[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 101 (Tuesday, July 23, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7189-S7194]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
The Andean Trade Preference Act
Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, I want to take a few minutes to talk
about the failure of the Congress to enact the Andean Trade Preference
Act, the importance of this issue in our hemisphere, and the absolute
criticality of us acting before we go out for the August recess on the
Andean Trade Preference Act.
Madam President, America is facing a crisis in its relations with our
Latin
[[Page S7190]]
neighbors. Political instability and a fierce backlash against free
market reforms are hobbling friendly democratic governments across the
region, with consequences that clearly endanger the democratic and free
market tide that has swept the continent in the past decade. Yet
partisan wrangling over other issues has prevented Congress from
renewing the Andean Trade Preference Act, even though both Houses have
approved it. It is time to stop the politics and send the President an
Andean trade bill, immediately.
Madam President, wrongly, the Andean Trade Preference Act has been
linked to the larger issues of trade adjustment authority and other
trade issues. I do not know why that is the case.
Mr. REID. Parliamentary inquiry, Madam President.
Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, I have the floor.
Mr. REID. Would my friend yield----
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator declines the inquiry.
Mr. REID. Will my friend yield for a question then?
Mr. McCAIN. What is that?
Mr. REID. The question I have----
Mr. McCAIN. Do I have the floor, Madam President?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona has the floor and may
decline to yield for an inquiry.
Mr. McCAIN. I decline to yield.
I remind my colleagues that only a few years ago we in Washington
were congratulating ourselves on living in a hemisphere that, with the
exceptions of Cuba and Haiti, had embraced freedom and free markets
after long years of military rule and statist economic policies.
Although there remained deep poverty, aggressive free market reforms
were seen as the best way to improve the welfare of people across Latin
America.
Mr. REID. Madam President, regular order.
Mr. McCAIN. Expanded trade policies, including the Andean Trade
Preference Act and America's vision of a hemispheric trade area----
Mr. REID. I ask the Chair to call for the regular order.
Mr. McCAIN. Lent momentum to the Latin reform agenda, which produced
real gains in people's daily lives and provided a critical base for the
consolidation of democratic institutions and free markets.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada is calling for the
regular order in debate. Under cloture, debate must be germane.
Mr. McCAIN. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona should confine his
remarks to the question before the body.
The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. REID. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the
quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. REID. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent the Senator from
Arizona be extended up to 15 minutes to speak on any subject he
desires.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from Arizona.
Mr. McCAIN. I thank my colleague from Nevada. I intend to be brief.
I do believe this is an important issue. The other body is going out
at the end of this week--in just 3 days. Unless we act on the Andean
Trade Preference Act, it will have significant consequences, both socio
and economic, in our hemisphere.
I thank my colleague from Nevada for allowing me this time.
Today, as we look south, the picture is altogether more bleak, and
deeply troubling in the eyes of both Americans and the people of Latin
America. Free market reforms are undergoing a crisis of legitimacy as a
result of political mismanagement, corruption and cronyism, and because
many of the easy reforms have already been made. It is fair to place
part of the blame on a failure of national leadership in parts of Latin
America. But almost every government in the hemisphere has been
democratically elected, and will be held democratically accountable.
What is more worrisome, and within our power to change, is Washington's
hands-off policy toward some of the very partners we touted only a few
years ago as a symbol of Latin America's success, their policy
accomplishments made possible with the support of the United States.
Today, as our friends in the Andean region grapple with the problems
of poverty, terrorism, drug trafficking, and the forces of political
extremism, leaders in Washington squabble over unrelated issues that
hold up speedy passage of the Andean Trade Preference Expansion Act.
This trade measure is not controversial. Were it to face an up-or-down
vote, it would probably garner 90 votes of support. But a political
decision made with no consideration of the plight of our Andean
partners--to bundle the noncontroversial ATPA into a trade package
including trade promotion authority and trade adjustment assistance--is
having stark consequences in Latin America at exactly the same time as
the backlash against reformist economic Ecuador, Colombia, and Peru.
