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 RESOLUTION” mentioning John Thune was published in the Senate section on pages S4045-S4048 on June 10.
Of the 100 senators in 117th Congress, 24 percent were women, and 76 percent were men, according to the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress.
Senators' salaries are historically higher than the median US income.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTION
By Mr. PADILLA (for himself, Ms. Warren, Mrs. Feinstein, and Mr.
Markey):
S. 2004. A bill to provide for the basic needs of students at institutions of higher education; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mrs. President, I rise to speak in support of the
``BASIC Act,'' which I introduced today.
I know how important it is to help students cover the full cost of attending college, including tuition and fees, housing, food, transportation, books, medical, childcare and supplies.
In California, even though State and institutional aid programs cover full tuition and fees for about half of students attending a California State University, University of California and California Community College, students struggle to pay for the remaining cost of attendance.
Each year, over 300,000 eligible applicants do not receive a state Cal Grant because of limited availability. Non-tuition college costs can exceed $20K annually. Low-income students may spend about half their family income on out-of-pocket costs after grant aid. This bill will help accelerate California's work to make college affordable and provide funding to reach more schools across California and across our Nation. This is especially important at a time when community college enrollment has slowed during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly among students of color, lower-income students, and students who have left to work or take care of family members.
As we work to build back better and increase affordability and accessibility of higher education, we must help our students stay in school.
That is why I am proud to introduce this bill to authorize $1 billion for a new grant program to help institutions of higher education meet students' basic needs.
This funding represents an essential aspect of building more equitable paths to higher education, and it represents an investment in our students, our institutions, and our future.
This legislation recognizes the disproportionate impact this pandemic has on vulnerable populations and it helps coordinate assistance across federal agency lines.
I want to thank Senator Warren and Representative Torres for introducing this bill with me, and I hope our colleagues will join us in support of this bill that ensures no student is forced to choose between their education and food or housing.
Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.
______
By Mr. REED (for himself, Ms. Collins, Mr. Van Hollen, Ms. Cortez
Masto, and Ms. Klobuchar):
S. 2008. A bill to strengthen the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Mr. REED, Mr. President, along with Senator Collins, I am reintroducing legislation that would eliminate the sunset date for the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (the Council or USICH) so that this agency can build upon its success in helping to prevent and end homelessness nationally.
The Council was established under the Reagan Administration as part of the landmark Mckinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act of 1987, Since that time, it has worked across the Federal government and the private sector to coordinate homeless assistance nationally. In 2009, e Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing Act, which I authored along with Senator Collins, expanded the Council's role to work with public, non-profit, and private stakeholders to develop a national strategic plan to end homelessness. According to the Council, the Council's work ``has helped drive homelessness down by 9% and helped 82 communities effectively end veteran homelessness and four end chronic homelessness'' since 2010.
Even with this progress, the Department of Housing and Urban Development's 2020 Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress found that on ``a single night in 2020, roughly 580,000 people were experiencing homelessness in the United States'' and ``2020 mark] ed] the first time since data collection began that more individuals experiencing homelessness were unsheltered than were sheltered.''
Clearly, we have more work to do. and if anything, COVID-19 has further highlighted the critical importance of housing. Indeed, for many families, their homes may be the single most effective and accessible form of personal protective equipment. And we also know that continuing to invest in programs to address homelessness and increase affordable housing pays additional dividends. According to Crossroads Rhode Island, a homeless services organization, ``In 2016, approximately 90% of individuals experiencing homelessness in Rhode Island were on Medicaid,'' and ``The average annual Medicaid cost for a person experiencing homelessness in Rhode Island ($14,723) was 80% higher than that of the average Medicaid recipient ($8,200).'' In short, helping families avoid homelessness can actually save taxpayers money.
This is what we call a win-win, and the Council is uniquely positioned to facilitate a whole of government approach that marshals the resources of the Council's 19 federal member agencies to help more communities effectively address homelessness and also potentially save taxpayer funds. Our bipartisan legislation ensures that the Council's doors remain open until there truly is an end to homelessness nationwide.
I thank the many groups that support our legislation including the National Low Income Housing Coalition, Local Initiatives Support Corporation, the Council of Large Public Housing Authorities, HousingWorksRI, and others. I urge our colleagues to join Senator Collins and me in supporting this legislation.
