[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 47 (Tuesday, April 19, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3885-S3892]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2005--Continued
Amendment No. 387
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senator from
Maryland, Ms. Mikulski, will be recognized for 5 minutes, and the
Senator from Virginia, Mr. Warner, will be recognized for 2 minutes.
The Senator from Maryland.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise to ask my colleagues to support
cloture on the amendment I offered last week on the H-2B visas. This
amendment is desperately needed by small and seasonal business
throughout the United States. This amendment is identical to the
bipartisan bill I introduced in February called the Save Our Small and
Seasonal Business Act. It is designed to be a temporary solution to the
seasonal worker shortage that many coastal and resort States are
facing.
My amendment helps keep American jobs, keep American companies open,
and yet retains control of our borders. Small and seasonal businesses
all over our country are in crisis. They need seasonal workers before
the summer can begin so they can survive. For years they relied on an
H-2B visa program to meet their needs. The program allows businesses to
hire temporary seasonal foreign workers with a mandated return to their
home country when no other American workers are available. But this
year they can't get temporary labor. They have been facing this for the
last couple of years because they have been shut out of the program
because there is a cap and the cap is reached by the wintertime.
My amendment will help these employers by doing three things. One, it
temporarily exempts good actor workers from the H-2B cap so employers
can apply for and name employees who have already come back and forth
to the United States. It protects against fraud, and it provides a fair
and balanced allocation of the H-2B visas between winter and summer
people.
Let me be clear about my amendment. First, it protects American jobs.
Second, it is a short-term remedy because it is only a 2-year solution.
What it does is exempt seasonal workers from the cap. That means there
are no new workers. There are no new immigrants. It means no more new
guest workers. It means people who have worked here before, who have
played by the rules and gone back home, are the only ones who will be
eligible. They have to have been here in the last 3 years, worked in
absolute compliance with the law, and returned back home to Mexico as
required. So it is not new people who will be exempt. It is an
employment program for them and for us.
The employer has to go through the whole Department of Labor and
Homeland Security process so we are in compliance with labor rules and
we also ensure our national security.
Like my colleagues, I worry about fraud, so we have very strong
antifraud provisions. We also make the system better by creating this
fair allocation. We recognize that States need them in the winter, but
summertime people need them, too.
There is a crisis. Thousands of small businesses are affected by
this. Hitting the cap so early had a great impact on my own State of
Maryland. We had a lot of summer seasonal business, particularly over
there on the Eastern Shore, working that wonderful, fabulous Chesapeake
Bay I share with my colleagues from Virginia. Many of our businesses
used this program year after year. First they hire all the American
workers they can find. Then they turn to the H-2B to find additional
workers. I could give example after example, but I can tell you, if
they don't get this legislation, they will have to either lay off their
permanent workers or close their doors.
So what my legislation is all about is a simple legislative remedy
with strong bipartisan support. It is realistic. It is specific. It is
narrow. It stands up for American companies, protects our borders.
I know there is great urgency about this. We absolutely need it. Many
of my companies have been around for 100 years working in the
Chesapeake Bay. Many of them provide the livelihoods not only on the
Eastern Shore but because of our fabulous seafood processing industry.
We provide jobs also in Baltimore and Bethesda and other parts. We have
to pass this legislation because if they can't start to hire within the
next few weeks, we are going to close American companies and end up
with an even more porous border.
I urge the adoption of my amendment, but now I urge my colleagues to
vote for cloture.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished colleague from
Maryland. We have in the Senate a great respect and admiration for the
junior Senator from Maryland for her commitment for the little person.
I cannot think of another example in her long and distinguished career
in the Senate where there is a clearer case for the small business,
that individual who is struggling to make an honest living and provide
jobs for others.
We have before us today a tremendous challenge as it relates to
immigration on a wide range of issues. This program works. It is very
small in comparison to others, but it works. It serves the small
businesses, not only seafood, which we have talked about before in the
context of this amendment, but other small things--the bed and
breakfasts, the small hotels that are so important in our respective
States and elsewhere in America.
I say to our colleagues, as they come to join us, it is essential
that we pass this to help this category of small businesspersons and to
lend credence to a program that works. For every one of these
individuals who is brought in, it would be my judgment--and I concur,
with my distinguished colleague--that there are two or three permanent
American workers whose jobs are supported by their efforts. Oftentimes
most of these come in for a short period, some several months, largely
in the summertime; some in the fall. Then they go back to their homes
beyond the borders of the United States. But the American worker then
takes their work product and it enables them to have a full-time, 12-
month means of employment.
This is one on which my colleagues will be proud to vote for cloture.
In effect, it will enable this legislation to pass.
On behalf of the leadership of the Senate, I ask unanimous consent
that the filing deadline for second-degree amendments be extended until
the beginning of the cloture vote on the Mikulski amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I yield whatever time I have remaining
to the other Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Do I not have a bit of time on mine? On behalf of my
colleague from Virginia, I ask unanimous consent that he proceed for 2
minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Virginia and the
Senator from Maryland. I urge my colleagues to support the cloture
motion on this amendment. It is an immigration issue, but it is more
importantly a small business issue.
There are a lot of small businesses that are seasonal in nature. It
may be construction, landscaping, tourism, or the seafood industry. It
is vitally important that we get this immigration, this H-2B visa
issue, in order logically. These are law-abiding citizens who want to
keep their small business in operation, providing the services that
people in their communities so desire.
I thank the Chair and my colleagues. I hope all colleagues will vote
for small businesses, to keep them operating in States all across the
Nation and bring some common sense with this temporary remedy, to bring
some common sense and reasonableness to a program that every year ends
up in a crisis. I thank Senator Mikulski of Maryland and my colleague
from Virginia, Senator Warner, of course. All of us are
[[Page S3886]]
working together for the betterment of many family businesses.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, the two Senators from Virginia accept the
challenge of the Senator from Maryland to a cookoff on crabcakes.
