    [Senate Document 109-35]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

    From the Senate Documents Online via GPO Access
    [wais.access.gpo.gov]

    From the Senate Documents Online via GPO Access
    [wais.access.gpo.gov]

                                       S. Doc. 109-35

                        TRIBUTES TO HON. JAMES M. TALENT

                               James M. Talent

                           U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSOURI

                                    TRIBUTES

                               IN THE CONGRESS OF

                               THE UNITED STATES

                     James M. Talent

                            Tributes

                      Delivered in Congress

                          James M. Talent

                    United States Congressman

                             1993-2001

                       United States Senator

                             2002-2007

                  U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
                         WASHINGTON : 2007

                    Compiled under the direction

                               of the

                    Joint Committee on Printing

                               CONTENTS

                 Biography.............................................
                                                                          v
                 Farewell to the Senate................................
                                                                       xiii
                 Proceedings in the Senate:
                    Tributes by Senators:
                        Alexander, Lamar, of Tennessee.................
                                                                          4
                        Allen, George, of Virginia.....................
                                                                          5
                        Bond, Christopher S., of Missouri..............
                                                                          8
                        Bunning, Jim, of Kentucky......................
                                                                         17
                        Clinton, Hillary Rodham, of New York...........
                                                                         11
                        Collins, Susan M., of Maine....................
                                                                         18
                        DeWine, Mike, of Ohio..........................
                                                                         11
                        Dodd, Christopher J., of Connecticut...........
                                                                         11
                        Dole, Elizabeth, of North Carolina.............
                                                                         20
                        Durbin, Richard, of Illinois...................
                                                                          6
                        Enzi, Michael B., of Wyoming...................
                                                                         14
                        Frist, William H., of Tennessee................
                                                                         18
                        Hagel, Chuck, of Nebraska......................
                                                                          3
                        Hatch, Orrin G., of Utah.......................
                                                                         12
                        Hutchison, Kay Bailey, of Texas................
                                                                         17
                        Kyl, Jon, of Arizona...........................
                                                                         11
                        Landrieu, Mary L., of Louisiana................
                                                                         11
                        Nelson, Bill, of Florida.......................
                                                                          5
                        Reed, Jack, of Rhode Island....................
                                                                          4
                        Salazar, Ken, of Colorado......................
                                                                          6
                        Snowe, Olympia J., of Maine....................
                                                                         16
                        Stevens, Ted, of Alaska........................
                                                                         18
                        Warner, John, of Virginia......................
                                                                          7
                                          Biography

                   Senator Jim Talent was born and raised in Des Peres, MO.
                 He graduated from Kirkwood High School in 1973 and
                 attended Washington University in St. Louis, where he
                 received the Arnold J. Lien Prize as the most outstanding
                 undergraduate in political science. He graduated Order of
                 the Coif from the University of Chicago Law School in 1981
                 and clerked for Judge Richard Posner of the U.S. Court of
                 Appeals from 1982 through 1983. Jim and his wife, Brenda,
                 were married in 1984. They have three children: Michael,
                 Kate, and Chrissy.
                   In 1984, at the age of 28, Senator Talent was elected to
                 the Missouri House of Representatives, where he served for
                 8 years and succeeded in passing numerous pieces of
                 legislation, including legislative efforts to build roads,
                 toughen drug laws, secure taxpayer rights and reduce
                 taxes. At the age of 32, Senator Talent was unanimously
                 chosen by his colleagues as the minority leader, the
                 highest ranking Republican leadership position in the
                 Missouri House. He served in that capacity until 1992 when
                 he was elected to Congress from Missouri's Second
                 District.
                   As a freshman Congressman, Jim Talent introduced the
                 Real Welfare Reform Act of 1994, which subsequently became
                 the basis for the historic bipartisan welfare reform bill,
                 the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of
                 1996. The legislation has resulted in 4.2 million people
                 moving from dependency on the government to jobs and self-
                 sufficiency.
                   Senator Talent served for 8 years on the Armed Services
                 Committee. In that capacity, he waged a long battle
                 against both the Clinton administration and budget hawks
                 in his own party to protect America's armed forces from
                 cuts in size and funding. Also as a freshman, Senator
                 Talent formed a special congressional committee to address
                 the decline in readiness of America's military.
                   Senator Talent was a member of the House Armed Services
                 Committee in 1997 when, in order to save money, the
                 Republican leadership of that committee attempted to
                 discontinue production of the Missouri-built F-18 Super
                 Hornet. This carrier-based aircraft was the Navy's top
                 acquisition priority for a number of years running and was
                 considered the key to the ability of the United States to
                 project power through its aircraft carriers in the decades
                 to come. The effort to discontinue the aircraft succeeded
                 in subcommittee, but Senator Talent led an initiative
                 against his own party leadership to restore the aircraft
                 in full committee. That effort succeeded on a close,
                 bipartisan vote, as the full committee overruled its own
                 chairman and subcommittee--a highly unusual outcome in
                 Congress.
                   The F-18 Super Hornet has since exceeded all
                 expectations and has become the linchpin of naval
                 aviation. The aircraft continues to earn the wholehearted
                 praise of Navy pilots for its performance off the USS
                 Abraham Lincoln and in the skies over Iraq. The Super
                 Hornet directly employs nearly 10,000 people in Missouri
                 and Senator Talent's initiative helped sustain and create
                 thousands of jobs for Missourians.
                   For 8 years, Senator Talent served on the House Small
                 Business Committee. In 1997, he was named chairman of the
                 committee where he was the youngest chairman in Congress.
                 In that capacity he fought successfully for tax and
                 regulatory relief for small business people across
                 America. In particular, he succeeded in permitting small
                 business men and women to deduct the cost of their health
                 insurance, restoring the tax deduction for those operating
                 businesses at home, helping women start their own
                 businesses and bolstering loan programs to help
                 individuals who want to start their own small businesses.
                 During this period the Congress also took the first steps
                 toward eliminating the estate tax--one of Senator Talent's
                 priorities.
                   He twice passed out of the U.S. House of Representatives
                 Association Health Plans legislation that would permit
                 small business people to join together and buy health
                 insurance through their trade associations--legislation
                 that would reduce by millions the number of uninsured
                 people in the country without any cost to the taxpayer.
                   Under Senator Talent's leadership, the Small Business
                 Committee became the most bipartisan in the House. Senator
                 Talent constantly promoted the idea that small business is
                 the avenue of opportunity for people of all backgrounds
                 and socio-economic status. In addition, as chairman,
                 Senator Talent was scrupulous in respecting the
                 prerogatives of all the members of the Small Business
                 Committee, including those of the other party. As a
                 result, the committee passed an overwhelming number of
                 bills without a single dissenting Democrat vote, which
                 made Senator Talent's committee one of the most effective
                 in the 106th Congress.
                   Senator Talent fought to preserve and protect Social
                 Security and voted to strengthen and save Medicare. He
                 voted to make prescription drugs affordable and available
                 for all seniors. In addition, Senator Talent was an
                 original co-sponsor of the first Patients' Bill of Rights
                 that passed the House in 1998, and was selected to serve
                 on the Patients' Bill of Rights conference committee in
                 2000.
                   For 6 years Senator Talent served on the House Education
                 and Workforce Committee. He was a consistent advocate of
                 safe schools and empowering parents and teachers through
                 greater local control. In 2000, Senator Talent passed
                 legislation to allow public school authorities to remove
                 from the classroom students who possessed or used illegal
                 drugs or committed aggravated assault in school.
                   Senator Talent believes that the American dream is real
                 for everyone, and he has worked to keep the commitment
                 made to veterans for their service to America. Senator
                 Talent introduced legislation that now offers small
                 business loans to more than half a million Missouri
                 veterans and 24 million veterans nationwide. He championed
                 the Missing Service Persons Act that expanded the legal
                 rights of the families of POWs and the missing in action,
                 so that the Department of Defense must on a regular basis
                 reexamine each individual case.
                   Senator Talent joined with former Representative J.C.
                 Watts (R-OK), former Representative Floyd Flake (D-NY),
