[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.
                                   