In Bolivia, the president of the country's coca-growers' association,
an avid opponent of free market policies, won enough votes in the next
presidential election to force a runoff against a more mainstream
candidate, in defiance of all pollsters' predictions. In Colombia, a
new President with a historic mandate for change needs our support
against the narcoterrorists that threaten his government; strangely, we
provide the aid his government needs But not the trade that is so
important to his people, and that costs America nothing. In Ecuador,
political instability grows as the spillover from Colombia's war and
the depth of poverty threaten state institutions. In Peru, a
democratically elected president who, as an opposition leader, stood
down a dictatorship has been forced by popular pressure to fire the
very reformers within his cabinet who hold the key to his country's
development. America is not to blame for every setback on the road to
free market, democratic governance in Latin America. But we are to
blame when we abdicate our responsibility to advance our interests and
support our friends with the trade preferences that they believe to be
critical to their economic future.
Madam President, on Friday the New York Times ran a front-page story
highlighting the growing political instability that increasingly haunts
Latin American leaders who understand that their country's development
hinges on a reform agenda supported by the United States. The article
traces a political rift over free-market reforms that runs straight
down the continent, from Venezuela to Argentina, and whose consequences
threaten to upend the extraordinary progress Latin American reformers
have made since they ended the era of military dictatorship and statist
economics. I ask unanimous consent the Times article be printed in the
Record, as well as an opinion piece by John Walters, our drug czar,
entitled ``Just Say Yes to ATPA.''
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From the New York Times, July 19, 2002]
Still Poor, Latin Americans Protest Push for Open Markets
(By Juan Forero)
The protest that shook this colonial city last month was
very much like others in Latin America recently. There were
Marxists shouting 60's-era slogans, and hard-bitten
unionists. But there was also Fanny Puntaca, 64, a shopkeeper
and grandmother of six. Though she had never before
protested, Ms. Puntaca said, she could not bear to see a
Belgian company buy what she called ``our wealth''--the
region's two state-owned electrical generators. So armed with
a metal pot to bang, she joined neighbors in a demonstration
so unyielding that it forced President Alejandro Toledo to
declare a state of emergency here, suspend the $167 million
sale and eventually shake up his cabinet. ``I had to fight,''
Ms. Puntaca said proudly. ``The government was going to sell
our companies and enrich another country. This was my voice,
my protest.''
Across Latin America, millions of others are also letting
their voices be heard. A popular and political ground swell
is building from the Andes to Argentina against the decade-
old experiment with free-market capitalism. The reforms that
have shrunk the state and opened markets to foreign
competition, many believe, have enriched corrupt officials
and faceless multinationals, and failed to better their
lives.
Sometimes-violent protests in recent weeks have detailed
the sale of state-owned companies worth hundreds of millions
of dollars. The unrest has made potential investors
jittery,and whipsawed governments already weakened by
recession. The backlash
[[Page S7191]]
has given rise to leftist politicians who have combined
pocketbook issues and economic nationalism to explosive
effect. Today the market reforms ushered in by American-
trained economists after the global collapse of Communism are
facing their greatest challenge in the upheavals sweeping the
region. ``The most worrying reading is that perhaps we have
come to the end of an era,'' said Rafael de la Fuente, chief
Latin American economist for BNP Paribas in New York. ``That
we are closing the door on what was an unsuccessful attempt
to orthodox economic reforms at the end of the 90's.''
For at time the policies worked, and many economists and
politicians say they still do. The reforms increased
competition and fueled growth. Stratospheric inflation rates
fell back to earth. Bloated bureaucracies were replaced with
efficient companies that created jobs. The formula helped
give Chile the most robust economy in Latin America. In
Mexico exports quintupled in a dozen years. In Bolivia,
poverty fell from 86 percent of the population in the 70's
to 58.6 percent today.
Still, the broad prosperity that was promised remains a
dream for many Latin Americans. Today those same reforms are
equated with unemployment and layoffs from both public and
private companies, as well as recessions that have hamstrung
economies. ``We privatized and we do not have less poverty,
less unemployment,'' said Juan Manuel Guillen, the mayor of
Arequipa and a leader in the antiprivatization movement here.
``On the contrary. We have more poverty and unemployment. We
are not debating theoretically here. We are looking at
reality.'' Indeed, 44 percent of Latin Americans still live
in poverty, and the number of unemployed workers has more
than doubled in a decade. Tens of millions of others--in some
countries up to 70 percent of all workers--toil in the
region's vast informal economy, as street vendors, for
instance, barely making ends meet. Economic growth has been
essentially flat for the last five years.
Popular perceptions--revealed in street protests, opinion
polls and ballot boxes--are clearly shifting against the
economic prescriptions for open markets, less government and
tighter budgets that American officials and international
financial institutions have preferred. A regional survey
supported by the Inter-American Development Bank found last
year that 63 percent of respondents across 17 countries in
the region said that privatization had not been beneficial.
