The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS” mentioning the U.S. Dept of Agriculture was published in the Senate section on pages S9802-S9810 on July 12, 1995.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. WELLSTONE:
S. 1024. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to assure fairness and choice to patients under the Medicare Program, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
the medicare health care quality act of 1995
Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Medicare Health Care Quality Act of 1995 today to make certain that Medicare beneficiaries are protected and receive access to high-quality care when they enroll in health plans offered through the Medicare Program.
I am deeply concerned about the extreme cuts in the Medicare Program that would be necessitated by the recently adopted budget resolution. A careful examination of the program clearly shows that the increasing numbers of elderly, disabled, and end-stage-renal disease patients--
changing demographics--and overall health care inflation account for most of the increased growth in spending. According to projections based on CBO numbers, the cuts contained in the Republican budget resolution will not allow the Medicare Program to even keep pace with the private sector on a per person basis. And the Medicare Program takes care of many of our society's sickest and frailest members.
We have heard a lot recently about Republican proposals to restructure Medicare by giving seniors a voucher and allowing them to purchase health coverage in the private market. This legislation would ensure that plans participating in such a program would be required to meet minimum standards of performance, and that access to needed care, and quality of that care are assured. Many health plans already meet the standards I have included in this legislation, but for those that do not, this legislation will provide a critical safety net for patients.
If a voucher system is created, it is likely that constraints on the amount of the voucher will force many seniors to choose managed care plans, as their most affordable alternative. Currently abut 3 million Medicare beneficiaries are enrolled in managed care plans through the Medicare Program. Most of these patients are satisfied with the care they receive. A significant fraction, however, primarily the frailest, the sick and disabled, are not satisfied, according to a recent report by the office of the inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services. Serious problems identified with the program identified in this report included:
Compliance with Federal enrollment standards for health screening and informing beneficiaries of their appeal rights appeared to be problematic.
Perceived unmet service needs . . . led 22% of disenrollees and
7% of enrollees to seek out-of-plan care''
Some beneficiaries reported having difficulty making appointment for services in terms of the days waited for scheduled appointments. . .
Some beneficiaries reported they were refused referrals to specialists. . .
It is clear to me, however, when I look at the managed care plans in Minnesota, that managed care plans can provide access and quality in health care, while holding down the growth of costs. In a recent editorial on July 6, 1995, in the New England Journal of Medicine, the editor-in-chief, Dr. Jerome Kassirer stated:
Managed care itself is not the enemy. On the contrary, many of its effects are salutary. Patients stay in the hospital far fewer days, many surgical procedures that previously required hospitalization are now safely performed in day surgery, there is far more attention to preventive care, many medical practices have been standardized to produce better outcomes, and satisfying patients has become an explicit goal. There is, however, remarkable diversity among managed-care plans. Some, mostly older plans that were created when cost containment was an unexpected benefit rather than their central purpose, deliver high-quality care economically. Unfortunately, others cut costs by recruiting the healthiest patients, excluding the sickest, rationing care by making it inconvenient to obtain, and denying care by a variety of mechanisms.
The Medicare Health Care Quality Act of 1995 defines the standards that must be met by any health plan, including managed care plans, if they are to participate as a plan for Medicare patients. The major standards would include those for:
Information to be provided to enrollees on plan coverage, benefits, patient satisfaction, and quality indicators to assist consumers in making informed purchasing decisions.
Utilization review activities, credentialing of health professionals, and handling of grievances by consumers and providers to assure that all are treated fairly by the health plan.
Provision of adequate access to care, including specialty and emergency care without penalizing consumers.
Fair marketing of health plans to Medicare beneficiaries to be certain plans cannot selectively market, and enroll only the healthiest patients.
Mr. President, I have repeatedly stated that trying to restructure the Medicare Program without addressing the bigger question of overall health system reform is foolish, and likely to worsen the situation in the private sector. As Medicare cuts are put in place, providers will be forced to shift charges to private sector payers, insurance rates will rise, more people will be unable to afford coverage, and we will all end up paying more for our health care in the end. I believe that we must tackle health care reform in this Congress. Until that happens, however, and as Medicare beneficiaries continue to join private sector health plans, including managed care plans, in increasing numbers, it is critical to be certain that adequate patient protections are in place. The Medicare Health Care Quality Act of 1995 will go a long way toward doing that.
I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 1024
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 ``Medicare Health Care Quality Act of 1995''.
SEC. 2. REFERENCES IN ACT; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Amendments to Social Security Act.--Except as otherwise specifically provided, whenever in this Act an amendment is expressed in terms of an amendment to or repeal of a section or other provision, the reference shall be considered to be made to that section or other provision of the Social Security Act.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title.
Sec. 2. References in Act; table of contents.
Sec. 3. Requirements relating to health professionals.
Sec. 4. Grievance procedures.
Sec. 5. Discrimination.
Sec. 6. Requirement for utilization review program.
Sec. 7. Access.
Sec. 8. Requirements for organization service areas.
Sec. 9. Other enrollee protections. Sec. 10. Information on eligible organization.
Sec. 11. Enrollment by mail.
Sec. 12. Waiver of certain medicare coinsurance and deductibles not remuneration.
Sec. 13. Effective date.SEC. 3. REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO HEALTH PROFESSIONALS.
Section 1876(c) (42 U.S.C. 1395mm(c)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(9)(A) The eligible organization shall credential health professionals furnishing health care services through the organization.
``(B)(i) The eligible organization shall establish a credentialing process. Such process shall ensure that a health professional is credentialed prior to that professional being listed as a health professional in the eligible organization's marketing materials, in accordance with recorded (written or otherwise) policies and procedures. The credentialing process shall provide for the review of an application for credentialing by the credentialing committee established under clause (iii).
``(ii) The medical director of the eligible organization, or another designated health professional, shall have responsibility for the credentialing of health professionals under the organization.
``(iii)(I) The eligible organization shall establish a credentialing committee that--
``(I) is composed of licensed physicians and other health professionals to review credentialing information and supporting documents;
``(II) provides input to the eligible organization on the credentialing process and procedures; and
``(III) appropriately represents the medical specialties of applicants for credentialing.
``(iv)(I) Credentialing decisions under the eligible organization shall be based on objective standards with input from providers of health services credentialed under the organization. Information concerning all application and credentialing policies and procedures shall be made available for review by the health professional involved upon written request.
``(II) The standards referred to in subclause (I) shall include determinations as to--
``(aa) whether the health professional has a current unrestricted valid license to practice the particular health profession involved;
``(bb) whether the health professional has clinical privileges in good standing at the hospital designated by the practitioner and the primary admitting facility, as applicable;
``(cc) whether the health professional has a valid DEA or CDS certificate, as applicable;
``(dd) whether the health professional has graduated from medical school (allopathic or osteopathic), completed a residency (accredited by the Accreditation Council on Graduate Medical Education or the American Osteopathic Association), or received Board certification (by medical specialty boards recognized by the American Board of Medical Specialties or the American Osteopathic Association), as applicable;
``(ee) the work history of the health professional;
``(ff) whether the health professional has current, adequate malpractice insurance in accordance with the policy of the eligible organization;
``(gg) the professional liability claims history of the health professional;
``(hh) whether the health professional has been convicted of a crime or cited by a licensing board for professional misconduct; and
``(ii) whether the health professional has any malpractice payments or disciplinary actions registered with the National Practitioner Data Bank under section 427(b) of the Health Care Quality Improvement Act (42 U.S.C. 11134(b)).