Before we started this, the Senator talked about her mother's formula.
We have ours.
Ms. MIKULSKI. I thank the Senator from Virginia. I accept the
challenge. If it takes two of you to take me on, so be it.
Mr. WARNER. With that, I yield the floor.
Cloture Motion
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the clerk will
report the motion to invoke cloture.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
Cloture Motion
We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the
provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,
hereby move to bring to a close debate on the Mikulski
amendment No. 387 to H.R. 1268.
B.A. Mikulski, J. Lieberman, Jon Corzine, Jeff Bingaman,
Byron Dorgan, Ron Wyden, Ken Salazar, Hillary Clinton,
Mark Pryor, Dick Durbin, Bill Nelson, Chuck Schumer,
Barack Obama, Frank Lautenberg, Patrick Leahy, Debbie
Stabenow, Chris Dodd.
The PRESIDING OFFICER: By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum
call has been waived.
The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on
amendment No. 387, offered by the Senator from Maryland, shall be
brought to a close? The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. The
clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 83, nays 17, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 101 Leg.]
YEAS--83
Akaka
Allard
Allen
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Burns
Burr
Cantwell
Carper
Chafee
Chambliss
Clinton
Coburn
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Corzine
Craig
Crapo
Dayton
DeMint
DeWine
Dodd
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Enzi
Feingold
Feinstein
Graham
Gregg
Hagel
Harkin
Hatch
Inouye
Isakson
Jeffords
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
Mikulski
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Santorum
Sarbanes
Schumer
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stabenow
Stevens
Sununu
Talent
Thomas
Thune
Voinovich
Warner
Wyden
NAYS--17
Alexander
Brownback
Bunning
Byrd
Cochran
Cornyn
Ensign
Frist
Grassley
Hutchison
Inhofe
Lott
McConnell
Roberts
Sessions
Shelby
Vitter
The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 83, the nays are
17. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn having voted in
the affirmative, the motion is agreed to.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on my
amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the Save Our
Small and Seasonal Business Act, offered as an amendment by Senator
Mikulski to the Supplemental Appropriations Act.
As many of my colleagues have stated, this amendment is very simple
and straightforward. It is a temporary fix and does not reward illegal
workers. It basically allows those workers who have followed the rules
and returned home at the end of their season to come back to work in
the United States and not count against the H-2B visa cap.
As the situation stands right now, the many businesses across our
Nation that use the visas are limited by how many can be approved each
year. The demand of the visas is high and the Department of Labor has
certified that there are positions that cannot be filled locally. With
the cap being for the entire fiscal year, those businesses with their
season in the fall and winter have a better chance of getting the
employees they need. In Wyoming, we have strong summer and winter
seasons. Our winter businesses have been able to get their workers and
yet see the impact of not having enough employees in the summer.
The H-2B visas are used in Wyoming by small businesses in a variety
of areas. I have heard from hotels, restaurants, touring companies,
hunting companies, art and framing stores, and others. Many of these
people depend on their return workers to keep their businesses going.
While some may consider this unskilled labor, a return worker who knows
the job and knows the customers is invaluable for a small business.
This amendment is about helping our small and seasonal businesses
survive another year--to give them a chance to stay in business until
the Senate can fully debate needed changes in immigration reform. It
does not provide amnesty or benefit those who have broken our laws.
This type of visa actually puts such a high level of responsibility
on the employers that we should consider putting some of these
requirements on other types of visas. Under Federal law, the employer
must certify that they cannot hire locally, the employer must guarantee
wages, and the employer accepts responsibility for the worker. The
amendment we are considering today keeps that built-in protection. It
also increases fraud protection to help us ensure that those who have
the visa applications approved are those who need the employees.
The support we have already heard for this amendment is evidence of
the wide impact of the H-2B visa program. Businesses from mountain
States and coastal States are in need of help. We have an opportunity
to take positive action in support of the small businesses that drive
our economy. I encourage all my colleagues to support the Mikulski
amendment.
Amendment No. 555
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I have an amendment at the desk, No. 555.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Arizona [Mr. Kyl] proposes an amendment
numbered 555.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the
amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To modify the criteria for excluding certain H-2B workers
from the numerical limitations under section 214(g)(1)(B) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act)
On page 2, strike lines 5 through 11, and insert the
following:
``(9)(A) Subject to subparagraphs (B) and (C), an alien
counted toward the numerical limitations of paragraph (1)(B)
during any 1 of the 3 fiscal years prior to the submission of
a petition for a nonimmigrant worker described in section
101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b) may not be counted toward such
limitation for the fiscal year in which the petition is
approved.
``(B) A petition referred to in subparagraph (A) shall
include, with respect to an alien--
``(i) the full name of the alien; and
``(ii) a certification to the Department of Homeland
Security that the alien is a returning worker.
``(C) An H-2B visa for a returning worker shall be approved
only if the name of the individual on the petition is
confirmed by--
``(i) the Department of State; or
``(ii) if the alien is visa exempt, the Department of
Homeland Security.''.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 555) was agreed to.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to
lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Vote on Amendment No. 387, As Amended
Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, there is no further debate on the
amendment. I yield all of my time and, therefore, request a vote on my
amendment, as amended.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment,
as amended. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call
the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
The result was announced--yeas 94, nays 6, as follows:
[[Page S3887]]
[Rollcall Vote No. 102 Leg.]
YEAS--94
Akaka
Alexander
Allard
Allen
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Brownback
Bunning
Burns
Burr
Cantwell
Carper
Chafee
Chambliss
Clinton
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Cornyn
Corzine
Craig
Crapo
Dayton
DeMint
DeWine
Dodd
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Ensign
Enzi
Feingold
Feinstein
Frist
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Harkin
Hatch
Hutchison
Inouye
Isakson
Jeffords
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lott
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
McConnell
Mikulski
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Roberts
Rockefeller
Salazar
Santorum
Sarbanes
Schumer
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stabenow
Stevens
Sununu
Talent
Thomas
Thune
Voinovich
Warner
Wyden
NAYS--6
Byrd
Inhofe
Nelson (FL)
Sessions
Shelby
Vitter
The amendment (No. 387), as amended, was agreed to.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. ENSIGN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.
Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, the next vote will be on invoking cloture
on the bill. I hope we will, in fact, invoke cloture. If cloture is
invoked this evening, it will be the last vote of the evening. This
will give the two managers time to work through the pending amendments
to determine which are germane. We will resume consideration of the
bill tomorrow and complete action on it. I say this in advance of the
cloture vote. If cloture is not invoked tonight, then we would have
additional votes this evening.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, for the purpose of completing action on
cleared amendments, there are two amendments that do not require a
rollcall vote. Senator Hutchison has an amendment and Senator Chambliss
has an amendment. I ask unanimous consent that it be in order for them
to offer those amendments at this time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from Texas.
Amendment No. 379, As Modified
Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 379 and send a
modification to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Texas [Mrs. Hutchison], for herself, Mr.
Schumer, and Mr. Domenici, proposes an amendment numbered
379, as modified.
Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading
of the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment, as modified, is as follows:
(Purpose: To make unused EB3 visas available to bring nurses to the
United States through Department of State procedures)
On page 231, between lines 3 and 4, insert the following
new section:
RECAPTURE OF VISAS
Sec. 6047. Section 106(d)(2)(A) of the American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000
(Public Law 106-313; 8 U.S.C. 1153 note) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by inserting before the period at the
end of the second sentence ``and any such visa that is made
available due to the difference between the number of
employment-based visas that were made available in fiscal
year 2001, 2002, 2003, or 2004 and the number of such visas
that were actually used in such fiscal year shall be
available only to employment-based immigrants, and the
dependents of such immigrants, and 50% of such visas shall be
made available to those whose immigrant worker petitions were
approved based on schedule A, as defined in section 656.5 of
title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the
Secretary of Labor''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)(A), by striking ``and 2000'' and
inserting ``through 2004''.
Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, this is an amendment to recapture
unused EB-3 visas. Senator Schumer, Senator Kennedy and I have worked
on this to try to assure that 50 percent of the unused EB-3 visas help
resolve our serious nursing shortage. It is very important. These visas
go out of existence and cannot be recaptured except by an act of
Congress. They have already been authorized. We need to recapture the
unused visas from 2001 to 2004, add to the number of nurses we can
bring to our country, as well as the EB-3 engineers and educated
workforce that are waiting in the wings.
Mr. President, I ask all of my colleagues to support this amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Texas. This is
an amendment we have worked on together. As she said, it fills some
badly needed positions without increasing the overall number. I hope we
will support it.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment,
as modified, of the Senator from Texas.
The Senator from Georgia.
Amendment No. 418, As Further Modified
Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to further
modify my amendment No. 418 with the changes that are at the desk, and
also add a number of cosponsors whose names are also at the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment, as further modified, is as follows:
On page 169, between lines 8 and 9, insert the following:
prohibition on termination of existing joint-service multiyear
procurement contract for C/KC-130J aircraft
Sec. 1122. No funds in this Act may be obligated or
expended to terminate the joint service multiyear procurement
contract for C/KC-130J aircraft that is in effect on the date
of the enactment of this Act.
Mr. CHAMBLISS. I thank the Chair.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I stand with Senator Saxby Chambliss and
strongly support his amendment to ensure the C-130J contracts continue
without interruption this year.
The C-130J has quickly been adapted to play vital and unique roles in
our national defense efforts. Today, both U.S. and Allied C-130Js are
performing operational missions in CENTCOM with a mission capable rate
of over 90 percent. The J performs missions in Iraq in 1 day that
requires the C-130E or H model 2 days. It is equally critical for
relief operations like the Tsunami effort in Asia, where lives were
spared due to the C-130Js quick capabilities.
I have made several visits to the Little Rock Air Force Base, the
premier training facility for the C-130J, and I have seen first hand
the J model's new features and capabilities. The C-130Js climb higher
and faster, flies at higher cruise speeds, takes off and lands in a
shorter distance, and is easier, safer and cheaper to operate than its
predecessor.
The military officials and troops who I have talked with want to
continue using C-130Js and they depend on the model's new features on
the ground. Cutting production of the C-130Js would not only deny our
soldiers the cutting-edge technology they need on today's battlefield,
but it would leave the Air Force and Marine Corps with an aging and far
less capable tactical airlift.
As I am sure my colleagues are aware, the Air Force recently grounded
or severely restricted the flying of 90 C-130s due to old age. Eighty-
four of these carriers are assigned to the Active-Duty Air Force. By
further terminating the contracts for C-130Js, we would be leaving the
Air Force unable to meet its future tactical requirements. The Air
Force will be 116 aircraft short of requirement and the Marine Corps
will be short 18 aircraft.
Terminating the C-130J contracts is short-sighted from a tactical
standpoint, but it is also foolish from a financial standpoint.
Terminating the current contracts could cost taxpayers more than the
cost of building new carriers. Liability fees for ending the C-130J
multiyear contracts are estimated at $1.3 billion for the Air Force and
$0.3 billion for the Marine Corps for a total of $1.6 billion. This
estimate does not
[[Page S3888]]
include the increased costs of maintaining aging planes.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and help ensure our
military has the equipment it needs to effectively and safely carry out
their missions, now and in the future.
amendment no. 379, as modified
Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask for a voice vote on my
amendment. We need to dispose of amendment No. 379, as modified.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment,
as modified.
The amendment (No. 379), as modified, was agreed to.
