[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 106 (Friday, July 29, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9367-S9373]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2006--Continued
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there is 2 minutes
equally divided on the conference report accompanying H.R. 2361.
Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I rise in support of the Interior
appropriations conference report and to speak about two key provisions:
one to protect our veterans and one to protect our kids.
First, the conference report includes a much needed $1.5 billion
supplemental spending package for veterans health care. This $1.5
billion will cover the massive budgetary shortfall that Congress only
recently discovered, and I hope this will prevent the loss of some
important veterans health care services.
Earlier this year, I, along with my Democratic colleagues on the
Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee, repeatedly asked the Department of
Veterans Affairs if the President's budget provided sufficient funds
for veterans health care. The response we received was yes, the funds
are sufficient.
Unfortunately, that response was not consistent with what folks on
the ground were saying about VA health care services. They complained
of long waiting periods for doctor's appointments, reduced office hours
at veterans clinics, an increased demand for services, and reduced
access. These voices were too loud to ignore, so I joined my colleagues
Senator Murray and Senator Akaka here on the floor of the Senate to ask
for additional funding for VA health care. Those efforts were
[[Page S9368]]
defeated, but we knew that a possible crisis was on its way.
That crisis became a reality when it was discovered that the VA was
more than $1.5 billion in the hole on its health care funding. Like
many of my colleagues in the Senate, I was shocked by that admission.
I was pleased to join Senator Murray in cosponsoring both a stand-
alone bill and an amendment to the Interior appropriations bill to get
veterans the funding they need so they can get the health care that
they have earned and deserve.
The $1.5 billion appropriated by today's Interior appropriations
conference report will help ensure that our Nation's veterans get that
health care. With this funding, our veterans facilities also will get
the maintenance they need, and I hope the VA will be able to keep its
hands out of its rainy day fund.
I don't think there is sone person in this Senate who would want to
tell a returning soldier who fought and bled for our country: Sorry,
but when it comes to getting health care, you are on your own.
I was right. The inclusion of this provision in the conference report
proves that we can work together to do what is necessary for our
Nation's veterans.
I thank Senator Murray, Senator Craig, and Senator Akaka for their
leadership on this issue. I hope we can work together--as we do today--
to ensure that veterans are not shortchanged next year. They deserve
better.
Second, I want to thank my colleagues for including an amendment in
the conference report that is important to parents of small children
all over the country but particularly in my hometown of Chicago. I am
referring to my amendment prohibiting EPA from spending tax dollars to
delay the promulgation of regulations that are now 9 years overdue.
These regulations, when promulgated, would require contractors to
reduce lead paint exposure during home renovation and remodeling.
I have raised this issue with EPA on numerous occasions and reminded
them of the serious health dangers that high blood lead levels pose for
children. Now, reluctantly, EPA officials have promised me these rules
will be issued by the end of the year. I intend to use this amendment
to hold them to their word. So today when we pass this funding bill, I
can tell the youngest, poorest citizens of Illinois that Congress is
doing its part to keep them safe from lead paint exposure.
I ask unanimous consent that my letter to EPA Administrator Johnson
regarding this issue be printed into the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC, July 25, 2005.
Hon. Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC.
Dear Administrator Johnson: As you may know, I have been
concerned about the failure of the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) to promulgate regulations pursuant to 15 U.S.C.
Sec. 2682(c)(3). This provision requires EPA to issue rules
for contractors to reduce lead exposure during home
renovation and remodeling by October 1996. Almost nine years
later, these rules still have not been issued, and I have
spent the past few months trying to understand why.
When your nomination was considered by the Senate
Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee in April, I
asked you when EPA was going to issue these rules. You stated
that EPA was focusing on a voluntary education and outreach
program and ``will evaluate the effectiveness of this effort
and will determine what additional steps may be necessary,
including regulation.'' Of course, 15 U.S.C. Sec. 2682(c)(3)
does not give EPA the option of whether to promulgate
regulations.
In May, Sen. Boxer, Rep. Waxman, and I wrote a follow-up
letter to you, asking once again when EPA would issue these
rules on lead. We received no response for two months.
In June, I included an amendment in the EPA appropriations
bill that would prohibit the agency from spending any funds
to delay the implementation of 15 U.S.C. Sec. 2682(c)(3).
That bill passed the Senate unanimously.
When Deputy Administrator-designate Marcus Peacock appeared
before the EPW Committee two weeks ago, I asked him about the
status of these lead rules. Responding to written questions
that I submitted to him after the hearing, Mr. Peacock
stated: ``As I understand it, the Agency will announce by the
end of this year a comprehensive program, which will include
a proposed regulation, as well as an extensive education and
outreach campaign aimed at the renovation, repair, and
painting industry and the consumer.''