``(III) A health professional who undergoes the credentialing process shall have the right to review the basis information, including the sources of that information, that was used to meet the designated credentialing criteria.
``(C)(i) A health professional who is subject to credentialing under this paragraph shall, upon written request, receive from the eligible organization any information obtained by the organization during the credentialing process that, as determined by the credentialing committee, does not meet the credentialing standards of the organization, or that varies substantially from the information provided to the eligible organization by the health professional.
``(ii) The eligible organization shall have a formal, recorded (written or otherwise) process by which a health professional may submit supplemental information to the credentialing committee if the health professional determines that erroneous or misleading information has been previously submitted. The health professional may request that such information be reconsidered in the evaluation for credentialing purposes.
``(iii)(I) A health professional is not entitled to be selected or retained by the eligible organization as a participating or contracting provider whether or not such professional meets the credentialing standards established under this paragraph.
``(II) If economic considerations, including the health care professional's patterns of expenditure per patient, are part of a selection decision, objective criteria shall be used in examining such considerations and a written description of such criteria shall be provided to applicants, participating health professionals, and enrollees. Any economic profiling of health professionals must be adjusted to recognize case mix, severity of illness, and the age of patients of a health professional's practice that may account for higher or lower than expected costs, to the extent appropriate data in this regard is available to the eligible organization.
``(iv)(I) The eligible organization shall develop and implement procedures for the reporting, to appropriate authorities, of serious quality deficiencies that result in the suspension or termination of a contract with a health professional.
``(II) The eligible organization shall develop and implement policies and procedures under which the organization reviews the contract privileges of health professionals who--
``(aa) have seriously violated policies and procedures of the eligible organization;
``(bb) have lost their privilege to practice with a contracting institutional provider; or
``(cc) otherwise pose a threat to the quality of service and care provided to the enrollees of the eligible organization.
At a minimum, the policies and procedures implemented under this subparagraph shall meet the requirements of the Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986.
``(III) The policies and procedures implemented under subclause (II) shall include requirements for the timely notification of the affected health professional of the reasons for the reduction, withdrawal, or termination of privileges, and provide the health professional with the right to appeal the determination of reduction, withdrawal, or termination.
``(IV) A written copy of the policies and procedures implemented under this paragraph shall be made available to a health professional on request prior to the time at which the health professional contracts to provide services under the organization.
``(D) For purposes of this paragraph, the term `health professional' means an individual who is licensed, credited, accredited, or otherwise credentialed to provide health care items and services as authorized under State law.''.
SEC. 4. GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES.
Section 1876(c)(5)(A) (42 U.S.C. 1395mm(c)(5)(A)) is amended--
(1) by adding ``(i)'' after ``(A)''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new clause:
``(ii) The procedures described under clause (i) shall include--
``(I) recorded (written or otherwise) procedures for registering and responding to complaints and grievances in a timely manner;
``(II) documentation concerning the substance of complaints, grievances, and actions taken concerning such complaints and grievances, which shall be in writing.
``(III) procedures to ensure a resolution of a complaint or grievance;
``(IV) the compilation and analysis of complaint and grievance data;
``(V) procedures to expedite the complaint process if the complaint involves a dispute about the coverage of an immediately and urgently needed service; and
``(VI) procedures to ensure that if an enrollee orally notifies the eligible organization about a complaint, the organization (if requested) must send the enrollee a complaint form that includes the telephone numbers and addresses of member services, a description of the organization's grievance procedure.
``(iii) The eligible organization shall adopt an appeals process to enable covered individuals to appeal decisions that are adverse to the individuals. Such a process shall include--
``(I) the right to a review by a grievance panel;
``(II) the right to a second review with a different panel, independent from the eligible organization, or to a review through an impartial arbitration process which shall be described in writing by the organization; and
``(III) an expedited process for review in emergency cases.
The Secretary shall develop guidelines for the structure and requirements applicable to the independent review panel and impartial arbitration process described in subclause (II).
``(iv) With respect to the complaint, grievance, and appeals processes required under this paragraph, the eligible organization shall, upon the request of a covered individual, provide the individual a written decision concerning a complaint, grievance, or appeal in a timely fashion.
``(v) The complaint, grievance, and appeals processes established in accordance with this paragraph may not be used in any fashion to discourage or prevent a covered individual from receiving medically necessary care in a timely manner.''.
SEC. 5. DISCRIMINATION.
Section 1876(c) (42 U.S.C. 1395mm(c)), as amended by section 3, is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(10)(A) The eligible organization may not discriminate or engage (directly or through contractual arrangements) in any activity, including the selection of service area, that has the effect of discriminating against an individual on the basis of race, national origin, gender, language, socio-economic status, age, disability, health status, or anticipated need for health services.
``(B) The eligible organization may not engage in marketing or other practices intended to discourage or limit the enrollment of individuals on the basis of health condition, geographic area, industry, or other risk factors.
``(C) The eligible organization may not discriminate in the selection of members of the health professional or provider network (and in establishing the terms and conditions for membership in the network) of the organization based on--
``(i) the race, national origin, disability, gender, or age of the health professional;
``(ii) the socio-economic status, disability, health status, age, or anticipated need for health services of the patients of the health professional or provider; or
``(iii) the health professional or provider's lack of affiliation with, or admitting privileges at, a hospital.
``(D) The eligible organization may not discriminate in participation, reimbursement, or indemnification against a health professional who is acting within the scope of the license, training, or certification of the professional under applicable State law solely on the basis of the license, training, or certification of the health professional. The eligible organization may not discriminate in participation, reimbursement, or indemnification against a health provider that is providing services within the scope of services that it is authorized to perform under State law.''.
SEC. 6. REQUIREMENT FOR UTILIZATION REVIEW PROGRAM.
Section 1876(c) (42 U.S.C. 1395mm(c)), as amended by sections 3 and 5, is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(11)(A) The eligible organization shall have in place a utilization review program that meets the requirements of this paragraph and that is certified by the Secretary.
``(B) The Secretary shall establish standards for the establishment, operation, and certification and periodic recertification of eligible organization utilization review programs.
``(C)(i) The Secretary may certify an eligible organization as meeting the standards established under subparagraph (B) if the Secretary determines that the eligible organization has met the utilization standards required for accreditation as applied by a nationally recognized, independent, nonprofit accreditation entity.
``(ii) The Secretary shall periodically review the standards used by the private accreditation entity to ensure that such standards meet or exceed the standards established by the Secretary under this paragraph.
``(D) The standards developed by the Secretary under subparagraph (B) shall require that utilization review programs comply with the following:
``(i) The eligible organization shall provide a written description of the utilization review program of the organization, including a description of--
``(I) the delegated and nondelegated activities under the program;
``(II) the policies and procedures used under the program to evaluate medical necessity; and
``(III) the clinical review criteria, information sources, and the process used to review and approve the provision of medical services under the program.
