 Health Resources and Services Administration, HRSA, report estimated that the national nursing shortage would more than triple, to more than one million nurses, by the year 2020. The report also predicts that all 50 States will experience nursing shortages by 2015. Quite simply, we need to educate more nurses, or we, as a Nation, will not have enough trained nurses to meet the needs of our aging society.

One of the biggest constraints to educating more nurses is a shortage of nursing faculty. Almost three-quarters of nursing programs surveyed by the American Association of Colleges of Nursing cited faculty shortages as a reason for turning away qualified applicants. Although applications to nursing programs have surged 59 percent over the past decade, the National League for Nursing estimates that 147,000 qualified applications were turned away in 2004. This represents a 27 percent decrease in admissions over the previous year, indicating the need to scale up capacity in nursing programs is more critical than ever.

I know that in my home State of New Mexico, nursing programs turned down almost half of qualified applicants, even though HRSA predicts that New Mexico will only be able to meet 64 percent of its demand for nurses by 2020. With a national nurse faculty workforce that averages 53.5 years of age, and an average nurse faculty retirement age of 62.5 years, we cannot and must not wait any longer to address nurse faculty shortages.

Nursing faculty are not the only segment of the population that is aging. As the baby boom generation ages, there will be an increased need for nurses to care for the elderly. However, less than one percent of practicing nurses have a certification in geriatrics.

The Nurse Faculty and Physical Therapist Education Act will amend the Public Health Service Act, to help alleviate the faculty shortage by providing funds to help nursing schools increase enrollment and graduation from nursing doctoral programs. The act will increase partnering opportunities between academic institutions and medical practices, enhance cooperative education, support marketing outreach, and strengthen mentoring programs. The bill will increase the number of nurses who complete nursing doctoral programs and seek employment as faculty members and nursing leaders in academic institutions. In addition, the bill authorizes awards to train nursing faculty in clinical geriatrics, so that more nursing students will be equipped for our aging population.

By addressing the faculty shortage, we are addressing the nursing shortage.

The aging population will also require additional health workers in other fields. Physical therapy was listed as one of the fastest growing occupations by the U.S. Department of Labor, with a projected job growth of greater than 36 percent between 2004 and 2014. The need for physical therapists is particularly acute in rural and urban underserved areas, which have three to four times fewer physical therapists per capita than suburban areas. To address this need, the bill also authorizes a distance education pilot program to improve access to educational opportunity for both nursing and physical therapy students. Finally, the bill calls for a study by the Institute of Medicine at the National Academy of Sciences which will recommend how to balance education, labor, and immigration policies to meet the demand for qualified nurses and physical therapists.

The provisions of the Nurse Faculty and Physical Therapist Education Act are vital to overcoming workforce challenges. By addressing nurse faculty and physical therapist shortages, we will enhance both access to care and the quality of care.

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

Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague Senator Lincoln to introduce the Nurse Faculty and Physical Therapist Education Act of 2009. This legislation will help to address the critical shortage of nurse faculty and physical therapists that is facing our Nation. The nationwide nursing shortage is growing rapidly, because the average age of the nursing workforce is near retirement and because the aging population has increased health care needs. The shortage is one that affects the entire Nation. A 2006 Health Resources and Services Administration, HRSA, report estimated that the national nursing shortage would more than triple, to more than one million nurses, by the year 2020. The report also predicts that all 50 States will experience nursing shortages by 2015. Quite simply, we need to educate more nurses, or we, as a Nation, will not have enough trained nurses to meet the needs of our aging society.

One of the biggest constraints to educating more nurses is a shortage of nursing faculty. Almost three-quarters of nursing programs surveyed by the American Association of Colleges of Nursing cited faculty shortages as a reason for turning away qualified applicants. Although applications to nursing programs have surged 59 percent over the past decade, the National League for Nursing estimates that 147,000 qualified applications were turned away in 2004. This represents a 27 percent decrease in admissions over the previous year, indicating the need to scale up capacity in nursing programs is more critical than ever.

I know that in my home State of New Mexico, nursing programs turned down almost half of qualified applicants, even though HRSA predicts that New Mexico will only be able to meet 64 percent of its demand for nurses by 2020. With a national nurse faculty workforce that averages 53.5 years of age, and an average nurse faculty retirement age of 62.5 years, we cannot and must not wait any longer to address nurse faculty shortages.

Nursing faculty are not the only segment of the population that is aging. As the baby boom generation ages, there will be an increased need for nurses to care for the elderly. However, less than one percent of practicing nurses have a certification in geriatrics.

The Nurse Faculty and Physical Therapist Education Act will amend the Public Health Service Act, to help alleviate the faculty shortage by providing funds to help nursing schools increase enrollment and graduation from nursing doctoral programs. The act will increase partnering opportunities between academic institutions and medical practices, enhance cooperative education, support marketing outreach, and strengthen mentoring programs. The bill will increase the number of nurses who complete nursing doctoral programs and seek employment as faculty members and nursing leaders in academic institutions. In addition, the bill authorizes awards to train nursing faculty in clinical geriatrics, so that more nursing students will be equipped for our aging population.

By addressing the faculty shortage, we are addressing the nursing shortage.

The aging population will also require additional health workers in other fields. Physical therapy was listed as one of the fastest growing occupations by the U.S. Department of Labor, with a projected job growth of greater than 36 percent between 2004 and 2014. The need for physical therapists is particularly acute in rural and urban underserved areas, which have three to four times fewer physical therapists per capita than suburban areas. To address this need, the bill also authorizes a distance education pilot program to improve access to educational opportunity for both nursing and physical therapy students. Finally, the bill calls for a study by the Institute of Medicine at the National Academy of Sciences which will recommend how to balance education, labor, and immigration policies to meet the demand for qualified nurses and physical therapists.

The provisions of the Nurse Faculty and Physical Therapist Education Act are vital to overcoming workforce challenges. By addressing nurse faculty and physical therapist shortages, we will enhance both access to care and the quality of care.

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

Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests.

The hearing will be held on Wednesday, June 17, 2009, at 2:30 p.m. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate office building.

The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony on the following bills:

S.409, to secure Federal ownership and management of significant natural, scenic, and recreational resources, to provide for the protection of cultural resources, to facilitate the efficient extraction of mineral resources by authorizing and directing an exchange of Federal and non-Federal land, and for other purposes; S. 782, to provide for the establishment of the National Volcano Early Warning and Monitoring System; S.874, to establish El Rio Grande Del Norte National Conservation Area in the State of New Mexico, and for other purposes; S.1139, to require the Secretary of Agriculture to enter into a property conveyance with the city of Wallowa, Oregon, and for other purposes; and S.1140, to direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey certain Federal land to Deschutes County, Oregon.

Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150, or by email to [email protected].

For further information, please contact David Brooks at (202) 224- 9863 or Anna Fox at (202) 224-1219.