``It's an emotional populist attitude people have,'' said
Larry Birns, director of the Council on Hemispheric Affairs,
a Washington-based policy analysis group. ``It may not be
reasoned, but it's real, and it's explosive and it's not
going to be easily contained by coming up with arguments that
free trade is the wave of the future.''
In Brazil, South America's largest country and its economic
engine, revulsion with American-led market orthodoxy has
fueled strong support for the labor leader Luiz Inacio da
Silva, known as Lula, who is now the front-runner in the
October presidential election, to the chagrin of worried
financial markets. In Paraguay protests last month blocked
the $400 million sale of the state phone company by President
Luis Gonzalez Macchi, whose government has been dogged by a
dismal economy and corruption charges. This week deadly
demonstrations led the president to declare a state of
emergency. In Bolivia the country's political landscape was
redrawn this month when Evo Morales, an indigenous leader who
promised to nationalize industries, finished second among 11
candidates for president. This spring, the sale of 17
electricity distributors in Ecuador fell through in the face
of political resistance, a blow to a country that has adopted
the dollar as its currency and is heavily dependent on
foreign investment. Meanwhile, in Venezuela, President Hugo
Chavez's left-leaning government has been intent on scaling
back reforms, exacerbating the divisions that led to his
brief ouster in April. The backlash in many of these
countries gathered momentum with the economic meltdown in
Argentina, which forced a change of presidents after
widespread rioting in December.
While the causes are multifold, many Argentines blame the
debacle on a combination of corrupt politicians and the
government's adherence to economic prescriptions from abroad
that have left the country with $141 billion in public debt,
the banking system in ruins and one in five people
unemployed. Argentines now look for possible salvation from
Elisa Carrio, a corruption fighter in Congress who has been
scathing in her criticism of the International Monetary Fund.
She is now the early favorite in the upcoming presidential
election. ``This has created the backlash because now there's
a debate all around Latin America,'' said Pedro Pablo
Kuczynski, Peru's former economy minister and a favorite of
Wall Street who resigned under pressure last week.
``Everywhere you look people say, `The guys followed the
model and they're in the soup. So obviously the model does
not work.' ''
The backlash comes as foreign direct investment in Latin
America has fallen steeply, dropping from $105 billion in
1999 to $80 billion in 2001. A big reason for the decline is
that many big-ticket sales of state companies to private
investors have already been completed. But economists like
Mr. Kuczynski, who say market reforms must continue for
capital-poor Latin economies to progress, are worried.
Bolivia, for instance, was an early convert along with Chile
in the 1990's to what is called the neoliberal model. It
reined in loose monetary policies and shrank the government
by unloading dozens of state-owned companies to private
international investors. The results, particularly in taming
inflation and reducing poverty, were impressive.
But in one of Latin America's poorest nations, it is hard
for Bolivian officials to talk about progress to the wide
portion of the population that continues to live in grinding
poverty and feels that entitlements the government once
provided in the form of subsidized rates for water and
electricity have been stripped away. The better services that
have accompanied the sale of state enterprises have left many
indifferent, particularly in impoverished areas where
residents have invested their own money and sweat to string
up electrical lines or put in water pipes and drainage.
``Clearly if you're poor and have no water, sewage and live
in a rural area, having three long distance telephone
companies when you have no phone lines doesn't make a bean of
difference,'' Bolivia's president, Jorge Quiroga,
acknowledged in an interview.
In Peru the resistance to privatization and market reforms
is especially pronounced and, for its government, puzzling.
Unlike most of Latin America, the economy here has steadily
grown since Mr. Toledo's election in June 2001 as the
government has continued sales of assets begun during the
decade-long rule of Alberto K. Fujimori. Government officials
say the program has been successful. Phone installation,
which used to take years and cost $1,500 or more, now costs
$50 and takes a day or two. Electrical service, once shoddy
and limited, has spread across the country. The privatization
of mines, which is nearly complete, has improved efficiency
and output so much that employment in that sector and related
activities has increased to more than 60,000 today from
42,000 in 1993. But government belt-tightening also led to
widespread layoffs. Mr. Toledo's government has been hit hard
by protests and popular discontent, much of it fueled by its
inability to alleviate poverty. Many have blamed the
privatizations, seeing them as a vestige of the corruption-
riddled presidency of Mr. Fujimiri, who is now in exile in
Japan.
