[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 34 (Thursday, March 16, 2006)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2241-S2273]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET FOR THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 
                            2007--Continued


                           Amendment No. 3133

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
resume consideration of S. Con. Res. 83.
  Under the previous order, the vote now occurs on the Conrad amendment 
No. 3133.
       Mr. SANTORUM. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 3133.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. The following Senator was necessarily absent: the 
Senator from Ohio (Mr. Voinovich).
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 44, nays 55, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 55 Leg.]

                                YEAS--44

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Clinton
     Conrad
     Dayton
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Obama
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Salazar
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Stabenow
     Wyden

                                NAYS--55

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Burr
     Chafee
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeMint
     DeWine
     Dole
     Domenici
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Frist
     Graham
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     Martinez
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Nelson (NE)
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Thune
     Vitter
     Warner

                             NOT VOTING--1

       
     Voinovich
       
  The amendment (No. 3133) was rejected.
    


                       Vote on Amendent No. 3114

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question now is on agreeing to the Burr 
amendment No. 3114.
  Mr. BURR. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  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. 56 Leg.]

                                YEAS--99

     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
     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
     Menendez
     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

       
     Byrd
       
  The amendment (No. 3114) was agreed to.
  Mr. GREGG. 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.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Graham). The time until 1:30 p.m. shall be 
equally divided.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, at this point, we are going to begin the 
amending process again. The sequence on our side will be Senator 
Cornyn, Senator Vitter, then I understand we go to Senator Stabenow and 
Senator Akaka.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, on our side it is Senator Stabenow, 
Senator Akaka, Senator Lincoln. I should intercede, Senator Vitter will 
be paired with Senator Landrieu on an amendment for Louisiana.
  Mr. GREGG. We will do Senator Cornyn and then Senator Vitter, and 
then I presume we will go to Senator Stabenow and then Senator Akaka, 
then Senator Collins, then Senator Lincoln; right?
  Mr. CONRAD. Very well.
  Mr. GREGG. I yield Senator Cornyn 5 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.


                           Amendment No. 3100

  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 3100 and ask for 
its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Texas [Mr. Cornyn], for himself, and Mr. 
     Graham, proposes an amendment numbered 3100.

  Mr. CORNYN. 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 provide for reconciliation instructions to the Committee 
                on Finance to reduce mandatory spending)

       On page 4, line 15, decrease the amount by $1,279,625,000.
       On page 4, line 17, decrease the amount by $1,340,125,000.
       On page 4, line 19, decrease the amount by $1,403,250,000.
       On page 4, line 21, decrease the amount by $1,469,500,000.
       On page 5, line 6, decrease the amount by $1,279,625,000.
       On page 5, line 8, decrease the amount by $1,340,125,000.
       On page 5, line 10, decrease the amount by $1,403,250,000.
       On page 5, line 12, decrease the amount by $1,469,500,000.
       On page 5, line 21, decrease the amount by $1,279,625,000.
       On page 5, line 23, decrease the amount by $1,340,125,000.
       On page 5, line 25, decrease the amount by $1,403,250,000.
       On page 6, line 2, increase the amount by $1,469,500,000.
       On page 6, line 10, decrease the amount by $1,279,625,000.
       On page 6, line 12, decrease the amount by $2,619,750,000.
       On page 6, line 14, decrease the amount by $4,023,000,000.
       On page 6, line 16, decrease the amount by $5,492,500,000.
       On page 6, line 24, decrease the amount by $1,279,625,000.
       On page 7, line 2, decrease the amount by $2,619,750,000.
       On page 7, line 4, decrease the amount by $4,023,000,000.
       On page 7, line 6, decrease the amount by $5,492,500,000.
       On page 21, line 3, decrease the amount by $1,250,000,000.
       On page 21, line 4, decrease the amount by $1,250,000,000.
       On page 21, line 7, decrease the amount by $1,250,000,000.

[[Page S2242]]

       On page 21, line 8, decrease the amount by $1,250,000,000.
       On page 21, line 11, decrease the amount by $1,250,000,000.
       On page 21, line 12, decrease the amount by $1,250,000,000.
       On page 21, line 15, decrease the amount by $1,250,000,000.
       On page 21, line 16, decrease the amount by $1,250,000,000.
       On page 27, line 3, decrease the amount by $29,625,000.
       On page 27, line 4, decrease the amount by $29,625,000.
       On page 27, line 7, decrease the amount by $90,125,000.
       On page 27, line 8, decrease the amount by $90,125,000.
       On page 27, line 11, decrease the amount by $153,250,000.
       On page 27, line 12, decrease the amount by $153,250,000.
       On page 27, line 15, decrease the amount by $219,500,000.
       On page 27, line 16, decrease the amount by $219,500,000.
       On page 29, strike lines 14 through 19, and insert the 
     following:
       (a) Spending Reconciliation Instructions.--In the Senate, 
     by May 16, 2006, the committees named in this section shall 
     submit their recommendations to the Committee on the Budget 
     of the Senate. After receiving those recommendations, the 
     Committee on the Budget shall report to the Senate a 
     reconciliation bill carrying out all such recommendations 
     without any substantive revision.
       (b) Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.--The Senate 
     Committee on Energy and Natural Resources shall report 
     changes in laws within its jurisdiction sufficient to reduce 
     budget authority and outlays by $0 in fiscal year 2007, and 
     $3,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2007 through 
     2011.
       (c) Committee on Finance.--The Senate Committee on Finance 
     shall report changes in laws within its jurisdiction 
     sufficient to reduce budget authority and outlays by $0 in 
     fiscal year 2007 and $10,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal 
     years 2007 through 2011.

  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I further ask unanimous consent that 
Senator Graham of South Carolina be added as a cosponsor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, last year, Congress made some real 
progress in getting a handle on mandatory spending by passing the 
Deficit Reduction Act. The Deficit Reduction Act will reduce mandatory 
spending by nearly $100 billion over the next decade, and it is the 
first time Congress has taken a hard look at how to find savings and 
reduce the budget deficit on the mandatory spending side since 1997.
  The Deficit Reduction Act is a good first step. My amendment builds 
on the savings of the Deficit Reduction Act. My amendment lowers the 
Federal budget deficit, lowers the Federal debt, and does not increase 
taxes on the American people.
  Today, the Federal budget, as we all know, is heavily weighted in 
favor of mandatory spending--entitlement spending, so to speak. As 
people live longer and the baby boom generation retires, that spending 
will increase and eat up a larger and larger share of our budget.
  Just in Medicare and Medicaid alone, in the last 5 years, we have 
seen a 22-percent increase in entitlement spending for those two 
programs. And if we don't do something in the next 30 years about 
entitlement spending, we won't have a dime of revenue to pay for other 
items that are important, such as defense, education, NIH research, and 
payments to health care providers to reimbursement under Medicare and 
Medicaid.
  My amendment directs the Senate Finance Committee to find $10 billion 
in additional savings over the next 5 years. One proposal for the 
Finance Committee to consider under this amendment would be to repeal 
the stabilization fund included in the Medicare Modernization Act. Let 
me explain what that is.
  This is essentially a bonus provision to preferred provider 
organizations--insurance companies, in other words--over and above the 
regular Medicare share to encourage them to participate in the Medicare 
Program. There simply is no reason to increase the Federal subsidy for 
these insurance companies over and above regular Medicare payments. We 
should eliminate that bonus and use that money, which is not necessary, 
to pay down the debt by $7 billion.
  There are other good areas I believe for the Finance Committee to 
find the $10 billion this amendment would require. The problem is this: 
If we don't do something about the autopilot our budget is on when it 
comes to the mandatory side of spending, we have only ourselves to 
blame because no one is at the wheel, and I am afraid the plane will 
crash all too soon. We are feeling the squeeze already. The 
appropriators, I know, are trying to squeeze more and more out of the 
discretionary spending portion of the budget because as the mandatory 
and entitlement side rose, there was less and less flexibility for 
spending on important programs that represent America's priorities 
under the discretionary portion of the budget.

  So I encourage my colleagues to support this amendment. It is one 
that can be done without detracting from current Medicare spending, but 
eliminates this bonus provision, this additional cash or Federal 
subsidy that is provided for under the law that could be saved and be 
put to more constructive use, showing that we are serious about fiscal 
responsibility and paying down the debt.
  I yield back the remaining time.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I rise to support this amendment. I think 
it is an excellent idea and hopefully it will be successful. 
Stabilization money is certainly available. It is walking-around money. 
We don't need to have it sitting there, and we should use it for 
reducing the deficit.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, this is a difficult matter for this 
Senator because I have proposed many times to my colleagues doing away 
with the stabilization fund. So this amendment puts me in a quandary to 
the extent that if we can assure that with this amendment we would 
eliminate the stabilization fund, I would be with the Senator.
  The problem we face here is, No. 1, the stabilization fund is $6.2 
billion, it is not $10 billion. No. 2, because of the way the budget 
resolution works, we cannot direct the Finance Committee on how to make 
the reduction. I wish we could, but we cannot.
  What we would be doing, in effect, by the Senator's amendment is 
telling the Finance Committee to cut $10 billion out of Medicare. They 
could do that in any number of ways without affecting the stabilization 
fund at all. In fact, colleagues may recall last year the Senate told 
the Finance Committee to take out the stabilization fund. I call it the 
slush fund. I think it is an absolute waste of money. I absolutely 
agree with the Senator on that point. But we all know at the end of the 
process, the stabilization fund was left intact because the way the 
budget process works, we give an instruction about how much finances to 
cut, but we cannot tell them how to do it.
  So I want my colleagues to know that is the circumstance we face with 
this amendment. I thank the Senator for the good faith of his 
amendment.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from 
Louisiana.


                           Amendment No. 3025

  Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I rise in support of my filed amendment 
No. 3025. I will not formally call it up because some revisions to it 
are still being worked on in conjunction with my colleague from 
Louisiana, Senator Landrieu, and many other leaders in the Senate. But 
I will speak on this very important topic, and it has to do with 
meeting in a positive and responsible way our ongoing needs throughout 
all the coastal areas--not just Louisiana--for hurricane protection and 
other coastal needs.
  Obviously, we have faced many challenges since Hurricanes Katrina and 
Rita. This is a responsible way to help meet those needs and to help 
future coastal needs of all coastal States and to do it in a way that 
we can afford and that we can build into the budget. Rather than having 
to come back here every 2 months, every 3 months for additional 
appropriations, wouldn't it be far better to have a stable revenue 
source that can help us meet these needs directly? The biggest part of 
that stable revenue source is royalty share, getting our fair share of 
what we produce off our coasts in terms of offshore oil and gas.
  This amendment is a first vital step in that direction because it 
would look to excess revenue, not anything built into the budget right 
now, but excess revenue in three areas to use for those vital purposes, 
not just for Louisiana

[[Page S2243]]

but for coastal needs and coastal States in general.
  What are these three areas I am talking about? The first would be 
offshore energy production, future revenues that aren't built into the 
budget now. The second would be the Federal share of ANWR energy 
production, should we pass that and say yes to that in the near future. 
Of course, ANWR is the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge. The third would 
be DTV revenue that comes in above the current projections for those 
spectrum auctions.
  Again, this is a vital first step that can get us on this path to 
self-sufficiency, to taking care of these crucial needs without 
constantly having to come here and look for direct Federal 
appropriations. We continue to work to perfect this amendment No. 3025 
so it can gain support.


                           Amendment No. 3078

  I formally call up amendment No. 3078, which is a separate amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Louisiana [Mr. Vitter] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 3078.

  Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further 
reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

  (Purpose: To establish a reserve fund to prevent catastrophic loss)

       On page 43, between lines 22 and 23, insert the following:

     SEC. 313. RESERVE FUND TO PREVENT CATASTROPHIC LOSS.

       If--
       (1) the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the 
     Senate reports a bill or joint resolution, or if an amendment 
     is offered thereto, or if a conference report is submitted 
     thereon, that increases investment in measures designed to 
     prevent catastrophic flood and hurricane damage in coastal 
     areas such that--
       (A) the measures, when completed, will likely decrease 
     future expenditures from the Disaster Relief Fund;
       (B) the increases do not exceed $10,000,000,000; and
       (C) the measures are certified by the President as likely 
     to prevent loss of life and property; and
       (2) that Committee is within its allocation as provided 
     under section 302(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 
     (2 U.S.C. 633(a));

     the Chairperson of the Committee on Budget of the Senate may 
     make the appropriate adjustments in the allocations and 
     aggregates to the extent that such legislation would not 
     increase the deficit for the fiscal year 2007 and for the 
     period of fiscal years 2007 through 2011.

  Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, very quickly, this is a separate amendment 
that would give us flexibility in the context of the budget to account 
for future levy and hurricane protection projects should the 
Environment and Public Works Committee pass out a bill that authorizes 
these important projects. It builds flexibility into the budget through 
a reserve fund without busting the budget, without doing any harm to 
the budget numbers and the overall caps. I look forward to my 
colleagues' support of this flexibility.
  I yield the remainder of my time.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I thank the two Senators from Louisiana, 
especially Senator Landrieu, for working with her colleague Senator 
Vitter on this important amendment for their home State that has 
obviously been so badly damaged by Hurricane Katrina. I thank Senator 
Landrieu and Senator Vitter for working together in a bipartisan way to 
begin to rebuild additional resources as their State has been so hard 
hit.
  I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from Louisiana.
  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I thank the Senator. He and the Senator 
from New Hampshire have done a fine job leading us through this budget. 
It is a tough instrument, of course, to negotiate.
  Senator Vitter and I are pleased to come to the floor to speak about 
three particular amendments that will be offered later in the day. One 
that will be discussed in more detail is a small business amendment. He 
and I serve together on the Small Business Committee. It has become 
apparent to us there are many issues regarding the slowness in which 
the applications our small businesses are putting in but not getting 
their due checks based on the current law fast enough to get them 
reestablished. So we will be offering an amendment on a small business 
issue which I will be cosponsoring with him later.
  These two issues we are speaking about this morning on levees are an 
authorization for an additional $10 billion through the committee 
Senator Vitter serves on to try to get the authorization levels up. Mr. 
President, as you know, because you just visited our great State, any 
number of levy projects throughout all of south Louisiana, from 
southwest to southeast, from the metropolitan area of New Orleans to 
the metropolitan area of Thibodaux, Houma, Lake Charles, and rural 
areas of Cameron and Vermilion Parish, all are short of the levy 
systems they need to protect themselves and are short of money to our 
coastal restoration efforts that serve as the first barrier against 
storms such as Rita and Katrina.
  So the second amendment I hope our colleagues will consider is a $10 
billion authorization increase in one of the committees Senator Vitter 
serves on, EPW. A critical third amendment we will discuss later when 
the details are worked out is a gulf coast recovery fund. That fund 
will take some additional revenues flowing into the Treasury from 
additional offshore oil and gas revenues, not specified to any 
particular place in the gulf, but of course the ANWR revenues and some 
others that may be coming in if this resolution passes, to support 
direct funding, coastal impact assistance to the Gulf Coast States: 
Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana. The Gulf Coast States that 
serve as America's only energy coast have been devastated by these two 
storms. Some smart investments now will save us billions of dollars 
down the road.
  Of course, we say from Louisiana and the gulf coast, if it weren't 
for our Gulf Coast States, we wouldn't even be able to access the great 
mineral revenues off our shores, right off the southern shore of the 
United States. So I am pleased to join with my colleague and work 
through the better part of today on these three amendments.
  Then at an additional time later on, with the leadership's go-ahead, 
we will also hopefully be discussing a defense amendment very important 
to the Barksdale Air Force Base in Shreveport.
  I thank my colleagues for their generosity, and I yield back the 
remainder of my time.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I very much thank the Senator.
  I see the Senator from Michigan is on the floor. Would the Senator 
from Michigan be prepared to present her amendment?
  Ms. STABENOW. Yes.
  Mr. CONRAD. I yield 3 minutes--is that sufficient time?
  Ms. STABENOW. Yes.
  Mr. CONRAD. I yield 3 minutes to the Senator from Michigan, and then 
next on our side will be Senator Akaka, and then I think Senator 
Collins is in line, and then Senator Lincoln.
  Senator Stabenow.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is recognized.
  Ms. STABENOW. Thank you, Senator Conrad. Again, thank you for your 
leadership on the Budget Committee.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?
  Ms. STABENOW. Yes.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, if it is agreeable to the chairman, I have 
a report I am supposed to do at the luncheon that is going on. If I 
could give the time at this point to people, would that be appropriate?
  Mr. GREGG. I would suggest that we reach a unanimous consent 
agreement that on the list you identified, everybody be granted 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CONRAD. Could we do 4 minutes? Because we have a bit of a time 
constraint, could we do 4 minutes?
  Ms. STABENOW. If I might ask, are we asking for 2 minutes per side?
  Mr. CONRAD. No. It would be 4 minutes for each of the Senators.
  Mr. GREGG. And that will come off your time when the Democratic 
Members make offers, and when we make offers, it will come off of our 
time.
  Mr. CONRAD. Very well.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 3141

  Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask 
for its immediate consideration.

[[Page S2244]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Michigan [Ms. Stabenow] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 3141.

  Ms. STABENOW. 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 provide an assured stream of funding for veteran's health 
 care that will take into account the annual changes in the veterans' 
 population and inflation to be paid for by restoring the pre-2001 top 
 rate for income over $1 million, closing corporate tax loopholes and 
                   delaying tax cuts for the wealthy)

       On page 3, line 13, increase the amount by $6,900,000,000.
       On page 3, line 15, increase the amount by $16,500,000,000.
       On page 3, line 17, increase the amount by $22,200,000,000.
       On page 3, line 19, increase the amount by $27,000,000,000.
       On page 3, line 21, increase the amount by $31,600,000,000.
       On page 4, line 1, increase the amount by $6,900,000,000.
       On page 4, line 2, increase the amount by $16,500,000,000.
       On page 4, line 3, increase the amount by $22,200,000,000.
       On page 4, line 4, increase the amount by $27,000,000,000.
       On page 4, line 6, increase the amount by $31,600,000,000.
       On page 4, line 13, increase the amount by $6,900,000,000.
       On page 4, line 15, increase the amount by $16,500,000,000.
       On page 4, line 17, increase the amount by $22,200,000,000.
       On page 4, line 19, increase the amount by $27,000,000,000.
       On page 4, line 21, increase the amount by $31,600,000,000.
       On page 5, line 4, increase the amount by $6,900,000,000.
       On page 5, line 6, increase the amount by $16,500,000,000.
       On page 5, line 8, increase the amount by $22,200,000,000.
       On page 5, line 10, increase the amount by $27,000,000,000.
       On page 5, line 12, increase the amount by $31,600,000,000.
       On page 23, line 24, increase the amount by $6,900,000,000.
       On page 23, line 25, increase the amount by $6,900,000,000.
       On page 24, line 3, increase the amount by $16,500,000,000.
       On page 24, line 4, increase the amount by $16,500,000,000.
       On page 24, line 7, increase the amount by $22,200,000,000.
       On page 24, line 8, increase the amount by $22,200,000,000.
       On page 24, line 11, increase the amount by 
     $27,000,000,000.
       On page 24, line 12, increase the amount by 
     $27,000,000,000.
       On page 24, line 15, increase the amount by 
     $31,600,000,000.
       On page 24, line 16, increase the amount by 
     $31,600,000,000.

  Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I rise today to offer an amendment to 
make veterans health care funding assured and mandatory.
  Real security means supporting our troops abroad and making sure they 
have the body armor and the equipment they need, but it also means 
supporting them when they come home. It means giving our current and 
our future veterans the health care they need and deserve.
  The amendment I am offering today provides full funding for veterans 
medical care to ensure that the VA has the resources necessary to 
provide quality health care in a timely manner to our Nation's sick and 
disabled veterans.
  The problem we face today is that resources for veterans health care 
are falling behind demand, and we know this because every year we are 
trying to address the shortfall.
  In 1993, there were about 2.5 million veterans in the VA health care 
system. Today there are more than 7 million veterans enrolled in the 
system, over half of whom receive care on a regular basis.
  Despite the 160-percent increase in patients over the last decade, 
the VA has received an average of only a 5-percent increase in 
appropriations during this administration. Some of my colleagues will 
say this amendment isn't necessary because there have been funding 
increases over the last several years. They also say we do not need to 
create another entitlement program. Over the last 2 years, we have seen 
a 500-percent increase in the number of veterans seeking care from the 
VA who have been serving in Iraq and serving in Afghanistan. But the 
administration's budget projects that the VA will treat 109,191 
veterans next year, and this falls over 35,000 veterans short of the 
number of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans the VA currently treats. So we 
see a 500-percent increase in the number of veterans coming home after 
serving us bravely in Iraq and Afghanistan, and yet their budget 
assumes that there are 35,000 fewer--fewer than last year--fewer Iraq 
and Afghanistan veterans we are going to treat next year. These numbers 
do not make sense.
  Last year's budget is also a case study on why we need to have 
assured funding for VA health care. In total, Congress provided an 
additional $3 billion for veterans health care because the 
administration grossly miscalculated the need for veterans health care.
  We need to finally move this into a category where every year those 
veterans coming home who need health care will know that the dollars 
are there based on their eligibility, based on their service, based on 
their need--not based on a debate on the floor in the Congress about 
how much we are willing to spend to address their health care needs. 
This should not be a year-to-year debate and commitment; this should be 
an assured commitment that the dollars will be there. Just as they are 
for Medicare, for Medicaid, our veterans ought to know that every year, 
their funding for critical health care services will be assured.
  Today's soldiers are tomorrow's veterans. America has made a promise 
to these brave men and women to provide them with the care they need--
not based on a debate on how much we want to spend or calculations year 
to year on the numbers that folks think may or may not seek care. This 
ought to be about making sure that every one of our brave men and women 
coming home, whether it is from the current wars or whether it is our 
World War II vets or any other war or conflict in which our soldiers 
have been serving--when they need health care as veterans, we will 
fulfill our promises to make sure it is there for them.
  I urge my colleagues to support this very important amendment, 
supported by all of the major veterans organizations in this country. 
It is time to get this done and get it done right.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Hawaii.


                           Amendment No. 3071

  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I ask that the pending amendment be set 
aside, and I call up my amendment, No. 3071, and ask for its 
consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk 
will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Hawaii [Mr. Akaka], for himself, Mrs. 
     Clinton, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Menendez, Mr. Kerry, 
     Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Dodd, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Schumer, Ms. 
     Landrieu, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Salazar, Mrs. Lincoln, Mr. 
     Durbin, and Mr. Kohl, proposes an amendment numbered 3071.

  Mr. AKAKA. 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 Title I grants and reduce debt by 
                    closing corporate tax loopholes)

       On page 3, line 13, increase the amount by $180,000,000.
       On page 3, line 15, increase the amount by $4,860,000,000.
       On page 3, line 17, increase the amount by $840,000,000.
       On page 3, line 19, increase the amount by $120,000,000.
       On page 4, line 1, increase the amount by $180,000,000.
       On page 4, line 2, increase the amount by $4,860,000,000.
       On page 4, line 3, increase the amount by $840,000,000.
       On page 4, line 4, increase the amount by $120,000,000.
       On page 4, line 13, increase the amount by $3,000,000,000.
       On page 5, line 4, increase the amount by $90,000,000.
       On page 5, line 6, increase the amount by $2,430,000,000.
       On page 5, line 8, increase the amount by $420,000,000.
       On page 5, line 10, increase the amount by $60,000,000.
       On page 5, line 19, increase the amount by $90,000,000.
       On page 5, line 21, increase the amount by $2,430,000,000.
       On page 5, line 23, increase the amount by $420,000,000.

[[Page S2245]]

       On page 5, line 25, increase the amount by $60,000,000.
       On page 6, line 8, decrease the amount by $90,000,000.
       On page 6, line 10, decrease the amount by $2,520,000,000.
       On page 6, line 12, decrease the amount by $2,940,000,000.
       On page 6, line 14, decrease the amount by $3,000,000,000.
       On page 6, line 16, decrease the amount by $3,000,000,000.
       On page 6, line 22, decrease the amount by $90,000,000.
       On page 6, line 24, decrease the amount by $2,520,000,000.
       On page 7, line 2, decrease the amount by $2,940,000,000.
       On page 7, line 4, decrease the amount by $3,000,000,000.
       On page 7, line 6, decrease the amount by $3,000,000,000.
       On page 18, line 24, increase the amount by $3,000,000,000.
       On page 18, line 25, increase the amount by $90,000,000.
       On page 19, line 4, increase the amount by $2,430,000,000.
       On page 19, line 8, increase the amount by $420,000,000.
       On page 19, line 12, increase the amount by $60,000,000.
       On page 53, line 1, increase the amount by $3,000,000,000.
       On page 53, line 2, increase the amount by $90,000,000.

  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I thank the managers of this bill for 
accommodating this amendment. I am very grateful.
  I rise with Senators Clinton, Kennedy, Bingaman, Dodd, Menendez, 
Kerry, Lieberman, Cantwell, Schumer, Landrieu, Mikulski, Salazar, 
Lincoln, Durbin, and Kohl to offer an amendment to the FY 2007 Budget 
Resolution to restore Title I funding within the No Child Left Behind 
Act. Certainly, NCLB has come under fire as schools across the country 
struggle to comply with its requirements, particularly for higher 
student test scores and teacher qualifications. My colleagues and I 
have gone on record several times about what we need to do to change 
the NCLB, to respond to the urgent concerns and needs in all of our 
communities, including those in my state of Hawaii.
  However, today, we are not talking about deficiencies in the Act, but 
a shortfall in its funding, and about misplaced budget priorities. This 
budget resolution is similar to the President's budget in its stated 
priorities. It has debt-financed tax cuts that largely benefit the 
well-off and special interests. It presents a five year plan, which 
does not recognize the significant negative impact on revenues that tax 
cuts will have beyond the next five years. It proposes $14 billion in 
net mandatory spending cuts. It also omits war costs beyond 2007. We 
somewhat improved the measure by increasing veterans and defense 
funding, even if I do not fully agree with the budget gimmick that was 
used to offset these increases.
  However, if we pass this budget as is, we fail our students and 
teachers once again by underfunding education. The President's FY 2007 
budget proposed the largest cut to federal education funding in the 
Education Department's 26-year history, a $2.1 billion reduction. As 
approved by the Budget Committee, the budget resolution did not do much 
better, including the same total amount for discretionary spending, 
with no guarantee that education would be increased. We must not 
underfund an area that represents the future of this country. As we 
debate the need to remain competitive in the world, and worry about 
other countries overtaking us in producing scientists, engineers, and 
professionals in other areas important to our industries and national 
security, we cannot let education take the hit.
  The Title I funding shortfall, the amount below authorized levels, is 
$12.3 billion for FY 2007. This increases the cumulative Title I 
shortfall since NCLB's enactment to $43.7 billion. Actual funding has 
barely increased since 2002, which continued to grow the gap between 
authorized and actual funding. The rightful amount in FY 2007 for Title 
I, as authorized, should be $25 billion. This budget resolution puts 
the amount at $12.7 billion.
  Mr. President, we are being realistic with our amendment, given our 
current budgetary climate. We are asking for a modest, responsible 
increase of almost $3 billion, which is what the President's initial 
budget requests sought to do. Let me underscore that point--our 
amendment would do what the President said he wanted to do in previous 
years, which is to secure an additional $4 billion in funding--$1 
billion annually--since FY 2004. Actual increases since then add up to 
just over $1 billion. In addition, the amendment is fully offset by 
closing abusive corporate tax loopholes.
  If we don't pass our amendment, Mr. President, 3.7 million students 
will not be served by the Title I program. A total of 29 states stand 
to lose Title I funding, according to the Department of Education, 
including Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, 
Connecticut, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, 
Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, 
Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, 
Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin.
  Another 7 states will be level-funded, including Alaska, Delaware, 
New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming.
  The remaining states that gain overall funding will still have many 
districts--maybe even a majority of those districts--lose funding. In 
addition, we must not forget history--even if states would gain this 
year, they likely lost in a previous year. My state of Hawaii is in 
this last category, for example, having received $47.5 million in FY 
2005, and more than a million dollars less in FY 2006 including across-
the-board cuts, at about $46.4 million.
  To extend this last point further, many states will have cuts a 
second year in a row, and some would be cut for four or even five years 
in a row. Twenty-nine states will receive less Title I money than they 
did two years ago in FY 2005: Alaska, Arkansas, California, 
Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Massachusetts, 
Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New 
Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, 
Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.
  Fifteen states will receive less Title I money than they did three 
years ago in FY 2004: California, Connecticut, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, 
Massachusetts, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, 
Oklahoma, Oregon, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.
  Nine states will receive less Title I money than they did 4 years ago 
in FY 2003: Connecticut, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, 
Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, and North Dakota.
  Three states will receive less Title I money than they did 5 years 
ago in FY 2002, which is less than they got before NCLB: Connecticut, 
Massachusetts, Minnesota.
  The District of Columbia will receive less money than it did in FY 
2004 or FY 2005.
  The Northern Mariana Islands will receive less Title I money in FY 
2007 than it had received in any of the years since the NCLB's 
enactment.
  Let me remind my colleagues who we are hurting by failing to 
adequately fund Title I. This comprehensive education program focuses 
help on disadvantaged children--those from lower-income families. Title 
I helps these students meet state and local academic standards, with 
scientifically-proven instructional support, in basic subjects such as 
reading, language arts, and mathematics. Title I provides support 
through guidance, health, nutrition, and social services. It also 
provides resources for comprehensive school-wide planning, professional 
development, curriculum development, parental involvement, and 
acquisition of instructional materials and equipment. Now some may say 
that federal assistance does not help all schools, only Title I 
schools, but that is not true--the statewide accountability system 
required under Title I applies to all public schools. So this program, 
this central piece of the NCLB, works to meet urgent needs in all of 
public education.
  Students, school faculty and staff, parents, and education 
administrators have been trying, mightily in some cases, to meet the 
challenges posed by NCLB and raise student academic achievement. We 
need to do this--to ensure that our citizens have the knowledge and 
skills they need to succeed when they leave school and enter the 
workforce or other pursuits. However, this is very difficult to do if 
they lack adequate funding.
  I can give you concrete examples of how our schools are suffering 
that I