Mrs. HUTCHISON. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. STEVENS. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
cloture motion
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the clerk will
report the motion to invoke cloture.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
Cloture Motion
We the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the
provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,
do hereby move to bring to a close debate on Calendar No. 67,
H.R. 1268.
Bill Frist, Mitch McConnell, Elizabeth Dole, Olympia
Snowe, Norm Coleman, Pat Roberts, Orrin Hatch, John
Cornyn, Craig Thomas, Michael Enzi, Larry E. Craig,
Trent Lott, George V. Voinovich, Bob Bennett, Pete
Domenici, Richard Burr, James Talent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum
call has been waived.
The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on H.R.
1268, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the
Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005, Humanitarian Assistance
Code of Conduct Act of 2005, shall be brought to a close?
The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
The clerk will call the roll.
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 100, nays 0, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 103 Leg.]
YEAS--100
Akaka
Alexander
Allard
Allen
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Brownback
Bunning
Burns
Burr
Byrd
Cantwell
Carper
Chafee
Chambliss
Clinton
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Cornyn
Corzine
Craig
Crapo
Dayton
DeMint
DeWine
Dodd
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Ensign
Enzi
Feingold
Feinstein
Frist
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Harkin
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Inouye
Isakson
Jeffords
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lott
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
McConnell
Mikulski
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Roberts
Rockefeller
Salazar
Santorum
Sarbanes
Schumer
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stabenow
Stevens
Sununu
Talent
Thomas
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Wyden
The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 100, the nays are
0. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn having voted in
the affirmative, the motion is agreed to.
Mr. COCHRAN. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. McCAIN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to yield to the
Senator from West Virginia for the purposes of proposing an amendment
and then following that, I regain the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Amendment No. 516
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank the very distinguished Senator from
Arizona for his characteristic courtesy.
I call up amendment No. 516 and ask that it be stated and temporarily
laid aside.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from West Virginia [Mr. Byrd] proposes an
amendment numbered 516.
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of
the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To increase funding for border security)
On page 187, after line 4, insert the following:
reduction in funding for diplomatic and consular programs
The amount for ``Diplomatic and Consular Programs'' under
chapter 2 of title II shall be $357,700,000.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Salaries and Expenses
For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'',
$389,613,000, of which $128,000,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2006, shall be available for the
enforcement of immigration and customs laws, detention and
removal, and investigations, including the hiring of
immigration investigators, enforcement agents, and
deportation officers, and the provision of detention bed
space, and of which the Assistant Secretary for Immigration
and Customs Enforcement shall transfer (1) $179,745,000, to
Customs and Border Protection, to remain available until
September 30, 2006, for ``Salaries and Expenses'', for the
hiring of Border Patrol agents and related mission support
expenses and continued operation of unmanned aerial vehicles
along the Southwest Border; (2) $67,438,000, to Customs and
Border Protection, to remain available until expended, for
``Construction''; (3) $10,471,000, to the Federal Law
Enforcement Training Center, to remain available until
September 30, 2006, for ``Salaries and Expenses''; and (4)
$3,959,000, to the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center,
to remain available until expended, for ``Acquisition,
Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses'', for the
provision of training at the Border Patrol Academy.
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask that the amendment be temporarily laid
aside.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Senator from
Arizona.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I am obviously always glad to accommodate
the most distinguished Member of the Senate from West Virginia.
The emergency supplemental appropriations for Defense, the global war
on terror, and tsunami relief for 2005 provides critical resources for
our men and women in uniform and for our foremost foreign policy
priorities. While I recognize the importance of its timely passage, I
am concerned it includes a number of provisions that do not constitute
``emergency spending.'' These items clearly should be debated and
funded under the regular order.
Before I go further, I would like to congratulate the distinguished
chairman of the Appropriations Committee for the hard work that he and
his staff have done in putting together this very vital appropriations
measure to pursue the war on terror and, of course, the war in
Afghanistan and Iraq.
We ought to ask a basic question: What is the purpose of emergency
appropriations? It is twofold. First, it is supposed to provide funding
for critical expenditures beyond what was anticipated in the
President's annual budget request; second, it is supposed to pay for
vital priorities that simply cannot wait until next year's budget.
What are the common elements? The unexpected and the time sensitive.
Simply put, the purpose of the supplemental appropriations bill is to
fund our country's urgent and unanticipated needs.
We have to consider this in the context of a couple of comments that
have been made recently. At a conference in February, David Walker, the
Comptroller General of the United States, said:
If we are to continue on our present path, we'll see
pressure for deep spending cuts or dramatic tax increases.
GAO's long-term budget simulations paint a chilling picture.
If we do nothing, by 2040 we may have to cut federal spending
by more than half or raise federal taxes by more than two and
a half times to balance the budget. Clearly, the status quo
is both unsustainable and difficult choices are unavoidable.
And the longer we wait, the more onerous our options will
become and the less transition time we will have.
Is that really the kind of legacy we should leave to future
generations of Americans?
Referring to our economic outlook, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan
Greenspan testified before Congress:
[[Page S3889]]
(T)he dimension of the challenge is enormous. The one
certainty is that the resolution of this situation will
require difficult choices and that the future performance of
the economy will depend on those choices. No changes will be
easy, as they all will involve lowering claims on resources
or raising financial obligations. It falls on the Congress to
determine how best to address the competing claims.
He said it falls on Congress. The head of the U.S. Government's chief
watchdog agency and the Nation's chief economist agree we are in real
trouble. We are in real trouble. Here is a radical idea for my
colleagues to consider to help secure our economic future: Stop using
scarce Federal dollars, taxpayers' dollars to fund unnecessary earmarks
and all the other frivolous projects that do nothing to provide for the
greater good of our Nation.