                 and Representative Danny Davis (D-IL) to design the most
                 comprehensive anti-poverty initiatives ever considered by
                 Congress. The Community Renewal Act was crafted to empower
                 local neighborhood groups, pastors and community leaders
                 by providing the tools they need to create good jobs,
                 decent housing, new businesses and safe neighborhoods.
                 After 5 years of hard work, the legislation was signed
                 into law by President Bill Clinton who lauded Senator
                 Talent for his bipartisan efforts to reduce poverty in
                 America.
                   Senator Talent led the effort to allow our producers to
                 add value to their commodities through innovative
                 agriculture enterprises. He fought for agriculture
                 assistance centers and tax incentives that would aid our
                 producers, help bolster the economy and create jobs in
                 rural America.
                   Senator Talent has been a leader in the fight for
                 important transportation and infrastructure projects in
                 Missouri and he has succeeded in raising the visibility of
                 the road issue as a safety issue. He spearheaded efforts
                 to secure the construction of four Missouri levees and to
                 improve Mississippi River infrastructure in the State's
                 Second Congressional District.
                   Senator Talent campaigned for the U.S. Senate on a
                 platform of health care, job creation, economic growth and
                 national defense. Missourians elected him to serve the
                 State in the U.S. Senate in November 2002. Previously,
                 Senator Talent served 8 years in the U.S. House of
                 Representatives (1993-2001) and 8 years in the Missouri
                 House (1985-1992). During his service in the Senate,
                 Senator Talent passed over 30 pieces of bipartisan
                 legislation into law.
                   Senator Talent served on four key Senate committees:
                 Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry; Armed Services;
                 Energy and Natural Resources; and the Special Committee on
                 Aging.
                   As a freshman Senator, he held numerous Senate
                 leadership positions. Senator Talent was the chairman of
                 the Armed Services Seapower Subcommittee and the chairman
                 of the Agriculture Committee's Subcommittee on Marketing,
                 Inspection, and Product Promotion. In addition, Senator
                 Talent was a member of President Bush's Export Council,
                 the Senate Republican Task Force on Health Care Costs and
                 the Uninsured, and he was elected to serve as a deputy
                 whip.
                   As Missouri's health care Senator, Talent introduced the
                 Small Business Health Fairness Act to increase access to
                 health care for small business owners and their employees
                 through Association Health Plans (AHPs). The bill would
                 provide health insurance for millions of uninsured
                 Americans by allowing small business men and women to
                 purchase health care plans for themselves and their
                 employees through trade associations.
                   To help more than 70,000 individuals, mostly African
                 Americans, with Sickle Cell Disease, Senator Talent and
                 Senator Chuck Schumer passed into law the Sickle Cell
                 Disease Treatment Act to help expand treatment and
                 services for patients with this disease. This legislation
                 was called the most significant Sickle Cell Disease
                 legislation passed in a generation.
                   As a member of the Armed Services Committee, Senator
                 Talent led efforts to increase defense spending and
                 provide for our men and women in uniform.
                   Senator Talent and Senator Lieberman led the successful
                 fight to save the C-17 Globemaster Program. The C-17 is
                 the finest military transport in the world. It is able to
                 carry troops, vehicles and supplies to any point on the
                 globe making its reliability and versatility unmatched.
                 The Senators worked across the aisle to secure $2.1
                 billion for the purchase of 10 additional aircraft to
                 extend the production line, saving thousands of Missouri
                 jobs.
                   In addition, Senator Talent, along with Senator Hillary
                 Clinton, passed the Military Health Readiness Act which
                 required pre- and post-deployment screenings for our
                 troops. This law addresses a major health care issue that
                 arose from the first Gulf war, in which some service men
                 and women returned home with symptoms of an illness
                 commonly referred to as Gulf war illness. The Talent-
                 Clinton measure provides a before and after snapshot of
                 the medical fitness of every service member deployed to a
                 theater of war so the results can then be compared to help
                 determine whether or not an individual, or their unit, was
                 exposed to a dangerous substance or pathogen.
                   Senator Talent and Senator Bill Nelson passed into law
                 the Servicemembers Anti-Predatory Lending Protection Act
                 which stops predatory payday lending practices targeted at
                 our service men and women by limiting the rate that payday
                 lenders can charge soldiers and their spouses for a loan.
                 A coalition of more than 75 veterans, civil rights, and
                 consumer organizations supported the legislation.
                   To ensure our Nation is able to produce the most up-to-
                 date equipment for the men and women who defend the United
                 States, Senator Talent introduced and passed legislation
                 directing the Army to develop a comprehensive plan to
                 modernize the munitions production facilities in the
                 United States. Much of the materiel and manufacturing
                 equipment at our Nation's munitions facilities is more
                 than 60 years old. This legislation called on the Army to
                 develop a strategic plan to modernize these important
                 manufacturing facilities to increase capacity, further
                 improve quality, and ensure their continued reliability.
                   Senator Talent sought to increase transportation
                 infrastructure funding by partnering with Senator Ron
                 Wyden to push their $50 billion Build America bonds
                 legislation. They successfully included $15 billion in
                 highway infrastructure bonds in the 2005 highway bill,
                 which will provide innovative financing for some of the
                 Nation's most challenging and critical transportation
                 projects.
                   A member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, Senator
                 Talent was a champion of measures to encourage the
                 production of alternative fuels to decrease America's
                 dependence on foreign oil and encourage investment and job
                 creation in rural America. Senator Talent and Senator
                 Blanche Lincoln passed legislation expanding the small
                 ethanol producer tax credit to those who produce up to 60
                 million gallons of ethanol annually and establish the tax
                 credit for small biodiesel producers who make up to 60
                 million gallons of biodiesel per year. He also worked
                 closely with Senator Barack Obama to pass a law to
                 encourage greater availability of alternative fuels.
                   As a member of the Energy Committee, Senator Talent
                 supported a pro-jobs, pro-growth energy bill to help
                 stimulate the economy, reduce energy prices, and increase
                 our energy independence. In summer 2005, Senator Talent
                 led the fight to add a renewable fuels standard to the
                 energy bill. Senator Talent succeeded and now 7.5 billion
                 gallons of renewable fuels like ethanol and biodiesel must
                 be added to the Nation's fuel supply by 2012, decreasing
                 America's dependence on foreign oil and creating thousands
                 of jobs.
                   Working with Senator Dianne Feinstein, Senator Talent
                 succeeded in passing the toughest, most comprehensive
                 anti-methamphetamine bill ever enacted into law. The
                 Combat Meth Act restricts nationally the ingredients
                 needed to cook methamphetamine. It also provides critical
                 tools to help law enforcement fight meth in our
                 communities. The President signed the Talent-Feinstein
                 Combat Meth Act into law in 2006.
                   Senator Talent successfully passed a measure as part of
                 the bankruptcy reform law that prevents corporate officers
                 who commit fraud in running a corporation and others from
                 defrauding their creditors in so-called ``asset protection
                 trusts.'' Prior to the passage of Talent's law, if a
                 corporate executive was convicted of a crime, victims were
                 virtually helpless to go after resources transferred into
                 a trust. Talent's amendment allowed victims to go after
                 any resource transferred into the trust by a corporate
                 criminal, preventing fraudulent transfers to these trusts.
                   Senator Talent and Senator Christopher Dodd introduced
                 and passed out of the Senate the Emmett Till Unsolved
                 Civil Rights Crime Act to create a ``cold case'' unit
                 within the Department of Justice to investigate and
                 prosecute unsolved murders from the civil rights era. The
                 legislation was supported by civil rights leaders
                 including Alvin Sykes and the family members of victims
                 who have actively sought justice in these cases.
                   Minority small business owners who have often been on
                 the losing side when it comes to competing for Federal
                 Government contracts got some relief due to legislation
                 sponsored by Senator Talent and signed into law. Senator
                 Talent's legislation saves minority small business owners
                 thousands of dollars by lifting a very significant
                 paperwork burden off of minority contractors who wish to
                 do business with the Government. Because of Talent's
                 efforts, once a disadvantaged small business is certified
                 at the Federal level it no longer will have to go through
                 recertification at the State and local levels. This new
                 law specifically applies to small businesses who qualify
                 for the Small Business Administration's Section 8(a)
                 Program, a business development program to help small
                 disadvantaged businesses compete in the American economy
                 and access the Federal procurement market.
                   Senator Talent successfully fought to reauthorize the
                 Nation's welfare programs based on the sound values of
                 healthy families and work participation. The
                 reauthorization of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
                 passed in 2006 and increased work participation by
                 requiring 50 percent of the current caseload to be engaged
                 in work activities. Most States had met the targets of the
                 1996 law and by 2006 had no incentive to extend the
                 benefits of work to able-bodied people who remain on the
                 rolls. This enhancement would help more individuals
                 achieve independence through work. The law also provides
                 millions for healthy marriage promotion over the next 5
                 years, strengthening American families.
                                   Farewell to the Senate
                                 Thursday, December 7, 2006