[[Page S2246]]

just heard of this week, when I met with a representative of Hawaii's 
PTSA, our affiliate of national PTA. Some students in Hawaii are having 
bread and water for lunch. Why? Because the schools don't have enough 
resources to ensure that parents know how to apply for reduced and free 
lunch. Parents who have raised funds to install air conditioners in hot 
classrooms, to allow students and teachers to concentrate on learning, 
cannot do so because the education system cannot afford the additional 
electricity costs. Students are not receiving extra help through 
tutoring in reading and math because funds are needed for other 
services that are deemed essential. Hawaii's schools are suffering 
because they need a greater infusion of resources, and we need to help 
them from the federal level, as we said we would when we approved the 
NCLB.
  Our schools will continue working to serve our kids and achieving the 
biggest bang for the buck, which is what education has been forced to 
do all along. I know this to my core, because I know what it's like to 
be in the shoes of those in education. I spent nearly two decades in 
education. I taught in several of Hawaii's elementary, middle, and high 
schools. Public and private. In the classroom, in music rooms, and in 
labs. In administration--as a vice principal and a principal. As a 
representative of Hawaii's principals to a national organization. And 
as a statewide administrator for the Hawaii Department of Education for 
the Model Cities program. I know what it's like to stretch the 
education dollar. However, we must stop being behind the curve with 
education funding.
  Education funding must be a given, not just a goal. Our Title I 
amendment goes partway toward making that happen, and I urge my 
colleagues to support it.
  The American Federation of Teachers, National Education Association, 
Council of State School Officers, and other education organizations 
support this increase for Title I. I ask unanimous consent that letters 
of support from the AFT and NEA be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                              American Federation of Teachers,

                                   Washington, DC, March 15, 2006.
     Office of the Hon. Daniel K. Akaka,
     Hart Senate Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Akaka: On behalf of the more than 1.3 million 
     members of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), I am 
     writing in support of your Title I amendment to the fiscal 
     year (FY) 2007 budget resolution.
       Knowing that the goals of the No Child Left Behind Act 
     (NCLB) could only be achieved with accountability and 
     dedicated resources, Congress set a funding authorization for 
     the program each year.
       In the three years following NCLB's passage, K-12 education 
     programs received average annual increases of $5 billion. 
     However, this steady growth has stalled, as witnessed in the 
     past two appropriations bills (FY 2005 and FY 06). Currently, 
     the gap between authorized and appropriated funds for Title I 
     from FY 02 through FY 06 is $40.3 billion. In addition, the 
     president's budget provides no increase this year for Title 
     I. Given inflation, this would amount to a cut in many 
     districts. It would have a devastating effect on schools that 
     educate large numbers of poor and minority students.
       It would also exacerbate a problem that has occurred over 
     the past few years as a result of chronic underfunding. The 
     U.S. Education Department projects that 29 states will lose 
     Title I funding and seven states will be level-funded in FY 
     07 if the president's budget request is enacted. The 
     remaining states, those that gain funding overall, will see 
     many of their individual school districts--possibly most of 
     them--lose funding. Also, any gains will not make up for 
     funding shortfalls since NCLB's enactment.
       Your amendment seeks a relatively modest increase to help 
     us move a step closer toward fully funding Title I. President 
     Bush has acknowledged the need to increase Title I funding by 
     $1 billion in FY 2004 and FY 2005, although actual increases 
     over the past four years have amounted to much less.
       At a time when schools and teachers are working hard to 
     meet the requirements of NCLB, this amendment will be a boost 
     for students, teachers, and school districts nationwide. 
     Ensuring that all children have highly qualified teachers and 
     that struggling schools have the tools to improve can't be 
     done on the cheap. Research indicates that recruiting highly 
     qualified teachers for hard-to-staff schools requires 
     improving the physical plant, providing up-to-date textbooks 
     and other learning resources, implementing proven curricula, 
     attracting and retaining exemplary administrative staff and 
     providing professional development and financial resources 
     for teachers.
       The AFT applauds you and your colleagues for making 
     education a top priority in this budget. Securing these 
     resources for the upcoming school year is critical to our 
     collective efforts to support and improve our nation's public 
     schools.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Kristor W. Cowan,
     Director, Legislation Department.
                                  ____



                               National Education Association,

                                   Washington, DC, March 16, 2006.
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC
       Dear Senator: On behalf of the National Education 
     Association's (NEA) 2.8 million members, we would like to 
     express our support for an amendment to be offered by Senator 
     Akaka (D-HI) to the proposed fy07 budget resolution that 
     would allow for an increase of $3 billion for Title I. This 
     amendment would build on the important foundation offered by 
     the just-passed Specter-Harkin amendment, which would 
     replenish key education and health programs recently cut.
       The Administration has called Title I the cornerstone of No 
     Child Left Behind. The program provides invaluable funds to 
     help close achievement gaps and maximize student learning. It 
     funds supplemental programs to enable educationally 
     disadvantaged students, particularly those attending schools 
     in high-poverty areas, to meet challenging academic 
     standards. It also pays the salaries of teachers and 
     paraprofessionals, funds pre-K, after-school, and summer 
     school programs, and provides for professional development 
     for teachers and paraprofessionals.
       Unfortunately, Title I continues to be significantly 
     underfunded, denying too many eligible students the full 
     services they need to succeed. The budget proposal before the 
     Senate would shortchange Title I by $12.3 billion below the 
     amount authorized in the No Child Left Behind Act. If enacted 
     as proposed, the budget will reduce Title I funding for 29 
     states and will flat-fund seven additional states. As a 
     result, the budget would deny essential Title I services to 
     some 3.7 million children.
       The Akaka amendment would allow for a relatively modest $3 
     billion increase for Title I, offset by closing abusive 
     corporate tax loopholes. In so doing, it would allow for an 
     important step in the right direction for this critical 
     program.
       Again, we urge your support for this important amendment.
           Sincerely,
     Diane Shust,
       Director of Government Relations.
     Randall Moody,
       Manager of Federal Policy and Politics.

  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is not a 
sufficient second.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I yield my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maine.


                           Amendment No. 3066

  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 3066, which is at 
the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Maine [Ms. Collins], for herself and Mr. 
     Lieberman, Mr. DeWine, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Kennedy, and Mr. 
     Menendez, proposes an amendment numbered 3066.

  Ms. COLLINS. 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 ensure that first responder and state and local government 
 grant programs key to our Nation's homeland security are funded at no 
 less than FY 2006 levels and to provide increases for port security, 
first responder programs, rail/transit security, and National Response 
      Plan Training, offset by discretionary spending reductions)

       On page 16, line 21, increase the amount by $4,000,000.
       On page 16, line 22, increase the amount by $3,000,000.
       On page 17, line 1, increase the amount by $1,000,000.
       On page 17, line 22, increase the amount by $488,000,000.
       On page 17, line 23, increase the amount by $164,000,000.
       On page 18, line 3, increase the amount by $227,000,000.
       On page 18, line 7, increase the amount by $75,000,000.
       On page 18, line 11, increase the amount by $22,000,000.
       On page 24, line 24, increase the amount by $494,000,000.
       On page 24, line 25, increase the amount by $171,000,000.
       On page 25, line 4, increase the amount by $158,000,000.
       On page 25, line 8, increase the amount by $146,000,000.
       On page 25, line 12, increase the amount by $19,000,000.

[[Page S2247]]

       On page 27, line 23, decrease the amount by $986,000,000.
       On page 27, line 24, decrease the amount by $338,000,000.
       On page 28, line 2, decrease the amount by $386,000,000.
       On page 28, line 5, decrease the amount by $221,000,000.
       On page 28, line 8, decrease the amount by $41,000,000.

  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
amendment, which is cosponsored by my colleague from Connecticut, 
Senator Lieberman--we would like to add as additional cosponsors 
Senators DeWine, Snowe, Kennedy, and Menendez.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to speak on behalf of an 
amendment offered by Senator Collins and myself to the Fiscal Year 2007 
budget resolution to strengthen our homeland security efforts--
particularly the ability of first responders to prevent, prepare for, 
respond to, and recover from terrorist attacks or catastrophic natural 
disasters.
  I have also filed an amendment that would increase the President's 
Government-wide homeland security budget by $8 billion--an amount still 
far below what the experts tell us we need to be as safe as we should 
be. I think the Nation would be best served by a healthier investment 
in homeland security, but I am happy to join with Senator Collins to 
offer this smaller $986 million proposal as a way to ensure support for 
first responders; rail, transit, port and cargo security, Coast Guard 
research and development, and assorted other programs.
  September 11, 2001, changed our lives forever. We face new and 
dangerous threats from our enemies that we must be prepared to deal 
with. Furthermore, the Federa1 response to Hurricane Katrina proved 
beyond a shadow of a doubt that we are still a Nation unprepared for 
catastrophe. Yet, the Bush administration seems to have turned its back 
on the lessons of September 11, 2001, and of August 29, 2005, the day 
Hurricane Katrina made landfall. And this budget resolution, which 
largely reflects the President's budget proposal, does nothing to 
indicate otherwise.
  We know our first responders lack the training, equipment, and 
frequently the manpower they need to do their jobs. Most don't even 
have the basic capability to communicate with one another across 
jurisdictional and service lines, and Hurricane Katrina demonstrated 
that sometimes during a major catastrophe they can't communicate at 
all.
  Yet, the President's fiscal year 2007 budget proposal eliminates a 
number of first responder programs and cuts others, leaving those on 
the frontlines of the war against terror or on the frontlines of a 
hurricane, struggling to make due with less. Our amendment would add 
$860 million to restore and expand first responder programs.
  We would restore $400 million for the Law Enforcement Terrorist 
Prevention Program, which the administration would totally eliminate; 
$251 million for the FIRE grants, which provide training and equipment 
to firefighters; $110 million to restore the SAFER Act, which helps 
recruit, hire and train local firefighters and which the administration 
would eliminate; $30 million for the Metropolitan Medical Response 
System which helps prepare local health officials for mass casualties; 
and $15 million for emergency preparedness grants. We would also add 
$67 million to the primary homeland security grants for States.
  After first responders, port security would get the second highest 
amount of funding under our amendment--for a total of $427 million for 
port security. Perhaps one of the unintended consequences of the Dubai 
Ports World fracas was that it underscored the need for better port 
security. Ninety-five percent of all our trade flows through our ports, 
and a terrorist event at one could cause economic havoc. Security 
experts have also warned that WMD would most likely be smuggled into 
the country in a shipping container.
  Our amendment would commit to strengthening port security by 
reallocating funding for the Targeted Infrastructure Protection Program 
to ensure a dedicated $300 million for port security grants. Another $2 
million would be set aside to audit the grants to ensure the money is 
being used properly and efficiently.
  Furthermore, we would provide $20 million for additional staff for 
the C-TPAT program--which permits expedited shipping for known 
companies that increase their shipping security. Currently, there are 
just 80 people responsible for overseeing 10,000 applications to the 
program. We would include $105 million for cutting-edge imaging 
inspection equipment for better cargo security and $4 million the 
administration cut from the Coast Guard's R&D program.
  Because we know our rail and transit system is wide open, vulnerable, 
and appealing to terrorists, and because the President's budget 
eliminates rail and transit grants, we would dedicate $200 million 
specifically for rail and transit security grants, just as we did for 
port security grants. Fourteen million Americans ride mass transit each 
weekday, more than 16 times the number of daily trips taken by 
Americans on domestic airlines. Let's not fail to learn the lessons of 
attacks on the London, Madrid, Moscow, Tokyo, and Israeli rail and 
transit systems.
  Our enemies are ruthless and choose their own battlefields in the 
communities where we live and work. Nature, too, can be ruthless and 
will strike in unpredictable ways year after year. We must have first 
responders who are trained and equipped not just to prepare for and 
respond to catastrophes but to work to prevent them, as well. We worked 
with a real sense of urgency after September 11, 2001, to secure our 
Nation. We must summon that same sense of urgency now to close the 
security gaps that remain. I wish there was a cheap way to do that. But 
there isn't. It takes money--more money than the administration's 
budget offers and more money than the majority's budget resolution 
we're debating this week offers. I urge my colleagues to support these 
modest proposals so that we can make additional headway toward our goal 
of being better able to prevent, prepare for, respond to, and recover 
from the terrorist attacks and natural disasters that are sure to come.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, the Collins-Lieberman amendment would 
provide $986 million to help prevent terrorist attacks and to enable us 
to respond more effectively if one does occur. It enjoys the support of 
a wide range of first responder groups, representing our police and our 
firefighters.
  Our amendment has two components. First, it restores funding to the 
fiscal year 2006 levels for key grant programs that assist first 
responders, as well as State and local governments. These are such 
programs as the Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program, the 
Metropolitan Medical Response System, emergency management performance 
grants, the FIRE Act, and SAFER programs.
  As this chart prepared by the Congressional Research Service 
indicates, the aggregate difference between the fiscal year 2006 
appropriated amount and the proposed budget request for this year is 
$395 million. Our amendment ensures that none of the programs listed on 
this chart would be funded at any less than the level that was 
appropriated for fiscal year 2006.
  Last year, for example, Congress appropriated $550 million for the 
State Homeland Security Grant Program, a key source of assistance to 
State and local governments and first responders. This level, I point 
out, was only half of the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. Communities 
use these funds for first responder preparation activities such as 
emergency planning, risk assessments, mutual aid agreements, equipment, 
training, and exercises.
  It is important to realize that the biggest single expenditure of 
these funds is the purchase of interoperable communications equipment. 
Therefore, a vote for our amendment is a vote to increase funding for 
interoperable communications equipment for first responders.
  Under the Collins-Lieberman amendment, we would also provide an 
additional $150 million for the State Homeland Security Grant Program 
to create a better national response system that will operate more 
smoothly at the Federal, State, and local level. Our committee's 
investigation into the preparedness for and response to Hurricane 
Katrina clearly demonstrated inadequate response and deficiencies in 
our ability to respond effectively to the