A case in point of what this legislation is and should be all about
is the urgent need of Balad Air Base in Iraq, a U.S. Army camp on the
very front line of the war on terror. The service members who live
there have nicknamed it ``Mortaritaville'' because of the frequency of
insurgent mortar attacks. Balad is quickly becoming a hub for military
operations in the Sunni Triangle and is home to more than 20,000 U.S.
troops. As a result, the camp's infrastructure is becoming overwhelmed
and requires more than $63 million to remain functional and effective.
This camp needs emergency funding.
The Department of Defense listed construction of a hospital facility,
command and control buildings, and related equipment among its
emergency needs for Balad, and appropriators in the House and Senate
have rightly agreed to such funding. The DOD and our appropriators
recognize these improvements to Balad are critical to our efforts in
Iraq and the broader war on terror, and this is why we have an
emergency supplemental appropriations bill to fund these types of
needs.
The bill includes many important provisions such as increased death
benefits, military operational costs, recapitalization of equipment,
and research and development associated with the war on terror to which
I lend my strongest support.
For example, this bill provides $1.285 billion in assistance to the
security forces of Afghanistan; $5.7 billion for the security forces of
Iraq; $227 million for counternarcotics activities in Afghanistan and
Pakistan; and $44 million for humanitarian assistance in Darfur, Sudan.
The foreign affairs provisions of this bill are remarkably free of
pork. As one who supports ensuring that taxpayers' dollars are spent
properly, I commend my colleagues and the chairman for their restraint
in this area. Unfortunately, due to its ``must pass'' nature, a number
of unauthorized provisions and funding not requested by the President
and unrelated to defense or foreign affairs have been included in this
bill, and literally hundreds of amendments have been attempted to be
added to the bill. The administration's proposed definition of an
emergency requirement is ``a necessary expenditure that is sudden,
urgent, unforeseen, and not permanent.''
We should do everything in our power to ensure this bill passes. But
we must also ensure every item in it is of a true emergency nature.
It is evident that some of my colleagues misunderstand the purpose of
supplemental appropriations, and continue to seek to add spending to
this bill that should be addressed as part of the regular
appropriations process. In fact, there is an unmistakable trend turning
emergency supplementals into a second budget request. Many programs
that should be in the baseline budget are somehow finding their way
into this supplemental. We must not allow this trend to continue--we
must not allow the supplemental to become a de facto second budget.
Let's look at a few examples of the kind of non-emergency spending
that has found its way into this bill.
There is $10 million for the University of Hawaii Library. I was
unaware that the war in Iraq and Afghanistan was also being fought at
the University of Hawaii's library.
There is $2.4 million to the Forest Service to repair damage to
national forest lands--surely a necessary expense--but one that should
be funded through the proper process, beginning with an authorization
and testimony by officials from the Forest Service in a public hearing.
There is $23 million to the Capitol Police for the construction of an
``off-site delivery facility.'' I'll be the first one around here to
praise the U.S. Capitol police for the good work that they do--I am
sure this facility is a high priority to them. But, again, let's
provide funding for this through the proper process--public hearings,
authorizing legislation, and the proper appropriations vehicle.
There is language in the bill to increase authorized funds for a fish
hatchery in Fort Peck, Montana, from $20 million to $25 million. I
would like to know how a ``multi-species fish hatchery'' is related to
the War on Terror. Does the author of such language believe the hatched
fish may enlist in our armed forces? Was it requested by the President
as an emergency need? No. Is this authorization related to the stated
purpose of the supplemental? No.
The bill also includes language authorizing the Secretary of the
Interior to analyze the viability of a sanctuary for the Rio Grande
Silvery Minnow in the Middle Rio Grande Valley. The Rio Grande Silvery
Minnow is a stout silvery minnow with moderately small eyes and a small
mouth. Adults minnows may reach 3.5 inches in total length. Perhaps the
silvery minnow could enlist with the Fort Peck, MT fish. I will await
the Secretary's study.
The bill includes $500,000 for a study of wind energy in North Dakota
and South Dakota. I believe we can all agree that this expenditure
earmark is not urgent. In fact, I am not certain there is a need for a
study as the wind energy potential in the Dakotas is well-established.
And I don't know what it has to do with fighting the war on terror or
aiding the tsunami disaster victims.
Another $500,000 is earmarked to the University of Nevada Reno for
the Oral History of the Negotiated Settlement project. I ask my
colleagues, how is this useful to the war on terror? How is this an
emergency need?
No bill would be complete without several projects for the State of
Alaska. The bill includes language that addresses how the Agriculture
Department pays dairy farmers in Alaska. I certainly don't wish to
neglect our Alaskan dairy farmers, but I cannot support prioritizing
their payment issues over the needs of our soldiers.
The bill includes $175,000 not requested by the President to remove
the sunken vessel State of Pennsylvania from the Christina River in
Delaware. That particular vessel has been at the bottom of the
Christina River for more than a decade, is not endangering commercial
traffic on the river, and I am sure Congress can wait to fund its
removal during the regular appropriations process.
Another $55 million is earmarked for a wastewater treatment facility
in Desoto County, MS. How exactly does this help the troops?
Not only do I have concerns with some of the provisions the
Appropriations Committee included in this bill, as I have highlighted,
I am very troubled by some of the amendments being proposed. I am well
aware that many of my colleagues--and their staffs--have expressed
frustrations about my objections to their amendments. I have, and will
continue, to object to adopting certain amendments by unanimous
consent. This is an ``emergency supplemental''--its not a Christmas
wish list. I frankly do not understand the managers willingness to
agree to some of these proposals. Some of them sound reasonable, but
who can be sure? That is why the President's request is so important--
it is thought out and designed to carry out specific objectives that
are urgent and necessary. I do not particularly care for being in the
position of ``bad cop'', but so be it. But I cannot agree to unanimous
approval of amendments that appear more wishful and urgent. For
example, $1 million for lobster disease in the northeast. I do not
doubt that this may be a problem but it simply does not belong on an
emergency supplemental appropriations bill to fund the war. There is
legislation regarding State regulation of hunting and fishing. I
support this concept, and even cosponsored a bill last year to reaffirm
the authority of State governments to regulate their own hunting and
fishing programs. But the simple
[[Page S3890]]
fact remains that tacking this legislation onto a war-time emergency
supplemental is both inappropriate and unnecessary. We can and should
pass this bill through the regular legislative process.