______
By Mr. REED (for himself and Mr. Grassley):
S. 2009. A bill to promote transparency by permitting the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board to allow its disciplinary proceedings to be open to the public, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Mr. REED. Mr. President. the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) Enforcement Transparency Act, which I reintroduce today with Senator Grassley, will bring needed transparency to the disciplinary proceedings the PCAOB has brought against auditors and audit firms earlier in the process.
Nearly two decades ago, in response to a series of massive financial reporting frauds, including those involving Enron and WorldCom. the Senate Banking Committee held multiple hearings, which produced consensus on various underlying causes, including weak corporate governance, a lack of accountability, and inadequate oversight of accountants charged with auditing public companies' financial statements. Later, in a 99 to 0 vote, the Senate passed the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act of 2002 to address the structural weaknesses revealed by the hearings. Among its many provisions, this law called for the creation of an independent board, the PCAOB, responsible for overseeing auditors of public companies in order to protect investors who rely on independent audit reports on the financial statements of public companies.
Today, the PCAOB, under the oversight of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), oversees more than 1,700 registered accounting firms, as well as the audit partners and staff who contribute to a firm's work on each audit. The Board's ability to begin proceedings that can determine whether there have been violations of its auditing standards or rules of professional practice is a crucial component of its oversight. However, unlike other oversight bodies, the Board's disciplinary proceedings cannot be made public without consent from the parties involved. Of course, parties subject to disciplinary proceedings have no incentive to consent to publicizing their alleged wrongdoing and these proceedings typically remain cloaked behind a veil of secrecy. In addition, the Board cannot publicize the results of its disciplinary proceedings until after the appeals process has been completely exhausted, which can often take several years.
This lack of transparency invites abuse and undermines the Congressional intent behind the PCAOB, which was to shine a bright light on auditing firms and practices, deter misconduct and bolster the accountability of auditors of public companies to the investing public.
Our bill will restore transparency by making hearings by the PCAOB, and all related notices, orders, and motions, transparent and available to the public unless otherwise ordered by the Board. This would more closely align the PCAOB's procedures with those of the SEC for analogous matters.
Increasing transparency and accountability of audit firms subject to PCAOB disciplinary proceedings bolsters investor confidence in our financial markets and better protects companies from problematic auditors. I hope our colleagues will join Senator Grassley and me in supporting this legislation to enhance transparency in the PCAOB's enforcement process.
______
By Ms. COLLINS (for herself, Mr. Kelly, and Mr. Menendez):
S. 2022. A bill to enable States to better provide access to whole genome sequencing clinical services for certain undiagnosed children under the Medicaid program, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the ``Ending the Diagnostic Odyssey Act.'' This legislation gives States the option of providing whole genome sequencing (WGS) clinical services through edicaid for children with a disease that is suspected to have a genetic cause, at an enhanced Federal matching rate for three years. I am pleased to be joined by Senators Kelly and Menendez.
Children with rare diseases will spend on average five to seven years on a diagnostic odyssey, and 30 percent of those children will not survive beyond the age of five years old. The average patient sees seven different physicians in that time. The wait to find a cause--never mind a cure--can be excruciating. Parents try to project a calm and reassuring presence for their child while facing a whirlwind of doctor appointments, hospital visits, and unanswered questions.
Undeniably, we are making progress in both accelerating research funding for rare diseases as well as in the development of diagnostics. In 2014, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) launched a program called the Undiagnosed Disease Network (UDN). In its first 20 months, the UDN accepted 601 participants undiagnosed by traditional medical practices. Of those who completed their UDN evaluation during this time, 35% were given a diagnosis. Many of these diagnoses were rare genetic diseases including 31 previously unknown syndromes.
In May 2019, the Director of the National Institutes of Health, Dr. Francis Collins, wrote a blog post on how whole genome sequencing--
combined with artificial intelligence (AI)--can now be used to diagnose genetic diseases in seriously ill babies in fewer than 24 hours. Dr. Collins writes ``I would submit that there is no other technology in the history of planet Earth that has experienced this degree of progress in speed and affordability.''