[[Page S2248]]

catastrophic events. This is not the time to reduce the Federal 
Government's commitment to national preparedness.
  The budget also shortchanges first responders in other programs, such 
as the FIRE Act and the SAFER grants. We would take care of that as 
well as the Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program, one of the 
programs that focuses on preventing terrorist attacks.
  Another important aspect of the Collins-Lieberman amendment deals 
with port security grants. Unfortunately, the administration's budget 
does not dedicate a separate funding stream for port security. Instead, 
it folds port security in with all other transportation and critical 
infrastructure, thus providing no assurance at all that any money will 
be provided to strengthen the security of our ports. The estimates are, 
from the ports administrators, that we need to have $400 million for 
port security grant funding. Because of budget constraints we don't go 
that far, but we do include dedicated funding, $300 million in port 
security grant funding. We have proposed an increase to move the 
funding level to meeting the identified needs and to help us improve 
the security of our ports.
  There are so many needs, but we have worked very hard to keep the 
cost of our amendment down. It is fully offset. I hope our colleagues 
will support this proposal. It also provides funding for a number of 
other critical infrastructure needs, such as our Nation's rail and 
transit systems.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and send a message to 
our first responders that they are a top priority. The additional 
funding provided by the Collins-Lieberman amendment is an investment we 
simply must make to strengthen our ability to prevent, detect, and if 
necessary respond to attacks on our homeland.
  I urge support for the amendment, and I yield the remainder of my 
time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas.
  Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I compliment our colleague from Maine 
for her conscientious efforts, as well as her fiscally responsible 
efforts. I ask unanimous consent to add my name to her list of 
cosponsors and again tell her how much we appreciate all of the many 
issues that have landed in her lap this year and what an incredible job 
she has done, working with Senator Lieberman to address those. I ask 
unanimous consent to add my name as a cosponsor, please.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 3047

  Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 3047.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Arkansas [Mrs. Lincoln], for herself, Mr. 
     Durbin, and Mrs. Clinton, proposes an amendment numbered 
     3047.

  Mrs. LINCOLN. 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:

 To provide $7.8 billion over two years to fund refundable tax credits 
targeted to small businesses with up to 100 employees so that they may 
 help purchase group health insurance for their low-wage workers, paid 
                for by closing corporate tax loopholes)

       On page 3, line 13, increase the amount by $4,500,000,000.
       On page 3, line 15, increase the amount by $3,300,000,000.
       On page 4, line 1, increase the amount by $4,500,000,000.
       On page 4, line 2, increase the amount by $3,300,000,000.
       On page 4, line 13, increase the amount by $4,500,000,000.
       On page 4, line 15, increase the amount by $3,300,000,000.
       On page 5, line 4, increase the amount by $4,500,000,000.
       On page 5, line 6, increase the amount by $3,300,000,000.
       On page 19, line 24, increase the amount by $4,500,000,000.
       On page 19, line 25, increase the amount by $4,500,000,000.
       On page 20, line 3, increase the amount by $3,300,000,000.
       On page 20, line 4, increase the amount by $3,300,000,000.

  Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I cannot imagine that the rest of my 
colleagues in this body are not hearing the same thing I hear, as I 
travel back each week to Arkansas, from my constituents. Always in the 
top three issues they bring up in the most passionate of ways happens 
to be how in the world are we in this Nation going to deal with the 
number of uninsured in this country, particularly in the small business 
arena?
  Those Americans who are working hard, those trying to provide for 
their families, those keeping the framework and the foundation of our 
small communities together, those working in small businesses, how are 
we going to do a better job in this body in helping to provide health 
insurance for those who are uninsured and their families?
  I rise today with my good friend Senator Durbin to propose an 
amendment to the budget resolution to provide $7.8 billion over 2 years 
to fund refundable tax credits targeted to small businesses with up to 
100 employees so they may help purchase group health insurance for 
their low-wage workers.
  I ask unanimous consent to add Senators Clinton, Kohl, and Cantwell 
as cosponsors of my amendment, and to take this opportunity as well to 
note that our amendment is endorsed by the National Association of 
Business Owners and the Small Business Majority.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, my amendment would dedicate funding to 
help small businesses that are struggling to provide health insurance 
to their employees, and would do so in a way that is fiscally 
responsible. My amendment is completely offset by closing corporate tax 
loopholes that have been agreed upon by the Finance Committee as well 
as by this entire body, the Senate. These are ways in which we can make 
fiscally responsible decisions in closing loopholes that exist and pay 
for something that is absolutely vital to working families.
  Unfortunately, the budget resolution before us doesn't specify either 
an amount to promote expanding health insurance coverage for employees 
of small businesses or a way to pay for it, which leads me to believe--
as do other Americans out there listening to this debate--that this is 
simply a priority for us.
  We cannot continue to act as if this issue doesn't exist. The 
President has mentioned it year upon year in his State of the Union 
Addresses, and yet we are seeing increases by the millions of 
individuals who are finding themselves uninsured. There are nearly 46 
million Americans currently without health insurance, including 456,000 
Arkansans in my home State of Arkansas. Twenty percent of working-age 
adults are uninsured. These are people who are working and playing by 
the rules to provide for their families. This number is so alarming to 
me that addressing this problem should be a national priority.
  Those who lack health insurance don't get access to timely and 
appropriate health care. They have less access to important screenings 
and state-of-the-art technology and prescription drugs. Working 
families need our help with this problem--and they need it now.
  Senator Durbin and I have a bill to help small businesses afford 
health insurance, and a refundable tax credit to employers as an 
integral part of our proposal. Our responsible tax credit is targeted 
to help those who need it the most.
  Low-wage workers and small businesses are significantly more likely 
to be uninsured than high-wage workers, and firms with a high 
proportion of low-wage workers are much less likely to offer insurance. 
Our tax credits are targeted to the firms and employees who need the 
most incentives to purchase health insurance coverage. Our tax credit 
goes to the employer because small employers believe offering health 
insurance has a positive impact on recruitment, retention, employees' 
attitude, performance, and health status.
  The budget resolution fails to address this huge problem in our 
country. The budget is a blueprint, and it should clearly represent 
America's working families' needs and priorities. It is supposed to 
reflect what our choices will be when it comes time to spending the tax 
dollars of this country. This amendment is about priorities.
  We must make a priority this growing number of uninsured in our 
country. They are working families, playing by the rules, trying 
desperately to contribute to their great Nation. One of

[[Page S2249]]

the things we can do is provide the employers the incentive they need 
to provide the kind of health insurance working families can use and 
need.
  The underlying proposal Senator Durbin and I have offered presents 
working families' ability to have the similar kind of health insurance 
that I and all of the Federal employees here have access to. What 
greater opportunity to provide greater choice at a lower cost. This is 
the tool that can make that happen. Providing a tax incentive to small 
businesses to be able to purchase and assist their employees--their 
low-wage workers--with the ability to engage in the insurance market 
and provide the ability to mitigate against their health care and their 
health care costs is absolutely essential, not just for the quality of 
life of working Americans but also think of what it does for our 
economy.
  We have a great opportunity in this budget to set priorities that are 
important to the working families of this country. I urge my 
colleagues, let us come together and do something for our small 
businesses and working families--and do something now.
  I ask my colleagues to support our amendment and look forward to the 
opportunity we have to do something about the escalating costs of 
health care and what it means to working families in this Nation.
  I request the yeas and nays on my amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  At the moment there is not a sufficient second.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, we will have no trouble getting a 
sufficient second.
  Perhaps we could give a second to the yeas and nays asked for by the 
Senator from Arkansas at this time. There now appears to be a 
sufficient second.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is now a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask the Parliamentarian if he could give 
us a breakdown on the time remaining between now and 1:30.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority has 24 minutes 32 seconds, the 
minority has 15 minutes 6 seconds.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, we have calls out to two other offices of 
Members who indicated an interest in offering amendments in this time 
period.
  As we have heard from the Parliamentarian, we only have 15 minutes 
left on our side. When we put in a quorum call, that time will be 
charged equally. I alert those Senators whose offices have been called 
that time is rapidly running through the hourglass. I hope very much 
those who have been called and who have asked for time will come. Time 
is rapidly evaporating.
  I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.
  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. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I yield 2 additional minutes to the 
Senator from Arkansas.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas is recognized.


                           Amendment No. 3106

  Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague.
  I come to the floor today to offer an amendment on behalf of rural 
America. If there is anything that has been consistent in this 
administration's budget, it has been that there has been more asked 
from rural America in terms of the burden of cuts that have happened 
and a disproportionate share of the labor-intensive ideas of how we are 
going to deal with incredible spending.
  I offer this amendment on behalf of rural America. I thank Senators 
Salazar, Pryor, Harkin, and Kohl for joining me in this effort.
  I am pleased to ask unanimous consent to add Senators Durbin and 
Schumer as cosponsors.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, our amendment would restore 
approximately $2 billion in discretionary cuts proposed for programs 
administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture in fiscal year 2007. 
To pay for these investments in rural America, our amendment would 
raise the discretionary cap by $2 billion and offset these expenditures 
by closing corporate tax loopholes which have passed the Senate on 
numerous occasions.
  The proposed discretionary cuts for USDA impact a variety of 
conservation, rural development, nutrition, and forestry programs that 
are vitally important to our communities across this great Nation.
  Mr. President, you and all other Members of this Senate have rural 
areas in your States and know the difficult times they are going 
through. They do not have the tax base. They may not have the corporate 
citizens in those areas that help them build this economy. These 
programs are vital to them in terms of developing the kind of economy 
they want and can have. They are not asking to be a major metropolitan 
area. They are simply asking to be the best they can possibly be.
  The discretionary spending would decline $208 million in fiscal year 
2007 in conservation. Rural development would see a decline of $421 
million less than in fiscal year 2007, and research would see a 14.6 
percent reduction from the fiscal year 2006 appropriations.
  I ask all of my colleagues, whether you represent a major 
metropolitan area or rural America, you know the fabric of this country 
depends on all of us. Please do not ask for a disproportionate share of 
rural America, and do not devastate the incredible advances they have 
already been able to make. Let us help them grow with the rest of 
America in their great effort.
  I urge my colleagues to support me in the WIC Program, the nutrition 
program, the conservation program, and all of the others that rural 
America depends on.


                    Amendment No. 3136, As Modified

  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President I call up an amendment at the desk. It is a 
substitute on the energy amendment I offered earlier. I ask unanimous 
consent to modify my previous amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is so modified.
  The amendment (No. 3136), as modified, is as follows:

(Purpose: To provide a reserve fund for bold energy legislation that is 
                            deficit neutral)

       At the appropriate place, insert the following:

     ``SEC.  . DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR ENERGY 
                   LEGISLATION.

        The Chairman of the Senate Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels and limits in this resolution for a bill or joint 
     resolution, or an amendment thereto or conference report 
     thereon, that would reduce our nation's dependence on foreign 
     sources of energy, expand production and use of alternative 
     fuels and alternative fuel vehicles, promote renewable energy 
     development, improve electricity transmission, encourage 
     responsible development of domestic oil and natural gas 
     resources, and reward conservation and efficiency, by the 
     amounts provided in such legislation for that purpose, 
     provided that such legislation would not increase the deficit 
     in fiscal year 2007 or over the total of the period of fiscal 
     years 2007 through 2011, and provided that the committee or 
     committees of jurisdiction are within their 302(a) 
     allocations.