``(ii) With respect to the administration of the utilization review program, the eligible organization may not employ utilization reviewers or contract with a utilization management organization if the conditions of employment or the contract terms include financial incentives to reduce or limit the medically necessary or appropriate services provided to covered individuals.
``(iii) The eligible organization shall develop procedures for periodically reviewing and modifying the utilization review of the organization. Such procedures shall provide for the participation of providers in the eligible organization in the development and review of utilization review policies and procedures.
``(iv)(I) A utilization review program shall develop and apply recorded (written or otherwise) utilization review decision protocols. Such protocols shall be based on sound medical evidence.
``(II) The clinical review criteria used under the utilization review decision protocols to assess the appropriateness of medical services shall be clearly documented and available to participating health professionals upon request. Such protocols shall include a mechanism for assessing the consistency of the application of the criteria used under the protocols across reviewers, and a mechanism for periodically updating such criteria.
``(v)(I) The procedures applied under a utilization review program with respect to the preauthorization and concurrent review of the necessity and appropriateness of medical items, services or procedures, shall require that qualified medical professionals supervise review decisions. With respect to a decision to deny the provision of medical items, services or procedures, a provider licensed in the same field shall conduct a subsequent review to determine the medical appropriateness of such a denial. Physicians from the same medical branch (allopathic or osteopathic medicine) and specialty (recognized by the American Board of Medical Specialties or the American Osteopathic Association) shall be utilized in the review process as needed.
``(II) All utilization review decisions shall be made in a timely manner, as determined appropriate when considering the urgency of the situation.
``(III) With respect to utilization review, an adverse determination or noncertification of an admission, continued stay, or service shall be clearly documented, including the specific clinical or other reason for the adverse determination or noncertification, and be available to the covered individual or any individual acting on behalf of the covered individual and the affected provider or facility. The eligible organization may not deny or limit coverage with respect to a service that the enrollee has already received solely on the basis of lack of prior authorization or second opinion, to the extent that the service would have otherwise been covered by the organization had such prior authorization or a second opinion been obtained.
``(IV) The eligible organization shall provide a covered individual with timely notice of an adverse determination or noncertification of an admission, continued stay, or service. Such a notification shall include information concerning the utilization review program appeals procedure.
``(vi) An eligible organization utilization review program shall ensure that requests by covered individuals or physicians for prior authorization of a nonemergency service shall be answered in a timely manner after such request is received. If utilization review personnel are not available in a timely fashion, any medical services provided shall be considered approved.
``(vii) A utilization review program shall implement policies and procedures to evaluate the appropriate use of new medical technologies or new applications of established technologies, including medical procedures, drugs, and devices. The program shall ensure that appropriate professionals participate in the development of technology evaluation criteria.
``(viii) Where prior authorization for a service or other covered item is obtained under a program under this paragraph, the service shall be considered to be covered unless there was fraud or incorrect information provided at the time such prior authorization was obtained. If a provider supplied the incorrect information that led to the authorization of medically unnecessary care, the provider shall be prohibited from collecting payment directly from the enrollee, and shall reimburse the organization and subscriber for any payments or copayments the provider may have received.
``(E)(i) The eligible organization shall, with respect to any materials distributed to prospective covered individuals, include a summary of the utilization review procedures of the organization.
``(ii) The eligible organization shall, with respect to any materials distributed to newly covered individuals, include a clear and comprehensive description of utilization review procedures of the organization and a statement of patient rights and responsibilities with respect to such procedures.
``(iii) The eligible organization shall disclose to the Secretary of the eligible organization utilization review program policies, procedures, and reports required by the Secretary for certification.
``(iv) The eligible organization shall have a membership card which shall have printed on the card the toll-free telephone number that an enrollee should call for customer service issues.
``(v) The eligible organization shall establish mechanisms to evaluate the effects of the utilization review program of the organization through the use of member satisfaction data or through other appropriate means.''.
SEC. 7. ACCESS.
(a) In General.--Section 1876(c) (42 U.S.C. 1395mm(c)), as amended by sections 3, 5, and 6, is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(12)(A) The eligible organization shall demonstrate that the organization has a sufficient number, distribution, and variety of qualified health care providers to ensure that all covered health care services will be available and accessible in a timely manner to all individuals enrolled in the organization.
``(B) The eligible organization shall demonstrate that organization enrollees have access, when medically or clinically indicated in the judgment of the treating health professional, to specialized treatment expertise.
``(C)(i) Any process established by the eligible organization to coordinate care and control costs may not impose an undue burden on enrollees with chronic health conditions. The organization shall ensure a continuity of care and shall, when medically or clinically indicated in the judgment of the treating health professional, ensure direct access to relevant specialists for continued care.
``(ii) In the case of an enrollee who has a severe, complex, or chronic condition, the eligible organization shall determine, based on the judgment of the treating health professional, whether it is medically or clinically necessary or appropriate to use a care coordinator from an interdisciplinary team or a specialist to ensure continuity of care.
``(D)(i) The requirements of this paragraph may not be waived and shall be met in all areas where the eligible organization has enrollees, including rural areas.
``(ii) If the eligible organization fails to meet the requirements of this paragraph, the organization shall arrange for the provision of out-of-organization services to enrollees in a manner that provides enrollees with access to services in accordance with this paragraph.''.
(b) Access to Emergency Care Services.--Section 1876(c)(4)(B) (42 U.S.C. 1395mm(c)(4)(B)) is amended--
(1) by inserting ``emergency'' before ``services'' the first place it appears;
(2) by striking ``, if (i)'' and all that follows through
``the organization''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``In such subparagraph, `emergency services' are services provided to an individual after the sudden onset of a medical condition that manifests itself by symptoms of sufficient severity (including severe pain) such that the absence of immediate medical attention could reasonably be expected by a prudent layperson (possessing an average knowledge of health and medicine) to result in placing the individual's health in serious jeopardy, the serious impairment of a bodily function, or the serious dysfunction of any bodily organ or part, and includes services provided as a result of a call through the 911 emergency system.''.
SEC. 8. REQUIREMENTS FOR ORGANIZATION SERVICE AREAS.
(a) In General.--Section 1876 (42 U.S.C. 1395mm) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(k)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), for purposes of this section, if the eligible organization's service area includes any part of a metropolitan statistical area, the service area shall include the entire metropolitan statistical area (including any area designated by the Secretary as a health professional shortage area under section 332(a)(1)(A) of the Public Health Service Act within such metropolitan statistical area).
``(2) The Secretary may permit an organization's service area to exclude any portion of a metropolitan statistical area (other than the central county of such metropolitan statistical area) if--
``(A) the organization demonstrates that it lacks the financial or administrative capacity to serve the entire metropolitan statistical area; and
``(B) the Secretary finds that the composition of the organization's service area does not reduce the financial risk to the organization of providing services to enrollees because of the health status or other demographic characteristics of individuals residing in the service area
(as compared to the health status or demographic characteristics of individuals residing in the portion of the metropolitan statistical area not included in the organization's service area).''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 1876(c)(4)(A)(i) (42 U.S.C. 1395mm(c)(4)(A)(i)) is amended by striking ``the area served by the organization'' and inserting ``the organization's service area''.SEC. 9. OTHER ENROLLEE PROTECTIONS.