For parents of children with an undiagnosed illness, answers cannot come soon enough. There are approximately 7,000 rare diseases known today. Approximately 80 percent of rare diseases are genetic, and about one-half of all rare diseases affect children. For example, Alstrom syndrome is an extremely rare and complex genetic disorder. Approximately 1200 affected individuals have been identified worldwide, which makes a obtaining a correct diagnosis challenging. Characteristics of Alstrom syndrome include vision disturbances, sensorineural hearing impairment, cardiomyopathy, obesity, kidney dysfunction, and diabetes. Robin Marshall, Executive Director of the Alstrom Syndrome International, located in Mount Desert Island, Maine, has said that ``Whole Genome Sequencing has changed the lives of those we represent by enabling earlier and more accurate diagnosis, fostering more timely and appropriate medical care, and unlocking a host of social services to combat the educational and psycho-social complications that our children confront.''
By giving states an incentive to provide whole genome sequencing for eligible children through Medicaid, my legislation will ensure that more children and their families can obtain the right diagnosis and treatment from the start. The ``Ending the Diagnostic Odyssey Act'' has the support of more than one hundred patient advocacy organizations, including Alstrom Syndrome International, the Genetic Alliance, the Personalized Medicine Coalition, and many others. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
______
By Mr. THUNE (for himself, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Moran, Mrs.
Blackburn, Mr. Warner, and Mr. Schatz):
S. 2024. A bill to require that internet platforms give users the option to engage with a platform without being manipulated by algorithms driven by user-specific data; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Mr. THUNE. 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:
S. 2024
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 ``Filter Bubble Transparency Act''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Algorithmic ranking system.--The term ``algorithmic ranking system'' means a computational process, including one derived from algorithmic decision-making, machine learning, statistical analysis, or other data processing or artificial intelligence techniques, used to determine the order or manner that a set of information is provided to a user on a covered internet platform, including the ranking of search results, the provision of content recommendations, the display of social media posts, or any other method of automated content selection.
(2) Commission.--The term ``Commission'' means the Federal Trade Commission.
(3) Connected device.--The term ``connected device'' means a physical object that--
(A) is capable of connecting to the internet, either directly or indirectly through a network, to communicate information at the direction of an individual; and
(B) has computer processing capabilities for collecting, sending, receiving, or analyzing data.
(4) Covered internet platform.--
(A) In general.--The term ``covered internet platform'' means any public-facing website, internet application, or mobile application, including a social network site, video sharing service, search engine, or content aggregation service.
(B) Exclusions.--Such term shall not include a platform that--
(i) is wholly owned, controlled, and operated by a person that--
(I) for the most recent 6-month period, did not employ more than 500 employees;
(II) for the most recent 3-year period, averaged less than
$50,000,000 in annual gross receipts; and
(III) collects or processes on an annual basis the personal data of less than 1,000,000 individuals; or
(ii) is operated for the sole purpose of conducting research that is not made for profit either directly or indirectly.
(5) Input-transparent algorithm.--
(A) In general.--The term ``input-transparent algorithm'' means an algorithmic ranking system that does not use the user-specific data of a user to determine the order or manner that information is furnished to such user on a covered internet platform, unless the user-specific data is expressly provided to the platform by the user for such purpose.
(B) Inclusion of age-appropriate content filters.--Such term shall include an algorithmic ranking system that uses user-specific data to determine whether a user is old enough to access age-restricted content on a covered internet platform, provided that the system otherwise meets the requirements of subparagraph (A).
(C) Data provided for express purpose of interaction with platform.--For purposes of subparagraph (A), user-specific data that is provided by a user for the express purpose of determining the order or manner that information is furnished to a user on a covered internet platform--
(i) shall include user-supplied search terms, filters, speech patterns (if provided for the purpose of enabling the platform to accept spoken input or selecting the language in which the user interacts with the platform), saved preferences, and the user's current geographical location;
(ii) shall include data supplied to the platform by the user that expresses the user's desire that information be furnished to them, such as the social media profiles the user follows, the video channels the user subscribes to, or other sources of content on the platform the user follows;
(iii) shall not include the history of the user's connected device, including the user's history of web searches and browsing, geographical locations, physical activity, device interaction, and financial transactions; and
(iv) shall not include inferences about the user or the user's connected device, without regard to whether such inferences are based on data described in clause (i).
(6) Opaque algorithm.--
(A) In general.--The term ``opaque algorithm'' means an algorithmic ranking system that determines the order or manner that information is furnished to a user on a covered internet platform based, in whole or part, on user-specific data that was not expressly provided by the user to the platform for such purpose.