I am pleased by Mr. Peacock's statement, which is a
significant departure from your response in April. I am also
encouraged by a letter I received last week from Susan Hazen,
Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator, responding to my
May letter. Ms. Hazen reiterated that ``the Agency plans to
announce by the end of this year, a comprehensive program
that will include a proposed rule.''
In light of the commitments I received from Mr. Peacock and
Ms. Hazen, I voted last Wednesday to confirm Mr. Peacock for
the deputy administrator position. However, I want you to
know that I will be closely monitoring EPA's actions
regarding lead paint and will expect you to honor your
commitment to issue these proposed rules by December 31,
2005.
I look forward to working with you on this important issue.
Sincerely,
Barack Obama,
United States Senator.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, the Interior appropriations conference
report before us today is a very important piece of legislation. This
conference report contains over $26.2 billion to fund the Department of
the Interior, the National Park Service, the Forest Service, the
Environmental Protection Agency, and the Indian Health Service, among
many others. This represents an increase of approximately $500 million
over the administration's budget request. While I appreciate the
importance of funding the programs in this legislation, I am
disappointed that we have once again exceeded the requested level of
spending.
One bright note of this bill is the correction of the funding
shortfall for the Department of Veterans Affairs' health care programs
that was only recently brought to the attention of Congress. I am
pleased that we have all acted quickly to provide an additional $1.5
billion in emergency funding for the VA.
This bill contains several accounts which are designated as
``Congressional Priorities.'' I fully recognize that Congress has a
responsibility to fund important projects, but we need to follow the
proper process in doing so. To put it simply, if there is a
congressional priority that is not included in the administration's
request, we should get it authorized through the appropriate committee
and then set aside the necessary funds.
It has become standard practice around here to forgo the authorizing
process and simply do everything on appropriations. That is wrong and
it needs to stop. Congressional priorities should be subjected to the
scrutiny of public hearings and debate--they should not be held up as
some type of sacred cows that are not to be questioned. We can no
longer afford to fund every pet project simply because a Member of
Congress considers it to be imperative.
Let me highlight a few of the projects that are contained in this
bill: $1.2 million for eider and sea otter recovery at the Alaska Sea
Life Center; $200,000 for landscaping at the Gettysburg Military Park
in Pennsylvania; $200,000 for the George Washington Memorial Parkway
right here in the Washington, DC, area; $450,000 for the Automobile
National Heritage area in Detroit, MI; $150,000 for the Actors Theatre
in Kentucky; $150,000 for the Black Horse Tavern in Pennsylvania; over
$6 million to rehabilitate bathhouses at the Hot Springs National Park
in Arkansas; $2.5 million for the Southwest Pennsylvania Heritage
Commission; $11.1 million for the Old Faithful Inn at Yellowstone
National Park; $5.3 million for Sleeping Bear Dunes in Michigan;
$200,000 for a diamondback terrapin study. That's one expensive turtle;
$400,000 to survey and monitor the ivory-billed woodpecker in Arkansas;
$150,000 for the Alaska Whaling Commission; $98,000 for the Alaska Sea
Otter Commission; $200,000 for maple research in Vermont; $1.8 million
for restoration of the Long Island Sound; $4 million for water system
technology in Kentucky, New Hampshire, Alaska, Pennsylvania, Missouri,
Montana, Illinois, and Mississippi. Interesting--what is it that all of
these States have in common? The answer is that they are all
represented by a member of the Appropriations Committee; $350,000 for a
tree planting program in Milwaukee, WI; $500,000 for the Hinkle Creek
watershed study in Oregon; $500,000 for a
[[Page S9369]]
hardwood scanning center at Purdue University in Indiana; and $400,000
for a wood technology center in Ketchikan, AK.
Another troubling aspect of the appropriations process is the way in
which we have become complacent with the routine violations of the
rules of both the Senate and the House that occur on these bills. The
rules of both bodies clearly state that it is not in order to legislate
on an appropriations bill. Senate rule XVI states, ``The Committee on
Appropriations shall not report an appropriation bill containing
amendments to such bill proposing new or general legislation . . .''
And House rule XXI states, ``A provision changing existing law may not
be reported in a general appropriation bill.'' Sadly, these directives
are routinely ignored in this process by the inclusion of legislative
language and policy changes on appropriations bills.
Let me point out just a few examples of these violations that are
contained in this conference report: Language prohibiting the closure
of the underground lunchroom at Carlsbad Caverns National Park in New
Mexico. Language prohibiting the demolition of a bridge between New
Jersey and Ellis Island. Language authorizing the Secretary of the
Interior to acquire lands for the operation of Ellis, Governors, and
Liberty Islands. Language prohibiting the demolition of structures on
the Zephyr Shoals property in Lake Tahoe, NV.
So as not to be viewed as unappreciative, I would like to comment on
one aspect of this measure with which I was pleased. In this bill,
there is over $3.2 billion for the State and Tribal Assistance Grant
Program. These funds are earmarked for 257 various projects around the
country. Last year, this same account contained 667 earmarks. I have
long been critical of the number of earmarks contained in this section,
and I commend the subcommittee chairman and ranking member for their
restraint in this area.