  Mr. CONRAD. I thank the Chair.
  I ask the Parliamentarian to give us an update on the time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority has 22 minutes 30 seconds, the 
minority has 9 minutes 5 seconds.
  Mr. CONRAD. 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.
  Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           amendment no. 3106

  Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I call up my amendment numbered 3106 
which I described to my colleagues.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Arkansas [Mrs. Lincoln], for herself, Mr. 
     Salazar, Mr. Pryor, Mr. Harkin, and Mr. Kohl, proposes an 
     amendment numbered 3106.

  Mrs. LINCOLN. 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:

[[Page S2250]]

  (Purpose: To restore the discretionary budget for the Department of 
Agriculture with an offset achieved by closing corporate tax loopholes)

       On page 3, line 13, increase the amount by $1,177,000,000.
       On page 3, line 15, increase the amount by $439,000,000.
       On page 3, line 17, increase the amount by $221,000,000.
       On page 3, line 19, increase the amount by $107,000,000.
       On page 3, line 21, increase the amount by $57,000,000.
       On page 4, line 1, increase the amount by $1,177,000,000.
       On page 4, line 2, increase the amount by $439,000,000.
       On page 4, line 3, increase the amount by $221,000,000.
       On page 4, line 4, increase the amount by $107,000,000.
       On page 4, line 6, increase the amount by $57,000,000.
       On page 4, line 13, increase the amount by $2,029,000,000.
       On page 5, line 4, increase the amount by $1,177,000,000.
       On page 5, line 6, increase the amount by $439,000,000.
       On page 5, line 8, increase the amount by $221,000,000.
       On page 5, line 10, increase the amount by $107,000,000.
       On page 5, line 12, increase the amount by $57,000,000.
       On page 13, line 21, increase the amount by $916,000,000.
       On page 13, line 22, increase the amount by $540,000,000.
       On page 14, line 1, increase the amount by $220,000,000.
       On page 14, line 5, increase the amount by $101,000,000.
       On page 14, line 9, increase the amount by $37,000,000.
       On page 14, line 13, increase the amount by $18,000,000.
       On page 14, line 21, increase the amount by $384,000,000.
       On page 14, line 22, increase the amount by $295,000,000.
       On page 15, line 1, increase the amount by $67,000,000.
       On page 15, line 5, increase the amount by $17,000,000.
       On page 15, line 9, increase the amount by $3,000,000.
       On page 15, line 21, increase the amount by $95,000,000.
       On page 15, line 22, increase the amount by $71,000,000.
       On page 16, line 1, increase the amount by $22,000,000.
       On page 17, line 22, increase the amount by $296,000,000.
       On page 17, line 23, increase the amount by $12,000,000.
       On page 18, line 3, increase the amount by $79,000,000.
       On page 18, line 7, increase the amount by $96,000,000.
       On page 18, line 11, increase the amount by $63,000,000.
       On page 18, line 15, increase the amount by $35,000,000.
       On page 19, line 24, increase the amount by $104,000,000.
       On page 19, line 25, increase the amount by $93,000,000.
       On page 20, line 4, increase the amount by $11,000,000.
       On page 21, line 24, increase the amount by $234,000,000.
       On page 21, line 25, increase the amount by $166,000,000.
       On page 22, line 4, increase the amount by $40,000,000.
       On page 22, line 8, increase the amount by $8,000,000.
       On page 22, line 12, increase the amount by $4,000,000.
       On page 22, line 16, increase the amount by $3,000,000.
       On page 53, line 1, increase the amount by $2,029,000,000.
       On page 53, line 2, increase the amount by $1,177,000,000.

  Mrs. LINCOLN. I appreciate my colleagues' attention on this and 
encourage their support in supporting rural America.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Vitter). The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


  Amendments Nos. 3078, 3041, 3134, 3045, 3123, and 3136, as Modified

  Mr. GREGG. I ask unanimous consent the following amendments be agreed 
to en bloc: Amendment 3078, Senator Vitter and Senator Landrieu; 
amendment 3041, Senator Baucus; amendment 3134, Senators Snowe, Vitter 
and Kerry; amendment 3045, Senator Lautenberg; amendment 3123, Senator 
Coleman; amendment 3136, as modified, Senator Conrad.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment (No. 3078) was agreed to.
  The amendments were agreed to, as follows:


                           amendment no. 3041

 (Purpose: To provide funding for an Internet Crimes Against Children 
                         task force in Montana)

       On page 24, line 24, increase the amount by ``$250,000''.
       On page 24, line 25, increase the amount by ``$250,000''.
       On page 27, line 23, decrease the amount by ``$250,000''.
       On page 27, line 24, decrease the amount by ``$250,000''.


                           AMENDMENT NO. 3134

  (Purpose: To prevent an increase in interest rates paid by disaster 
   victims, and to increase funding for the SBA's Microloans, Small 
   Business Development Centers, HUBZones, and other small business 
  development programs, and to offset the cost through a reduction in 
                       funds under function 920)

       On page 15, line 21, increase the amount by $130,000,000.
       On page 15, line 22, increase the amount by $92,000,000.
       On page 16, line 1, increase the amount by $30,000,000.
       On page 16, line 5, increase the amount by $7,000,000.
       On page 16, line 9, increase the amount by $1,000,000.
       On page 27, line 23, decrease the amount by $130,000,000.
       On page 27, line 24, decrease the amount by $92,000,000.
       On page 28, line 2, decrease the amount by $30,000,000.
       On page 28, line 5, decrease the amount by $7,000,000.
       On page 28, line 8, decrease the amount by $1,000,000.


                           AMENDMENT NO. 3045

 (Purpose: To Add $8 million to Function 300 (Environment and Natural 
 Resources) for Highlands Land Acquisition. Fully offset with Function 
                                  920)

       On page 13, line 21, increase the amount by $8,000,000.
       On page 13, line 22, increase the amount by $2,000,000.
       On page 14, line 1, increase the amount by $2,000,000.
       On page 14, line 5, increase the amount by $2,000,000.
       On page 14, line 9, increase the amount by $1,000,000.
       On page 14, line 13, increase the amount by $1,000,000.
       On page 27, line 23, decrease the amount by $8,000,000.
       On page 27, line 24, decrease the amount by $2,000,000.
       On page 28, line 2, decrease the amount by $2,000,000.
       On page 28, line 5, decrease the amount by $2,000,000.
       On page 28, line 8, decrease the amount by $1,000,000.
       On page 28, line 11, decrease the amount by $1,000,000.


                           amendment no. 3123

   (Purpose: To increase funding to fully fund the Clean Coal Power 
                              Initiative)

       On page 12, line 21, increase the amount by $200,000,000.
       On page 12, line 22, increase the amount by $200,000,000.
       On page 27, line 23, decrease the amount by $200,000,000.
       On page 27, line 24, increase the amount by $200,000,000.

  The amendment (No. 3136), as modified, was agreed to.
  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I am deeply disappointed that this budget 
resolution assumes deep cuts and unprecedented fees for the Small 
Business Administration, the SBA. The administration's request of $624 
million is insufficient to meet the needs of small businesses in this 
country that need access to capital, counseling, and Federal contracts. 
By the SBA's own calculation, the request is $18 million less than what 
was available to the Agency last year when congressional initiatives 
and disaster supplementals are excluded. If this budget is adopted, the 
Agency will have been cut more than 37 percent since 2001. In context, 
that means it will have suffered the largest cuts of all 24 Federal 
agencies.
  To address this shortfall, I introduced S.A. 3072 to increase SBA's 
fiscal year 2007 budget of $624 million by $151 million, for a total of 
$775 million. The amendment would have paid for this increased spending 
by closing abusive corporate tax loopholes and would, among other 
things, have prevented the administration from increasing the cost of 
disaster loans, from imposing a new fee on SBA's largest loan and 
venture capital programs, from eliminating the SBA's microloan 
programs, and from weakening business assistance to women, minorities, 
veterans, Native Americans, and those trying to cut through redtape to 
contract with the Federal Government.
  This budget resolution comes after 5 years of drastic budget cuts 
which have

[[Page S2251]]

eroded SBA's core programs and left the Agency with one of the worst 
morale problems in the Federal Government. SBA's largest lending 
program, the 7(a) program, is now more expensive than ever for small 
business borrowers and lenders, and the administration is proposing to 
add new ``administrative fees'' for larger 7(a) loans, 504 loans, and 
SBIC or venture capital deals. These fees are the first time the SBA 
has attempted to pass along administrative costs to lenders and small 
business borrowers, but the administration is pushing for them because 
they will generate $7 million in savings. We are told that some 7(a) 
borrowers will pay $625 more per loan, some 504 borrowers will pay 
$1,625 per loan, and the majority of companies that get an SBIC 
investment will pay $45,000 more. This is in addition to the excessive 
fees these small business borrowers already pay to cover the loan 
subsidy cost. This would set a bad precedent. To prevent the 
administration from imposing a new fee on small business borrowers, my 
amendment provided $7 million to the SBA's budget for next year to 
offset this proposal.
  Deep budget cuts for SBA have also meant less transparency and 
accountability when it comes to the oversight of small business 
contracting. After pressure from our Committee on Small Business and 
Entrepreneurship, the SBA hired additional procurement center 
representatives, PCRs--the Government officials responsible for 
monitoring the bundling of large contracts and for helping small 
businesses cut through redtape to compete for Federal contracts--now 
bringing the number of PCRs nationwide up to 58. But many of these are 
not full-time PCRs. To avoid further reports of contracting abuses, 
large businesses receiving small business contracts, and Federal 
agencies missing their small business goals, my amendment provided $10 
million for 100 additional PCRs to ensure robust contracting oversight 
throughout the Nation.
  For the fifth year in a row, this budget continues on the path of 
providing unrealistic funding by cutting critical programs, such as the 
Small Business Development Centers or SBDCs, Women's Business Centers 
and SCORE, forcing SBA's counseling partners to spend fewer hours with 
clients because the Federal matching grant isn't keeping pace with 
inflation or demand. Despite the budget's failure to account for 
inflation costs, these programs continue to play an integral role in 
helping entrepreneurs from underrepresented communities. These cuts, 
when combined with 5 years of budget cuts for the SBA as a whole, would 
leave the SBA ill-prepared to meet the demands of the growing 
entrepreneurial sector. I strongly oppose flat funding these resources 
for small businesses and so proposed an additional $23 million in my 
amendment to bring Small Business Development Centers from the outdated 
$87.1 funding level to $110 million, proposed $4.95 million to bring 
SCORE funding to $7 million, and $4.7 million to bring the Women's 
Business Centers to a level of $16.5 million.
  All of this pales in comparison to the mismanagement of the response 
to recovery of the gulf coast region. The SBA's disaster loan program, 
essential to the recovery of business owners, homeowners, and renters 
after a disaster, almost ran out of money twice in February. Instead of 
getting their fiscal house in order like every American family must do, 
the President now proposes to raise the cost of disaster loans and no 
longer guarantee our most vulnerable borrowers fixed interest rates. 
Although they could still have up to 30 years to pay off a loan, if 
they don't pay it off in 5 years, the interest rate will go up. Instead 
of telling us how this will help disaster victims, we are told this 
will save the SBA an estimated $41 million. We should not be saving 
money on the backs of disaster victims. Instead, we should help them to 
rebuild their homes and businesses. To prevent raising disaster loan 
interest rates, my amendment provided $41 million to the SBA's budget 
for next year.
  The $151 million in my amendment would have provided real money to 
our appropriators and to small business programs in desperate need of 
funding. Unfortunately, this amendment did not garner bipartisan 
support. While I am disappointed with this outcome, I am pleased that 
we were able to work out a bipartisan compromise with Senator Snowe, 
the chair of the Small Business Committee. Our compromise, S.A. 3134, 
would increase the SBA fiscal year 2007 budget by $130 million, and 
although it would not add any additional funds to the budget 
resolution, it is a bipartisan effort to address many of the issues 
that my amendment 3072 attempted to address. There is bipartisan 
support for the 7(j) technical assistance program and the HUBZONE 
Program, which Senator Bond from Missouri worked hard to put in place 
and I joined with him in cosponsoring it when he was chairman for SBDCs 
and SCORE and Women's Business Centers; for the Microloan Program and 
microloan technical assistance, both of which the President has tried 
to eliminate for several years now. We all support U.S. Export 
Assistance Centers and Veterans Business Development, Small Business 
Innovation Research, and Small Business Technology Transfer Program. 
While I would have liked to have seen higher funding levels for the 
PRIME and New Markets Venture Capital Program, I am glad that our 
amendment reflects continued funding for these vital programs. We made 
a strong bipartisan statement that minority lending numbers must be 
increased, with about $1 million more toward Native-American outreach. 
And we agreed to reject the proposals to raise the cost of disaster 
loans and to impose a new fee on the lending and venture capital 
programs. Overall, amendment 3134 is sending an important signal to all 
that there is broad bipartisan support to increase funding for these 
vital small business programs.
  Mr. President, I thank my colleagues, Senators Landrieu, Lieberman, 
Levin, Nelson of Florida, Vitter, and Coleman for joining us to 
cosponsor this amendment, the entire Senate for agreeing to the 
amendment, and Senators Conrad and Gregg for their help in putting 
together a more realistic budget for small businesses.
  Mr. GREGG. 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. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, could we get an update on the time 
situation?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Certainly. The minority has 2 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. CONRAD. Two minutes?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Correct. The majority has 16 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. CONRAD. I ask the chairman, could I get 2 additional minutes to 
give to Senator Kerry?
  Mr. GREGG. Sure.
  Mr. CONRAD. The chairman, once again, is gracious to provide another 
2 minutes. I ask unanimous consent for 2 minutes from his time to our 
time and I give 4 minutes to the Senator from Massachusetts.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts is recognized.
  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I am grateful to both of the managers and 
appreciate the courtesy.


                           Amendment No. 3143

  Mr. President, I have an amendment which I send to the desk and ask 
for its appropriate consideration in the line of votes, as we decide on 
that later.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Kerry] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 3143.