(a) Clarification of Restrictions on Charges for Out-of-Plan Services.--
(1) Inpatient hospital and extended care services.--Section 1866(a)(1)(O) (42 U.S.C. 1395cc(a)(1)(O)) is amended in the matter preceding clause (i) by inserting after ``this title'' the following: ``(without regard to whether or not the services are furnished on an emergency basis)''.
(2) Physicians' services and renal dialysis services.--Section 1876(j)(2) (42 U.S.C. 1395mm(j)(2)) is amended by striking ``this setion'' and inserting ``this section
(without regard to whether or not the services are furnished on an emergency basis)''.
(b) Arrangements for Dialysis Services.--Section 1876(c)
(42 U.S.C. 1395mm(c)), as amended by sections 3, 5, 6, and 7 is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(13) Each eligible organization shall assure that enrollees requiring renal dialysis services who are temporarily outside of the organization's service area
(within the United States) have reasonable access to such services by--
``(A) making such arrangements with providers of services or renal dialysis facilities outside the service area for the coverage of and payment for such services furnished to enrollees as the Secretary determines necessary to assure reasonable access; or
``(B) providing for the reimbursement of any provider of services or renal dialysis facility outside the service area for the furnishing of such services to enrollees.''.
SEC. 10. INFORMATION ON ELIGIBLE ORGANIZATION.
Section 1876(c)(3)(C) (42 U.S.C. 1395mm(c)(3)(C)) is amended--
(1) by redesignating clauses (i) and (ii) as subclauses (I) and (II);
(2) by inserting ``(i)'' after ``(C)''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new clause:
``(ii)(I) The eligible organization shall provide prospective covered individuals with written information concerning the terms and conditions of the eligible organization to enable such individuals to make informed decisions with respect to a certain system of health care delivery. Such information shall be standardized so that prospective covered individuals may compare the attributes of all such organizations offered within the coverage area.
``(II) Information provided under this section, whether written or oral shall be easily understandable, truthful, linguistically appropriate and objective with respect to the terms used. Descriptions provided in such information shall be consistent with standards developed for medicare supplemental policies under section 1882.
``(III) Information required under this clause shall include information specific to medicare beneficiaries concerning--
``(aa) coverage provisions, benefits, and any exclusions by category of service or product;
``(bb) plan loss ratios with an explanation that such ratios reflect the percentage of the premiums expended for health services;
``(cc) prior authorization or other review requirements including preauthorization review, concurrent review, post-service review, post-payment review, and procedures that may lead the patient to be denied coverage for, or not be provided, a particular service or product;
``(dd) an explanation of how organization design impacts enrollees, including information on the financial responsibility of covered individuals for payment for coinsurance or other out-of-plan services;
``(ee) covered individual satisfaction statistics, including disenrollment statistics;
``(ff) advance directives and organ donation;
``(gg) the characteristics and availability of health care professionals and institutions participating in the organization, including descriptions of the financial arrangements or contractual provisions with hospitals, utilization review organizations, physicians, or any other provider of health care services that would affect the services offered, referral or treatment options, or physician's fiduciary responsibility to patients, including financial incentives regarding the provision of medical or other services;
``(hh) quality indicators for the organization and for participating health professionals and providers under the organization, including population-based statistics such as immunization rates and other preventive care and health outcomes measures such as survival after surgery, adjusted for case mix; and
``(ii) an explanation of the appeals process and the grievance procedure.''.
SEC. 11. ENROLLMENT BY MAIL.
Section 1876(c)(3) (42 U.S.C. 1395mm(c)(3)) is amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraphs:
``(H) Each eligible organization that provides items and services pursuant to a contract under this section shall permit an individual entitled to benefits under part A to obtain enrollment forms and information and to enroll under this section by mail, and no agent of an eligible organization may visit the residence of such an individual for purposes of enrolling the individual under this section or providing enrollment information to the individual other than at the individual's request.
``(I)(i) Each eligible organization that provides items and services pursuant to a contract under this section shall include the information described in clause (ii) in any solicitation for enrollment in such organization sent by mail to an individual entitled to benefits under part A.
``(ii) The information described in this clause is--
``(I) the toll-free number of the health insurance advisory service program established under section 4359 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 1395b-3); and
``(II) an appropriate explanation of the services provided by such program.
SEC. 12. WAIVER OF CERTAIN MEDICARE COINSURANCE AND
DEDUCTIBLES NOT REMUNERATION.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall modify section 1001.952(k) of title 42, Code of Federal Regulations, to provide that the term ``remuneration'' as used in section 1128B of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1320a-7b) does not include any reduction or waiver of a coinsurance or deductible amount owed to a provider furnishing patient services covered under part B of the medicare program under title XVIII of such Act if such reduction or waiver is provided under a program that--
(1) facilitates access to health services for patients, who because of economic circumstances might otherwise refrain from seeking needed health care;
(2) initially and annually screens patients to determine financial need and eligibility for the program; and
(3) establishes financial need and eligibility on a case-by-case basis and grants such a reduction or waiver only if the beneficiary--
(A) has an annual gross income (including Social Security benefits, tax-exempt income, and income from any other source) of 200 percent or less of the Federal poverty level;
(B) does not have assets in excess of $30,300, excluding the homestead (as defined in State law) and one automobile;
(C) is not eligible for medical assistance under a State plan under title XIX of such Act; and
(D) is not enrolled in a prepaid health plan.
(b) Additional exclusion.--The modification described in subsection (a) shall be in addition to any exclusions contained in such section on the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 13. EFFECTIVE DATE.
The amendments made by this Act shall apply with respect to contract years beginning on or after January 1, 1997.
______
By Mr. BUMPERS (for himself, Mr. Nickles, Mr. Pryor, and Mr.
Inhofe):
S. 1025. A bill to provide for the exchange of certain federally owned lands and mineral interests therein, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. the arkansas-oklahoma land exchange act of 1995
Mr. BUMPERS. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce a piece of legislation that will begin a public process for a project of great importance. This legislation would allow for the exchange of lands between the Weyerhaeuser Co., the Forest Service, and the Fish and Wildlife Service. This land exchange could, in my view, achieve a number of worthy goals for the environment in my home State of Arkansas and for the State of Oklahoma. It is a bill that I have been working on, and will continue to work on, with the advice and assistance of Senators Pryor, Nickles, and Inhofe, as well as Congressman Brewster of Oklahoma and the entire Arkansas House delegation.
First, let me provide a bit of background on this exchange proposal. In 1985, I learned that the Weyerhaeuser Co. had informed the Forest Service that it had thousands of acres of land for sale in Arkansas. These lands included undeveloped timberland adjacent to Lake Ouachita. After a meeting that I had with representatives of the Weyerhaeuser Co., they agreed to withhold the sale to allow me time to work through the appropriations process and acquire environmentally significant lands through the land and water conservation fund for the Ouachita National Forest.
