[Pages S6021-S6024]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

By Mr. DORGAN (for himself, Mr. Nelson of Florida, and Mr.
Carper):
S. 3183. A bill to amend the Commodity Exchange Act to provide oil
and gas price relief by requiring the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission to take action to end excessive speculation, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I rise to introduce a piece of legislation
on behalf of myself, Senator Nelson of Florida, and Senator Carper
dealing with the subject of energy speculation. I want to run through a
couple charts, and I want to describe the reason for the introduction
of this legislation.
This chart shows the price of oil and what has happened to the price
of oil. The price of oil has nearly doubled in a year. There is no
justification for it, no fundamentals of supply and demand that explain
what has happened to the price of oil.
These commodity contracts, by and large, are traded in this country
on something called the commodity exchange--NYMEX, it is called. This
is what it looks like. They trade back and forth, and there are
legitimate reasons to trade on the exchanges. Those reasons to trade on
the exchanges are for legitimate hedging for actual physical petroleum
products for future delivery. The problem is, with respect to the oil
markets, the legitimate hedging has become a smaller part of what is
traded. There is now this unbelievable speculation going on in the
commodity markets. That speculation has perverted the market, broken
the market, causing the price of oil and gasoline to be well above that
which is justifiable.
We have an organization in the Government called the Energy
Information Administration, the EIA. They are the ones who know what
there is to know about energy issues. As shown on this chart, here is
what they have told us. Back in May of 2007--last year--here is where
they said the price of oil would be. Back in July, they said it would
be on this line, as shown on this chart; back in September, on this
line. I hope they were not buying any commodities on the basis of their
advice--they would be flat broke in a month. Here is what happened to
the price. It went straight up. All the while, the EIA did not seem to
have the foggiest notion of where the price was going to go. Why?
Because the fundamentals do not justify what is happening.
Now I have the EIA coming down to testify before my subcommittee this
week. I want to ask them these questions. They insist there is very
little speculation in this marketplace. But most experts insist this
has become an unbelievable spectacle of speculation that injures
America's drivers and consumers, injures our industry, and causes great
damage to our economy.
A House study, just in the last few days, from the House Subcommittee
on Oversight and Investigations, said here is what has happened to the
commodities market with respect to oil. As to the oil futures market:
37 percent used to be speculators in that market. Now it has gone to 71
percent. The speculators have taken over that market.
When the Commodity Exchange Act was passed by the Congress in the
1930s, here is what the congressional report said: This bill authorizes
the Commission--the Commodity Futures Trading Commission; that is
supposed to be the regulating body--to fix limitations on purely
speculative trades and commitments.
Hedging is exempted. But for purely speculative positions, we
provided the authority to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to
deal with that because we did not want this market to be taken over by
speculators.
I have used these charts many times.
This one has to do with Fadel Gheit, the top energy analyst for
Oppenheimer & Co. Here is what he says:

There is absolutely no shortage of oil. I'm convinced that
oil prices shouldn't be a dime above $55 a barrel.
I call it the world's largest gambling hall. . . . It's
open 24/7. . . . Unfortunately, it's totally unregulated. . .
. This is like a highway with no cops on the beat and no
speed limit and everybody's going 120 miles an hour.

I will not show all the charts I have shown in the past, but the CEO
of Marathon Oil says:

$100 oil isn't justified by the physical demand in the
market.

It was recently reported Americans drove 4.5 to 5 billion fewer miles
in the last 6 months than in the previous 6 months. So we are driving 4
or 5 billion fewer miles, using less energy. Four of the first 5 months
of this year, crude oil inventories were up--not down, up. So if the
supply of the product is going up and the use of the product is going
down, the marketplace would have you believe--or at least you would
expect--the price would come down. Instead, the price has gone up,
which demonstrates this is not about market fundamentals. It is about
an unbelievable orgy of speculation in the marketplace that is not
justified.
Now the question is, Will Congress do something about it or will it
just apply some lip gloss? Is this just something where we act as if we
are doing something or are we going to drive the speculators out of
this market? I am introducing legislation that is tough and real and
will address this issue.
The regulating body here is the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
It has acted like most regulating bodies in recent years. Most of them
are run by people who came to the Government not liking Government and
not wanting to regulate. It all goes back to Mr. Pitt, back in 2001, in
which he said: The Securities and Exchange Commission is going to be a
business-friendly place. Well, we have seen a lot of these agencies
that are business friendly. They just get out of the way and pretend
they are in a deep Rip van Winkle sleep, and they are not going to see
anything and they are not going to know anything and they are not going
to care much about anything.