                   Mr. TALENT. Mr. President, my great friend and colleague
                 from Missouri [Mr. Bond] has an Intelligence Committee
                 meeting to go to. So he went ahead and gave his kind
                 tribute [see page 8] before I give my speech, and those
                 who are not aware of that may have thought that maybe they
                 would be able to get in short tributes and avoid the long
                 farewell speech. That is not true.
                   I will devote my time to a substantive and very
                 important subject--the appropriate level of funding for
                 America's military. It is an issue that I have worked on
                 and fought for since I went to the House of
                 Representatives in 1993.
                   I am grateful for my friend's remarks, and I want to say
                 that I have always enjoyed serving in legislatures, in
                 part because of the collegial nature of the service. When
                 you are done, yes--it is the legislation that you worked
                 on that you want people to remember, but what you remember
                 are the friendships and the associations and the bonds
                 that you have made. And, fortunately, those do not end
                 with your service. I look forward to continuing to visit
                 with my friends in the Senate for years to come. I hope to
                 be able to work with them in other venues on issues of
                 importance to America. Nothing is more important for
                 America than her security.
                   Mr. President, America has the most capable military in
                 the world by a large margin; in fact we have the best
                 military that has ever served any nation at any time in
                 human history. We should be proud of that; we should
                 especially be proud of the men and women who make
                 America's military what it is. But it would be wrong for
                 us to believe that because our military is the best in the
                 world or even the best ever, that it is as capable as it
                 needs to be. True, America is many times stronger than
                 other nations, but its responsibilities are many times
                 greater as well. If Denmark's military is inadequate, it
                 doesn't matter that much, even to Denmark; if America's
                 military is inadequate, it matters tremendously, first to
                 America, but also to the hopes and aspirations of people
                 throughout the world.
                   We must understand the importance of this issue very
                 clearly, without the distortions of ideology, politics,
                 expediency, or wishful thinking. Like it or not, the
                 progress of the international order toward peace and
                 democracy depends on the reality and perception of
                 American power. Like it or not, America is the first
                 defender of freedom in the world and therefore always a
                 prime target for those who hate freedom. And like it or
                 not, while there are many tools in the basket of western
                 diplomacy, the underpinning of them all is an American
                 military establishment which the world knows is capable of
                 swiftly, effectively and at minimal cost defeating every
                 substantial threat to our security and to our freedom.
                   Judged by this standard--the only appropriate standard--
                 the situation is very grave. I have substantial doubt--as
                 good as the men and women are--whether our current
                 military establishment is strong enough. Because of
                 decisions over the last 15 years driven more by budgetary
                 than military considerations, our Army and Navy may well
                 be too small, and much of the equipment in all the
                 services is too old and increasingly unreliable.
                   Whatever the current status of the military may be,
                 there can be no doubt that without a substantial increase
                 in procurement spending beginning now and sustained over
                 the next 5 to 10 years--an increase, I suggest to the
                 Senate today, that must be measured not in billions but in
                 tens of billions of dollars above current estimates every
                 year--our military will be set back for a generation. We
                 will not be able to modernize our forces to the degree
                 necessary to preserve our security with the necessary
                 margin of safety.
                   I said that our current military is too small and
                 inadequately equipped to execute the national military
                 strategy. I will not go into detail on this point because
                 my main focus is on the future, but a brief explanation is
                 warranted. The world is, on balance, at least as dangerous
                 today as it was at the end of the cold war. And we may
                 thank God we are no longer in danger of a massive nuclear
                 attack from the former Soviet Union, nor is a major land
                 war in Europe likely.
                   Against this, however, we are engaged in a global war on
                 terror that will continue for years to come. The end of
                 the cold war led to the emergence of dangerous regional
                 conflicts, such as the conflicts in the Balkans. We are in
                 greater danger today of a rogue missile attack than ever
                 before, and China is emerging as a peer competitor much
                 faster than anyone believed.
                   These conditions either did not exist, or like the
                 conflicts in the former Yugoslavia, were suppressed during
                 the cold war. As a result, the operational tempo of our
                 conventional forces--and that means the rate, intensity
                 and duration of their deployment--was far higher beginning
                 in the mid-1990s, even before September 11, than it had
                 ever been during the cold war. Yet at the beginning of the
                 1990s, our forces were 30 to 40 percent bigger than today.
                 For example, the active-duty Army was cut from 18
                 divisions at the time of Desert Storm to only 10 divisions
                 by 1994. Don't we wish that we had those additional
                 divisions today to relieve the pressure in Iraq? The Navy
                 has gone from 576 ships in the late 1980s to 278 ships
                 today.
                   At the same time, procurement budgets have been cut
                 substantially, far greater than the cuts in force
                 structure warranted. The contrast in the average annual
                 procurement of major equipment from two periods--1975 to
                 1990 and from 1991 to 2000--is startling. For example, we
                 purchased an average of 78 scout and attack helicopters
                 each year from 1975 to 1990, and only 7 each year from
                 1991 to 2000. We purchased an average of 238 Air Force
                 fighters each year from 1975 to 1990, and an average of
                 only 28 each year from 1991 to 2000. We purchased five
                 tanker aircraft each year from 1975 to 1990, an average of
                 only one per year from 1991 to 2000.
                   The implications for these dramatic reductions are
                 profound. Older platforms--that is what the military calls
                 ships, planes, and vehicles--are rather tired and not
                 replaced, which means that force structure is reduced.
                 Military capabilities are reduced. If platforms are not
                 replaced, the average age of the fleet increases,
                 readiness levels drop, and the cost of maintaining the
                 smaller, older inventory climbs rapidly because
                 maintenance costs increase.
                   For these reasons, I suggest that the current force
                 today is too small and its equipment too old, relative to
                 the requirements of our national military strategy. That
                 strategy calls for a military capable of defending the
                 homeland, sustaining four peacekeeping engagements, and
                 fighting two large-scale regional conflicts, at least, at
                 approximately the same time. We are supposed to be able to
                 do all that at once. I believe the requirements of our
                 military are actually greater than this, but in any event,
                 we cannot execute even these commitments, and we certainly
                 will not be able to do so in the future, within an
                 acceptable level of risk, unless at least the Army is made
                 bigger and unless all three services have the money to
                 robustly recapitalize their major platforms with the most
                 modern equipment.
                   For years, the various services, in response to pressure
                 from political authorities to reduce the budget below what
                 they needed, have delayed or cancelled new programs. They
                 have been reducing the number of new ships or planes they
                 say they need, kicking crucial decisions down the
                 budgetary road, robbing Peter to pay Paul, and otherwise
                 trying to avoid confronting the approaching funding
                 crisis.
                   That crisis is upon us now. We are entering the crucial
                 phase of recapitalization. Beginning with the next budget
                 and intensifying over the next 5 to 10 years, the services
                 are scheduled to bring online the new platforms that will
                 anchor American security for the next generation. No one
                 can say these programs are unneeded. The Navy must buy new
                 destroyers, must ramp up procurement of Virginia-class
                 submarines, must finalize the design and buy large numbers
                 of Littoral Combat Ships and design and build a new CG-X
                 cruiser.
                   The Air Force must buy large numbers of the F-22. That
                 is our new air-superiority fighter. We must maintain the
                 ability to have complete air superiority over any combat
                 theater. The Air Force must buy large numbers of Joint
                 Strike Fighters or equivalent aircraft. In addition, the
                 Air Force must buy out its airlift requirement. That is
                 how we transport personnel, equipment and supplies from
                 one place to another in the world. It must build a new
                 generation of tankers, must design and build a long-range
                 strike bomber to replace the B-52. Our B-52 inventory is
                 45 years old.
                   The Army must rebuild, modernize or replace almost its
                 entire capital stock of ground combat and support vehicles
                 including many of its tanks.
                   The current procurement budget for all three services is
                 $80.9 billion. Simple budgetary mathematics tells us that
                 the services cannot possibly meet their crucial
                 requirements without an average budget over the next 5 to
                 10 years that I estimate is at least $30 billion higher
                 than what we are now spending.
                   Perhaps I have gone into more detail than the Senate is
                 willing to indulge me in already, but I want to look at
                 some depth at the situation of the Navy. Here I speak from
                 what I know because I have been the chairman of the
                 Subcommittee on Seapower for the last 4 years. Currently,
                 there are 278 ships in the U.S. Navy. The Navy
                 shipbuilding plan calls for 326 ships by the year 2020,
                 eventually settling down to an average of 313 ships. The
                 plan actually calls for fewer aircraft carriers, a
                 substantial drop in attack submarines, and fewer major
                 surface combatants, but it attempts to make up for these
                 reductions with modern destroyers, more capable submarines
                 and what it calls pre-positioning ships that allow us to
                 establish sea bases from which to project forces ashore,
                 as well as a whole new class of smaller multi-mission
                 modular vessels called littoral combat ships. There is no
                 margin whatever for error in this plan. It is, at best,
                 the minimum necessary for our security.
                   The Chief of Naval Operations--that is the admiral who
                 leads the Navy--has estimated the plan will require a
                 shipbuilding budget of $13.3 billion for fiscal year 2008,
                 the upcoming budget year. That is $5 billion more than
                 what was spent this year on shipbuilding. His plan calls
                 for that figure to escalate to $17.5 billion by 2012. I
                 believe these figures are too conservative. It is a good-
                 faith effort to calculate what we need but too
                 conservative. I think the plan will require billions more
                 each year to execute. Both the Congressional Budget Office
                 and the Congressional Research Service agree. In any
                 event, I say on my oath as a Senator, that it will be
                 utterly impossible, at current levels of defense spending,
                 for the Navy to reach and sustain the $13.3 billion
                 figure, to say nothing of the even higher sums required in
                 the out-years of the 5-year defense plan and beyond.
                   Beginning no later than 2009, there will be a growing
                 shortfall in the shipbuilding accounts, in addition to an
                 annual shortfall of $1 billion to $2 billion in Navy
                 aviation procurement. I expect the total deficiency to be
                 no less than $45 billion over the fiscal year 2008 to
                 fiscal year 2016 period; and remember, this assumes that
                 the 313-ship Navy is sufficient to protect American
                 security, an optimistic assumption.
                   Lest the Senate get lost in all the figures, let me sum
                 it up this way. The Navy, responding to budgetary
                 pressure, has formulated a plan for a 313-ship Navy in the
                 future which, frankly, may be inadequate; the Navy
                 estimates a figure for funding the plan which independent
                 authorities, using long-term historical cost data, believe
                 is far too low. And yet without substantial increases in
                 the Navy's procurement budget, it is a dead certainty that
                 even that figure cannot be sustained.
                   As a practical matter, the expected shortfall means the
                 sacrifice of two to three attack subs and two to three
                 surface combatants, a reduction in purchases of the
                 littoral combat ships, and delays to the Sea Basing
                 Program and the new CG-X Cruiser Program, which is
                 necessary for missile defense.
                   The short of it is that the Navy needs at least an $8
                 billion increase per year in procurement above current
                 estimates. The Marines need about $3 billion more. It is
                 not necessary to go into the same level of detail with
                 regard to the budgetary picture for the other services.
                 The pain has been spread fairly evenly across the service,
                 so they are in roughly in the same situation. That means a
                 procurement shortfall over the next 10 years of at least
                 $30 billion per year adjusted for inflation. Most
                 independent experts believe the number is far higher.
                   For example, the CBO estimates that the overall defense
                 budget shortfall will be no less than $52 billion per
                 year. We should add to this the fact that the active-duty
                 Army is clearly too small, as we have learned in Iraq.
                 Even in an age of transformation and nonlinear
                 battlefields, there are still times when America needs to
                 put large numbers of boots on the ground, particularly in
                 the post-September 11 period. The United States needs the
                 ability to carry on sustained, large-scale peacekeeping or
                 low-intensity combat operations, without having to send
                 the same units three or four times to a combat theater
                 over the duration of a mission. A nation of our size and
                 strength should not have to use essentially its whole
                 active-duty Army, much of its Marine Corps, and many of
                 its Reserves to sustain 130,000 troops over time in a
                 combat view.
                   In 1992--which was right after Desert Storm--the Defense
                 Department stated a requirement of 12 active duty Army
                 divisions. That was before the increases in operational
                 tempo of the 1990s and before the global war on terror.
                 The Army should surely be at least 12 divisions today. It
                 costs approximately $2 billion to stand up and sustain an
                 addition to the Army or Marine Corps of division strength
                 so we need to invest $4 billion per year in increased
                 force structure for the Army, in addition to the $30
                 billion more in new procurement funding.
                   So to sustain our military over the next generation at
                 the appropriate level, we need to increase procurement
                 spending and spending on the size of the Army by about $34
                 billion per year. And that is above current baseline
                 estimates. It would have to be sustained over the life of
                 the current defense plan and beyond.
                   I want to emphasize that this is, of necessity, a
                 ballpark figure. It is always difficult to predict
                 precisely the cost of new programs--some of which are in
                 the design phase, particularly given the uncertainties
                 associated with developing technologies. We will be
                 acquiring this equipment over the next 10 to 20 years and
                 needs in technology are going to change. We must confront
                 the fact that whatever the necessary amount turns out
                 precisely to be, the procurement budgets we are projecting
                 today are fundamentally inadequate. We have to ramp up
                 spending. We must begin now. And we have to accept the