  Mr. KERRY. 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 eliminate increased fees and co-payments for retired 
                          military healthcare)

       On page 3, line 13, increase the amount by $592,000,000.
       On page 3, line 15, increase the amount by $1,619,000,000.
       On page 3, line 17, increase the amount by $2,188,000,000.
       On page 3, line 19, increase the amount by $2,685,000,000.
       On page 3, line 21, increase the amount by $3,271,000,000.

[[Page S2252]]

       On page 4, line 1, increase the amount by $592,000,000.
       On page 4, line 2, increase the amount by $1,619,000,000.
       On page 4, line 3, increase the amount by $2,188,000,000.
       On page 4, line 4, increase the amount by $2,685,000,000.
       On page 4, line 6, increase the amount by $3,271,000,000.
       On page 4, line 13, increase the amount by $735,000,000.
       On page 4, line 15, increase the amount by $1,862,000,000.
       On page 4, line 17, increase the amount by $2,322,000,000.
       On page 4, line 19, increase the amount by $2,816,000,000.
       On page 4, line 21, increase the amount by $3,424,000,000.
       On page 5, line 4, increase the amount by $592,000,000.
       On page 5, line 6, increase the amount by $1,619,000,000.
       On page 5, line 8, increase the amount by $2,188,000,000.
       On page 5, line 10, increase the amount by $2,685,000,000.
       On page 5, line 12, increase the amount by $3,271,000,000.
       On page 9, line 20, increase the amount by $735,000,000.
       On page 9, line 21, increase the amount by $592,000,000.
       On page 9, line 24, increase the amount by $1,862,000,000.
       On page 9, line 25, increase the amount by $1,619,000,000.
       On page 10, line 3, increase the amount by $2,322,000,000.
       On page 10, line 4, increase the amount by $2,188,000,000.
       On page 10, line 7, increase the amount by $2,816,000,000.
       On page 10, line 8, increase the amount by $2,685,000,000.
       On page 10, line 11, increase the amount by $3,424,000,000.
       On page 10, line 12, increase the amount by $3,271,000,000.

  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, the President's budget proposal includes a 
concept to increase TRICARE--this is the DOD, Department of Defense, 
health care program--fees and copayments for military retirees under 
the age of 65 and for their dependents.
  All of us recognize there is this spiraling cost to health care. I 
understand that. And it affects everything we are doing in the country. 
The Department of Defense is, needless to say, no different. It has 
those increases. But the answer is not found in tripling the fees for 
retired officers, doubling them for senior enlisted retirees, and 
demanding more from every military retiree under the age of 65 who uses 
the health care system, when you look at the other costs that are 
already going up for all of those folks.
  Most importantly, there are a series of better ways that have been 
recommended to bring down the cost of health care for those retirees. 
So you do not have to go immediately to fees and copayments in order to 
solve the problem of the increase in costs.
  In successive budget requests, the Bush administration has asked for 
increased fees and copayments for veterans health care, which is 
increasingly shifting the burden of that care from some veterans on to 
others, and it is driving some veterans out of the system altogether, 
which is, obviously, not fair.
  My amendment will restore the funding for TRICARE so that military 
retirees are not saddled with these increased costs and fees. We pay 
for it by closing a number of tax loopholes. I think by doing so, we 
keep faith with people who have served our country for 20 years or 
more.
  They did not ask to change the terms of their commitment to the 
military when things got tough, and I do not think we should be 
ignoring and changing our commitment to them now.
  Mr. President, I yield back such time as may remain.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, we are 10 minutes away from the big show, 
which may go on for a long time. It may be a big, long show. In any 
event, I want to alert Members we are going to go to 10-minute votes. 
We are going to be holding the 10-minute votes as strictly as possible. 
The first vote will, obviously, not be 10 minutes. And we are going to 
start voting at 1:30. We have pending so many amendments that we could 
be here well into the evening. Cooperation is needed if people do not 
want to be here well into tomorrow morning.
  With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence 
of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from 
Nebraska.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nebraska is recognized.
  Mr. HAGEL. Mr. President, thank you. And I thank the distinguished 
chairman of the Budget Committee.


                           Amendment No. 3127

  Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 3127 and ask for its immediate 
consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Nebraska [Mr. Hagel] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 3127.

  Mr. HAGEL. 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 establish a reserve fund for a Comprehensive Entitlement 
                           Reform Commission)

       At the end of title III, insert the following:

     SEC. ___. RESERVE FUND FOR A COMPREHENSIVE ENTITLEMENT REFORM 
                   COMMISSION.

       If--
       (1) the Committee on Finance of the Senate reports a bill 
     or joint resolution, or if an amendment is offered thereto or 
     if a conference report is submitted thereon, that establishes 
     a Comprehensive Entitlement Reform Commission for the purpose 
     of conducting a comprehensive review of the Social Security, 
     Medicare, and Medicaid programs and making recommendations to 
     sustain the solvency and stability of these programs for 
     future generations; and
       (2) that committee is within its allocation as provided 
     under section 302(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974;
     the chairman of the Committee on the Budget may make the 
     appropriate adjustments in allocations and aggregates to the 
     extent that such legislation would not increase the deficit 
     for fiscal year 2007 and the period of fiscal years 2007 
     through 2011.

  Mr. HAGEL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senators 
Isakson and Chambliss be added as cosponsors.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. HAGEL. Mr. President, last October, I introduced legislation, S. 
1889, to create a bipartisan entitlement reform commission. Senator 
Isakson cosponsored my legislation, and Representative John Tanner 
joined me in introducing this legislation in the House of 
Representatives.
  In January, the President called on Congress to create such a 
commission in his State of the Union Address. The amendment I am 
offering today responds to the President's request.
  My amendment establishes a reserve fund that would allow Congress to 
pass legislation later this year forming a bipartisan entitlement 
reform commission. This bipartisan commission would review America's 
three major entitlement programs--Social Security, Medicare, and 
Medicaid--and make comprehensive recommendations on how to stabilize 
and keep solvent these programs for future generations.
  The entitlement course that we are currently on is unsustainable. 
Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid have been vital components for 
millions of Americans as they have found a happier retirement. However, 
over the next 75 years, these three programs represent a $42 trillion 
unfunded mandate for the American taxpayer.
  The Social Security trust fund faces a $4 trillion unfunded 
commitment and will pay out more money than it takes in beginning 
around 2017. The fund will be exhausted by 2041. The Medicare Part A 
trust fund--hospital insurance--faces an almost $9 trillion unfunded 
commitment and will be exhausted by 2020.
  Where is the money to pay for these commitments going to come from? 
We must deal with these challenges today while we still have time and 
constructive options. To leave future generations burdened with paying 
for huge

[[Page S2253]]

entitlement commitments when they will be competing in a far more 
competitive world than exists today would be dangerously irresponsible.
  This is not a Republican or a Democratic problem. This affects us 
all. Most significantly, it affects the most vulnerable in our society. 
Creating this commission will start us down the road to dealing with 
this problem and will protect the next generation from facing Draconian 
choices in their future.
  Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to vote for this amendment today.
  Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  Mr. HAGEL. Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota is recognized.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I assume I have no time remaining.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct. The remainder of the time is 
controlled by the Senator from New Hampshire.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, may I ask the Senator from New Hampshire 
for 2 minutes so I might offer an amendment.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I yield the Senator from North Dakota 2 
minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota is recognized.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I thank the chairman again for his 
courtesy.


                           Amendment No. 3148

  Mr. President, I want to say to the Senator from Nebraska that while 
on this side we agree that we have long-term challenges, very deep 
long-term challenges, with the fiscal health of the country, we believe 
the amendment the Senator from Nebraska has offered is too narrow in 
scope.
  Mr. President, for that reason, I send an amendment to the desk to be 
considered at the same time as the amendment offered by the Senator 
from Nebraska. Basically, the difference is this: We think everything 
ought to be on the table. We think everything ought to be on the table, 
not just entitlements but domestic discretionary spending, the revenue 
side of the equation, that all ought to be considered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Will the Senator briefly allow the clerk to 
formally report.
  Mr. CONRAD. I will be happy to.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from North Dakota [Mr. Conrad] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 3148.

  The amendment is as follows:

 (Purpose: To create a deficit-neutral reserve fund for addressing the 
long term fiscal challenges facing our nation, by creating a bipartisan 
    commission or process to consider all parts of the budget, with 
                everything on the table for discussion)

     SEC. __. RESERVE FUND FOR ADDRESSING THE LONG-TERM FISCAL 
                   CHALLENGES FACING THE NATION.

       The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate 
     may revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels and limits in this resolution for a bill or joint 
     resolution, or an amendment thereto or a conference report 
     thereon, that would provide for the bipartisan leadership of 
     the House and Senate to work with the President to establish 
     a commission (or other mutually agreeable process) to address 
     the long-term fiscal challenges facing the nation, provided 
     that such commission or process--
       (1) Addresses these long-term fiscal challenges in a manner 
     in which both political parties are represented equally, and
       (2) Considers all parts of the budget by putting everything 
     on the table for discussion

     provided that such legislation would not increase the deficit 
     for fiscal year 2007 and the period of fiscal years 2007 to 
     2011.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator may continue.
  Mr. CONRAD. I thank the Chair.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have a letter printed in 
the Record from AARP in opposition to the Hagel amendment, indicating 
they agree that the Hagel amendment is too narrow in scope, and that we 
ought to have a broader look at all of the problems facing our fiscal 
future, not just focus on one part.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                                         AARP,

                                                   March 16, 2006.
     Hon. Kent Conrad,
     Ranking Minority Member, Budget Committee, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Conrad: The Senate will shortly consider an 
     amendment regarding a narrowly focused commission to address 
     the long-term challenges facing Social Security, Medicare and 
     Medicaid. AARP agrees that we must confront the challenges 
     and opportunities posed by the aging of the baby boom 
     generation, but a commission focused primarily on the fiscal 
     impact of our critical health and income security programs 
     overlooks the important role they play in the lives of 
     millions of Americans of all ages.
       Commissions have been most effective in laying out policy 
     options when they have been balanced, established without 
     preconditions, given a mandate to address the underlying 
     causes of problems, and provided all sides with an 
     opportunity to be heard. A commission to address our long-
     term fiscal challenges has merit provided it examines the 
     full scope of our budgetary policy, including the revenue 
     needed to ensure the health and income security of all 
     Americans.
       Most important to AARP and its 36 million members, the 
     commission must recognize that ultimately the solutions must 
     be about people. A commission's recommendations should put us 
     on a path to secure the future ability of Social Security, 
     Medicare and Medicaid to continue to provide a foundation for 
     the health and retirement security of all generations as well 
     as guide the way to sound long-term budget policies.
       The current amendment offered by Senator Hagel does not 
     meet all of these criteria. Therefore, AARP cannot support 
     this amendment.
           Sincerely,

                                              David P. Sloane,

                                         Senior Managing Director,
                                  Government Relations & Advocacy.

  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence 
of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, just for the edification of our colleagues 
because it is going to get a little confusing around here with all the 
amendments we have, we are going to begin the amendment voting process 
with the amendment of Senator Lieberman on homeland security. That will 
be followed by Senator Clinton's amendment, followed by Senator 
Specter's amendment on education, followed by the amendment of Senator 
Reed of Rhode Island on LIHEAP, followed by Senator Lautenberg's 
amendment on TSA fees, followed by Senator Sarbanes's amendment on 
function 300, followed by Senator Dorgan's amendment on tribal issues, 
followed by Senator Cornyn's amendment on reconciliation, followed by 
Senator Stabenow's amendment on veterans, followed by Senator Akaka's 
amendment on title I, followed by Senator Collins's amendment on 
homeland security, followed by Senator Lincoln's amendment on small 
business--oh, we are stopping at Senator Collins's amendment, and then 
we are going to order the next group of amendments.
  So that is the basic concept.
  Mr. CONRAD. Might we put in a quorum call? We have a little bit of a 
glitch.
  Mr. GREGG. Yes.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I wish to amend the prior list of how we 
will proceed with votes. We will begin with Senator Reed and his LIHEAP 
amendment. We will follow that with Senator Clinton on health care, 
followed by Senator Specter, and then we will go to Senator Lieberman. 
Then the list will continue as outlined in the prior discussion.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GREGG. I ask unanimous consent that for the amendments which are 
pending, there be 2 minutes equally divided prior to each vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I further ask unanimous consent that no 
second degrees be in order, with the exception of the Clinton amendment 
which might be subject to a second degree or further side by side.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

[[Page S2254]]

  The Senator from Rhode Island is recognized for 1 minute.


                           Amendment No. 3074

  Mr. REED. Mr. President, this amendment would raise the allocation 
for LIHEAP to the statutorily authorized $5.1 billion. It recognizes 
the fact that energy prices have been going up and that we are likely 
not to see a mild winter again next year; that we can expect right now 
to need more resources. Just a few weeks ago, we were on the floor of 
the Senate trying to raise the emergency funding for LIHEAP because of 
the intersection of cold temperatures and the increased cost of fuel. 
If we do pass this amendment, it will increase the allocation of 
resources not just to the cold States but to the warm States. This will 
provide significant resources for those States such as Alabama, 
Louisiana, and Nevada that need the assistance in the summertime for 
air-conditioning.
  I urge my colleagues to pass my amendment. We know it is going to be 
a problem next year. The funds in the President's budget are 
insufficient. We have to stand up and make sure we take care of the 
vulnerable people.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, we made a very strong commitment to LIHEAP 
a few weeks ago. We passed an additional billion dollars on the Senate 
floor. In other vehicles, we have passed even more money for LIHEAP. 
This amendment does not fund LIHEAP because nothing in this bill is 
binding on the Appropriations Committee. What it does do, however, is 
raise the cap by $1 billion and raise taxes by $1 billion. It will be 
up to the Appropriations Committee to decide whether they are going to 
fund LIHEAP at this year's level or next year's level or last year's 
level. The history is pretty strong. LIHEAP gets well funded around 
here and you can pretty much presume that the Appropriations Committee 
will do that. But they will do it within the cap, and that is the way 
it should be. Therefore, I hope Members will reject this amendment 
because it is basically a tax-and-spend amendment.
  I ask unanimous consent that the yeas and nays be deemed to have been 
ordered on all amendments that are proceeding here.
  Mr. CONRAD. No objection.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second. The yeas and nays are ordered.
  Mr. GREGG. I ask unanimous consent that seconds be deemed to have 
been approved for all the yeas and nays for the balance of the 
amendments.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 3074.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  The result was announced--yeas 51, nays 49, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 57 Leg.]