[[Page S6022]]

This agency is not much different--the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission. The fact is, it has been asleep on its feet, just dead from
the neck up. It is time for us to say to this agency: It is your job to
regulate. The fact is, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, when he signed this
legislation some 70, 80 years ago, said:

It should be our national policy to restrict, as far as
possible, the use of these exchanges for purely speculative
operations.

Franklin Roosevelt knew it. Why doesn't this Commodity Futures
Trading Commission know it?
The legislation I am introducing today does a couple things. No. 1,
it demands the Commodity Futures Trading Commission by date certain to
distinguish between that which represents normal hedging transactions
between producers and consumers of a physical product and the rest,
which is speculation. It says this market is designed for normal
hedging of risks between producers and consumers of a physical product.
Others who are engaged in excess speculation are going to be slapped
with a higher margin--a 25-percent margin requirement--that is either
quadruple or quintuple the current requirement, depending on what is
assessed between the 5- and 7-percent rate. But this essentially says
to speculators: It is going to cost you more to speculate in this
marketplace if you are one of these folks who just want to speculate to
make a lot of money.
Will Rogers talked about this long ago. He talked about people buying
things they will never get from people who never had it. That is what
is going on with investment banks, hedge funds, and a lot of others who
are neck deep in this marketplace. They have never seen a barrel of
oil. They don't want a barrel of oil. All they want to do is speculate
and make a bundle of money. The problem is, it is damaging this
country.
My legislation, No. 1, requires the separation of legitimate traders
verses speculators. It puts an increased margin requirement on the
speculators to try to wring some of that speculation out of the market.
No. 2, it requires position limits that are significant, imposed by
the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
No. 3, it requires the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to revoke
or modify any previous actions they have taken in which they have
prevented themselves from being able to regulate and see the
transactions that exist in this futures market.
Unbelievably almost, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which
is the regulator, decided, on its own volition, that it would allow,
for example, a London exchange, largely owned by American interests, to
come in and trade on computer terminals in Atlanta, GA, and pretend
they are not American. So the Commodity Futures Trading Commission
said: Do you know what, we will do a letter of no action so we can't
regulate and can't see it. That is unbelievable, in my judgment. It is
an unbelievably irresponsible position for a regulator to have taken.
It is taken, I suppose, by those who believe ``regulations'' is a four-
letter word. It is not. If ever we wonder about that, take a look at
what has happened to the price of oil and gas in a situation where
speculators have taken over.
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission is a regulator of this
market. It has done a miserable job. It has nearly all the authority it
needs to do the right thing. What I propose to do with the Commodity
Futures Trading Commission is wring the speculators out of this market.
They have distorted the market, broken the market, and we end up in a
situation now where the price of gasoline is devastating this economy.
The price of oil is not justified by supply and demand. When that
happens, there is a responsibility for this Congress to act. It is an
urgent responsibility, in my judgment, now for this Congress to say
what is happening is wrong, it is hurting this country's economy, it is
hurting industries and the American people, and we need to do something
about it. The best start, in my judgment, would be to pass this
legislation I am introducing today.
One final point. I am reaching out to Democratic and Republican
offices in the hopes that this will be a bipartisan piece of
legislation that will address a very serious issue on an urgent basis
and begin to do something that moderates the price of oil and gas that
many experts have told us is 20, 30, and in some cases 40 percent above
that which is justified by the marketplace. We should not stand for it.
We do not have to. We ought to pass this legislation soon.
By Mr. KERRY:
S. 3184. A bill to make grants to States to implement statewide
portal initiatives, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Finance.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, we must do all we can to ensure that our
young people have the skills necessary to compete in today's global
economy. My home State of Massachusetts has done an outstanding job
ensuring that educators have access to the high-quality tools necessary
to adequately prepare our students for the future. In particular, they
have been one of a handful of pioneering states that have created a
statewide, online education ``portal'', which is a suite of web-based
tools that enhance the teaching and learning experience for teachers,
parents, and students.
Education portals are a one-stop resource for educators, parents, and
students to support teaching and learning, as well as leadership
skills. Portals provide access to shared resources and create an entry
point to other information and services including: lesson plans;
research-based training resources; model classroom examples; engaging
interactive media; listservs; and after-school resources. Among other
things, a portal allows educators to quickly search for lesson plans or
other resources by content standard, grade level, specific student and
classroom needs, and/or topic. It also provides a secure, on-line
community for educators to collaborate and discuss teaching and
learning experiences, as well as providing a vital communication tool
between the school and parents.
It is for these reasons, I am sponsoring legislation to help my State
and others secure the funding they need to improve their education
systems and prepare their students for success. While it is true that
Congress has done a lot to promote education technology and set higher
standards for teachers, more must be done to address the divide that
afflicts so many of our rural and urban schools.
What is missing is a funding source for states to develop and
maintain web-based tools for training, communication, collaboration,
and curriculum planning. The Empowering Teaching and Learning Through
Education Portals Act establishes annual competitive grants that will
provide funding on a one-to-one basis for states that wish to implement
and maintain best-practice education portals. The legislation also
provides new tax incentives to private organizations that support State
education portal efforts.
The Empowering Teaching and Learning Through Education Portals Act
bridges the urban-rural digital divide by ensuring that all districts
have access to the best available resources. It supports high quality
teaching, professional development and retention of teachers and
promotes an on-line support network and learning community for teachers
and administrators. Furthermore, it provides teacher coaching and
guidance in order to address the challenges of teaching a diverse
student body, and collaborate on winning strategies to address various
learning styles, needs, and achievement levels. It offers
administrators tools to securely communicate and collaborate with
district personnel, as well as with the Department of Education, and
gives them access to formative assessments and other resources.
Finally, it provides a means to actively engage students in a rich,
relevant, multimedia environment that results in improved learning and
student retention.
It is imperative that we prepare our children for the sophisticated
workforce of the 21st century and an increasingly competitive global
economy. This legislation takes some of the brightest ideas for
modernizing teaching and learning and matches them with the dollars
needed to translate them from paper to practice. That, I believe, is a
goal we can all agree on.
I urge my colleagues to support the Empowering Teaching and Learning
Through Education Portals Act.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:

[[Page S6023]]

S. 3184

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Empowering Teaching and
Learning Through Education Portals Act''.

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act:
(1) 21st century skills.--The term ``21st century
skills''--
(A) means skills that students need to succeed in school,
work, and life; and
(B) includes--
(i) skills related either to core academic subjects or to
21st century themes;
(ii) learning and innovation skills, such as--

(I) creativity and innovation;
(II) critical thinking and problem solving; or
(III) communication and collaboration; and

(iii) life and career skills to prepare students for the
global economy, such as--

(I) flexibility and adaptability;
(II) productivity and accountability; or
(III) leadership and responsibility.

(2) Core academic subjects; educational agencies; schools;
state.--The terms ``core academic subjects'', ``elementary
school'', ``local educational agency'', ``secondary school'',
``State'', and ``State educational agency'' have the meanings
given the terms in section 9101 of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
(3) Covered educator.--The term ``covered educator'' means
a teacher, administrator, or other professional staff member,
at a covered school.
(4) Covered parent.--The term ``covered parent'' means the
parent of a covered student.
(5) Covered school.--The term ``covered school'' means a
Head Start agency operating a Head Start program, or a public
school that is a preschool, elementary school, secondary
school, or institution of higher education (including such an
institution offering a program leading to a baccalaureate
degree or a program leading to an advanced degree).
(6) Covered student.--The term ``covered student'' means a
student at a covered school.
(7) Covered teacher.--The term ``covered teacher'' means a
teacher at a covered school.
(8) Education technology.--The term ``education
technology'' means any technology resource that improves the
learning, training, and engagement of students or helps
teachers learn, improve their knowledge, and practice.
(9) Institution of higher education.--The term
``institution of higher education'' has the meaning given the
term in sections 101 and 102 of the Higher Education Act of
1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001, 1002).
(10) Professional development.--The term ``professional
development'' means a resource or training that increases a
teacher's skills, content knowledge, or other information
that has a positive impact on student learning.
(11) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Education.