I am, however, still concerned with the number of earmarks contained
in this and many of the other annual appropriations bills. Mr.
President, the process of earmarking funds in appropriations bills has
simply lurched out of control. According to a report issued by the
Congressional Research Service, in fiscal year 1994 there were 4,126
earmarks in the then 13 annual appropriations bills. That number grew
to 14,040 earmarks in fiscal year 2004. That is an increase of 240
percent in just 10 years.
It is clear that, with our ever-growing mandatory entitlement
spending coupled with our shrinking discretionary accounts, we are on
the road to fiscal disaster. At a conference in February 2005, David
Walker, the Comptroller General of the United States, said this:
If we 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 that:
(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.
It falls on the Congress, my friends. The head of the Government's
chief watch-dog agency and the Nation's chief economist agree--we are
in real trouble.
The time has come to stop the practice of earmarking unauthorized
funds and let the cabinet officials responsible for the various
agencies of our government determine where and how our dwindling
discretionary funds are to be spent. If we in the Congress are not
willing to do our jobs and authorize our spending priorities, we should
at least be willing to trust the President's Cabinet, who we voted to
confirm to their positions, to do their jobs and appropriately fund
their respective agencies' needs without our interference.
Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, exactly 1 month ago I praised the
Appropriations Committee's efforts to fund the State Revolving Fund for
Wastewater Treatment and for Drinking Water at the highest possible
levels. Today, however, I am gravely concerned about the overall cut in
environmental spending contained in the bill before us today and
specifically with a large cut in the clean water program.
First, let me say that I intend to vote for this conference report,
as it contains a $1.5 billion supplemental spending package to cover a
shortfall in veterans health care funding.
I was highly disappointed to learn last month of the shortfall in
funding for veterans health care. It was particularly outrageous that
this announcement followed on the heels of assurances from the
Veterans' Administration and President Bush that the additional funding
we attempted to add in the emergency supplemental funding bill was not
needed. Clearly, this was not the case. I am pleased that the Senate
moved immediately to rectify this problem and dealt with this problem
while we still had a chance.
I am frustrated, however, that the funding to combat this shortfall
was not attached to the more appropriate vehicle. At a time when our
soldiers are returning from war and veterans are coming into the VA in
record numbers, our veterans and our local VA hospitals need and
deserve this funding. I only hope that we have learned our lesson from
this unfortunate sequence of events and that we will do what is
necessary in the future to ensure that the essential funds are provided
for our veterans in a timely manner and following appropriate
procedures. Our veterans deserve no less.
A clean and healthy environment may be our most important legacy for
our children. It saddens me to think that under the guise of fiscal
responsibility, the bill before us today cuts spending at the
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, to levels not seen since fiscal
year 2001. This bill funds the EPA at about $7.7 billion. As recently
as fiscal year 2004, the EPA received $8.365 billion. This is a cut of
over $600 million in just 2 years.
Because of the administration's fiscal policies and priorities, which
have led to record deficits, we are now going to underfund many
programs that are important to the protection of public health and the
environment. There are many programs I could touch on, but let me focus
my remarks on the sad state of the clean water State revolving fund,
CWSRF.
The CWSRF offers long-term, low-interest loans to State and local
governments to help them meet Federal water quality standards by fixing
old, decaying sewer pipelines, building and repairing wastewater
treatment plants, and controlling other sources of water pollution. The
conference report before us today funds the CWSRF at about $900
million, down from almost $1.1 billion last year and over $1.3 billion
in FY 2004. This huge drop in spending is occurring at a time when
nearly half of America's rivers and lakes do not meet basic Clean Water
Act standards.
Furthermore, municipalities are currently struggling to fix old water
and sewage pipes. The EPA estimates that clean water infrastructure
needs nationwide will cost $390 billion over the next 15 years. The
aging of the Nation's sewage treatment infrastructure has a direct
effect on our waters and the people who come into contact with them.
Many systems have exceeded their effective lives and are decaying
because they were designed and built decades ago when urban areas were
more compact and had much smaller populations.
I intend to carry on this fight for increased spending on water
infrastructure and other important environmental programs. I hope that
we can come to our senses before it is too late.
expanding the oil and gas leasing program
Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, as we prepare to accept the conference
report on the fiscal year 2006 Interior appropriations spending bill, I
want to raise an issue regarding the implementation of a pilot project
in the State of Utah to determine the feasibility of expanding the oil
and gas leasing program to include online auctioning of leases.
There is a very active oil and gas lease trading market in the
private
[[Page S9370]]
sector. Many of these leases are bought and sold online in an auction
process quite similar to other auction processes on the Internet.