Tomorrow I will be joining with my friend from Oklahoma, Senator
Coburn, in offering amendments to strike the most egregious,
unnecessary, and non-emergency provisions from this bill. I urge my
colleagues to support our efforts to keep this important legislation
free from non-essential, pork barrel projects.
Let me close by noting that I appreciate the hard work of the
Appropriations Committee and their staff. Field visits were conducted
in Afghanistan and the Middle East as the Committee diligently
researched the DoD's many requests pursuant to the war on terror. But I
am concerned about their decision to include unnecessary, nonemergency
earmarks in this bill and the accompanying report. When considering
military construction projects like those in Balad, Iraq, consideration
was taken to determine whether the project was truly of an emergency
nature. Why did the Committee not apply the same consideration to the
fish hatchery in Montana?
As I mentioned, on tomorrow I have a couple of amendments we will be
seeking votes on. I hope we realize we have a looming deficit, a trade
deficit, and unanticipated expenses concerning the war in Iraq. There
was one high-ranking Defense official at the time of the beginning of
the war in Iraq who said the oil revenues would pay for United States
expenses. We are now up to close to $300 billion and we are not yet
able to reduce our forces. I think we ought to take into consideration
the fact that we will have continued, very significant expenses
associated with the conflict in Iraq and in Afghanistan before we begin
appropriating money for fish hatcheries and for libraries.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
Mr. SPECTER. I thank the Chair.
(The remarks of Mr. Specter and Mr. Leahy pertaining to the
introduction of S. 852 are located in today's Record under ``Statements
on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
Amendment No. 440
Mr. REID. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Biden, I send an
amendment to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Nevada [Mr. Reid], for Mr. Biden, proposes
an amendment numbered 440.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the
amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To appropriate, with an offset, $6,000,000 for the Defense
Health Program for force protection work and medical care at the
Vaccine Health Care Centers)
On page 169, between lines 8 and 9, insert the following:
force protection work and medical care at vaccine health care centers
Sec. 1122. (a) Increase in Amount for Defense Health
Program.--The amount appropriated by this chapter under the
heading ``Defense Health Program'' is hereby increased by
$6,000,000.
(b) Availability of Amount.--Of the amount appropriated or
otherwise made available by this chapter under the heading
``Defense Health Program'', as increased by subsection (a),
$6,000,000 shall be available for force protection work and
medical care at the Vaccine Health Care Centers.
(c) Offset.--The amount appropriated by chapter 2 of this
title under the heading ``Global War on Terror Partners
Fund'' is hereby reduced by $6,000,000.
Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I rise to offer amendment No. 440 on behalf
of myself, Senator Bingaman, and Senator Carper to fully protect the
health of our military personnel. Let me explain. The military
regularly protects our troops by vaccinating them. There are vaccines
to keep personnel healthy in the face of common illnesses like the flu
and to protect them from biological warfare agents such as anthrax or
smallpox.
These force protection measures are important. Equally important is
the recognition that not every person will react positively to a
vaccination.
Vaccines, even those generally considered safe, are still drugs put
into the body. There will always be a small number of personnel whose
bodies have an adverse reaction to a safe vaccine. In order to deal
with this, the Vaccine Health Care Centers Network was established in
2001.
The centers act as a specialized medical unit that can provide the
best possible clinical care to any military member, active duty, Guard
or Reserve, or their family that has a severe reaction. They also
advise the Department of Defense regarding vaccine administration
policies and educate military health care professionals regarding the
safest and best practices for vaccine administration. Their overall
mission is to promote vaccine safety and provide expert knowledge to
patients and physicians.
Why is this so important? As many of my colleagues know, the number
of adults who get regular vaccines is fairly small. While we have
specialists who deal with childhood vaccinations and problems that
might develop, the population of adults regularly vaccinated with
anything more than the flu vaccine is small.
In the military, the reverse is true. Military personnel are
regularly vaccinated for travel, for threats relating to their theater
of operation, and for thinks such as the flu.
For this reason, it is essential that the military have a centralized
place to capture the information on those who experience severe
problems. In particular, because serious problems are rare, it is
difficult for the average base physician to develop the expertise
needed to provide the best treatment.
Let me give my colleagues more specifics.
In fiscal year 2004, the centers responded to over 120,000 emails and
other consultation inquiries.
They managed over 600 cases of prolonged adverse events, which means
literally over 58,000 pages of medical information reviewed. These are
very complex and specialized medical cases. They require personnel with
expertise and the ability to dedicate significant time.
Since beginning operations in 2001, the total number of cases managed
through fiscal year 2004 is 1,341.
Without the centers, that is over one thousand military personnel who
would not have gotten the care they deserve. The best possible care we
can provide.
In addition to providing care and consultative services, the centers
developed clinical guidelines and aids for physicians and nurses giving
vaccines. Over 28,000 immunization ``tool kits'' were distributed. They
have also provided ongoing education at bases through lectures and
training.
In addition, they have worked collaboratively with outside
researchers to get the best possible analysis of the trends in cases
that they do see.
This has all been done by an extremely small staff--only one full-
time doctor, three nurse practitioners, and five educators and support
staff at each of the four regional facilities. The value and medical
services they have provided to the entire military family--Army, Navy,
Air Force, Marines, and Coast Guard--has been extraordinary.
Military personnel and their dependents are more confident in the
vaccination programs and reports from those who do suffer adverse
reactions are extremely positive regarding the care they now get from
the centers.