Here in Arequipa, where the economy was already limping,
when word came that the government was about to sell the two
state-owned electric companies, Egasa and Egesur, people
recalled that Mr. Toledo had campaigned on a pledge never to
sell the companies to private owners. It did not matter that
the government promised Arequipa half the sale price, and
that the investor, the Brussels-based Tractebel S.A., would
invest tens of millions of dollars more to improve services.
The promises were not believed. Soon the workers federation,
neighborhood organizations and university students organized
protests, suspecting that higher electricity costs and
layoffs were on the way. ``Thanks to our fight, our
perseverance, the government backed down,'' Alejandro
Pacheco, a leader in the protests here, told a roomful of
supporters this week. ``Now we need to do this in the rest of
Peru.''
____
[From the Hill, Mar. 20, 2002]
Just Say Yes To ATPA
(By John Walters)
It is rare when an easy-to-understand, bipartisan foreign
policy initiative that is embraced by all the countries
involved and lauded by the Federal Government for its
effectiveness is developed and passed into law. It is rarer
still when such an initiative is allowed to simply slip away
due to legislative indifference or neglect. Yet that could be
the fate of one of our most effective South American policy
initiatives.
On December 4, 2001 the Andean Trade Preferences Act (ATPA)
expired. Although the House has voted to extend ATPA, the
Senate has not yet acted. There is a temporary duty deferral
in place, but if it is allowed to expire without being
reauthorized, thousands of people in the Andean region will
suffer--and we will have needlessly lost a valuable tool in
our ongoing anti-drug efforts.
ATPA simultaneously furthers two important policy goals:
stimulating legitimate economic growth while destabilizing
the drug trade. To make progress in the fight against illegal
drug production we must provide alternative and expanded job
opportunities to support economic growth and democratic
institutions in the Andean region. For the past ten years,
ATPA has been a powerful trade tool in the fight against
illicit drug production and trafficking by successfully
helping our Andean allies (Colombia, Bolivia, Ecuador and
Peru) develop legitimate commercial exports as alternatives
to the illegal drug industry--an industry that supplies
Colombia's leading terrorist group, the FARC, with an
estimated $300 million a year.
ATPA's benefits to the region's development are
indisputable. In 1991, the last full year before ATPA was
implemented, the United States imported $12.7 billion in
total commodities from the Andean nations. In 2000, the U.S.
imported $28.5 billion in total commodities from these
nations, a 125 percent increase. One of the great successes
tied to ATPA is the Andean region's development of a robust
flower industry--an industry that is especially important
because of the large number of economically distressed people
it employs. There are often as many as ten employees per
hectare of flower-producing land involved in cultivating the
flowers for export. ATPA has also generated significant
[[Page S7192]]
job opportunities in other industries, such as fruits and
vegetables, jewelry, and electronics. These new jobs draw
workers who otherwise might have been drawn to drug-producing
narco-terrorist groups for employment.
Our economy has realized direct benefits from this program
as well. Under ATPA, U.S. exports to the Andean region have
soared, growing by nearly 65 percent to a total of $6.3
billion in 1999.
Now that the House has voted, the Senate should act
quickly. The passage of ATPA reiterates our commitment to
helping the Andean region develop economic alternatives to
drug crop production. We know that drug production in this
region is tied to our country's demand for these poisonous
substances. But as we work to cut the demand for drugs in the
United States, we must support our southern neighbors in
their efforts to build their economies and promote democracy.
Last week the House also passed H. Res. 358, which
expressed the support of Congress for the democratically
elected government of Colombia and its efforts to counter
terrorism. I applaud their actions and wholeheartedly agree
that we must actively support our neighbors in Colombia and
the Andean region. ATPA is a direct and tangible way for the
United States to demonstrate this support.
Letting ATPA lapse would not just be a missed economic
opportunity; it would be a threat to regional stability. Our
goal is to help these countries create an economic and social
environment in which legitimate industry, rather than
narcotics cultivation and trafficking, is the norm. We have
the opportunity to help our neighbors build and expand their
economies and democratic institutions. Renewing ATPA is a top
regional priority and a top anti-drug priority. I urge the
Senate to act quickly.
Mr. McCAIN. Renewing the Andean Trade bill is the most immediate
action we could take to remind our partners in the region of our
commitment to reform and free markets. Unfortunately, Congress'
inaction on ATPA is rightly viewed by our friends in the region as a
symbol of America's unfortunate disregard for their plight in this
difficult time. It is time we paid attention. I urge immediate action
from the conferees to the trade bill to separate out and pass ATPA.