Information about the individual lease sale is made available to the
public with accompanying documentation, prices are set and bids are
accepted, sales and transactions are completed all online. The system
operates very efficiently and expands the opportunity to participate to
potential bidders all across the country.
BLM is currently limited to conducting oil and gas lease auctions
orally. However, under the Government Performances Result Act, or GPRA,
Federal agencies are allowed to conduct pilot studies to identify
opportunities to further improve the efficiency and effectiveness of
their business processes. Under GPRA, a pilot program which tested the
feasibility of both oral and online auctions might help BLM increase
the efficiency of the auction process and increase the exposure of
leases to a broader number of participants.
However, the BLM does not currently have the capability to implement
a program like this. But were they to develop a partnership with the
private sector to develop an online component of the oil and gas
leasing program, the program becomes much more feasible.
With that in mind, I requested funds for the BLM State office in Utah
to conduct a pilot program with a private sector partner to develop a
potential online oil and gas leasing project and to conduct a series of
tests to see if this idea is workable. The Senate included funding for
this program in the State of Utah. However, the committee did not
specify that BLM should try to identify a private sector partner that
has experience in conducting online oil and gas lease auctions.
Would it be the opinion of the chairman that BLM should identify and
work with a partner in the private sector to proceed forward quickly
with the development of a pilot program in Utah?
Mr. BURNS. The Senator is correct. The Bureau of Land Management
currently does not have the mechanism in place to implement a pilot
project like this. However, there are entities in the private sector
that have a well-established history of conducting oil and gas lease
auctions online. I would encourage BLM in Utah to quickly identify a
private sector partner and develop a pilot program in Utah for online
oil and gas lease auctions and encourage the director of the BLM to
make sure that the necessary resources are devoted to implementing this
project in a timely manner.
Mr. BENNETT. I appreciate that clarification.
Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I would like to take just a moment to
comment on the Interior appropriations conference report now before the
Senate.
First, let me congratulate Senator Burns, chairman of the Intenor
Subcommittee and his ranking member, Senator Dorgan, for their work on
finishing this important piece of legislation before we adjourn for the
August recess. My home State of Idaho has great interest in the
Interior appropriations bill every year. And timely completion of this
legislation is welcome news to my constituents.
As odd as this may sound, though, I do not wish to speak about
Interior matters in this bill. Rather, I want to say a few words about
the $1.5 billion included in this legislation for fiscal year 2005
supplemental funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs health care
system.
I know all of my colleagues are aware of the notice I received a
little over 1 month ago that VA funding for this fiscal year was
severely strained. And that, as a result, this Congress was going to
need to move fast to provide an infusion of resources to ensure our
veterans continued to receive high-quality, timely health care from VA.
Working with Senators Hutchison, Cochran, Murray, Feinstein, Akaka,
and others, the Senate voted unanimously to add $1.5 billion for VA
health care to this Interior appropriations bill. We did so because we
were confident this legislation would be completed in time to get this
bill to the President's desk--and more importantly get the money to VA
for veterans' health care--before the August recess. As is evident with
the expected passage of this bill today, we have accomplished that
goal.
Certainly this victory has not come without some hard work and
negotiations. It was extremely difficult to get the administration to
provide us with accurate budget numbers in any timely fashion. I spoke
several times with VA Secretary Jim Nicholson and with OMB about the
need to get the information to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs and
the Appropriations Committee fast and to get it right with respect to
fiscal year 2005 and fiscal year 2006 so that we would not be back here
again in 6 months talking about shortfalls.
I am cautiously optimistic that VA and OMB have gotten it right this
time. Working with Congress, they submitted a fiscal year 2005 and 2006
budget amendment that identified the need for an additional $2.952
billion. This bill provides a $1.5 billion down payment that goes
towards meeting that identified need.
In addition, Senators Hutchison and Feinstein are working on VA's
funding need for fiscal year 2006 in the military construction/VA
appropriations bill that was recently sent to the Senate floor by the
full Appropriations Committee. We will all have a chance to vote on
that measure after the recess.
I also want to tell my colleagues that I was very unhappy with the
way in which all of this information about VA's shortfalls came to my
attention. As chairman of the Veterans Committee, I take very seriously
my responsibility to provide oversight of the VA and its financial
picture on behalf of the Senate. And I want each of you to know that I
have received personal assurances from Secretary Nicholson that he will
provide quarterly reports throughout the fiscal year on VA's financial
picture so that Senators can be certain that VA is on track and on
budget.
Working together with Members on both sides of the aisle, I believe
we can conduct the proper oversight of VA's health care budget and make
certain that adequate finances are provided for the health care needs
of our Nation's veterans.
Again, Mr. President, I thank my colleagues for all of their support,
especially Chairman Cochran and Ranking Member Byrd of the full
Appropriations Committee. Their unwavering commitment in the face of
VA's shortfalls made this substantial supplemental increase possible.