                 fact that it will not be cheap.
                   I also want to make clear that this additional $34
                 billion must come from an increased overall defense
                 budget. There may be some who say that it is possible to
                 cannibalize the rest of the defense budget to produce all
                 or most of this additional procurement funding. That is a
                 dangerous fantasy. The money cannot come from the
                 supplemental appropriations bills. Those are necessary to
                 pay the day-to-day costs of the war and may not have been
                 adequate to do that. The money cannot come from reducing
                 the readiness budget because that budget is overstressed
                 already. It cannot come from reducing the number of
                 service personnel because the military is already too
                 small. It can't come from reducing salary and benefits. We
                 have to retain the best people. Besides, Congress is far
                 more likely, and properly in my view, to increase
                 personnel benefits rather than reduce them. Take a look at
                 the last 7 years. Total spending on defense health care,
                 for example, increased from $17.5 billion in fiscal year
                 2000 to $37 billion in fiscal year 2006--an increase of
                 more than 100 percent over the last 7 years, appropriately
                 so.
                   The men and women of America's military deserve good
                 salaries and benefits, and so do those who are retired.
                 The savings from base closing is not going to supply the
                 additional funds. Those are highly speculative. They will
                 not occur, if at all, for many years, and they are
                 unlikely to be more than a billion dollars per year.
                   Some say we can save money by reducing congressional
                 earmarks or additions to the defense budget, and within
                 limits that is true. But the total of such earmarks is no
                 more than $3 billion to $4 billion per year.
                 Realistically, Congress is not going to give up all of
                 them, and at least some number of them are clearly
                 justified because they simply restore to the budget items
                 that our service chiefs desperately wanted and omitted
                 only because of budgetary pressure.
                   Still others will say we can get the necessary
                 additional funding by lowering the cost of new programs
                 through procurement reform. I am all for procurement
                 reform. I have been for it ever since Secretary Bill
                 Perry, who was a great Secretary of Defense, proposed it
                 over 10 years ago. We have had several waves of
                 procurement reform since then. Several Defense Secretaries
                 have all championed its virtues. We continue to hold
                 oversight hearings to pressure the defense industry to
                 lower costs. We keep trying to catch people in the
                 Department who might be violating procurement regulations.
                 I have chaired some of those hearings.
                   Meanwhile, the cost of new programs keeps going up. I
                 suggest the reasons have less to do with deficiencies in
                 the procurement system, bad as it is, than with the stress
                 on the industrial base and on the military caused by the
                 budgets that are consistently too low and unstable.
                   One of the arguments supporting reductions in force in
                 the past has been that transformational technology and
                 tactics can empower the military to do more with less. The
                 idea is to make each service member, each plane, ship, and
                 vehicle less vulnerable so we lose fewer of them, and more
                 lethal so we need fewer of them. Within limits, that is
                 sometimes true. But the best technology costs money, and
                 changing technology, tactics, and doctrine makes it more
                 difficult to fix stable requirements. Program instability
                 costs money, too.
                   Here is an example. The Navy originally planned to
                 procure 32 DD(X) next-generation destroyers. The ship has
                 a truly advanced design. It is a marvel of
                 transformational technology. But its unique capabilities
                 have driven the per ship cost to about $3 billion. As a
                 result, the Navy plans to procure only seven new
                 destroyers. The problem is that the complexity of the
                 ship's design, the unprecedented capabilities of the
                 vessel, and the high price of the best technologies, have
                 all driven up cost to the point where the ship is
                 impossible to procure in sufficient numbers at current
                 budget levels.
                   Another example: The Air Force desperately needs more
                 air lift, and it also needs a new tanker aircraft. The Air
                 Force shoulders much of the mobility mission, and it also
                 performs the mid-air refueling mission. Normally, the Air
                 Force would simply buy more C-17 aircraft. It is a
                 perfectly good, modern cargo aircraft. Then the Air Force
                 would design and procure a new tanker. But because the
                 service is under tremendous pressure to save money, it has
                 decided to develop a cargo-tanker, combining the two
                 missions into one aircraft. The service assures us that it
                 is not going to have any bells and whistles on the new
                 plane, and the aircraft will be low in cost.
                   Surely, the concept of a cargo-tanker allows the Air
                 Force to claim that it will be able to perform both of
                 these missions while relieving some of the pressure on its
                 budget. But, again, reality must and will eventually bite.
                 As requirements build and changing technologies force
                 changes in design, the odds are very high that the cost of
                 the new aircraft--if it is to do the combined mission it
                 is supposed to do-- will go up substantially.
                   The problem of cost is exacerbated by the stress on the
                 defense industrial base. Procurement budgets have been too
                 low for 15 years and because of budgetary pressure they
                 constantly change. The Department regularly projects what
                 it intends to procure in the out-years of its defense plan
                 but then often makes last-minute cuts and changes.
                   Under those circumstances, it is no surprise that
                 contractors are not investing sufficiently in the defense
                 industrial base. It is shrinking, and it is
                 undercapitalized. That means fewer competitors, more sole-
                 source contracts, less research, and, therefore, higher
                 costs. No amount of oversight, reform, or pressure on
                 procurement officials can change that.
                   The good news is that a robust and consistent commitment
                 to adequate funding would soon begin to reverse these
                 trends. Again, I am all for improvements in the way we
                 design and build new systems, and those improvements can
                 save money. But they cannot work miracles. Sufficient and
                 stable funding is not only consistent with transformation
                 and efficient use of the taxpayers' dollars, it is
                 necessary to both. If Congress were to commit to my
                 proposal, for example, the service chiefs and the defense
                 industry would know that substantial new money was
                 coming--enough to make it at least plausible they could
                 produce and acquire the systems they need. They could
                 budget for the long range, knowing that funding would be
                 stable. They could work together in a way that would
                 reduce costs instead of trying to pull money away from
                 other services or maneuver year to year just to keep vital
                 programs alive, and often in a way that ends up costing
                 the taxpayers more in the long run.
                   We must stop thinking that facing reality and funding
                 our military adequately is beyond the reach of this great
                 Nation. Yes, the Federal Government has fiscal problems.
                 Yes, the two major parties have very different views on
                 what to do about those problems, but nobody can or does
                 claim that the defense budget is the cause.
                   Right now, we are spending 3.8 percent of our gross
                 domestic product on the regular defense budget. That is a
                 very low percentage historically, far less than we spent
                 at any time during the cold war. Under President Carter,
                 we spent 4.6 percent of the GDP on national defense.
                   If we spent only 4.2 percent now, we could easily fund
                 what I have proposed. We would have a fighting chance to
                 support our service men and women with the equipment they
                 need and deserve. We could sustain the military power that
                 the last two Presidents have used to protect our freedom
                 and stabilize the post-cold-war world. We would send the
                 clearest possible message to both our friends and enemies,
                 and to those nations who are deciding now whether they are
                 going to be a friend or enemy, that whatever happens,
                 whatever the direction our foreign policy takes, the
                 United States has the ability to sustain our freedom and
                 the hope of freedom for the world.
                   To those who worry about the price of strength, I say
                 there is a greater price to be paid for weakness. How many
                 conflicts will we invite, how much instability will we
                 engender, if we allow this restless and troubled world to
                 doubt America's ability to defend herself?
                   Let's look at the risks of alternative courses of
                 action. If we adopt the course I suggest, and it turns out
                 that I was wrong, all we will have lost is a fraction of
                 our wealth that would be spent in this country on products
                 produced by our workers, for a margin of safety that, in
                 the end, we did not need. But if we stay on our current
                 course, and it turns out that I was right, how much will
                 we pay then in lost lives and treasure, fighting in
                 conflicts that a policy of strength would have deterred?
                   How big will the deficit become then, in a world made
                 less stable by American weakness? What effect will that
                 have on the economy, and not just the economy, but on the
                 hopes and opportunities of the next generation--our
                 children and our grandchildren--who have the right to
                 expect that we are looking out for them?
                   Twenty-five years ago, our country was also in a
                 difficult situation. Our enemies doubted American resolve.
                 They were challenging us on a number of fronts. We had
                 just gone through a period of chronic underfunding of the
                 military, probably worse than what has happened recently.
                 As a result, the force was hollow, unable to reliably
                 perform the missions necessary to protect America. That is
                 why the tragic Desert One Mission went so wrong in the
                 desert during the Iranian hostage crisis.
                   When President Reagan assumed office, he faced the
                 situation squarely and honestly, and with the support of a
                 Democratic House and Republican Senate, he secured two
                 double-digit increases in the overall defense budget, and
                 reasonable increases for several years thereafter. On the
                 strength of that bipartisan commitment, America's service
                 men and women and America's defense industrial base
                 transformed our military into the truly dominant force
                 that fought and won Operation Desert Storm.
                   A united government sent the message to friend and foe
                 alike that whatever our differences about foreign policy,
                 America was still willing to pay the price of freedom. It
                 is not too much to say that the decisions made in 1981 and
                 1982 laid the basis for the collapse of the Soviet Union,
                 the success of Operation Desert Storm, and the benefits of
                 peace and security that we enjoyed throughout the 1990s.
                   With this speech, I bring my career in the Senate to a
                 close. I believe I can do no greater service to my country
                 than to urge Senators not to be dissuaded by the counsels
                 of those who say that what I have proposed cannot be done.
                   At the beginning of my remarks I stated that America's
                 service men and women are the finest who have ever served
                 in any military on behalf of any nation at any time. I
                 should have included their families as well. I realized
                 that when today, just a few hours ago, I had the privilege
                 of meeting with Dana Lamberson and her two children, Kelsi
                 and Evan.
                   Mrs. Lamberson's husband, SFC Randall Lamberson, was
                 killed in Iraq only 8 months ago. Mrs. Lamberson told me
                 that before her husband deployed, their family openly
                 discussed the sacrifice which he, and they, might be
                 called on to make. I asked her how she was able to bear
                 her grief with such grace and fortitude. She told me that
                 when she was tempted to be discouraged, she remembered
                 what her husband had always said when times were tough:
                 that ``life is only as difficult as you make it.''
                   Mr. President, I have met thousands of Americans over
                 the last 4 years like the Lamberson family, not just
                 soldiers and their families, but people from every walk of
                 life, who live each day with courage, resilience, and
                 optimism. Because of them, I believe with all my heart
                 that America's time of leadership is not done.
                   I ask the Senate to honestly face the true cost of
                 defending this Nation. If we do, if we carry that burden
                 with confidence, we will find the weight of it to have
                 been a small thing compared to the blessings of peace and
                 liberty we will secure for ourselves, and the hope we will
                 give to freedom-loving people all over the world.
                   Mr. President, I cannot close without thanking my
                 dedicated staff who served the people of Missouri so well
                 over the last 4 years, who have kept me going, kept me on
                 time, who are largely responsible for the many pieces of
                 legislation which Senator Bond was kind enough to mention.
                 I just ask the Senate to indulge me for another moment or
                 two because I am going to read their names. I think they
                 deserve it: Mark Strand, my chief of staff; Cortney Brown,
                 my scheduler; Les Sealy, our great office manager who
                 always got us what we needed; Brian Anderson, our IT
                 manager. I am glad he understood it because I never do.
                   I thank our legislative staff: Brett Thompson,
                 legislative director; Faith Cristol, our great legislative
                 counsel; and my legislative assistants: Lindsey Neas,
                 Katie Smith, Heath Hall, Jesse Appleton, Katie Duckworth,
                 Christopher Papagianis, Shamed Dogan, and John Cox, who
                 works so hard and so well on veterans issues, a man who
                 has served this country in many different venues; Andy
                 Karellas, Martha Petkovich, and Sarah Cudworth, who did
                 legislative correspondence, grants, and case work; Peter
                 Henry, who managed the mail; Sarah Barfield, my staff
                 assistant; two great Navy fellows: CDR Dan Brintzinghoffer
                 and LCDR Lori Aguayo, two patriots and both outstanding
                 officers; and Mark Hegerle, my energy fellow who came over
                 from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission just in time
                 to help me make a real difference on the energy bill.
                   I want to thank our press shop: Rich Chrismer, my great
                 communications director; Erin Hamm, and Andrew Brandt.
                   Casework--we handled over 10,000 cases. I am a big
                 believer in casework. This is a big government, and
                 navigating it is hard, and if we could help, we wanted to
                 help. I thank Nora Breidenbach, Jenny Bickel, Abby
                 Pitlick, Debbie Dornfeld, and Jessica Van Beek.
                   And the State staff, we always tried to integrate the
                 work of the State staff and the Washington staff, and I
                 think we did it. I thank Gregg Keller, our State director;
                 in St. Louis: Kacky Garner, my district director; Peggy
                 Barnhart; Rachel McCombs; and Angel McCormick Franks; in
                 Kansas City: Joe Keatley, my great district director;
                 Danny Pfeifer; Emily Seifers; Greg Porter; and Erick
                 Harris; in Jefferson City: Donna Spickert, who was the
                 State capitol director; and Becky Almond, my in-State
                 scheduler, as well as a great staff assistant; in
                 Springfield: Terry Campbell, the district director;
                 Christopher Stone; and Coriann Gastol; and in Cape
                 Girardeau: Jeff Glenn, who directed that office; and Liz
                 Mainord.
                   I also want to thank, as other Senators have done, my
                 family, my wife, obviously, in particular, who has shared
                 the highs and lows of this job, and my wonder kids.
                   Mr. President, it remains only for me to thank my
                 colleagues in the Senate for the many kindnesses, personal
                 and professional, which they have shown me and my family
                 over the last 4 years.
                   Mr. President, I yield the floor.