This issue is critical to American leadership and economic growth in
the Andean region, as its leaders will tell anyone who listens. America
has too much at stake to turn our back on our Andean partners, who
confront threats from terrorists, drugs, and poverty that threaten
their governments and their people's future. Our friends in Peru,
Colombia, Ecuador, and Bolivia cannot wait much longer.
Madam President, I do not want to hold up the progress of the Senate
on this important prescription drug bill. But I think it is generally
regarded as factual that we will probably not provide trade promotion
authority or trade adjustment authority to the President of the United
States before the other body goes out at the end of this week. That
would be a terrible mistake.
I will come to the floor on Wednesday or Thursday and ask consent
that we move, take up, and pass the Andean Trade Preference Act. I
believe that is probably the only way we will get this done before the
Congress goes out for the August recess.
We have a serious situation in our hemisphere from Mexico to the
Tierra del Fuego. Argentina, once the fifth largest economy in the
world, is facing an economic crisis of incredible proportions.
Venezuela is in a chaotic socioeconomic situation. Peru, Bolivia, and
Ecuador are all in various stages of extreme difficulties. Colombia is
in the midst of a civil war which at least, if they are not losing,
they are probably not winning either.
This is a modest proposal. I have been visited by the leaders of
these countries, and they say the following: We do not want aid, but we
do want trade.
This is a trade agreement that was made by the first Bush
administration. It should clearly be passed. It would get 90 votes in
this body if it were up by itself. We should address it, move it
forward, and do these nations a small favor. We could pay a very heavy
penalty in terms of socioeconomic difficulties in our own hemisphere if
we do not act quickly on this issue.
Mr. NICKLES. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. McCAIN. I am glad to yield.
Mr. NICKLES. Madam President, I wish to be associated with my friend
and colleague from Arizona and thank him for his tenacity in raising
this issue. The Senate is being very irresponsible in not passing the
Andean Trade Preference Act.
I thank the Senator from Arizona. I will be happy to join him in
making that unanimous consent request and ask that our colleagues join
us in helping these four allies. I appreciate our friend from Arizona
bringing the matter to the attention of the Senate.
Mr. McCAIN. I thank my friend from Oklahoma. I hope we won't have to
do it. We owe it to these very great allies of ours in a very difficult
time to act before we go out. The other body goes out at the end of
this week.
I thank my colleague from Nevada for his indulgence. I thank my
colleagues for their indulgence, and I yield the remainder of my time.
Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I commend our Senate leadership for
moving so promptly to the consideration of the nomination of Dr.
Richard Carmona to be Surgeon General of the United States.
Today, the U.S. Senate is in the midst of an historic health care
debate. So it is appropriate that we consider at this time a nominee to
this position of such crucial importance to the public health.
The Surgeon General is our Nation's doctor. He is our country's
principal official on health care and health policy issues. He is the
leader of the Public Health Service and the Service's Commissioned
Corps, one of the seven uniformed services of the United States.
In fact, almost exactly 204 years ago, the Public Health Service was
created on July 16, 1798. President John Adams signed a law creating
what was then called the Merchant Hospital Service for the care of sick
or injured merchant seamen. Boston was the site of the first such
facility, but the Service soon extended through the Great Lakes, the
Gulf of Mexico and to the Pacific.
As our country grew in the 19th century, so did the Service. It was
Service physicians who inspected the immigrants who arrived at Ellis
Island. Even then, the Surgeon General was at the head of national
disease prevention campaigns against cholera, tuberculosis, and
smallpox.
When the Service was renamed the Public Health Service in 1912, it
was the Surgeon General who was at the forefront in combating the great
influenza epidemic of 1918. At a time when modern medicine was in its
infancy, this epidemic took more than 600,000 lives, the worst epidemic
in American history.
I raise this history to make a simple point. The Surgeon General has
been, and continues to be, one of the most important job in our
National Government. Our Nation has faced extraordinary public health
threats in the past, and today, the challenges are just as grave.
Once, the threat was cholera. Today, it is AIDS. Smallpox threatened
our cities in the 19th century. Today, it is bioterrorism. It will be
the Surgeon General who will continue to promote and protect the health
of all Americans.