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, while I voted in favor of the fiscal
year 2006 Interior appropriations conference report, which contains
funding for a number of important programs, including vital funding for
veterans health care, I am disappointed in the lack of adequate
investment in the clean water State revolving fund. This program has
been helpful to communities all over Wisconsin, and across the country,
in their efforts to safeguard their water supplies and to comply with
new standards for drinking water contaminants like arsenic and radium.
I was concerned earlier this year when the President requested a 33
percent cut for the clean water State revolving fund for his fiscal
year 2006 budget. Because of my concern, I joined a bipartisan group of
Senators in asking the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee to ignore
the requested cut in funds and instead provide $1.35 billion for this
program. The Senate bill included $1.1 billion for the revolving fund,
and I am disappointed that the conferees did not retain this more
favorable funding level.
Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to address the conference
report on the Interior appropriations bill. Indeed, our efforts in the
Senate to add $1.5 billion in funding for VA this year have borne
fruit. I again laud our bipartisan effort to address the funding crisis
in VA health care.
I also wish to thank my colleague, the Democratic leader, Senator
Reid, for his determination to ensure that $1.5 billion was the final
amount of fuhding for this year. Though some were willing to accept
less, he and I understand that every last dollar of this amount is
needed to provide the highest quality of care to all veterans--be they
older veterans in VA nursing homes or younger service members just
returning from Iraq and seeking VA care for the first time.
We all know that while many of us have been saying that VA needs more
money since the early part of the year, the administration needed to be
[[Page S9371]]
pressed to own up to the shortfall. As I have said before, I hope in
the future all Members reach out to VA nurses and doctors and reach out
to the veterans service organizations. We need not wait for the
administration to make an official pronouncement about something that
is so obvious. I do believe that the administration has lost its
credibility in forecasting demand and expected costs. I believe this is
true for its estimates of this year's funding, as well as next year.
The battle for next year's funding will be upon on us shortly. During
the budget resolution I debate in March, I offered an amendment to
increase VA's funding by $2.8 billion for next year. I stood before
this body and outlined the case for a significant increase for VA. But
we were I rejected because the administration claimed VA needed far
less.
The administration wants us to now believe that VA needs a certain
amount for fiscal year 2005 and 2006. They now want to convince us that
they have a handle on the numbers. I remain skeptical.
VA rightly admits the fiscal year 2006 budget was off-the-mark in its
estimate of the number of returning service members who will come for
VA care. We know from experience how much it costs to treat a returning
service member. Yet, the administration wants to now convince us that,
in fact, the cost of treating a patient is less than half of this
amount.
My original estimate of a need for $3 billion in VA health care
spending for next year remains correct. The VA appropriations bill must
contain the full amount for VA health care next year. If not, our
veterans will find this nightmare repeated once again.
Along those lines, I appreciate the work that Senators Craig and
Hutchison and our other colleagues are doing to tackle this problem. I
believe we can find a solution, together.
Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, within the conference report on the
interior appropriations bill is an essential provision to provide $1.5
billion to address the current shortfall in funding for VA health care.
The Interior appropriations conference report was selected as the
quickest legislative vehicle to address this immediate and compelling
lack of funding for VA.
With our country in combat in various regions around the world,
including Iraq and Afghanistan, it is greatly disturbing that the VA is
facing such a severe shortfall. I am proud that the Senate prevailed in
securing the $1.5 billion needed to respond to urgent health care needs
of veterans now--both veterans returning from current conflicts and
aging veterans needing long-term care. While we are addressing this
compelling need today, this crisis could have--and should have--been
averted. The administration should have proposed a better budget for VA
in February of 2005. The administration could have supported Senator
Murray's amendment to the Iraq supplemental in April of 2005 to add
$1.97 billion for VA health care. Neither happened, and it is troubling
that VA blames use of old models and early estimates on VA health care
needs beginning in 2002. Our heroic service men and women have been
serving in Iraq since 2003, and the VA budget officials should have
known to rework and review the VA health care budgets. It is a sad
excuse for VA officials to tell Congress in April that VA health care
funding is adequate and fine, and then have VA officials come to
Congress at the end of June of 2005 to suggest a shortfall of at least
$1.5 billion in the VA health care programs. We simply must have a
better budget process at the VA to measure and adjust any estimates
over time so that our veterans get the health care they have earned
with their brave service.
Military personnel--Active Duty members and especially members of the
National Guard and Reserves--respond to the call of duty. They risk
their lives in service to our Nation, and they, and their families,
endure enormous sacrifices due to their service. A new survey from the
Army suggest that as many as 30 percent of those military personnel
serving in Iraq and Afghanistan will face mental health concerns, like
post traumatic stress disorder, PTSD, at the time of their return due
to the violence and experiences they face. I have hosted private
roundtables throughout West Virginia to meet with returning veterans
from Iraq and Afghanistan, and I believe that they have compelling
needs for mental health care due to the overwhelming stress of serving
in such a challenging combat situation. Even service personnel who are
supposedly not in combat zones face attacks from car bombs and suicide
bombers. It is sad and tragic, and of course it affects our troops. The
stories from West Virginia veterans about their service have convinced
me that we must invest in more resources for mental health care,
counseling, and our vet centers.