                                          TRIBUTES

                                             TO

                                       JAMES M. TALENT
                                  Proceedings in the Senate
                                                  Tuesday, December 5, 2006
                   Mr. HAGEL. Mr. President ... As we recognize, it is a
                 distinct privilege and high honor to serve our country in
                 any capacity, and certainly none higher than in uniform.
                 But it is especially important that we recognize those who
                 have given years of their lives, sacrificing their
                 families, their own time, to help make a better world for
                 all of us. I know of no capacity in which we serve our
                 country that has given those who have had this rare
                 opportunity to serve in the Senate anything more noble
                 than trying to shape a better world from this Senate.
                   These individuals who will leave the Senate, some on
                 their own terms, some on the terms of the election, but,
                 nonetheless, in their own specific way have contributed a
                 great deal to this country.
                   I take a few minutes to recognize each. ...
                   Senator Jim Talent from Missouri has had 14 years of
                 service in the House and Senate. I worked very closely
                 with Senator Talent on his bill, the Combat
                 Methamphetamine Act. I believe it is one of the most
                 significant, relevant, important bills to pass the 109th
                 Congress. He, too, will be missed. No one worked harder
                 than Jim Talent for the interests of his State. He
                 understands agriculture, he understands energy like very
                 few in his State. He began his service to his country and
                 to the State of Missouri at the age of 28, when he was
                 elected to the House of Representatives. We will continue
                 to hear more from Jim Talent. ...
                   Mr. President, in conclusion, it is not easy to put
                 one's self on the firing line and offer one's self as a
                 candidate for any office. It takes a certain amount of
                 courage and, I suspect, a little dose of insanity. But
                 nonetheless individuals who believe deeply enough to
                 commit themselves to a cause greater than their own self-
                 interests need to be recognized. Having nothing to do with
                 me or you or any one individual, but it is the essence of
                 our country, it is the very fabric of our democracy that
                 makes it all work and probably gives rise to, more than
                 any one reason, why we have been such a successful nation
                 for over 200 years--because people from all walks of life,
                 in every community, in every State, offer themselves for
                 office. Whether it is a mayor, a Governor, city
                 councilman, county official, a sheriff, these individuals
                 deserve recognition.
                   We all make mistakes. That is who we are. But in the
                 end, it is not unlike what Teddy Roosevelt once referred
                 to in his magnificent quote about the man in the arena.
                 And it is the man and the woman in the arena who change
                 our lives. It makes a better world that shapes history,
                 that defines our destiny. And for these individuals who
                 will no longer have that opportunity to serve our country
                 in the Senate, we wish them well, we thank them, and we
                 tell them we are proud of them and their families and wish
                 them Godspeed.
                   Mr. President, I thank you for the time and yield the
                 floor.
                                                Wednesday, December 6, 2006
                   Mr. REED. Mr. President, this is an opportunity to
                 recognize the service of several of our colleagues who are
                 departing from the Senate. To Senator Jeffords, Senator
                 Frist, Senator DeWine, Senator Talent, Senator Santorum,
                 Senator Burns, and Senator Allen, let me express my
                 appreciation for their service to their States and their
                 service to the Nation and wish them well. ...
                   To all my colleagues who served and conclude their
                 service, let me once again express deep appreciation for
                 their friendship and for their service to the Nation.
                   I yield the floor.

                   Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, we are coming to the end
                 of the session and 10 of our colleagues are retiring. I
                 want to say a word about them ...
                   Or Jim Talent, who was the outstanding political science
                 student at Washington University in St. Louis when he was
                 there. No one would be surprised to learn that. ...
                   When the most recent class of Senators was sworn into
                 office nearly 2 years ago, in the gallery were three
                 women. One was the grandmother of Barack Obama. She was
                 from Kenya. One was the mother of Senator Salazar, a 10th
                 generation American. One was the mother of Mel Martinez,
                 the new Republican National Committee chairman, who, with
                 her husband, put her son on an airplane when he was 14
                 years old and sent him from Cuba to the United States, not
                 knowing if she would ever see him again.
                   In a way, each one of us who is here is an accident.
                 None of us knew we would be here. Each of us is privileged
                 to serve, and one of the greatest privileges is to serve
                 with our colleagues. We will miss them and we are grateful
                 for their service.
                   I yield the floor.

                   Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, as the time for my departure
                 from the Senate draws near, on behalf of the greatest
                 blessing in my life, my wife Susan, and on behalf of
                 myself, I thank all of my colleagues for their many
                 courtesies and friendships that have been forged during
                 the past 6 years. I offer a few concluding reflections
                 about our time here together, as well as about the future
                 of our Republic. ...

                   Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I see others who
                 wish to speak, and I will make a couple of brief comments.
                   In the comments of the Senator from Virginia [Mr.
                 Allen], his final couple of comments recalled for me a
                 statement made in the closing of the Constitutional
                 Convention in Philadelphia, when on the back of the chair
                 of the presiding officer was a sunburst. Someone opined in
                 that Constitutional Convention: Dr. Franklin, is that a
                 rising sun or is it a setting sun? And Franklin ventured
                 to say that with the birth of the new Nation, with the
                 creation of the new Constitution, that he thought it was a
                 rising sun.
                   Indeed, it is that hope of which the Senator from
                 Virginia has just spoken that motivates this Senator from
                 Florida to get up and go to work every day, and to look at
                 this Nation's challenges, not as a Democratic problem or a
                 Republican problem, but as an American problem, that needs
                 to be solved in an American way instead of a partisan way.
                   We have had far too much partisanship over the last
                 several years across this land, and, indeed, in this
                 Chamber itself. And of the Senators who are leaving this
                 Chamber, I think they represent the very best of America,
                 and on occasion have risen in a bipartisan way. It has
                 been this Senator's great privilege to work with these
                 Senators: Allen of Virginia, Burns of Montana, Chafee of
                 Rhode Island, Dayton of Minnesota, DeWine of Ohio, Frist
                 of Tennessee, Jeffords of Vermont, Santorum of
                 Pennsylvania, Sarbanes of Maryland, Talent of Missouri.
                   As the Good Book in Ecclesiastes says: There is a time
                 to be born and a time to die. There is a time to get up,
                 and a time to go to bed. There is a time for a beginning,
                 and there is a time of ending.
                   For these Senators who are leaving, it is clearly not an
                 ending. It is an ending of this chapter in their lives,
                 but this Senator from Florida wanted to come and express
                 his appreciation for their public service, to admonish
                 those where admonishment is needed when this Chamber,
                 indeed, this Government, has gotten too partisan, but to
                 express this Senator's appreciation for the quiet moments
                 of friendship and reflection and respect in working
                 together, which is the glue that makes this Government
                 run.
                   Whether you call it bipartisanship, whether you call it
                 friendship, whether you call it mutual respect, whatever
                 you call it, the way you govern a nation as large and as
                 complicated and as diverse as our Nation is--as the Good
                 Book says: Come, let us reason together--that is what this
                 Senator tries to be about. And that is what this Senator
                 will try to continue to do in the new dawn of a new
                 Congress. So I wanted to come and express my appreciation
                 for those Senators who will not be here, for the great
                 public service they have rendered.
                   Mr. President, I am truly grateful for their personal
                 friendship and for their public service.
                   I yield the floor.

                   Mr. DURBIN. ... I wish all of my colleagues who are
                 retiring well as they begin the next chapters of their
                 careers.