The acquisition of lands inside the Lake Ouachita Management Area presents opportunities for more dispersed recreation, wildlife enhancement work, and protection of visual and water quality of the lake. These acquisitions began in 1989 and have continued up through this year. As a result of these acquisitions, the Government has been able to acquire almost 40,000 acres of some of the best forest lands I have seen. Since the acquisition program started, the bald eagle has become established on Lake Ouachita. In addition, habitat is provided for the red-cockaded woodpecker, Southern lady slipper, and Arkansas fat mucket mussel. The area is popular for deer, turkey, and small game hunting.
While it would be nice to continue acquiring lands through the land and water conservation fund, that is just not a practical strategy. I know that some of my constituents do not like the concept of a land exchange because it means some lands leave Federal ownership and, under this proposal, would go to the Weyerhaeuser Co. However, reality is that this Government has a budget deficit, and funds for land acquisition have been decreasing for several years. In fact, the money that has been dedicated to land acquisition of the Weyerhaeuser property has fallen steadily since 1991. The decrease of funds has not resulted from my lack of interest in this area. It is due to the fact that Federal dollars are scarce for the kind of environmental enhancement I would like to see. Therefore, I believe it is incumbent upon Congress, the Federal Government, land owners and interest groups to be creative about how we can reach mutual goals for conservation. I challenged the Weyerhaeuser Co. to work with me in finding such an opportunity, and I believe they have taken a good step toward such an effort. I know Senator Nickles offered the same challenge. As a result, for the past year, the Weyerhaeuser Co., the Forest Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service have been working to determine if a mutually agreed upon land exchange proposal could be achieved. The bill today represents the result of that preliminary effort.
Pursuant to this legislation, the State of Arkansas would gain approximately 25,000 acres for a national wildlife refuge. This unique bottomland forest called Pond Creek is located in the floodplain between the Cossatot River and the Little River. It is extremely rich and diverse in wetland habitat for wading birds, resident and migratory waterfowl, small mammals, deer, fish, alligators, and other wildlife. I understand that there are four bird rookeries there, used by herons, egrets, and other birds. This land would become part of the Cossatot National Wildlife Refuge.
Arkansas would also benefit by acquiring lands that would complement Lake Ouachita; the Little Missouri Wild and Scenic River; Flatside Wilderness, and parts of the Ouachita National Forest. These acquisitions would enhance recreational opportunities for hiking, rock climbing and mountain bicycling. It would protect watersheds, and help block up ownership that is currently intermingled between the Weyerhaeuser Co. and the Forest Service. In the State of Arkansas, approximately 30,000 acres would be added to the Ouachita National Forest.
In Oklahoma, the exchange would add more than 100,000 acres to the Ouachita National Forest through the addition of lands around Lake Broken Bow. This lake is similar to Lake Ouachita--very beautiful, and worthy of protection. I will work closely with my colleagues in the Senate and House from Oklahoma to ensure that this legislation fits with their goals for the area.
To summarize, through this exchange the Federal Government stands to receive almost 160,000 acres of land that is currently owned by the Weyerhaeuser Co. I want to emphasize that I have personally viewed this property and believe it is worthy for consideration in this land exchange bill.
Of course, Weyerhaeuser will also receive something in this exchange through the acquisition of approximately 28,000 acres of the Tiak district of the Ouachita National Forest in Oklahoma and approximately 20,000 acres in Arkansas. This is land currently under timber management, and would continue under timber management by the Weyerhaeuser Co. I have inquired into the company's forest practices and understand that these lands would be managed in conjunction with its recently adopted Forestry Resource Goals. These goals strengthen and reinforce the company's commitment to continue protecting water quality and fish habitat in carrying out forest management, providing habitat for wildlife associated with managed forests, using scientifically based practices to protect soil stability and ensuring long term soil productivity; and considering aesthetics in forest practices as they manage forestlands for sustainable production of wood and other forest products. I understand that the Weyerhaeuser practices go beyond the guidelines of State Best Management Practices [BMP's], and that it has a good neighbor policy that calls for carefully considering the concerns of adjacent landowners and host communities.
There are several issues I would like to address. First, is the concern that Weyerhaeuser is merely trading away cutover lands. I have toured the exchange area and seen first hand the quality of lands that the Forest Service has been receiving through the land and water conservation fund, as well as the lands that Weyerhaeuser would transfer to the
Government. These are some of the best forests I have seen, and they deserve to be in Federal ownership.
Currently, the Arkansas Nature Conservancy has scientists conducting an ecological assessment of all of the Weyerhaeuser lands that would come into Federal ownership. I am anxious to see the result of this work, and it will be important for Congress to review this proposal as the bill moves ahead. I plan to hold hearings on this very topic so that we can all understand the environmental impact of the land exchange. While we know a great deal about the lands currently in Federal ownership that would go to Weyerhaeuser, this assessment will help us learn more information about the quality of lands owned by Weyerhaeuser that would go to the Ouachita National Forest for management. I understand that preliminary data show that this land provides habitat for a number of sensitive species and serves important watersheds.
A question has arisen about whether this exchange would be a value-
for-value exchange. I can assure my colleagues that this exchange would be a value-for-value exchange. I understand that the Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, and Weyerhaeuser Co., have contracted with an independent land appraiser to determine the values of the land and ensure that land is traded on a value-for-value basis. That is, the total value of the land, timber and other economic resources that the Federal Government would give up will equal the total value that it receives from Weyerhaeuser. Determining resource values will involve surveys, land appraisals, timber cruises, mineral and geologic assessments. As with any other business transaction, evaluations would be based on such items as recent comparable sales and current market values. These will provide an economically sound basis for discussion and negotiation--even for areas where the highest and best land uses may be environmental, recreational, or aesthetic rather than economic. I plan to be sure that the land values will be established precisely before this legislation is enacted.
Concerns have also been raised about whether or not hunting and fishing will be allowed in the Cossatot National Wildlife Refuge. I believe that as long as hunting and fishing can be conducted in a manner that is compatible with sound wildlife management, then it makes sense to allow this and other forms of recreation.
One issue that I am committed to working on with my colleagues from Oklahoma is an issue regarding the school districts in McCurtain County. I understand that under the current land exchange proposal, two school districts--Haworth and Tom--would lose money they presently receive under current allocations from the timber receipt payments. I know these timber receipt payments are important to the operation of these school districts and look forward to finding an equitable solution to this situation.
Then there is the issue of minerals. Because of the acreage imbalance, the exchange would result in approximately 100,000 acres of Weyerhaeuser minerals being located under the lands to be conveyed to the Federal Government. At my request, Weyerhaeuser Co. has met with the Forest Service to come up with a recommendation that could be agreed to by all parties. The result of these discussions includes a proposal whereby Weyerhaeuser would trade all Forest Service mineral rights--approximately 50,000 acres--for an equivalent amount of acreage of Weyerhaeuser mineral rights when the surface is exchanged. The Weyerhaeuser hardrock minerals, which means all minerals except oil and gas, on all of the property Weyerhaeuser conveys to the Government, would be conveyed at the time of the surface exchange. However, Weyerhaeuser will reserve oil and gas rights on the acres for 45 years. Ownership by Weyerhaeuser of all oil and gas rights within any section containing a producing oil or gas well would extend beyond 45 years for as long as production continued. Weyerhaeuser would also reserve a proportionally reduced 6.25 percent of 8/8's overriding royalty interest in all oil and/or gas produced from any well located within the eight governmental sections immediately surrounding any section in which well is producing as of December 31, 2041.