                                YEAS--51

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Chafee
     Clinton
     Coleman
     Collins
     Conrad
     Dayton
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Obama
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Salazar
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Wyden

                                NAYS--49

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Burr
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Dole
     Domenici
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Frist
     Graham
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     Martinez
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Thune
     Vitter
     Voinovich
     Warner
  The amendment (No. 3074) was agreed to.
  Mr. GREGG. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. CONRAD. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic leader is recognized.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                      Amendment No. 3115 Withdrawn

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I hope this sets a good example for the 40-
odd amendments we have left. I ask unanimous consent that the Reid-
Clinton amendment be withdrawn, and the Ensign amendment--it has not 
been filed yet, I believe--will not be offered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, we will now go to the Specter amendment. 
Senator Specter and those in opposition had not expected this amendment 
to come up so quickly. I hate to slow the voting down.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, if we could ask our colleagues, we know 
the list that has been put in, and if colleagues who have amendments 
about to be considered will be closely attentive to what is happening 
here so we don't have dead time, that would be very helpful to the 
process.
  After this amendment, next is the Lieberman amendment. So we alert 
Senator Lieberman and his staff. Then we will have the Lautenberg 
amendment. If those Senators can be ready to go.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I see the cosponsor of the amendment is on 
the Senate floor. Would he like to take the time allocated to him?
  Mr. HARKIN. We have 30 seconds?
  Mr. GREGG. The Senator has a minute. Proponents of the amendment have 
a minute.


                           Amendment No. 3048

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will now be 1 
minute on each side on the Specter-Harkin amendment No. 3048, on which 
the yeas and nays have been ordered.
  Who seeks recognition? The Senator from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, Senator Harkin and I have submitted this 
amendment, joined by 27 cosponsors, which would add $7 billion to the 
fund for education, health, and workers' safety. This account has been 
decimated since fiscal year 2005 with a loss of some $15.7 billion when 
we consider the cuts and the failure to have an inflationary increase.
  Health and education are the two major capital assets of the country. 
We have gone beyond the fat, beyond the muscle, beyond the bone, and 
into the marrow. This funding will help us a little, not really enough. 
We ask our colleagues to support it.
  I yield to Senator Harkin.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague for his great 
leadership in the areas of health and education, especially medical 
research. This amendment only takes us back to 2005. That is all it 
does. It sets the level back to where it was in 2005. It is a very 
modest proposal.
  I hope we can have a strong vote on this amendment to get the money 
we need for Pell grants, for NIH, for the Centers for Disease Control--
all the programs that are so necessary to our country.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise in support of this amendment to 
provide an additional $7 billion for critical health, education, 
training and low-income programs. This budget has all the wrong 
priorities. Instead of easing the burden on middle-class families and 
helping to curb the costs of education and health care, President Bush 
and the Republicans want to cut funding for these programs by more than 
$4 billion and spend billions on tax breaks for multimillionaires. This 
amendment would restore cuts to some of the most vital programs in our 
country programs like No Child Left Behind, Pell

[[Page S2255]]

grants, NIH, and nursing education. It is my job as a U.S. Senator to 
look out for the day-to-day needs of Marylanders and the long-term 
needs of the Nation, and this amendment takes us closer to both of 
these goals.
  Our middle-class families are stressed and stretched. Families in my 
State of Maryland are worried--they are worried about their jobs, they 
are terrified of losing their health care, and they don't know how they 
are going to afford to send their kids to college. Families are looking 
for help and President Bush doesn't offer them much hope. His budget 
would freeze the maximum Pell grant at $4,050 for the fourth year in a 
row. Twenty years ago, Pell grants covered 80 percent of average costs 
at 4-year public colleges. Now, they cover only 40 percent. If Pell 
grants remain the same for another year, many students will be forced 
to take out more student loans and some won't be able to go to school 
at all. Our students are graduating with so much debt, it is like their 
first mortgage. The average undergraduate student debt from college 
loans is almost $19,000. College is part of the American dream; it 
shouldn't be part of the American financial nightmare.
  We need to do more to help middle-class families afford college. We 
need to immediately increase the maximum Pell Grant to $4,500 and 
double it over the next 6 years. We need to make sure student loans are 
affordable. And we need a bigger tuition tax credit for the families 
stuck in the middle who aren't eligible for Pell grants but still can't 
afford college.
  America needs a public school system that works. I support the goals 
of No Child Left Behind: a good teacher in every classroom, making sure 
every student is proficient in math and reading, and fighting against 
the soft bigotry of low expectations. But to do that, schools need help 
from the Federal Government. Schools need resources for smaller 
classes, teacher training, and meeting special needs--like bilingual 
education or special education. Yet the Republican budget doesn't give 
schools the funds to do the job. It falls $15.4 billion short of what 
we promised for No Child Left Behind. It shortchanges schools and 
shortchanges our children. That is wrong.
  I have heard from teachers and parents from all over Maryland. They 
are worried about how they are going to meet all the requirements in No 
Child Left Behind. They all tell me that they are worried about whether 
their school will make the grade--especially in this time of budget 
cuts and budget crunches.
  No Child Left Behind placed the burden on schools to improve. I know 
the teachers and school officials are doing their best to turn 
struggling schools around. But they can't do it alone. They need 
encouragement, support, and resources. That is why this amendment is so 
important. We must make sure no child is left out of the budget.
  NIH is a jewel in the Nation's crown. As the Senator from Maryland, I 
am proud that NIH is in my home State. The investments we are making in 
biomedical research today have the potential to pay priceless returns 
for people across this country. That is why I strongly supported the 
bipartisan doubling of the NIH budget over 5 years to $27 billion. This 
goal was met in 2003, but our work is not done. We must continue to 
invest in biomedical research and support continued increases of the 
NIH budget, so that the research that scientists are doing will 
continue to help people live longer, healthier lives.
  The Republican budget level funds the NIH at $28.3 billion, which is 
$62 million less than in fiscal year 2005. As a result, the total 
number of NIH-funded research project grants would drop by 642, or 2 
percent, below last year's level. The budget would cut funding for 18 
of the 19 institutes. Funding for the National Cancer Institute would 
drop by $40 million, and funding for the National Heart, Lung, and 
Blood Institute would drop by $21 million. Over the years, the American 
people have invested in NIH. It is paying off in improved prevention, 
diagnosis, and treatments for diseases. We must continue to invest in 
biomedical research.
  Today, our Nation faces a shortage of nearly 500,000 nurses. As our 
population continues to grow and age, the need for nurses will continue 
to increase. The Department of Labor reported in the Winter 2005-2006 
Occupational Outlook Quarterly that America's demand for new and 
replacement RN's will grow by 29 percent between 2004 and 2014, to 1.2 
million, in order to accommodate growing patient needs and to replace 
retiring nurses. Yet the Republican budget funds nursing workforce 
development programs at last year's level of $150 million. Congress 
must do more to address this crisis.
  I am proud to cosponsor this amendment and I urge my colleagues to 
vote for it. These additional funds are crucial for so many important 
programs that change lives and save lives. I will keep fighting so that 
these programs get the funds they need and to ensure that Americans 
have health care at any age, public schools we can depend on, and 
access to higher education.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
  Who yields time in opposition?
  Mr. GREGG. I yield back the time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has been yielded back. The question 
is on agreeing to amendment No. 3048. The yeas and nays have been 
ordered. The clerk will call the roll.
  This will be a 10-minute vote.
  The bill clerk called the roll.
  The result was announced--yeas 73, nays 27, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 58 Leg.]

                                YEAS--73

     Akaka
     Alexander
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Burns
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Chafee
     Clinton
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Conrad
     Dayton
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Dole
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Frist
     Grassley
     Hagel
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lott
     Lugar
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Obama
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Salazar
     Santorum
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Stevens
     Talent
     Thune
     Voinovich
     Warner
     Wyden

                                NAYS--27

     Allard
     Allen
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burr
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Graham
     Gregg
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Kyl
     Martinez
     McCain
     McConnell
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Sununu
     Thomas
     Vitter
  The amendment (No. 3048) was agreed to.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I spoke to the distinguished majority leader 
just a few minutes ago, and we have lots and lots of amendments. We 
hope we would stick to 10 minutes. On my side, if Senators aren't here 
in 10 minutes, I hope it would be a fair, equal punishment that if 
people aren't here in 10 minutes, the vote should be closed. Everyone 
knows what the rules are. People have things to do. It is not fair to 
the Senators. People come straggling in after 16, 17, 18 minutes, and 
it is not fair. So I would hope that we have 10-minute votes. We have 
lots of votes to do.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I also wish to agree with the Democratic 
leader and express a request. We are going to have a long day here. We 
have a lot of votes lined up, and we have a lot of votes to follow that 
as well. So let's follow the managers' lead, and we are going to leave 
it to their discretion. Right now, we have instructed them to cut off 
those votes. With that, no complaints. People have to stick close to 
the floor.


                           Amendment No. 3034

  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sununu). Under the previous order, the 
next amendment is the Lieberman amendment No. 3034 on which the yeas 
and nays have been ordered and for which there will be 2 minutes evenly 
divided for debate.
  The Senator from North Dakota.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, could I just alert colleagues, we have now 
done a vote count. We have over 60 votes pending. We can only do three 
votes an hour. That would take us 20 hours. I urge colleagues--there 
are other vehicles coming. We have had a lot of votes already on this 
budget resolution. We have a lot more votes scheduled. I would urge 
colleagues to come to us and remove some of their amendments from 
consideration.
  I thank the Chair.

[[Page S2256]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On amendment No. 3034, the Senator from 
Connecticut is recognized for 1 minute.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator 
Durbin be added as a cosponsor of this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I have said that the budget before us, 
when it comes to our homeland security, is shortsighted and short-
funded. But I wish to go beyond that, so working with my staff we 
reached out to experts in the various areas that constitute our 
homeland security in a time of terrorism. This is the result: a 
comprehensive proposal that would add $8 billion to our homeland 
security. It is, in fact, what is necessary to protect the American 
people at a time of terrorism and from natural disasters like Katrina. 
The money will go to first responders, port security, rail transit 
security, FEMA, bioterrorism, chemical security, and aviation security, 
and the Coast Guard.
  For real homeland security, I urge my colleagues to support this 
amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
  Who yields time in opposition? The Senator from New Hampshire.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, we have increased the funding for national 
defense by $30 billion in this bill in the core budget. We have 
increased it by $40 billion in the ancillary budget which funds 
alongside the core budget, putting it up to $90 billion. We have 
increased border and port security funding by $4 billion, and we 
already have in the pipeline something like $5 billion of unspent money 
for first responders and something like $3.5 billion for 
interoperability. This amendment is not needed, and it is a tax-and-
spend amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time having been yielded back, the 
question is on agreeing to amendment No. 3034.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. The following Senators were necessarily absent: the 
Senator from Virginia (Mr. Allen), the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. 
Chafee), and the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Lott).
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Montana (Mr. Baucus) is 
necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 43, nays 53, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 59 Leg.]

                                YEAS--43

     Akaka
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Clinton
     Conrad
     Dayton
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Obama
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Salazar
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Stabenow
     Wyden

                                NAYS--53

     Alexander
     Allard
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Burr
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeMint
     DeWine
     Dole
     Domenici
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Frist
     Graham
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Kyl
     Lugar
     Martinez
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Nelson (NE)
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Thune
     Vitter
     Voinovich
     Warner

                             NOT VOTING--4

     Allen
     Baucus
     Chafee
     Lott
  The amendment (No. 3034) was rejected.
  Mr. GREGG. 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. 3137

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the next amendment 
is the Lautenberg amendment on which the yeas and nays have been 
ordered. There will be 2 minutes evenly divided. The Senator from New 
Jersey is recognized for 1 minute.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, my amendment is now being considered. 
The vote is simple: If you vote yes, you support my amendment to strike 
this unfair tax increase from the budget. However, if you vote no on 
this, you are saying to the average family that they should pay more 
taxes. So the vote is yes. We want to strike this unfair tax increase 
from the budget.
  The average family of four traveling round-trip on nonstop flights 
will pay $40 in security taxes under the President's budget proposal. 
The traveling public is already overtaxed. They pay nearly 20 percent 
in total Federal taxes on every airline ticket.
  To make matters worse, this tax increase will hit families the 
hardest--families and loved ones traveling to be together, whether 
during holidays or emergencies.
  The proper vote for the families of America is a yes vote. I urge my 
colleagues to support my amendment and eliminate the Bush airline 
passenger tax increase.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator has expired. Who seeks 
time in opposition?
  Mr. GREGG. We are willing to accept this amendment. I ask unanimous 
consent the yeas and nays be vitiated and the amendment be agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the yeas and nays are 
vitiated and the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3137) was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3103