Why do we need to provide $6 million on the emergency supplemental
for this? The reason is simple. The centers are in danger of losing
part of their funding this fiscal year. They are currently funded with
Army global war on terror money.
I applaud the Army for recognizing the need for the centers and
providing those funds from their wartime allocation. But the Army is
only the executive agent for what is a defense-wide service. They
cannot be the sole funder. I am very concerned that the funding this
year is being redirected because other services have not budgeted for
the centers' work, despite the fact that 46 percent of their cases were
related to Air Force, Navy, and Marines personnel.
Clearly, force protection in this time of war demands a good
vaccination program. Equally clear, that program must include quality
care for those who suffer adverse events in every service, not just the
Army.
[[Page S3891]]
In addition, as we look ahead, we all anticipate a growing need for
biological defenses, particularly vaccines. We established Project
BioShield for that very reason.
At this point, there is no civilian equivalent to the Vaccine Health
Care Centers Network, but I think we are going to need to consider
setting up some collaborative effort to take advantage of their
knowledge should a mass civilian inoculation become necessary.
Let me also remind my colleagues that the Department of Defense asked
for and received an emergency authority from the Department of Health
and Human Services to begin administering the anthrax vaccine.
I will not go into the technicalities of that, but it basically
allows the military to vaccinate personnel with informed consent. If
the Department believes it is an emergency to resume that vaccine, how
can we consider preserving the Vaccine Health Care Centers any less?
At the end of the day, this is very simple. We simply cannot mandate
that military personnel take these vaccines and then abandon them when
a problem arises.
This is the same as providing a prosthesis to someone who loses a
limb.
If military personnel are injured because of their service to this
Nation, we have an absolute obligation to give them the best possible
care. Anything less is unconscionable.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, we have some requests to make on behalf
of the managers of the bill with respect to amendments that have been
cleared on both sides of the aisle. We understand there has been a
review undertaken by staff to try to ensure that the amendments which
are going to be presented to the Senate are consistent with the vote
taken on cloture earlier in the day.
Amendment No. 343
With that information, I call up amendment No. 343 on behalf of Mr.
Pryor regarding Camp Joseph T. Robinson.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the pending amendment is
laid aside.
The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Cochran], for Mr. Pryor, proposes
an amendment numbered 343.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of
the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To release to the State of Arkansas a reversionary interest
in Camp Joseph T. Robinson)
On page 231, between lines 3 and 4, insert the following:
Sec. 6047. The United States releases to the State of
Arkansas the reversionary interest described in sections 2
and 3 of the Act entitled ``An Act authorizing the transfer
of part of Camp Joseph T. Robinson to the State of
Arkansas'', approved June 30, 1950 (64 Stat. 311, chapter
429), in and to the surface estate of the land constituting
Camp Joseph T. Robinson, Arkansas, which lies east of the
Batesville Pike county road, in sections 24, 25, and 36,
township 3 north, range 12 west, Pulaski County, Arkansas.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I know of no request for debate on the
amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no debate, the question is on
agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 343) was agreed to.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote, and I move
to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Amendment No. 427, as modified
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 427 on behalf of
Mr. Durbin regarding Iraqi security services.
Mr. President, I also send a modification of the amendment to the
desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is modified.
The amendment (No. 427), as modified, is as follows:
On page 169, between lines 8 and 9, insert the following:
reports on iraqi security forces
Sec. 1122. Not later than 60 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, and every 90 days thereafter, the
President shall submit an unclassified report to Congress,
which may include a classified annex, that includes a
description of the following:
(1) The extent to which funding appropriated by this Act
will be used to train and equip capable and effectively led
Iraqi security services and promote stability and security in
Iraq.
(2) The estimated strength of the Iraqi insurgency and the
extent to which it is composed of non-Iraqi fighters, and any
changes over the previous 90-day period.
(3) A description of all militias operating in Iraq,
including their number, size, strength, military
effectiveness, leadership, sources of external support,
sources of internal support, estimated types and numbers of
equipment and armaments in their possession, legal status,
and the status of efforts to disarm, demobilize, and
reintegrate each militia.
(4) The extent to which recruiting, training, and equipping
goals and standards for Iraqi security forces are being met,
including the number of Iraqis recruited and trained for the
army, air force, navy, and other Ministry of Defense forces,
police, and highway patrol of Iraq, and all other Ministry of
Interior forces, and the extent to which personal and unit
equipment requirements have been met.
(5) A description of the criteria for assessing the
capabilities and readiness of Iraqi security forces.
(6) An evaluation of the operational readiness status of
Iraqi military forces and special police, including the type,
number, size, and organizational structure of Iraqi
battalions that are--
(A) capable of conducting counterinsurgency operations
independently;
(B) capable of conducting counterinsurgency operations with
United States or Coalition mentors and enablers; or
(C) not ready to conduct counterinsurgency operations.
(7) The extent to which funding appropriated by this Act
will be used to train capable, well-equipped, and effectively
led Iraqi police forces, and an evaluation of Iraqi police
forces, including--
(A) the number of police recruits that have received
classroom instruction and the duration of such instruction;
(B) the number of veteran police officers who have received
classroom instruction and the duration of such instruction;
(C) the number of police candidates screened by the Iraqi
Police Screening Service screening project, the number of
candidates derived from other entry procedures, and the
overall success rates of those groups of candidates;
(D) the number of Iraqi police forces who have received
field training by international police trainers and the
duration of such instruction;
(E) a description of the field training program, including
the number, the planned number, and nationality of
international field trainers;
(F) the number of police present for duty;
(G) data related to attrition rates; and
(H) a description of the training that Iraqi police have
received regarding human rights and the rule of law.
(8) The estimated total number of Iraqi battalions needed
for the Iraqi security forces to perform duties now being
undertaken by the Coalition Forces, including defending
Iraq's borders, defeating the insurgency, and providing law
and order.