Over the years, our country has been blessed with courageous and
outspoken Surgeons General. They did not allow politics to blunt their
work to alert the public to health threats. By speaking the truth about
public health, they enabled millions of our fellow citizens to live
longer, fuller lives.
We remember Dr. David Satcher's work on mental health and against the
tobacco industry, and Dr. C. Everett Koop's historic leadership on
AIDS. There is Dr. Julius Richmond's pioneering work on Head Start and,
of course, Dr. Luther Terry's landmark report on smoking.
These are big shoes to fill. But today, our country needs another
such champion of public health. We need a strong and independent
Surgeon General who will put public health first, and leave politics
and ideology well behind.
In this new century of the life sciences, the Surgeon General must
help us take the breakthroughs at the lab bench and ensure they improve
the lives of all Americans. He must lead our country in preventing
tobacco use by our children and youth, expanding access to health care,
ending disparities in health care among our nation's communities,
improving childhood immunization rates, preparing for the threat of
bioterrorism, and preventing the spread of the AIDS epidemic.
These are heavy responsibilities, and they demand an individual of
extraordinary expertise and experience, who has demonstrated a strong
commitment to improving the public health.
[[Page S7193]]
Dr. Carmona comes to us with an impressive background. He has taken
on many important responsibilities. He is a trauma surgeon, a decorated
police officer, a former health care administrator, and a former Green
Beret. He is a father of four children. In addition to his heroic
service in the Army and as a law enforcement officer, Dr. Carmona made
his professional mark in the fields of trauma care and bioterrorism
preparedness.
The Committee carefully considered Dr. Carmona's nomination. In both
his oral testimony and in response to written questions from the
Committee, he satisfactorily addressed all the tough questions that
would be expected for someone nominated to this important position.
Dr. Carmona impressed us with his commitment to preventive health,
and made particularly clear his intention to aggressively oppose
tobacco use by our children and youth and to combat the HIV/AIDS
epidemic.
Dr. Carmona is a trauma surgeon and nurse by training. But he has
assured us that he will also listen to, and learn from, the greater
public health community. There is an army of health professionals and
educators in our country eager to help him do his job. Theirs is an
army waiting to be led in the campaign for better health.
I would close by noting that Dr. Carmona is endorsed by the National
Safe Kids Campaign, the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill, the
American Medical Association, the American Dental Association, and the
National Hispanic Medical Association.
For these reasons, I support Dr. Carmona to be Surgeon General of the
United States, and encourage my colleagues to vote in favor of his
nomination.
Mr. KYL. Madam President, I rise in support of the nomination of Dr.
Richard Carmona to be Surgeon General. He is clearly the person we need
at this critical time for this position.
Dr. Carmona is exceptionally qualified for this important position.
The President has announced that the new Surgeon General will address a
number of important health issues, among them, helping America prepare
to respond to major public health emergencies, such as bioterrorism.
Dr. Carmona's education and extensive career in public service have
prepared him to lead ably on all health issues facing Americans today.
He received his medical education from the University of California at
San Francisco and a Masters of Public Health at the University of
Arizona. He is currently a Clinical Professor of Surgery, Public
Health, and Family and Community Medicine at the University of Arizona,
as well as Chairman of the State of Arizona Southern Regional Emergency
Medical System. Dr. Carmona has published numerous scholarly articles
on such varied subjects as emergency care, trauma care and responses to
terrorism.
He is also currently a Deputy Sheriff in the Pima County Sheriff's
Department SWAT team and the National Association of Police
Organizations named him the Nation's Top Cop in 2000.
Dr. Carmona has also been an administrator of a community hospital.
Additionally, he was a Special Forces Medic and served in Vietnam,
where he received the Bronze Star, two Purple Hearts, and a Combat
Medical Badge.
As you can tell, Dr. Carmona not only has the medical experience to
be Surgeon General, but also other expertise that will be necessary for
the Surgeon General position at this crucial time. Unfortunately, one
of the key areas Dr. Carmona will be involved in is bioterrorism. He
will provide valuable leadership in helping to prepare the United
States for possible future attacks. It is very important for America to
be able to turn to trusted leaders if such a terrible event should
occur and Dr. Carmona has the experience and skills necessary to
respond to such events.
I have no doubt that Dr. Carmona will be an excellent Surgeon General
and help our nation deal not only with bioterrorism, but other pressing
issues such as alcohol and drug abuse, and overcrowding in hospital
emergency rooms. Dr. Carmona will also be able to bring guidance in
these other critical areas. His experience in trauma care will help
guide him in dealing with the multitude of problems that are affecting
hospital emergency rooms. I urge every Senator to support his
confirmation.