(B) Exception for age-appropriate content filters.--Such term shall not include an algorithmic ranking system used by a covered internet platform if--
(i) the only user-specific data (including inferences about the user) that the system uses is information relating to the age of the user; and
(ii) such information is only used to restrict a user's access to content on the basis that the individual is not old enough to access such content.
(7) Search syndication contract; upstream provider; downstream provider.--
(A) Search syndication contract.--The term ``search syndication contract'' means a contract or subcontract for the sale, license, or other right to access an index of web pages on the internet for the purpose of operating an internet search engine.
(B) Upstream provider.--The term ``upstream provider'' means, with respect to a search syndication contract, the person that grants access to an index of web pages on the internet to a downstream provider under the contract.
(C) Downstream provider.--The term ``downstream provider'' means, with respect to a search syndication contract, the person that receives access to an index of web pages on the internet from an upstream provider under such contract.
(8) User-specific data.--The term ``user-specific data'' means information relating to an individual or a specific connected device that would not necessarily be true of every individual or device.
SEC. 3. REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW USERS TO SEE UNMANIPULATED
CONTENT ON INTERNET PLATFORMS.
(a) In General.--Beginning on the date that is 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, it shall be unlawful--
(1) for any person to operate a covered internet platform that uses an opaque algorithm unless the person complies with the requirements of subsection (b); or
(2) for any upstream provider to grant access to an index of web pages on the internet under a search syndication contract that does not comply with the requirements of subsection (c).
(b) Opaque Algorithm Requirements.--
(1) In general.--The requirements of this subsection with respect to a person that operates a covered internet platform that uses an opaque algorithm are the following:
(A) The person provides notice to users of the platform that the platform uses an opaque algorithm that makes inferences based on user-specific data to select the content the user sees. Such notice shall be presented in a clear, conspicuous manner on the platform whenever the user interacts with an opaque algorithm for the first time, and may be a one-time notice that can be dismissed by the user.
(B) The person makes available a version of the platform that uses an input-transparent algorithm and enables users to easily switch between the version of the platform that uses an opaque algorithm and the version of the platform that uses the input-transparent algorithm by selecting a prominently placed icon, which shall be displayed wherever the user interacts with an opaque algorithm.
(2) Nonapplication to certain downstream providers.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect to an internet search engine if--
(A) the search engine is operated by a downstream provider with fewer than 1,000 employees; and
(B) the search engine uses an index of web pages on the internet to which such provider received access under a search syndication contract.
(c) Search Syndication Contract Requirement.--The requirements of this subsection with respect to a search syndication contract are that--
(1) as part of the contract, the upstream provider makes available to the downstream provider the same input-transparent algorithm used by the upstream provider for purposes of complying with subsection (b)(1)(B); and
(2) the upstream provider does not impose any additional costs, degraded quality, reduced speed, or other constraint on the functioning of such algorithm when used by the downstream provider to operate an internet search engine relative to the performance of such algorithm when used by the upstream provider to operate an internet search engine.
SEC. 4. ENFORCEMENT BY FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION.
(a) Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices.--A violation of this Act by an operator of a covered internet platform shall be treated as a violation of a rule defining an unfair or deceptive act or practice prescribed under section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 57a(a)(1)(B)).
(b) Powers of Commission.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (3), the Federal Trade Commission shall enforce this Act in the same manner, by the same means, and with the same jurisdiction, powers, and duties as though all applicable terms and provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.) were incorporated into and made a part of this Act.
(2) Privileges and immunities.--Except as provided in paragraph (3), any person who violates this Act shall be subject to the penalties and entitled to the privileges and immunities provided in the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.).
(3) Common carriers and nonprofit organizations.--Notwithstanding section 4, 5(a)(2), or 6 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 44, 45(a)(2), 46) or any jurisdictional limitation of the Commission, the Commission shall also enforce this Act, in the same manner provided in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this paragraph, with respect to--
(A) common carriers subject to the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 151 et seq.) and Acts amendatory thereof and supplementary thereto; and
(B) organizations not organized to carry on business for their own profit or that of their members.
(4) Authority preserved.--Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit the authority of the Commission under any other provision of law.
____________________
Alerts Sign-up