                   Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to bid farewell
                 to several of my friends here in Washington. Too often we
                 get caught up here in the back-and-forth of politics and
                 lose sight of the contributions of those with whom we work
                 every day. It is only at moments such as these, at the end
                 of a cycle, that we have a moment to reflect on the
                 contributions of our colleagues. And while we may not
                 always see eye to eye, this Senate is losing several
                 admirable contributors who have made many sacrifices to
                 serve our democracy. ...
                   A number of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle
                 will be departing in January, as well. There is our
                 colleague from Virginia, Senator Allen, who wears, in my
                 opinion, the second best pair of boots in the Senate.
                 There is Senator Santorum of Pennsylvania, whose passion
                 is admirable and whose energy is always enviable. Also
                 leaving us is my colleague in the centrist Gang of 14 that
                 helped bring this Senate back from the abyss; Senator
                 DeWine of Ohio, who will head back to the Buckeye State
                 with my respect and admiration; and my friend Senator
                 Talent from Missouri, with whom I spent many hours in the
                 Agriculture Committee working to level the playing field
                 for America's farmers and ranchers. We will miss Senator
                 Chafee of Rhode Island's independence and his clear voice
                 for fiscal discipline in Washington. And we will miss
                 Senator Burns of Montana, who shares my passion for rural
                 America and who is headed home to Big Sky Country, back to
                 the Rockies that I know we both miss so much. ...
                   America, when held to its finest ideals, is more than a
                 place on the globe or a work in progress. It is the
                 inspiration to those around the world and here at home to
                 seek out excellence within themselves and their beliefs.
                 It has been a pleasure to work alongside each of these
                 gentlemen, who have helped me as I have found my way,
                 sometimes literally, through the halls of the Senate, in
                 the pursuit of these greater ideals that we all share:
                 security, prosperity, and an America that we leave better
                 than when we arrived. These ideals will resonate here long
                 after we all are gone and another generation stands in our
                 place making the decisions of its day.
                                                 Thursday, December 7, 2006
                   Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I have had the privilege of
                 being here for the 28th year beginning shortly. I
                 calculated not long ago that I have served with 261
                 individuals. I am not about to try and review all of the
                 many magnificent friendships I am privileged to have
                 through these years. Indeed, if one looks at the rewards,
                 of which there are many serving in this historic
                 institution, the Senate, it is the personal bonds, the
                 friendships that we so firmly cement and that will last a
                 lifetime as a consequence of our duties of serving the
                 United States of America and in our respective States.
                   We are called ``United States'' Senators. I often
                 believe it is the first obligation, our Nation, the
                 Republic for which it stands. ...
                   I would also like to pay tribute to nine other U.S.
                 Senators who will retire from the Senate in the coming
                 days. ...
                   Now, I would like to take a few moments to salute our
                 majority leader, Senator Frist, as well as Senators
                 Chafee, Burns, Santorum, DeWine, Jeffords, Talent, and
                 Dayton. Each and every one of these U.S. Senators has
                 served his State and his country with great distinction.
                   Without a doubt, I could speak at-length in honor of
                 each of these outstanding individuals. In light of time
                 constraints, however, and the fact that so many of my
                 colleagues wish to similarly pay tribute, I shall endeavor
                 to keep my remarks brief. ...
                   Over the past 4 years, I have been fortunate to have
                 been given the opportunity to work closely with Jim Talent
                 on the Senate Armed Services Committee. Since his first
                 day on the committee--Jim Talent has been one of the
                 hardest working committee members.
                   As chairman of the Seapower Subcommittee, Senator Talent
                 has been at the forefront of the committee's efforts to
                 strengthen the Navy's shipbuilding program, working
                 closely with the Chief of Naval Operations in the
                 formation of the CNO's plan for a 313-ship Navy. He showed
                 steadfast determination in working with the administration
                 and the Congress to secure the funding required to build
                 the future Navy; spearheading the effort to raise the top-
                 line for shipbuilding by over 20 percent during the course
                 of his tenure as Seapower chairman.
                   Senator Talent has also been passionate in his support
                 for the needs of our brave men and women in uniform;
                 championing quality-of-life and quality-of-service
                 initiatives. Most notably, he has been a strong advocate
                 for legislation that will put an end to predatory lending
                 practices against military personnel and their families.
                 ...
                   In conclusion, over the years I have served with each of
                 these 10 Senators, each has not only been a trusted
                 colleague, each has also been my friend. I will miss
                 serving with each of them in the Senate but know that each
                 will continue in public service in some capacity. I wish
                 each and every one of them well in the years ahead.
                   Mr. President, I see a number of colleagues here anxious
                 to speak, and I have taken generously of the time the
                 Presiding Officer has allowed me to speak.
                   I yield the floor.

                   Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise on the floor to pay
                 tribute to my very good friend and colleague, Senator Jim
                 Talent, who will be leaving the Senate next month.
                   I have known Jim for over 20 years, since he was
                 minority leader in the Missouri House of Representatives.
                 Throughout all these years, when he was in the State
                 legislature and in the House as chairman of the Small
                 Business Committee when I was chairman of the Senate Small
                 Business Committee, I found Jim to be unfailingly a man of
                 honesty, integrity, and hard work. He has been a wonderful
                 friend and colleague.
                   I am going to miss him very much, and many people in
                 Missouri are.
                   We all know that Washington can change a person, but it
                 hasn't changed Jim. Jim still has the same commonsense
                 Missouri values he brought with him to Washington. He
                 still has the same calm, polite demeanor. He still has
                 strong convictions and a work ethic. As I said to our
                 folks back home in Missouri, in an arena of show horses he
                 has been a work horse.
                   I was with him on the night he got the news that he lost
                 the campaign. He was a man of unfailingly good humor and
                 courage. And still, he thanked his Lord, his friends, and
                 graciously accepted his fate.
                   I have a feeling and hope that public service will see
                 much more of Jim Talent somewhere, sometime. And whatever
                 he decides to do in the public or in the private sector,
                 the qualities he has demonstrated to so many of us in the
                 Senate will carry with him.
                   He served in the Senate for only 4 years, but when you
                 look at his record of legislative achievements, he has had
                 so many positive impacts on people's lives it is hard to
                 believe he could cram all of that into 4 years.
                   He has been a leader on national security, energy, and
                 criminal justice.
                   As a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Jim
                 worked to extend production of the C-17 line, allowing
                 30,000 workers across the country to keep their jobs, and
                 more important, to give our military strategic lift
                 capability which they need to move troops and equipment to
                 very difficult to reach places.
                   Jim also cares about our troops in battle. He sponsored
                 legislation to end predatory lending to active service
                 members and their families. The new law just took effect 6
                 weeks ago. Some of our soldiers were paying almost 400
                 percent interest on money loaned to them. Thanks to Jim
                 Talent, the rates are now capped at 36 percent. I trust
                 that applies to the Marines as well.
                   Last year, Jim worked very hard to include a renewable
                 fuel provision in the energy bill. On a bipartisan basis,
                 under his leadership, the United States will produce up to
                 7\1/2\ billion gallons of renewable fuels with ethanol and
                 biodiesel. That will be implemented by 2012.
                   Jim's work in this area will only become more important
                 as we see in the future America continuing to face high
                 energy costs and our attempt to reduce our dependence on
                 foreign oil.
                   Another accomplishment Jim will be known for is
                 something which is extremely important in our State of
                 Missouri, and this work--again on a bipartisan basis with
                 the Senator from California--was to fight meth. Meth is a
                 drug that has been destroying lives and communities across
                 our State for many years and now even across the country.
                   The Combat Meth Act has helped stop the supply of meth
                 ingredients to dealers through the ban on over-the-counter
                 sales. You see a significant reduction in meth lab busts.
                 It shows that we are finally beginning to make progress
                 against this drug.
                   Obviously, I have to mention his other bipartisan
                 successes, such as the sickle cell disease bill and the
                 Emmett Till bill.
                   On a narrow focus, Jim and I have worked together on
                 many transportation and economic development projects to
                 serve our State of Missouri, including the Liberty
                 Memorial in Kansas City, the Page Avenue Extension in St.
                 Charles, and countless others throughout the State.
                   I should also mention that my friend Jim Talent has put
                 forward some terrific proposals that he has been working
                 on that have been enacted. His effort to allow small
                 business employers to pool together to form association
                 health plans comes to mind, and those of us who have been
                 working to change the law so that small business employees
                 and their families will have access to the same kind of
                 insurance benefits that employees of major corporations
                 have will not give up the fight. We are going to continue
                 with his great leadership in mind.
                   I am sure the next Congress will follow up. This idea
                 should be central to any discussion of expanding health
                 care coverage to the uninsured.
                   Jim, as we prepare to say goodbye to you now from this
                 floor, thank you for your years of devoted service to our
                 State, to our Nation. With heartfelt gratitude, on behalf
                 of my wife Linda and I, we wish you, Brenda, and your
                 children the very best in future endeavors. And I know for
                 a fact that there will be great successes ahead.
                   I yield the floor.

                   Mrs. CLINTON. ... Finally, I also wish the very best to
                 my Republican colleagues who will leave the Senate at the
                 conclusion of this Congress. The Senate, at its best, is a
                 body that promotes bipartisanship, deliberation, and
                 cooperation, and the dedication to shared values. It has
                 been a privilege to work with my departing colleagues on
                 the other side of the aisle.
                                                   Friday, December 8, 2006
                   Ms. LANDRIEU. ... To all of our retiring Members, I say
                 thank you. Thank you for your efforts on behalf of my
                 State when you were needed and thank you for your service
                 to America.

                   Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I also will say a word about a
                 couple of my colleagues who are leaving, and I will be
                 brief. ...
                    Jim Talent from Missouri is another colleague from the
                 House of Representatives. He is another serious and
                 dedicated public servant whom I suspect we will see more
                 of in the future. ...
                    I know we all move on at some time and that none of us
                 is irreplaceable. But by the same token, these colleagues
                 of ours who will be leaving will be missed and they will
                 be remembered for their great service to the Senate, to
                 their States, and to the United States of America.
                   I yield the floor.