SEC. 3. GRANTS.

(a) In General.--The Secretary may award grants to eligible
States, to pay for the Federal share of the cost of
implementing and maintaining education portal initiatives.
(b) Amounts.--The Secretary may award the grants for
periods of not less than 1 year and not more than 3 years.
(c) Federal Share.--
(1) In general.--The Federal share of the cost described in
subsection (a) shall be 50 percent.
(2) Non-federal share.--The State may provide the non-
Federal share of the cost in cash or in kind, fairly
evaluated, including plant, equipment, or services. The State
may provide the non-Federal share from State, local, or
private sources.

SEC. 4. APPLICATIONS AND AWARDS.

(a) In General.--To be eligible to receive a grant under
this section for an initiative, a State shall submit an
application to the Secretary at such time, in such manner,
and containing such information as the Secretary may require.
(b) Contents.--The application shall contain, at a
minimum--
(1) a comprehensive plan for the initiative for which the
State seeks the grant, including evidence that the initiative
meets the requirements of subsections (a) and (c) of section
5;
(2) information describing how the State will provide the
non-Federal share of the cost described in section 3(a), and
will continue to provide that share during the implementation
of the initiative and the remainder of the grant period;
(3) information describing how the State will meet the
maintenance of effort requirements in section 6;
(4) information explaining the protocol the State will use
to ensure safe and legal access to the education portal;
(5) an assurance that the State has established or will
establish an advisory panel, to provide advice on the
implementation and maintenance of the initiative, including
representatives of leaders in school districts, leaders at
institutions of higher education, State educational agencies,
parents, and teachers; and
(6) a plan to ensure sufficient statewide bandwidth
capacity and systems access to implement and maintain the
State education portal.
(c) Awards.--In determining the amounts of grants under
this Act, the Secretary--
(1) shall take into consideration the extent to which a
State has developed and implemented an education portal
initiative prior to the date of the submission of the
application involved; but
(2) shall not penalize States that have made greater
progress in developing and implementing such initiatives.

SEC. 5. USE OF FUNDS.

(a) Required Uses.--A State that receives a grant under
this Act for a fiscal year shall use the funds made available
through the grant to implement or maintain an education
portal initiative that includes--
(1) collecting and making available--
(A) high quality resources (including data, tools, and
digital media content) for covered educators, covered
students, and covered parents, that support teaching,
leading, and learning, and are, as appropriate, aligned with
State education standards; and
(B) information for covered teachers to use in assisting
covered students to attain skills such as 21st century
skills; and
(2) collecting resources for ongoing and sustainable
professional development for covered educators, related to
the use of education technology, and making the resources
available through the implementation of research-based
methods and strategies for teacher coaching, collaborating,
or mentoring.
(b) Allowable Uses.--The State may use the funds made
available through the grant for such an initiative, for a
portal that--
(1) gives covered educators access to formative assessment
and other resources to address various student learning
styles, needs, and achievement levels;
(2) provides an entry point to other information or
services, including information on model examples of
effective classroom practices, subscriptions or data systems,
content standards, lesson plans, courses of study, engaging
interactive media, Web resources, e-mail list management
software, online portfolios, after-school program resources,
and other educational resources;
(3) provides access to technology-based curriculum
resources and tools that promote the teaching and learning of
21st century skills;
(4) enables covered educators to quickly search for lesson
plans, professional development resources, model examples of
effective classroom practices, or other resources, by content
standard, grade level, or topic;
(5) provides an online support network or community for
covered educators to collaborate on and discuss teaching,
learning, curricula, and experiences, and serves as a
communication tool between covered educators and covered
parents;
(6) includes digital media content developed by a
television public broadcasting entity in coordination with
the grant recipient; or
(7) makes available access to 1 or more resource sections
of the education portal, subject to the protocol described in
section 4(b)(4), by covered education, covered students, and
covered parents, from other States (with no requirement for
State-specific log-ins), so that those covered educators,
covered students, and covered parents can benefit from
resources developed in the State, thereby expanding access to
the national learning community.
(c) Provision of and Access to Resources.--The covered
educators, covered students, and covered parents in the State
may provide resources and information for the education
portal, subject to the protocol described in section 4(b)(4).
The resources and information in the education portal shall
be accessible statewide by the educators, students, and
parents, subject to the protocol.
(d) Other Federal Funds.--A State that receives a grant
under part A of title II of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6601 et seq.) may use funds
made available through that grant to maintain (but not
implement) the State's education portal initiative under this
Act, after the end of the period in which the State receives
funding under this Act.
(e) Conforming Amendment.--Section 2113(a) of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
6613(a)) is amended by striking ``A'' and inserting ``Subject
to section 5 of the Empowering Teaching and Learning Through
Education Portals Act, a''.