Knowing this, and knowing this for several years, we simply must
ensure that VA health care get the funding it needs to serve all our
veterans, Active Duty as well as National Guard and Reserves. But
caring for our new veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan cannot
be at the expense of serving veterans of other eras, Vietnam, Korea,
and World War II and all the times in between.
Our aging veterans have huge long-term care concerns, and VA has an
obligation to serve them. Part of our current shortfall was a lack of
long-term care funding. While we did not know about the Iraq war in
2002, surely we should have been aware of the demographics of the VA
population and the looming need for health care. This issue will not go
away, and VA must serve all of our veterans.
Since coming to the Senate in 1985, I have been proud to serve on the
Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee and I treasure this opportunity to
work on behalf of veterans in West Virginia and throughout our country.
Today's passage of the $1.5 billion provision for VA health care in the
Interior appropriations package is an important step to address the VA
health care shortfall. But honestly, this is merely a downpayment, and
much more must be done to strengthen the process and the funding for VA
health care. This Senator is fully committed to finding a real solution
to the chronic problems of insufficient funding for VA health care. Our
dedicated veterans deserve no less.
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I commend Chairman Conrad Burns and the
ranking member, Senator Byron Dorgan, on their work on this
legislation. I am pleased that this conference report includes the full
$1.5 billion proposed by the Senate to make up the current 2005 fiscal
year shortfall in funding for veterans health care. The Interior bill
may seem a strange vehicle for this funding, but it was the first
vehicle available once the administration confirmed the funding crisis
in VA health care, and I thank the managers for preserving this
provision in their conference report.
It is critically important that the President sign this conference
report into law quickly so that this money can be used to replenish the
coffers of the VA and make sure that there is no interruption in the
VA's ability to provide medical services to our Nation's veterans.
Make no mistake about it, this money is needed now--now. We know the
VA anticipates an even greater shortfall in fiscal year 2006, and the
Senate Appropriations Committee has addressed that problem in the 2006
Military Construction and VA appropriations bill by providing $1.977
billion in emergency funding for VA health care in 2006.
The $1.5 billion that is provided in this conference report is
specifically intended to address the current--the current--2005 crisis
in VA health care funding. The precise amount of the current shortfall
remains somewhat murky. The administration, after months and months of
denying that a shortfall even existed, first pegged it as $975 million,
and then upped--upped--the estimate to $1.275 billion.
The Senate, however, fully mindful of the VA's dismal track record in
estimating shortfalls, and wisely skeptical of the administration's
fluctuating estimates, voted to include a total of $1.5 billion in this
bill, with the proviso--get this--with the proviso that the funds would
be available both this year and next. This was in sharp contrast to the
House, which provided only $975 million in a separate bill to cover the
fiscal year 2005 shortfall in VA funding.
It is a victory for our Nation's veterans. Hallelujah. It is a
victory for our Nation's veterans that the conferees agreed on the
Senate level of $1.5 billion, but it will be merely a Pyrrhic
[[Page S9372]]
victory if the White House tries to balance the books by shortchanging
veterans in 2005 to make up some of the anticipated shortfall in 2006.
Do not let it happen.
It is worth repeating: The Senate Appropriations Committee has
addressed the 2006 shortfall by adding $1.977 billion in emergency
funding to the 2006 Military Construction and Veterans Affairs
appropriations bill. The entire amount of the VA funding included in
the Interior bill--$1.5 billion--is available for 2005--for 2005--and I
strongly urge the administration, I strongly urge the White House, to
spend up to that amount to meet the current health care needs of our
veterans.
The Senate voted twice, both unanimous votes, to provide $1.5 billion
to make up the 2005 shortfall in veterans health care. I think the
Senate made its position crystal clear. We did not vote to bank the
money for some future rainy day. We voted to provide adequate funding
to address an exiting crisis in the veterans health care system, and I,
for one, fully expect--I fully expect--the administration to use this
funding for the current crisis, and not attempt to horde it--horde it--
horde it--for the future.
America's veterans have given much for their country. We have an
obligation to give back to them something and to provide for their
health care needs. This conference report is a good first step in
shoring up the VA's health care budget and, hopefully, leading the way
toward more realistic and adequate budgeting for the needs of our
veterans in the future.
Now, Mr. President, there is another part of this conference report
for which the Senate can be very proud. Just a few weeks ago, this body
voted unanimously--unanimously--to approve an amendment that I offered,
along with Senator Thad Cochran of Mississippi and Senator John Warner
of Virginia, to provide $10 million--$10 million--to the national
memorial to the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. That funding
remains part of this final conference report before the Senate.