                   Mr. DeWINE. ... Mr. President, I want to wish the best
                 to all of my fellow Senators who were defeated this fall
                 or who are retiring this year--Senators Frist, Santorum,
                 Talent, Burns, Allen, Chafee, Dayton, and Jeffords. They
                 are all good people and all good friends. I wish them
                 well. ...

                   Mr. DODD. ... Mr. President, today I pay tribute to my
                 departing colleagues who have, for a time, lent their
                 talents, their convictions, and their hard work to this
                 distinguished body. I may have had my disagreements with
                 them, but the end of a term is a time for seeing
                 colleagues not simply as politicians, but as partners who
                 have ``toiled, and wrought, and thought with me.'' Each,
                 in his own way, was distinctive; and each, in his own way,
                 will be sorely missed. ...
                   I would also like to recognize Senator Jim Talent.
                 Senator Talent has been a lifelong resident of St. Louis;
                 and even when he was attending Washington University in
                 his hometown, his outstanding intellect was on display as
                 he was named the most outstanding undergraduate in
                 political science. It was a sign of success to come. Jim
                 Talent was elected to the U.S. House in 1992 and served a
                 total of 12 years in Congress, the last 4 representing
                 Missouri in the Senate.
                   I was especially proud to work with Senator Talent on
                 legislation of the utmost moral importance: a bill that
                 would establish new offices at the Department of Justice
                 and FBI to investigate and prosecute civil rights-era
                 murders. This legislation would help ensure that those who
                 took the lives of civil rights workers, and have thus far
                 escaped justice, never have another peaceful night of
                 sleep. Senator Talent said it eloquently:

                   We want the murderers and their accomplices who are
                 still living to know there's an entire section of the
                 Department of Justice that is going after them. We need to
                 unearth the truth and do justice because there cannot be
                 healing without the truth.

                   Senator Talent was also known for his work for renewable
                 energy, his opposition to predatory lending, and his solid
                 social conservatism. And though we didn't always agree, I
                 am sure everyone who served with him has respected his
                 intellect and his outspokenness. May he and his wife
                 Brenda have many more years of happiness. ...

                   Mr. HATCH. ... Mr. President, I rise today to pay
                 tribute to the accomplishments of Senator Jim Talent from
                 the great State of Missouri. I feel privileged to have
                 worked with Jim on different pieces of legislation, and I
                 greatly admire his dedication to his constituents and
                 respect his many accomplishments during his time in public
                 office.
                   Jim's official political career started when he was only
                 28 years old, after he was elected to the Missouri House
                 of Representatives. He went on to serve for 8 years in
                 that position, and he worked diligently to pass meaningful
                 legislation which benefited the people of Missouri.
                   In 1992, Jim was elected to the House of Representatives
                 from Missouri's Second District. Jim wasted no time in
                 tackling important issues and introduced the Real Welfare
                 Reform Act of 1994. Much of the ideas from this
                 legislation were phased into the Personal Responsibility
                 and Work Opportunity Act of 1996, which I joined Jim in
                 voting for. This historic piece of bipartisan legislation
                 has had a profound positive impact and dramatically
                 changed the way that this country helps its neediest
                 citizens. According to the Department of Health and Human
                 Services, welfare caseloads in this country have declined
                 58 percent since the enactment of this legislation. These
                 results show that, even as a new Senator, Jim had
                 tremendous foresight in crafting meaningful ideas which
                 addressed a serious problem in this country.
                   Jim also served on many important committees during his
                 time in the House, including the Armed Services Committee,
                 the Small Business Committee, and the Education and
                 Workforce Committee. During his time on these committees,
                 Jim continued to utilize his tremendous work ethic in
                 reviewing and drafting important initiatives which
                 benefited American citizens. In addition, Jim worked
                 endlessly as an advocate for small business, which he
                 recognized as the financial backbone of our country.
                   In November 2002, Jim began the next phase of his
                 service after being elected to serve as Senator for his
                 State of Missouri. Being born and raised in Missouri, Jim
                 had a great knowledge base of the State and thus the
                 background to recognize important issues which affected
                 his constituents and the State as a whole.
                   I can truthfully say there has been no Senator in the
                 history of this body who has worked harder to represent
                 his State than Jim Talent.
                   Jim served on four diverse Senate committees:
                 Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry; Energy and Natural
                 Resources; Aging; and the Armed Services Committee.
                   During this Congress, Jim and I worked together on the
                 joint resolution which proposed an amendment to the
                 Constitution authorizing Congress to prohibit the physical
                 desecration of the flag of the United States. Jim and I
                 were in complete agreement on this subject, and I greatly
                 respected his steadfast support of this proposed
                 legislation. During debate of this topic, Jim continually
                 provided insightful commentary that showed his heartfelt
                 support of a very important topic. Jim summed up his
                 feelings with the following sentiment:

                   The flag is the unifying symbol of our Republic. It
                 represents that common history and heritage which holds
                 America together notwithstanding religious, cultural, or
                 political differences. Physical and public desecration of
                 the flag degrades those values and coarsens America far
                 more than any speech or political dissent possibly could.

                   We were both sorry to see the amendment narrowly miss
                 passage, but I will always admire and respect Jim's
                 unwavering support on this important topic.
                   A final item I would like to draw attention to is the
                 Combat Meth Act that Jim drafted along with Senator
                 Feinstein. Recognizing the disastrous effects that have
                 been wrought on American neighborhoods and families due to
                 this horrible drug, Senators Talent and Feinstein wrote
                 this new law aimed at making the ingredients used to cook
                 meth less available to lawbreakers. While we didn't always
                 agree on the approach to this effort, we were united in
                 efforts to stop the insidious damage inflicted by this
                 drug. I applaud Jim's efforts in drafting an incredibly
                 important law that we all hope will have a significant
                 impact on decreasing the amount of toxic meth labs in our
                 communities.
                   As Jim embarks on the next phase of his career, I wish
                 him luck in all of his future endeavors. I also want to
                 extend my congratulations and appreciation for Jim's
                 legislative achievements during his time in Congress. I am
                 confident that his character and attributes will continue
                 to steer him toward a life of accomplishment and benefit
                 to those around him. ...

                   Mr. ENZI. ... Mr. President, soon the last remaining
                 items of business on the legislative calendar for the
                 current session of Congress will be completed and the
                 current session will be brought to a close. When it does,
                 several of our colleagues will be returning home and
                 ending their service in the Senate. We will miss them, and
                 we will especially miss the good ideas and creative energy
                 they brought to their duties in the U.S. Senate.
                   Jim Talent is one of those individuals we will miss
                 because of his can-do spirit and his determination to make
                 a difference. He cares a great deal about our country, and
                 he came to the Congress determined to make this a better
                 place for us all to live--especially our children and our
                 children's children. That is why he has always been so
                 focused on the future of our Nation and the need to solve
                 the problems that face us before they overwhelm us.
                   I first met Jim when he was the chairman of the House of
                 Representatives Small Business Committee. Coming from a
                 small business background myself, I was determined to do
                 everything I could to eliminate the redtape that too often
                 serves to discourage instead of encourage the growth of
                 our small businesses throughout the country.
                   At the time, Jim was working on a number of issues in
                 his committee that I was working on with the Workplace
                 Safety and Training Subcommittee of the Health, Education,
                 Labor, and Pensions Committee. Together we began to focus
                 on some OSHA issues and other matters affecting the
                 workplace that needed our attention. We came up with a
                 plan to work them incrementally, and by taking them up
                 piece by piece, bit by bit, we were able to get some
                 things done that might have otherwise been put off for
                 another day. Over a couple of years, we were able to pass
                 into law some of the first changes in the history of OSHA.
                 Each step was a small victory for the workers of America.
                 Taken together, the results gave us both hope that we
                 would collaborate on bigger and bigger things in the
                 future.
                   Back then, Jim had a decision to make. He was very
                 popular back home and he probably could have stayed in the
                 House for quite a long time, but he decided he wanted to
                 run for statewide office. That call eventually led him to
                 run for the Senate. It was a difficult battle, but Jim
                 emerged with a well-earned victory.
                   I was delighted by his decision to run for the Senate
                 and even more enthused by his victory. It proved what I
                 had always thought about Jim, that he is a hard worker and
                 he is always there to fight for what he believes in.
                   During his service in the Senate, Jim has been a
                 champion for the people of his State and an expert on
                 health plans for small businesses. When he was in the
                 House he had served on the conference committee for the
                 Patients Bill of Rights. He got the health plan
                 legislation we wanted in the report, but the report was
                 never voted on. Now that he was in the Senate, he was
                 working on a number of issues but none as hard or as
                 focused as he was on passing the small business health
                 plan into law that he had helped shape and draft.
                   In the end, we were able to get 56 votes in the Senate
                 for our plan, but it takes 60 to force a matter to a vote.
                 That meant we were just four votes short of the total we
                 needed to pass this legislation and address the issue of
                 health care for small businesses and people all across the
                 country.
                   I know we will miss Jim's participation when we take up
                 this issue next year, but I expect he will find a way to
                 keep our feet to the fire and remind us that the people of
                 this Nation are expecting us to get something done to help
                 address their health care needs. I look forward to hearing
                 from him with his suggestions and thoughtful comments
                 about the bill that emerges from committee next year--how
                 to improve it and, more important, how to pass it.
                   In the years to come, I know I will miss Jim and his
                 creative ideas and enthusiasm for getting things done.
                 Jim's greatest asset has always been his ability to listen
                 to all sides of an argument and create ways around the
                 obstacles that were preventing us from taking action. He
                 is a leader, an innovator, and most of all, a friend to
                 all who have come to know him.
                   Thanks Jim, for your dedication, your persistence, your
                 courage, and the many capabilities you brought to your
                 work on the Senate. You will be missed around here. Good
                 luck in whatever you choose to do in the days to come. You
                 will always have our support and our appreciation for your
                 determination to make this country's health care system
                 work as it should.