Finally, let me say Mr. President that this proposal has a great deal of support. It is supported in concept by the Forest Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service. It has the support of the Arkansas Nature Conservancy and the Oklahoma Wildlife Federation to name but a few. I was particularly encouraged recently by the statement of the Department of Agriculture's Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment, James Lyons. When I asked him about the exchange in an Interior Appropriations Subcommittee hearing, he said ``I think it is a good exchange for the taxpayers and for Weyerhaeuser, and certainly for the State of Arkansas''. I would encourage anyone who has concerns about this proposal to contact Weyerhaeuser and the Forest Service and take the time to tour the proposed lands for exchange. It was time well spend for me, and I would highly recommend it.
I would emphasize that I want to hear from my constituents about this proposal. I want to hear about what they like and what they don't like so that I can be sure that the public process we are beginning today will benefit from their views.
I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 1025
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds that:
(1) the Weyerhaeuser Company has offered to the United States Government an exchange of lands under which Weyerhaeuser would receive approximately 50,000 acres of Federal land in Arkansas and Oklahoma in return for conveying to the United States lands owned by Weyerhaeuser consisting of approximately 165,000 acres of forested wetlands and other forest land of public interest in Arkansas and Oklahoma, consisting of:
(A) certain Arkansas Ouachita lands located near Lake Ouachita, Little Missouri Wild and Scenic River, Flatside Wilderness and the Ouachita National Forest;
(B) certain lands in Oklahoma located near McCurtain County Wilderness, the Broken Bow Reservoir, the Glover River, and the Ouachita National Forest; and
(C) certain Arkansas Cossatot lands located on the Little and Cossatot Rivers and identified as the ``Pond Creek Bottoms'' in the Lower Mississippi River Delta section of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan;
(2) acquisition of the Arkansas Cossatot lands by the United States will remove the lands in the heart of a critical wetland ecosystem from sustained timber production and other development;
(3) the acquisition of the Arkansas Ouachita lands and the Oklahoma lands by the United States for administration by the Forest Service will provide an opportunity for enhancement of ecosystem management of the National Forest System lands and resources;
(4) the Arkansas Ouachita lands and the Oklahoma lands have outstanding wildlife habitat and important recreational values and should continue to be made available for activities such as public hunting, fishing, trapping, nature observation, enjoyment, education, and timber management;
(5) private use of the lands the United States will convey to Weyerhaeuser will not conflict with established management objectives on adjacent Federal lands;
(6) the lands the United States will convey to Weyerhaeuser as part of the exchange described in paragraph (1) do not contain comparable fish, wildlife, or wetlands values;
(7) the United States will convey all mineral interests and oil and gas interests to Weyerhaeuser on or under all surface acres designated to be exchanged pursuant to the exchange described in paragraph (1) in which the Federal Government owns such interests;
(8) pursuant to such exchange, Weyerhaeuser will convey to the United States all mineral interests and equivalent oil and gas interests on or under all surface acres designated to be exchanged pursuant to the exchange described in paragraph
(1) in which Weyerhaeuser owns such interests;
(9) the United States and Weyerhaeuser have agreed to the values and boundaries of all lands, mineral interests, and oil and gas interests to be conveyed in the exchange and concur that the lands, mineral interests, and oil and gas interests to be conveyed by Weyerhaeuser and the lands, mineral interests, and oil and gas interests to be conveyed by the United States are approximately equal in value; and
(10) the exchange of lands, mineral interests, and oil and gas interests between Weyerhaeuser and the United States is in the public interest.
(b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to authorize and direct the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to enter into an exchange of lands, mineral interests, and oil and gas interests that will provide environmental, land management, recreational, and economic benefits to the States of Arkansas and Oklahoma and to the United States.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
As used in this Act:
(a) Land.--The terms ``land'' or ``lands'' mean the surface estate and any other interests therein except for mineral interests and oil and gas interests.
(b) Mineral Interests.--The term ``mineral interests'' means geothermal steam and heat and all metals, ores, and minerals of any nature whatsoever, except oil and gas interests, in or upon lands subject to this Act including, but not limited to, coal, lignite, peat, rock, sand, gravel, and quartz.
(c) Oil and Gas Interests.--The term ``oil and gas interests'' means all oil and gas of any nature whatsoever including carbon dioxide, helium, and gas taken from coal seams (collectively ``oil and gas'') together with the right to enter lands for the purpose of exploring the lands for oil and gas and drilling, opening, developing, and working wells on such lands and taking out and removing from such lands all such oil and gas together with the right to occupy and make use of as much of the surface of said lands as may reasonably be necessary for these purposes subject to the Secretary of Agriculture's rules and regulations set forth in section 251.15 of title 36, Code of Federal Regulations.
(d) Secretaries.--The term ``Secretaries'' means the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture.
(c) Weyerhaeuser.--The term ``Weyerhaeuser'' means Weyerhaeuser Company, a company incorporated in the State of Washington.
SEC. 3. EXCHANGE.
(a) Exchange of Lands and Mineral Interests.--
(1) In General.--Subject to paragraph (a)(2), within 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture shall convey to Weyerhaeuser, subject to any valid existing rights, approximately 20,000 acres of Federal lands and mineral interests in the State of Arkansas and approximately 30,000 acres of Federal lands and mineral interests in the State of Oklahoma as depicted for exchange on maps entitled ``Arkansas-Oklahoma Land Exchange--Federal Arkansas and Oklahoma Lands,'' dated 1995 and available for public inspection in appropriate offices of the Secretaries.
(2) Offer and Acceptance of Lands.--The Secretary of Agriculture shall make the conveyance to Weyerhaeuser if Weyerhaeuser offers deeds of title, subject to limitations and the reservation described in subsection (b), acceptable to the Secretary of Agriculture that convey to the United States the following:
(A) approximately 110,000 acres of lands and mineral interests owned by Weyerhaeuser in the State of Oklahoma, as depicted for transfer to the United States upon a map entitled ``Arkansas-Oklahoma Land Exchange--Weyerhaeuser Oklahoma Lands,'' dated 1995 and available for public inspection in appropriate offices of the Secretaries;
(B) approximately 30,000 acres of lands and mineral interests owned by Weyerhaeuser in the State of Arkansas, as depicted for transfer to the United States upon a map entitled ``Arkansas-Oklahoma Land Exchange--Weyerhaeuser Arkansas Ouachita Lands,'' dated 1995 and available for public inspection in appropriate offices of the Secretaries; and
(C) approximately 25,000 acres of lands and mineral interests owned by Weyerhaeuser in the State of Arkansas, as depicted for transfer to the United States upon a map entitled ``Arkansas-Oklahoma Land Exhchange--Weyerhaeuser Arkansas Cassatot Lands,'' dated 1995 and available for public inspection in appropriate offices of the Secretaries.