There are many in this country who, during his life, did not
appreciate the passion that Dr. King stirred in people. There are many
who believed his goals could be achieved through different means. And I
was one of those people, Robert C. Byrd. I was one of them. And I was
wrong. I was wrong. I have come to admire Dr. King. I have come to
recognize that his dream--his dream--truly is the American dream.
Dr. King spoke of a day when children, regardless of color,
regardless of creed, regardless of religious belief, would walk
together in peace. Oh, how we need that message today, how we need that
spirit today, as religious beliefs are used to divide our people, not
to unite us, and as terrorist attacks breed distrust for people who
come from different lands. Oh, how we need to recall the lessons that
the late Dr. King taught some 40 years ago.
During the conference negotiations on this legislation, Mr.
President, there was a great discussion on how the Congress could
encourage more Americans to contribute to the construction of the King
Memorial. This legislation will help. This legislation says that every
dollar raised in the private sector will be matched with a dollar from
the U.S. Government, up to $10 million. That is why I urge those who
believe in the message of Dr. King to take just a few minutes and
contribute to this national memorial.
Now, Mr. President, I thank the chairman of the Appropriations
Committee, the gracious Senator from Mississippi, Mr. Thad Cochran, for
his support and for his work on behalf of this memorial. Without his
support we would not have had this in the bill. We would not be at this
moment without his strong efforts.
I also thank the senior Senator from Virginia, the chairman of the
Armed Services Committee, Mr. John Warner, for his work, too. Right
from the start, Senator Warner stood up and cosponsored this amendment.
His influence and his support were vital to this effort.
I also thank Senator Pete Domenici for his support of this effort.
Finally, let me thank the tens of millions of Americans who continue
to build the dream--the dream; ah, how great the dream--that Dr. Martin
Luther King, Jr., voiced some 40 years ago. Achieving that dream is not
easy. Despite efforts to put the past behind us and move forward
together, there remain those who are determined to look backward. There
remain those who would rather promote fear and division than build
unity and common purpose. I hope this memorial to the legacy of the
Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., will remind all of us--all of
us--that there is far more strength in unity, far more strength in
resolve, far more strength in love of one's fellow man than there ever
can be in division, in discord, and in disunity.
And so, Mr. President, I thank those who have been so helpful. And I
hope that one of Dr. King's favorite Bible passages, which is also one
of mine, comes to be a reality. And I have seen it coming to be a
reality. It comes from the Book of Isaiah.
Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert
a highway for our God.
Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill
shall be made low: and the crooked shall be made straight,
and the rough places plain:
And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh
shall see it together:. . . .
That was one of Dr. Martin Luther King's favorite Scriptures. And so
I look forward to that day, Mr. President. That day was the hope of Dr.
King. And that day is my hope as well.
Mr. President, I thank the Chair and thank all Senators.
Mr. President, before I yield the floor, I ask unanimous consent to
have printed in the Record a list of the Senate cosponsors of the
Martin Luther King, Jr., Memorial amendment.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
cosponsors list
Amendment Number: SP1053.
Cosponsors: Cochran, Warner, Kennedy, Mikulski, Landrieu,
Johnson, Stabenow, Murray, Bingaman, Jeffords, Rockefeller,
Obama, Feinstein, Schumer, Sarbanes, Boxer, Harkin, Corzine,
Brownback, DeWine, Levin, McConnell, McCain, Biden, Nelson of
FL, Clinton, Bayh, Kerry, Roberts, Leahy, Allen, Pryor,
Durbin, Martinez, Lieberman, Feingold, Hutchison.
Total Cosponsors: 37.
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I yield the floor.
Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I yield back any remaining time on the
Interior conference report.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator yields back all remaining time on
the Interior conference report.
Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, have the yeas and nays been ordered?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. They have not been ordered.
Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the
Interior conference report.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to the conference report. The clerk will
call the roll.
The bill clerk called the roll.
The result was announced--yeas 99, nays 1, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 210 Leg.]
YEAS--99
Akaka
Alexander
Allard
Allen
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Brownback
Bunning
Burns
Burr
Byrd
Cantwell
Carper
Chafee
Chambliss
Clinton
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
NAYS--1
Coburn
The conference report was agreed to.
Mr. REID. 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.
[[Page S9373]]
Mr. REID. Mr. President, when I came to work this morning, as I
pulled into the Capitol, there were dogs under Capitol police control,
sniffing to find out if there were explosives in the cars coming into
the Capitol. There was an officer with a semiautomatic shotgun. As I
proceeded, there was an officer on the Capitol steps with an assault
rifle. As I came into the Capitol, there were police officers at the
door. These are the same type of officers as the two who were gunned
down, Chestnut and Gibson, a few years ago. These were police officers
protecting us.