(9) The extent to which funding appropriated by this Act
will be used to train Iraqi security forces in
counterinsurgency operations and the estimated total number
of Iraqi security force personnel expected to be trained,
equipped, and capable of participating in counterinsurgency
operations by the end of 2005 and of 2006.
(10) The estimated total number of adequately trained,
equipped, and led Iraqi battalions expected to be capable of
conducting counterinsurgency operations independently and the
estimated total number expected to be capable of conducting
counterinsurgency operations with United States or Coalition
mentors and enablers by the end of 2005 and of 2006.
(11) An assessment of the effectiveness of the chain of
command of the Iraqi military.
(12) The number and nationality of Coalition mentors and
advisers working with Iraqi security forces as of the date of
the report, plans for decreasing or increasing the number of
such mentors and advisers, and a description of their
activities.
(13) A list of countries of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organisation (``NATO'') participating in the NATO mission for
training of Iraqi security forces and the number of troops
from each country dedicated to the mission.
(14) A list of countries participating in training Iraqi
security forces outside the NATO training mission and the
number of troops from each country dedicated to the mission.
(15) For any country, which made an offer to provide forces
for training that has not been accepted, an explanation of
the reasons why the offer was not accepted.
(16) For offers to provide forces for training that have
been accepted by the Iraqi government, a report on the status
of such training efforts, including the number of troops
involved by country and the number of Iraqi security forces
trained.
[[Page S3892]]
(17) An assessment of the progress of the National Assembly
of Iraq in drafting and ratifying the permanent constitution
of Iraq, and the performance of the new Iraqi Government in
its protection of the rights of minorities and individual
human rights, and its adherence to common democratic
practices.
(18) The estimated number of United States military forces
who will be needed in Iraq 6, 12, and 18 months from the date
of the report.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I know of no requests for debate on the
amendment as modified.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, the question is
on agreeing to the amendment, as modified.
The amendment (No. 427), as modified, was agreed to.
Mr. COCHRAN. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. LEAHY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Amendment No. 399
Mr. COCHRAN. I call up amendment numbered 399, on behalf of Mr.
Dorgan, regarding the independent counsel investigation of Henry
Cisneros.
I know of no requests for debate on the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, the question is
on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 399) was agreed to.
Mr. COCHRAN. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. LEAHY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Amendment No. 560
Mr. COCHRAN. I send to the desk an amendment on behalf of Mr. Shelby,
regarding judicial security enhancements.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Mississippi, [Mr. Cochran], for Mr.
Shelby, for Mr. Kennedy, for himself, Mr. Durbin and Mr.
Obama, proposes an amendment numbered 560.
Mr. COCHRAN. I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be
dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To clarify funding for judicial security enhancements)
On page 184, line 16, after ``$11,935,000,'', insert ``for
increased judicial security outside of courthouse facilities,
including priority consideration of home intrusion detection
systems in the homes of federal judges,''.
Mr. COCHRAN. I know of no requests for debate on the amendment
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, the question is
on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 560) was agreed to.
Mr. COCHRAN. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. LEAHY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Amendment No. 561
Mr. COCHRAN. I send to the desk an amendment on behalf of Mr. Reid of
Nevada--technical in nature--and ask it be reported.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Mississippi, [Mr. Cochran], for Mr. Reid
of Nevada, proposes an amendment numbered 561.
Mr. COCHRAN. I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be
dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To modify the provision relating to agricultural and natural
resource conservation activities in the Walker River Basin, Nevada)
In section 6017(b)(1)(A), insert ``appurtenant to the
land'' after ``water''.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I know of no requests for debate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 561) was agreed to.
Mr. COCHRAN. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. LEAHY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Amendment No. 562
Mr. COCHRAN. My final request is to send to the desk another
amendment on behalf of Mr. Reid of Nevada that is technical in nature.
I ask that it be reported.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Cochran], for Mr. Reid of
Nevada, proposes an amendment numbered 562.
Mr. COCHRAN. I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be
dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To modify the provision relating to the water lease and
purchase program for the Walker River Paiute Tribe)
In section 6017(c)(2), strike subparagraphs (A) and (B) and
insert the following:
(A) acquired only from willing sellers;
(B) designed to maximize water conveyances to Walker Lake;
and
(C) located only within the Walker River Paiute Indian
Reservation.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I know of no requests for debate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, the question is
on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 562) was agreed to.
Mr. COCHRAN. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. LEAHY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Senator, my
friend from Vermont. He is a valuable member of the Appropriations
Committee.
Mr. President, I am pleased with the progress we have been able to
make on this supplemental appropriations bill today. The Senate is
working hard to ensure we consider requests that have merit which
should be included in this bill.
The focus of the bill, as everyone realizes, though, is on assisting
and providing for our troops, the Department of Defense facilities that
are located in Iraq, trying to help ensure we protect the forces we
have there, giving them what they need to bring these operations to a
successful conclusion. We have made tremendous progress there, as well
as in Afghanistan, bringing an opportunity for peace and freedom to the
people of both of those countries. It is quite amazing to see the
success that has been achieved in that direction, as those nations
continue to work to build the infrastructure for democracy and a
growing economy.
Our troops still need additional assistance, and that is why it is
important for us to respond in a positive way to the requests of the
administration to fund those needs and provide that assistance which
will play such a critical role in their success.
The funds appropriated in this bill will provide support, pay in
allowances. It will provide additional equipment, more modern and more
effective equipment, so that the chances of success will be enhanced.
We do not want to drag out this supplemental unnecessarily. We need
to complete action on the bill so we can go to conference with our
counterpart committee, the Appropriations Committee in the House, and
work out differences between the two bodies on this bill.
We do not want to delay this supplemental. We do not want to endanger
our troops and our national interests in those areas of the world and
here at home by unnecessary delay.
We appreciate the cooperation of all Senators. I thank everyone who
has played a part today in our success in moving forward with this
legislation.
Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________