(b) Exchange of Oil and Gas Interests.--
(1) In General.--Subject to paragraph (b)(2), at the same time as the land and mineral interests exchange is carried out pursuant to this Section, the Secretary of Agriculture shall exchange all Federal oil and gas interests, including existing leases and other agreements, in the lands described in paragraph (a)(1) for equivalent oil and gas interests, including existing leases and other agreements, owned by Weyerhaeuser in the lands described in paragraph (a)(2). Any exchange of oil and gas interests pursuant to this Act may be made without regard to the limitations requiring that exchanges be made within the same State under section 206 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1716).
(2) Reservation.--In addition to exchanging oil and gas interests pursuant to paragraph (b)(1), to account for the acreage imbalance in the exchange required under this Act, there is hereby reserved to Weyerhaeuser, its successors, and assigns until December 31, 2041, and for so long thereafter that oil or gas is produced therefrom (``term reservation''), all oil and gas in and under the acreage imbalance lands depicted for reservation by Weyerhaeuser upon a map entitled
``Arkansas-Oklahoma Land Exchange--Weyerhaeuser Oil and Gas Interest Reservation Lands,'' dated 1995 and available for public inspection in appropriate offices of the Secretaries. Beginning January 1, 2042, there is hereby reserved to Weyerhaeuser, its successors and assigns, a proportionately reduced 6.25 percent of 8/8's overriding royalty interest in all oil and gas produced from any well in any governmental section adjacent to or cornering a section in which oil and gas is being produced at the expiration of the term reservation (``overriding royalty''). The overriding royalty will continue until either the producing well (a well producing on December 31, 2041) ceases production or until all federally leased wells to which the overriding royalty applies ceases production, whichever is later.
(c) General Provisions.--
(1) Valuation.--The lands, mineral interests, and oil and gas interests exchanged pursuant to this Act shall be approximately equal in value, as determined by the Secretaries and agreed to by Weyerhaeuser. To ensure that the natural values of the area are not affected by the exchange, a formal appraisal based upon drilling or other surface disturbing activities shall not be required for any mineral interests or oil and gas interests exchanged.
(2) Maps controlling.--The acreage cited in this Act is approximate. In the case of a discrepancy between the description of lands, mineral interests, and/or oil and gas interests to be exchanged pursuant to subsection (a) and the lands, mineral interests, and/or oil and gas interests depicted on a map referred to in such subsection, the map shall control. Subject to the notification required by paragraph (3), the maps referenced in this Act are subject to such minor corrections as may be agreed upon by the Secretaries and Weyerhaeuser.
(3) Final maps.--Not later than 180 days after the conclusion of the exchange required by subsection (a), the Secretaries shall transmit maps accurately depicting the lands and mineral interests
conveyed and transferred pursuant to this Act and the acreage and boundary descriptions of such lands and mineral interests to the Committees on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and the Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives.
(4) Cancellation.--If, before the exchange has been carried out putsuant to subsections (a) and (b), Weyerhaeuser provides written notification to the Secretaries that Weyerhaeuser no longer intends to complete the exchange, with respect to the lands, mineral interests, and oil and gas interests that would otherwise be subject to the exchange, the status of such lands, mineral interests, and oil and gas interests shall revert to the status of such lands, mineral interests, and oil and gas interests as of the day before the date of enactment of this Act and shall be managed in accordance with applicable management plans.
(5) Withdrawal.--Subject to valid existing rights, the lands, mineral interests, and oil and gas interests depicted for conveyance to Weyerhaeuser for possible exchange on the maps referenced in subsections (a) and (b) are withdrawn from all forms of entry and appropriation under the public land laws (including the mining laws); and from the operation of mineral leasing and geothermal steam leasing laws effective upon the date of the enactment of this Act. Such withdrawal shall terminate 45 days after completion of the exchange provided for in subsections (a) and (b) or on the date of notification by Weyerhaeuser of a decision not to complete the exchange.
SEC. 4. DESIGNATION AND USE OF LANDS ACQUIRED BY THE UNITED
STATES.
(a) National Forest System.--
(1) Addition to the system.--Upon acceptance of title by the Secretary of Agriculture, the 140,000 acres of land conveyed to the United States pursuant to Section 3(a)(2)(A) and (B) of this Act shall be administered by the Secretary of Agriculture in accordance with the laws and regulations pertaining to the National Forest system.
(2) Plan amendments.--Within 36 months after the completion of the exchange required by this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture shall amend applicable land and resource management plans and accompanying documents pursuant to section 6 of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974, as amended by the National Forest Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 1604).
(b) Other.--
(1) Addition to the national wildlife refuge system.--Once acquired by the United States, the 25,000 acres of land identified in section 3(a)(2)(A), the Cossatot lands, shall be managed by the Secretary of the Interior as a component of the Cossatot National Wildlife Refuge in accordance with the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966
(16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee).
(2) Plan preparation.--Within 24 months after the completion of the exchange required by this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall prepare and implement a single refuge management plan for the Cossatot National Wildlife Refuge, as expanded by this Act. Such plans shall recognize the important public purposes served by the nonconsumptive activities, other recreational activities, and wildlife-related public use, including hunting, fishing, and trapping. The plan shall permit, to the maximum extent practicable, compatible uses to the extent that they are consistent with sound wildlife management and in accordance with the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee) and other applicable laws. Any regulations promulgated by the Secretary of the Interior with respect to hunting, fishing, and trapping on those lands shall, to the extent practicable, be consistent with State fish and wildlife laws and regulations. In preparing the management plan and regulations, the Secretary of the Interior shall consult with the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission.
(3) Interim use of lands.--
(A) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), during the period beginning on the date of the completion of the exchange of lands required by this Act and ending on the first date of the implementation of the plan prepared under paragraph (2), the Secretary of the Interior shall administer all lands added to the Cossatot National Wildlife Refuge pursuant to this Act in accordance with the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee) and other applicable laws.
(B) Hunting seasons.--During the period described in subparagraph (A), the duration of any hunting season on the lands described in subsection (1) shall comport with the applicable State law.
SEC. 5. OUACHITA NATIONAL FOREST BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT.
(a) In General.--Upon acceptance of title by the Secretary of Agriculture of the lands conveyed to the United States pursuant to Section 4(a)(2)(B) and (C), the boundaries of the Ouachita National Forest shall be adjusted to encompass those lands conveyed to the United States generally depicted on the maps entitled ``Arkansas-Oklahoma Land Exchange--Weyerhaeuser Oklahoma Lands'' and ``Arkansas-Oklahoma Land Exchange--Weyerhaeuser Arkansas Ouachita Lands'' dated 1995. For the purpose of section 7 of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 4601-9), the boundaries of the Ouachita National Forest, as adjusted by this Act, shall be considered to be the boundaries of the Forest as of January 1, 1965.
(b) Maps and Boundary Descriptions.--Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture shall prepare a boundary description of the lands depicted on the maps referred to in Section 3(a)(2)(B) and (C). Such maps and boundary description shall have the same force and effect as if included in this Act, except that the Secretary of Agriculture may correct clerical and typographical errors.
Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Arkansas-Oklahoma Land Exchange Act of 1995. This legislation represents several years of work on the part of the U.S. Forest Service, the Weyerhaeuser Co., the Oklahoma and Arkansas congressional delegations, State officials, and local communities. I firmly believe that this land exchange will benefit not only timber resource management, but also wildlife habitat, tourism, recreation, and the economic vitality of the region.
During the course of negotiations, I strongly held that any exchange of lands would have to serve the best interests of Oklahoma citizens and the taxpayer. With this in mind, we crafted a proposal that would represent no cost to the Federal Government and that would allow for an equitable exchange of land and resources between the U.S. Forest Service and the Weyerhaeuser Co.
Specifically, the public, through the U.S. Forest Service, will receive 105,000 acres in southeast Oklahoma adjacent to Broken Bow Lake and near the McCurtain County Wilderness Area, the lower Mountain Fork River, and the Glover River. These acres will become part of the Ouachita National Forest. The U.S. Forest Service will also receive approximately 28,000 acres located near Lake Ouachita in Arkansas and an additional 25,000 acres in Sevier County, AR, to become part of the Cossatot National Wildlife Refuge.
In exchange, the Weyerhaeuser Co. will receive 28,000 acres of land located in the Tiak District of the Ouachita National Forest in McCurtain County, OK. The Tiak District was hand planted in pine timber and has been managed commercially in large blocks by the U.S. Forest Service for many years. In Arkansas, Weyerhaeuser will receive approximately 20,000 acres of scattered tracts located in Garland, Yell, and Perry Counties.
I am committed to ensuring this proposal will not have an adverse impact on school district funding in southeastern Oklahoma. I am presently working with State and local officials, as well as the U.S. Forest Service and Weyerhaeuser, to guarantee an equitable and fair distribution of Forest Service timber receipt payments to local school districts. We are progressing positively and will attempt to reach an agreement before the exchange of lands is authorized to proceed.
I have confidence in Weyerhaeuser's sound forest management practices and its commitment to replanting trees and protecting wildlife. I also have confidence in the U.S. Forest Service's ability to manage the land surrounding Broken Bow Lake as it
becomes part of the Ouachita National Forest. I appreciate their commitment to managing our natural resources for the benefit of all citizens, including the development of tourism and recreation in the area.
The Arkansas-Oklahoma Land Exchange Act of 1995 has the support of the Oklahoma Wildlife Federation, the Broken Bow Lake and Mountain Fork River Association, the Idabel Chamber of Commerce, the Broken Bow Chamber of Commerce, and the McCurtain County Chapter of Wild Turkey Federation.
______
By Mr. BROWN (for himself, Mr. Bradley, Mr. Bryan, Mr. Chafee, and Mr. Lautenberg):
S. 1027. A bill to eliminate the quota and price support programs for peanuts, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
peanuts legislation
Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, later this year Congress will be considering a new farm bill. This bill will guide our farm program into the next century. As we look to the future, we must clean up outdated programs of the past. Senator Bradley and I are introducing a bill to eliminate the Federal peanut program.
The peanut program was established as part of the Agricultural Adjustment Act in 1938 when America was emerging from the Great Depression. Insuring a stable supply and price for agricultural commodities, including peanuts, was of great importance during the unstable economic times that followed the Great Depression. Today, however, the peanut program drives up the price for consumers and restricts the number of farmers that can take part in the program.
The peanut program was originally intended to stabilize prices for farmers. Now, it has become a cartel. A small number of farmers own licenses, issued by the USDA, that allow them to participate in the program. These licensed farmers are restricted by a set production quotas reminiscent of communist-era central planning. How does someone obtain an allotment under the quota to grow peanuts? The right to participate in the program can be inherited, purchased, or rented. In fact in 1991, 68 percent of the peanuts produced under the peanut program were produced by farmers
who rented the right to grow peanuts under the Federal program from licensed quota-owners. Those who rented collectively paid $208 million for the privilege of using someone else's quota.
Farmers who do not own and are not able to rent a quota allotment are shut out of the peanut cartel. They cannot sell their peanuts on the U.S. free market. Unlicensed peanut farmers have only two options. They can sell their peanuts on the international markets where they receive only about half what quota-owners are assured through the Federal program. They also could sell their peanuts to the Federal Government for one-fifth the price the quota-owners receive, which is below the cost to produce the peanuts.
While the peanut cartel benefits a small number of quota-owners, it gouges the American consumer. This program makes peanuts and peanut butter more expensive to Americans. In a 1993 report, the General Accounting Office estimated that the current program cost the U.S. peanut consumer between $314-$513 million per year in higher prices.
The peanut program differs significantly from other commodity programs. Commodity programs should provide a measure of stability to the agriculture industry and insure an abundant supply of food at a reasonable price. The peanut program does not accomplish this goal. The current peanut program prevents farmers who do not own or cannot rent a quota from selling on the U.S. market. The current program artificially raises the price of peanuts and peanut products to U.S. consumers.
Consumers do not benefit from the program. Most of the peanut growers do not benefit from the program. The peanut program only benefits a small number of people who own a quota license.
This program is simply a bad program that needs to be eliminated. The agriculture industry has under gone a significant change since its inception. America and the American farmer have outgrown the peanut program.
Mr. BRADLEY. Mr. President, today, Senator Brown and I are introducing legislation to end the Federal peanut program, a system of production quotas, price support loans and import restrictions which benefit a privileged few at great cost to American taxpayers and consumers.
You do not have to be a peanut farmer to take advantage of the peanut program. In fact, you do not have to be farmer at all. You just have to be lucky enough to inherit--or rich enough to buy--a quota. Quota holders live all over the United States and in foreign countries as far away as Hong Kong and Great Britain.
The Federal peanut program has been in place since the 1930's. It places strict quotas on peanut production, which drive up the cost to consumers by as much as $500 million a year, according to the American Peanut Product Manufacturers.
Farmers who wish to grow peanuts for human consumption in the United States must own or lease a quota. And while quotas are assigned to particular farms, they can be rented or sold to someone else within the same county. The GAO reports that 68 percent of all quota owners merely rent out their quotas to others. Even worse, fewer than 22 percent of all quota holders control 80 percent of the total U.S. peanut quota.
This program does nothing to help American farmers. It simply lines the pockets of what amounts to a Park Avenue peanut cartel.
Additionally, the Government provides Federal price support loans of
$678 per ton for peanuts grown within the quota limits, despite the fact that the world price for peanuts is only $350 per ton. If a farmer cannot sell his crop, he can forfeit it to the Government in return for the Federal price support. These price supports will cost American taxpayers $119 million in 1995.
This program turns market capitalism on its head. It forces consumers to pay twice as much for peanuts than they otherwise would pay. Ironically, high peanut prices are shrinking the market for peanut products. At this rate, we're going to make peanut butter and jelly a delicacy.
For the dynasty of peanut quota holders, this program is the greatest thing since sliced bread. But for everyone else, it is a shell game you cannot win. The peanut program does not need overhauling, it needs to end now.
____________________