SEC. 6. MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT.

(a) In General.--A State that receives a grant under this
Act for a fiscal year shall maintain the expenditures of the
State for education portal initiatives at a level not less
than the level of such expenditures of the State for the
fiscal year preceding the first fiscal year for which the
State received such a grant.
(b) Reduction.--If the Secretary determines that a State,
during a fiscal year, expends less than the sum required to
comply with subsection (a), the Secretary shall--
(1) determine the difference between the required sum and
the expenditure; and
(2) reduce the State's grant under this Act for the
following year by the amount of the difference.

SEC. 7. EVALUATIONS AND CONFERENCE.

(a) Federal Evaluation.--The Secretary shall conduct an
evaluation of each initiative funded under this Act. The
Secretary

[[Page S6024]]

shall submit a report containing the results of the
evaluation to Congress.
(b) Federal Conference.--Not less often than once every 2
years, the Secretary shall hold a conference for advisory
panels described in section 4(b)(5), to share information on
best practices relating to education portal initiatives.
(c) State Evaluations.--Each State that receives a grant
under this Act shall conduct an evaluation of the initiative
funded under the grant, using funds provided as part of the
non-Federal share of the costs described in section 3(a). The
State shall prepare and submit to the Secretary a report
containing the results of the evaluation.

SEC. 8. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this
Act $100,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2012,
and such sums as may be necessary for each of the following 2
fiscal years.

SEC. 9. SPECIAL RULES RELATING TO CORPORATE CHARITABLE
CONTRIBUTIONS TO EDUCATION PORTAL PROJECTS OF
ELIGIBLE STATES.

(a) In General.--Paragraph (2) of Section 170(b) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (related to percentage
limitations) is amended by redesignating subparagraphs (C)
and (D), respectively, and by inserting after subparagraph
(A) the following new subparagraph:
``(B) Special rule for corporate contributions to education
portal projects of eligible states.--
``(i) In general.--In the case of qualified education
portal project contributions--

``(I) subparagraph (A) shall be applied separately with
respect to such contributions and with respect to other
charitable contributions of the taxpayer, and
``(II) in applying subparagraph (A) to such qualified
education portal project contributions, subparagraph (A)
shall be applied by substituting `50 percent' for `10
percent'.

``(ii) Qualified education portal project contribution.--
For purposes of this paragraph, the term `qualified education
portal project contribution' means a charitable contribution
in cash--

``(I) to a State (as defined in section 2 of the Empowering
Teaching and Learning Through Education Portals Act) which
has a grant application approved under section 4 of such Act,
and
``(II) for the purpose of paying the non-Federal share of
the cost of implementing and maintaining education portal
initiatives (within the meaning of section 3 of such Act).''.

(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to contributions made after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
______

Mr. BIDEN (for himself and Mr. Lugar) (by request):
S.J. Res. 42. A joint resolution relating to the approval of the
proposed agreement for nuclear cooperation between the United States
and the Russian Federation; to the Committee on Foreign Relations
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 2159, for not to exceed 45 calendar days.
Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, today Senator Lugar and I introduce, by
request, a resolution of approval of the proposed agreement for
peaceful nuclear cooperation between the United States and the Russian
Federation, which the President transmitted to Congress on May 13,
2008, pursuant to sections 123b. and 123d. of the Atomic Energy Act.
Pursuant to section 130i.(2) of that Act, the majority and minority
leaders have designated Senator Lugar and me to introduce this
resolution.

____________________