In this Chamber today, there are plain clothes Capitol police
officers here for our protection. All of these police officers are
trained to put our lives ahead of theirs.
When we, in recent days, have been directed to leave the Capitol,
taken from the Capitol, there are police officers who wait behind to
make sure everyone is out before whatever wrong is supposed to happen
happens. They are the last here before the doors are closed.
I was a Capitol policeman. I was not trained to do any of the things
these men and women are trained to do today. We are in an extremely
vulnerable situation here in the United States Capitol complex. In
every one of the office buildings, every place we go in the Capitol
complex, there are evil people who are trying to do harm to us and the
millions of visitors who come here every year.
That is why, as I read this morning the language in the Legislative
Branch appropriation bill, I was offended. I was offended by the
language in that bill, the insulting language about our Capitol Police.
They are our Capitol Police.
This legislation is going forward. As a member of the Appropriations
Committee--I was chairman of the Legislative Branch Appropriations
Subcommittee for a number of years, and I enjoyed the service greatly--
I feel that the Capitol Police have been wronged in this appropriations
bill. The Capitol Police is an imperfect organization, similar to every
organization. It is a big organization. I am sure the administration
makes mistakes and things happen that should not happen within the
Capitol Police force. However, I repeat, the men and women who put
their lives on the line for us every day, 24 hours a day--for each of
us, for the staff here, as I said before, for the thousands of people
who are visiting today in this Capitol--their support, their protection
is consistent and strong.
I resent this libel, by vague generality, that is contained in this
conference report. The language in the Senate version of the
Legislative Branch bill contained a number of constructive clauses and
areas of improvement for the police, written in a way that is
completely appropriate in an appropriations bill. What is returned from
the conference is an anti-Capitol Hill Police screed that is
unacceptable.
I am pleased the Senate was largely able to prevail on fiscal issues
in this conference report. The Capitol Police will have most of the
resources they need to protect Members, staff, and the visitors who
come here. However, it seems that our conferees were forced, obviously,
to swallow nasty report language about the Chief of Police, his
deputies, and other police administrators in order to get adequate
funding for them. This is absurd. I am happy to have the funding, but
the trade is ridiculous.
It is unwarranted. There are problems in all large organizations.
Let's work to solve them together, but not have the nasty tone of this
conference report. For whatever reason, we have had a succession of
people in the House of Representatives who do not like the Capitol
Police force. They have stated so publicly and privately. But it is not
getting better; it is getting worse.
This is the last year I will accept it. Maybe others will, but I will
not. Let me be very clear. I will never ever allow a Legislative Branch
conference report that is as nasty and relentlessly negative toward our
Capitol Police as this one that is going to become law. One will never
become law again. I am going to reach out to my friends on the House
side, Congressman Lewis and the Speaker and others, to see what we can
do to improve this.
I support Chief Gainer, his deputies, his staff, and all his
officers. They have my support and my devotion because they protect my
life every day. They risk their lives every day to protect this
institution, and they deserve better than the pettiness that I have
read in these pages.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the next three
rollcall votes be 10-minute votes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Under the previous order, there will now be 2 minutes of debate
equally divided on the conference report to accompany H.R. 2985, the
Legislative Branch appropriations bill. The Chair recognizes the
Senator from Colorado.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I yield to the minority to speak first.
Are there any additional comments?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois is recognized for 1
minute.
Mr. DURBIN. I thank the Chairman again for his hard work on the bill,
and I agree with Senator Reid in every word he has said. What is in
this conference committee report about the Capitol Police is totally
undeserved and unwarranted. It is a shame there are some people in this
Capitol, not necessarily on this side of the Rotunda, who unfortunately
put that language in here. Remember, we are here safely today because
they are literally risking their lives as we do our work. For goodness
sakes, they deserve our appreciation, and they do not deserve the
condemnation that is part of this conference committee report.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Colorado.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I think we have a good bill for us. I ask
everybody to vote ``aye'' on the conference report. We have been very
generous with the police. We all recognize the hard work and sacrifice
they have made on behalf of all of us, our staffs, and the many
visitors who come to the Capitol.
We have taken a very strong position in support of the Capitol Police
on this side of the Capitol. We worked closely with the minority side
and appreciate their input as we move forward with this particular
piece of legislation.
I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a
sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to the conference report.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
The result was announced--yeas 96, nays 4, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 211 Leg.]
YEAS--96
Akaka
Alexander
Allard
Allen
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Brownback
Bunning
Burns
Burr
Byrd
Cantwell
Carper
Chafee
Chambliss
Clinton
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Cornyn
Corzine
Craig
Crapo
Dayton
DeMint
DeWine
Dodd
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
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 (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
NAYS--4
Coburn
Conrad
Ensign
Inhofe
The conference report was agreed to.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. CRAIG. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
____________________