Mr. DOMENICI. Madam President, I rise today in support of Dr. Richard
Carmona, the President's nominee to be the Surgeon General of the
United States.
The job of Surgeon General is a challenging and evolving one. The
traditional requirements of disease prevention and health promotion
continue to be vitally important. We must have a Surgeon General who is
qualified and prepared to address these issues.
However, in this post-September 11 world, being the chief Public
Health Officer also involves addressing the very real threat of
bioterrorism. Therefore, it is imperative that our Surgeon General have
the background and ability to deal with this new threat.
Fortunately, the President selected a candidate for this position who
is uniquely qualified to address all of these requirements of the job.
I won't attempt to recite all of his numerous accomplishments and
qualifications, but I would like to briefly touch on a few, simply to
illustrate why I believe this is the right man at the right time for
this job.
Dr. Carmona's educational background, with a medical degree and a
Masters in Public Health, provides a solid foundation. It is his
experience, however, that solidifies his qualification for this
position.
Dr. Carmona has a tremendous amount of hands-on experience as a
trauma surgeon, professor, and medical director of the Arizona
Department of Public Safety Air Rescue Unit. His experience as a
professor at the University of Arizona has given him the opportunity to
teach about public health, surgery, and family and community medicine.
As a result, he has spent a great deal of time dealing with those more
traditional aspects of the job.
As for the more recent responsibilities that come with being named
Surgeon General, Dr. Carmona has been working on the issue of
bioterrorism since the mid-1990's. He has worked to develop seminars on
bioterrorism for medical students. Furthermore, he recognizes the
importance of coordinating the schools of public health with other
local agencies to prevent and respond to potential threats.
While I could spend much more time touting the qualifications of Dr.
Carmona, I will instead end by saying I am thankful that this
remarkable American has answered the President's call to serve.
As a New Mexican, I am pleased to extend a neighborly welcome to
someone else from the great Southwest. As a U.S. Senator, I am proud to
cast my vote to confirm him as the Surgeon General of the United
States.
Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, I rise in strong support of the
nomination of Dr. Richard Carmona to be Surgeon General of the United
States.
Dr. Carmona's inspiring story is the living embodiment of the
American dream. A high school dropout, Richard Carmona first served our
nation with the Special Forces in Vietnam, where he became a decorated
Green Beret. Upon his return, he obtained his high school equivalency
and became the first member of his family to graduate from college. He
went on to become a nurse and later enrolled in medical school,
specializing in trauma surgery.
When he graduated, Dr. Carmona relocated in Tucson, Arizona, and
established southern Arizona's first trauma center. Later he continued
his education, obtaining a master's degree in public health from the
University of Arizona, where he now serves as a member of the faculty.
As a professor, Dr. Carmona shares his knowledge and experience in
clinical surgery, public health and community medicine with our
nation's future doctors.
Always in pursuit of more challenges, in 1986, Dr. Carmona joined the
Pima County Sheriff's Department as a surgeon and a part-time SWAT team
leader. Today, Dr. Carmona is a celebrated Deputy Sheriff. In fact, he
has received the honor of ``Top Cop'' from the National Association of
Police Organizations, and is one of the most decorated policemen in
Arizona.
In addition to his service, Dr. Carmona is a motivating community
leader. He has stressed the importance of local preparedness, and
warned of the dangers of a biological assault long before September 11.
After the terrorist attacks, Dr. Carmona recognized the
[[Page S7194]]
psychological impact of the events on Tucson residents, and coordinated
a team of mental health experts to assist them in dealing with the
associated trauma. Due to his bioterrorism experience, he was also put
in charge of implementing southern Arizona's bioterror and emergency
preparedness plans.
Although Arizona will surely miss this phenomenal man, and I know he
will miss Arizona, in Richard Carmona, our nation will gain an
invaluable leader. With his military and law enforcement background,
coupled with his demonstrated commitment to public health and community
preparedness, Dr. Carmona is extraordinarily, perhaps uniquely
qualified to address the needs of our nation as Surgeon General.
I urge all of my colleagues to favorably support this outstanding
nominee.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the nomination? If
not, without objection, the nomination is confirmed.
The nomination was confirmed.
Mr. KENNEDY. I ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider
the vote by which the nomination was confirmed be laid upon the table,
and the President be immediately notified of the action.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________