                   Ms. SNOWE. ... Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to
                 Senator Jim Talent, my colleague and friend whose capacity
                 for being a catalyst on issues that he holds dear is truly
                 remarkable--and he will be missed in the U.S. Congress.
                   In his first term in the U.S. Senate from Missouri,
                 otherwise known as the Show-Me State, Senator Jim Talent
                 has shown--not just me--but his colleagues and his
                 constituents that he is a person who cares about health
                 care, small business, economic growth, and defense.
                 Whether during his 8 years in the U.S. House or his 4
                 years in the U.S. Senate, Jim Talent has demonstrated the
                 fortitude and will necessary to meet challenging issues
                 with national implications.
                   In the U.S. House, as a freshman Congressman, he
                 introduced the Real Welfare Reform Act of 1994, which
                 became the basis for landmark, bipartisan welfare reform
                 legislation. Never one to turn from a challenge, then-
                 Congressman Talent also managed to get association health
                 plans legislation passed out of the U.S. House, not once
                 but twice. And he built on that success by working on that
                 same issue in the U.S. Senate--indeed, Senator Talent was
                 an essential proponent of this important effort to allow
                 small businesses to pool their resources to lower
                 skyrocketing health insurance costs.
                   I saw firsthand how the same indefatigable energy that
                 was indicative of his commitment in the House was very
                 much on display in the Senate as he worked tirelessly with
                 our leadership, Labor Secretary Chao, the National
                 Federation of Independent Business, and so many others on
                 this critical issue. As we go forward to identify a path
                 forward on this vital matter, Senator Talent's acumen and
                 will to move this issue will be missed in our Chamber.
                   I wish Jim Talent and his entire family all the best for
                 what I am certain will be a successful next chapter in his
                 life. ...

                   Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I would like to pay tribute
                 to the Republican Members of the Senate who will not be
                 returning in the 110th Congress. Senators George Allen;
                 Conrad Burns; Lincoln Chafee; Mike DeWine; Dr. Bill Frist;
                 Rick Santorum; and Jim Talent have served their
                 constituents with honor and distinction during their
                 tenure here in the U.S. Senate. All care very deeply for
                 this great Nation and I hope they will have continued
                 success in their future endeavors. ...
                   Majority leader Bill Frist has run the Senate through
                 difficult and trying times and he has done it well.
                 Senator Mike DeWine, my neighbor to the north, has
                 represented the Buckeye State with great distinction and
                 has committed over 30 years of his life to public service.
                 Senator George Allen represented the Commonwealth of
                 Virginia in the U.S. Senate for 6 years, and he worked
                 closely with me to make America safer by helping usher
                 through important legislation to arm cargo pilots. Senator
                 Jim Talent has had a great career in Congress and wrote
                 the blueprint to the welfare reform bill of 1996. And
                 Senator Lincoln Chafee has continued the proud legacy set
                 forth by his father and my friend, Senator John Chafee.
                   Mr. President, I would like to again commend all of our
                 departing Republican Senators. I am proud of what they
                 accomplished here in the U.S. Senate. They will all be
                 missed, and I wish all of them the very best.

                   Mrs. HUTCHISON. ... Mr. President, Jim Talent has a long
                 and honorable history of service to the people of
                 Missouri.
                   In the House of Representatives, he introduced the bill
                 that laid the foundation for historic welfare reforms.
                   In 1997, he became the youngest chairman in the House
                 when he was named Chairman of the House Small Business
                 Committee. Under his leadership, the committee passed many
                 crucial reforms for small business owners, including tax
                 relief and health insurance provisions.
                   When Jim joined the Senate in 2000, he continued serving
                 his State while emerging as a powerful force for the good
                 of his State and the Nation.
                   His work on the Energy Committee has shown great
                 foresight and has galvanized our fight for energy
                 independence.
                   I am proud to have served with Jim these past 6 years.
                   I expect great things from his continued efforts on
                 behalf of the Midwest. ...
                 UNANIMOUS CONSENT AGREEMENT--TRIBUTES TO RETIRING SENATORS
                   Mr. FRIST. I ask unanimous consent that the tributes to
                 retiring Senators be printed as a Senate document and that
                 Senators be permitted to submit tributes until December
                 27, 2006.

                   The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so
                 ordered.
                                               Wednesday, December 27, 2006
                   Mr. STEVENS. ... Mr. President, Senator Jim Talent has
                 served the people of Missouri with great distinction. He
                 is a hard worker, and while he never sought the spotlight,
                 Jim quickly earned the respect of his colleagues in the
                 Senate.
                   It has been my privilege to work with Jim on a number of
                 issues. He understood the threat methamphetamine poses to
                 our Nation and helped establish the Senate's anti-meth
                 caucus to fight this epidemic.
                   Jim has also been a determined leader on defense and
                 energy issues. We worked together to secure the funding
                 required to modernize the Department of Defense and sought
                 to ensure our troops have the resources they need. Jim
                 also understands the importance of diversifying our energy
                 resources. His leadership on renewable energy greatly
                 benefited his constituents and the rest of our Nation.
                   We will all miss Senator Talent's intelligence and
                 knowledge of the issues. I wish him the best of luck in
                 all of his future endeavors. ...

                   Ms. COLLINS. ... Mr. President, as the 109th Congress
                 draws to a close, I want to say thanks and farewell to one
                 of its hardest working and most dedicated Members, Senator
                 Jim Talent of Missouri.
                   I have had the privilege of working with Senator Talent
                 as a member of the Armed Services Committee and its
                 Seapower Subcommittee, which he has chaired.
                   Working with Senator Talent has always been rewarding.
                 He has been a prodigious Senator and brings to bear on
                 defense issues both detailed knowledge and long-range
                 vision. His final speech on the floor of the Senate
                 displayed those qualities, as he surveyed the state of
                 readiness and equipment in our national defense, and
                 persuasively warned of the dangers of under-investment in
                 personnel and material.
                   Senator Talent's focus on seapower issues may seem to go
                 against type. Missouri does not spring readily to mind in
                 a word-association test for ``Navy'' or ``shipbuilding,''
                 as Maine or Mississippi might. But the Senator from
                 Missouri has been as dedicated to working through seapower
                 issues as any coastal Senator.
                   Senator Talent was a key player in settling on a dual-
                 lead shipyard strategy for the Zumwalt-class DDG-1000
                 destroyers, formerly known as the DD(X). As a Senator from
                 a shipbuilding State, I am naturally well pleased with
                 this policy. But as a U.S. Senator, I also share Senator
                 Talent's conviction that it is a wise national strategy to
                 preserve shipbuilding capabilities in multiple locations.
                 He has also been a leading voice in deliberations on the
                 CGX ship class that will constitute our next generation of
                 guided-missile cruisers.
                   Senator Talent brought extraordinary intellectual gifts
                 to the Senate. After distinguishing himself in
                 undergraduate work at Washington University and in legal
                 studies at the University of Chicago, he clerked for Judge
                 Richard Posner of the Seventh Circuit and taught at the
                 Washington University School of Law.
                   His academic prowess was reinforced with practical
                 political experience. After winning a seat against long
                 odds in the Missouri Legislature, he established himself
                 as a popular and respected political figure. Moving on to
                 the U.S. House, he was an early and influential voice in
                 the debate that ultimately led to a fundamental reform of
                 Federal welfare law. This combined 16 years of legislative
                 service served him well when he took his seat in the
                 Senate.
                   Besides his dedication to chairing the Seapower
                 Subcommittee, Senator Talent has been a leading advocate
                 for promoting alternative energy, for helping small
                 businesses form associations to buy health insurance, and
                 for expanding the Federal fight against sickle-cell blood
                 disease. To these and other issues he brings a powerful
                 combination of intellect, research, deliberation, and
                 collegiality.
                   In November, Senator Talent lost a close contest for
                 reelection in a difficult campaign year. We cannot quarrel
                 with the decision of the voters, but we can respectfully
                 regret that the Senate will lose the benefit of Jim
                 Talent's wise and gentlemanly presence. I join my
                 colleagues in wishing him and his family well, and in
                 expecting many more contributions to the public good from
                 this man of many gifts and accomplishments.
                                                    Monday, January 8, 2007
                   Mrs. DOLE. Mr. President, it is an honor indeed to pay
                 tribute to a number of fine individuals who I am fortunate
                 to call not just my colleagues, but also dear friends:
                 Senators Bill Frist, George Allen, Conrad Burns, Lincoln
                 Chafee, Mike DeWine, Rick Santorum and Jim Talent. ...
                   Senator Jim Talent has been an outstanding
                 representative of the people of Missouri. A dedicated
                 public servant, he served for 8 years in the State House
                 of Representatives, as well as 8 years in the U.S. House.
                 Jim was the lead author in the House of the landmark 1996
                 welfare reform bill that has moved more than 1 million
                 Americans off welfare and into work and self-sufficiency.
                   Jim is man of impeccable character and a natural leader,
                 and in the Senate he held a number of leadership posts in
                 his freshman term--as the chairman of the Armed Services
                 Seapower Subcommittee, as the chairman of the Agriculture
                 Subcommittee on Marketing, Inspection, and Product
                 Promotion, and as a deputy whip. He also demonstrated a
                 remarkable ability to make things happen legislatively,
                 with many of his bills passed by Congress and signed into
                 law. Jim's amazing legislative record reflects not just
                 his abilities but also the respect he earned from his
                 colleagues.
                   Jim delivered on his promises to Missourians to help
                 create jobs, grow the economy and strengthen our national
                 defense. He also worked to improve health care, and he
                 advocated on behalf of those who suffer from sickle cell
                 disease and breast cancer.
                   It has been my pleasure to serve with Jim on the Senate
                 Armed Services Committee. I have seen him in action and
                 know that there is no one more committed to ensuring that
                 our country's defenses remain strong. I was proud to work
                 closely with him to enact legislation to prevent predatory
                 lenders from targeting our brave men and women in uniform
                 and their families. There is no question that he is a
                 steadfast supporter of our service members, their
                 families, and their livelihood.
                   This Chamber needs more Members like Jim, who understand
                 that the only way to really make a difference is to put
                 partisan concerns aside and work across the aisle.
                 Throughout his public service career, Jim Talent has
                 certainly made a positive difference, and he will surely
                 be missed in the U.S. Senate.
                   As these men--Bill Frist, George Allen, Conrad Burns,
                 Lincoln Chafee, Mike DeWine, Rick Santorum and Jim
                 Talent--conclude their service in the U.S. Senate, let me
                 say that I am so proud to have worked with individuals of
                 such character, strength, and intellect. Our Nation is
                 grateful for their many contributions. And as they each
                 will undoubtedly continue to contribute to our country's
                 greatness, their leadership and vision will be missed here
                 in the U.S. Senate.