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the next amendment 
is No. 3103, the Sarbanes amendment, on which the yeas and nays have 
been ordered and on which there will be 2 minutes evenly divided.
  The Senator from Maryland.
  Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, this amendment raises the function 300 
back to baseline. I have a letter here. I ask unanimous consent to have 
it printed in the Record. It is from a number of the leading 
environmental organizations.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                                   March 16, 2006.
       Dear Senator: On behalf of our millions of members and 
     supporters, we write to urge you to vote for the amendment to 
     the budget resolution proposed by Senator Sarbanes. It will 
     provide $31.1 billion for environmental protection and 
     restoration in function 300 of the Fiscal Year 2007 budget. 
     This amendment will restore funding in function 300 to the 
     baseline level taken from Fiscal Year 2006 and stop the 
     proposed back slide in environmental protection. The 
     environment is not only important for public health, but it 
     is also a critical asset to the nation providing 
     recreational, cultural, economic, and ecological capital to 
     our society.
       The cuts proposed in the Senate budget resolution would 
     undermine the progress that has been made on protecting our 
     natural resources. Funding for drinking water and clean water 
     infrastructure has been cut to dangerous levels; clean up of 
     toxic sites around the country will continue to slow down; 
     species and land preservation for future generations will 
     struggle forward; the condition of our national parks would 
     continue to deteriorate; our ocean resources would linger on 
     the brink of collapse; and farmers and ranchers seeking 
     assistance to improve environmental quality will be turned 
     away.
       Unfortunately, the federal government in the past several 
     years has not provided the support that these resources need 
     to protect local communities and the natural ecosystems. In 
     addition, past budget resolutions have proposed Arctic 
     drilling--an old, tired idea that would further devastate the 
     environment--as a way to pay for other important programs. 
     Though on paper there have been increases in funding for the 
     environment, inflation has outstripped those increases 
     leading to cut backs in critical environmental programs. 
     Adjusted for inflation the cuts have amounted to almost $2 
     billion in the past two years. We ask that you stop this 
     trend and reinvigorate the federal government's role as a 
     leader in investing in our country by providing at least 
     $31.1 billion for environmental protection and restoration in 
     the Fiscal Year 2007 budget.
           Sincerely,
         Cindy Shogan, Executive Director, Alaska Wilderness 
           League; S. Elizabeth Birnbaum, Vice President for 
           Government Affairs, American Rivers; Mary Beth Beetham, 
           Director of Legislative Affairs, Defenders of Wildlife; 
           Marty Hayden, Vice President for Policy and 
           Legislation, Earthjustice; Brock Evans, President, 
           Endangered Species Coalition; Sara Zdeb, Legislative 
           Director, Friends of the Earth; Betsy Loyless, Vice 
           President for Policy, National Audubon Society; Karen 
           Steuer,

[[Page S2257]]

           Vice President, National Environmental Trust; Blake 
           Selzer, Legislative Director, National Parks 
           Conservation Association; Heather Taylor, Deputy 
           Legislative Director, Natural Resources Defense 
           Council; Michele Boyd, Legislative Director, Public 
           Citizen; Anna Aurilio, Legislative Director, U.S. PIRG; 
           Linda Lance, Vice President Public Policy, The 
           Wilderness Society.

  Mr. SARBANES. I will quote one paragraph:

       The cuts proposed in the Senate budget resolution would 
     undermine the progress that has been made on protecting our 
     natural resources. Funding for drinking water and clean water 
     infrastructure has been cut to dangerous levels; clean up of 
     toxic sites around the country will continue to slow down; 
     species and land preservation for future generations will 
     struggle forward; the condition of our national parks would 
     continue to deteriorate; our ocean resources would linger on 
     the brink of collapse; and farmers and ranchers seeking 
     assistance to improve environmental quality will be turned 
     away.

  Don't let these things happen. Support this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time in opposition?
  The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, let me say to my friend Senator Sarbanes, 
there is no stronger supporter of our State revolving funds than I am, 
as chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee. But I wish 
to say this is a $2.9 billion tax increase. There are ways of doing it 
by eliminating some unnecessary programs.
  Regarding the portion also affecting the Corps of Engineers, I 
understand they are underfunded at this time and we are working right 
now in our committee to see what we can do to come up with some money 
by striking some of the less important, less necessary programs.
  I urge my colleagues to vote against the Sarbanes amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time having been yielded, the question is 
on agreeing to the amendment. The yeas and nays have been ordered. 
Under the previous order, this will be again a 10-minute vote.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. The following Senator was necessarily absent: the 
Senator from Idaho (Mr. Craig).
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu) 
and the Senator from Michigan (Mr. Levin) are necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 48, nays 49, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 60 Leg.]

                                YEAS--48

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Chafee
     Clinton
     Collins
     Conrad
     Dayton
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Obama
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Salazar
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Snowe
     Stabenow
     Warner
     Wyden

                                NAYS--49

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Burr
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Cornyn
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Dole
     Domenici
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Frist
     Graham
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     Martinez
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Specter
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Thune
     Vitter
     Voinovich

                             NOT VOTING--3

     Craig
     Landrieu
     Levin
  The amendment (No. 3103) was rejected.
  Mr. GREGG. 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. 3102

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the next amendment 
is the Dorgan amendment No. 3102. The yeas and nays have been ordered. 
There will be 2 minutes equally divided.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, can I alert colleagues again? We have 
colleagues who are missing votes. They are missing votes because of the 
time deadline. We have had Democrats missing votes and we have had 
Republicans missing votes. We don't want you to miss votes. We want you 
to make votes but at the same time we have to stay on schedule.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I will be very brief.
  This is an amendment which I offered last year. It adds $1 billion to 
the account dealing with American Indians.
  All of us in this Chamber know there are neighbors among us in this 
country who live in Third World communities. We have a bona fide 
Federal crisis in health care, education, and housing on Indian 
reservations. We have a trust responsibility for the health care of 
American Indians.
  Did you know we also have a responsibility for Federal prisoners' 
health care? We spend twice as much per person for the health care of 
Federal prisoners as we do to meet our trust responsibility for the 
health care of American Indians.
  We all know we underfund these accounts. This adds $1 billion to a 
multitude of Indian accounts dealing with health care, housing, and 
education. It is funded by closing some tax loopholes.
  I hope this Senate will decide this is the right set of priorities.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, this amendment doesn't guarantee that any 
money goes to the tribal authorities. All it does is raise the cap by 
$1 billion--increases taxes by $1 billion. It is entirely up to the 
Appropriations Committee how they spend money. We have no control over 
that. The practical effect of this amendment is simply tax and spend.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. 
Under the previous order, the yeas and nays have been ordered. Under 
the previous order, this will be a 10-minute vote.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. Dayton) 
and the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Inouye) are necessarily absent.
  The result was announced--yeas 42, nays 56, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 61 Leg.]

                                YEAS--42

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Clinton
     Conrad
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Harkin
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Obama
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Salazar
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Stabenow
     Wyden

                                NAYS--56

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Burr
     Carper
     Chafee
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeMint
     DeWine
     Dole
     Domenici
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Frist
     Graham
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     Martinez
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Thune
     Vitter
     Voinovich
     Warner

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Dayton
     Inouye
       
  The amendment (No. 3102) was rejected.
  Mr. GREGG. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. REID. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3100

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is now 2 minutes equally divided prior 
to voting on the Cornyn amendment.
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, my amendment directs the Senate Committee 
on Finance to find $10 billion in additional savings out of the 
Medicare Program and builds on the work done in the Deficit Reduction 
Act where we

[[Page S2258]]

reduced the rate of growth for mandatory spending by nearly $100 
billion over the next decade.
  As all Members know, there is increasing pressure on discretionary 
spending on important priorities because of the growth of Medicare, 
Social Security, and Medicaid. Medicare and Medicaid alone grew by 22 
percent over the last 5 years. This will allow the Committee on Finance 
to take the stabilization fund, for example, that is used to supplement 
payments to preferred provider organizations which participate in the 
Medicare Program, which is available to be recouped to help pay down 
some of the debt in the amount of $10 billion, as well as other sources 
of revenue that they can gain out of the Medicare Program.
  I ask my colleagues to vote ``aye.''
  Mr. CONRAD. I yield the time to the ranking member on the Finance 
Committee, Senator Baucus.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, colleagues, this is deja vu all over 
again. This is the reconciliation cut bill of $11 billion which barely 
passed the House all over again. It is added on, on top of that again. 
That was a net $11 billion cut for Medicare and Medicaid in the 
jurisdiction of the Committee on Finance, and this is $11 billion yet 
on top of that. That will come out of you know whose hides. You know 
how unpopular that will be back home.
  This is not the way to cut entitlement spending or put a limit on it. 
The better way is an all-encompassing way when everyone is in it 
together, not directed to the Committee on Finance jurisdiction which 
will cut more out of Medicaid, cut more spending out of Medicare.
  I strongly urge my colleagues, just remember, this is deja vu all 
over again. It is a repeat of what happened last year. That was 
extremely unpopular.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  The yeas and nays have been ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant journal clerk called the roll.
  The result was announced--yeas 43, nays 57, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 62 Leg.]

                                YEAS--43

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Burr
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Dole
     Domenici
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Frist
     Graham
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Kyl
     Lott
     McCain
     McConnell
     Nelson (NE)
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thune
     Vitter
     Voinovich
     Warner

                                NAYS--57

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Chafee
     Clinton
     Coleman
     Collins
     Conrad
     Dayton
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Harkin
     Hutchison
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lugar
     Martinez
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Obama
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Salazar
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Wyden
  The amendment (No. 3100) was rejected.
  Mr. GREGG. I move to reconsider the vote and move to lay that motion 
on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                             Change of Vote

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, on vote No. 62, I am recorded as ``yea.'' 
I intended to vote ``nay.'' I ask unanimous consent to change my vote. 
It will not change the outcome of the vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The foregoing tally has been changed to reflect the above order.)
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire.


                      Amendment No. 3112 Withdrawn

  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, with the approval of Senator Landrieu, I 
ask unanimous consent that her amendment No. 3112 be withdrawn.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, for the edification of our colleagues, when 
we complete the Collins amendment, the next five amendments after 
that--we have pending the Stabenow, Akaka, and Collins amendments--and 
the next five amendments after that will be the Lincoln amendment No. 
3047; Grassley, an unnumbered amendment; Inhofe, No. 3093, I believe; 
Lincoln, No. 3106; Kerry, No. 3143.
  We are now on to Senator Stabenow.


                           Amendment No. 3141

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 2 minutes equally divided on the 
amendment.
  Who yields time?
  The Senator from Michigan.
  Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, my amendment is about guaranteeing that 
every veteran in America has the health care they were promised and 
they deserve. Over the last 2 years, we have seen a 500-percent 
increase in the number of veterans seeking care from the VA who served 
in Iraq and Afghanistan alone. But this budget falls over 35,000 
veterans short of the number of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans whom the 
VA currently treats. And remarkably, the President's budget projects 
fewer vets will seek mental health care, which is absolutely incorrect. 
If you believe, as I do, the men and women who have fought for our 
country should not have to fight every day, every year, for the health 
care they need, I urge you to vote yes on this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Idaho.
  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I will be brief, but it is important I have 
the attention of my colleagues.
  Yesterday, with the Burns amendment, we increased veterans funding 
over last year by 14 percent, so we have already increased veterans 
spending by 14 percent. The Senator from Michigan wishes now to 
increase it by 36 percent. That is 104 billion new dollars over a 5-
year period. And it is taxed for. At least she has the courtesy of 
offering something that is paid for.
  But even the Veterans Administration, with the Burns amendment, by 
their best guesstimation--and I use the word ``guesstimation''--would 
suggest that veterans' care next year will grow by less than 2 percent. 
There is absolutely no justification for increasing veterans health 
care budgets by a grand total of 36 percent in 1 year.
  This Senate has been progressively generous to America's veterans, as 
we should be. It is now one of the most rapidly growing health care 
budgets in our country, with the Burns amendment, not the Stabenow 
amendment. Please vote no on the Stabenow amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
  The question is on agreeing to the amendment. The yeas and nays have 
been ordered. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  The result was announced--yeas 46, nays 54, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 63 Leg.]

                                YEAS--46

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Clinton
     Conrad
     Dayton
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Obama
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Salazar
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Wyden

                                NAYS--54

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Burr
     Chafee
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeMint
     DeWine
     Dole
     Domenici
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Frist
     Graham
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     Martinez
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Nelson (NE)
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Thune
     Vitter
     Voinovich
     Warner
  The amendment (No. 3141) was rejected.
  Mr. GREGG. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. FRIST. I move to lay that motion on the table.

[[Page S2259]]

  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                             Change of Vote

  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to change my 
vote on amendment No. 3141, which we just voted on prior to this, 
offered by Senator Stabenow. I voted ``nay.'' I wish to change it to 
``yea.'' It doesn't change the outcome of the vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The foregoing tally has been changed to reflect the above order.)


                           Amendment No. 3071

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There will now be 2 minutes equally divided 
prior to a vote on the Akaka amendment.
  Who yields time?
  Mr. CONRAD. I yield time to the Senator.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senators Boxer 
and Johnson be added as cosponsors of my amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, this amendment restores $3 billion to title 
I in No Child Left Behind educational programs. The amendment was 
offered because this budget resolution underfunds title I by more than 
$12 billion. You should know that a $3 billion increase would bring 
title I up to what the President requested since fiscal year 2004. 
Without this increase, 29 States could lose title I funding, and 
another 7 States would be level funded.
  Vote aye on the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time? The Senator from Wyoming.
  Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, this amendment increases funding by $3 
billion and will be offset by closing tax loopholes, which means 
raising taxes, which would require a separate effort, anyway. The 
resolution we have before us already provides $12.7 billion in 2007 for 
grants to local education agencies, the largest component of No Child 
Left Behind. That represents a 45-percent increase from 2001.
  The Federal investment in education will have grown by $12.2 billion, 
or 29 percent, since fiscal year 2001. In addition, the resolution 
provides an additional $1.5 billion for funding for function 500, which 
includes No Child Left Behind, and those funds can be used for that. 
Education is and should be one of our highest priorities, but this 
amendment is paid for by increasing taxes and busts the discretionary 
spending cap. I ask that you vote no.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. 
The yeas and nays have been ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant journal clerk called the roll.
  The result was announced--yeas 49, nays 51, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 64 Leg.]

                                YEAS--49

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Chafee
     Clinton
     Collins
     Conrad
     Dayton
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Obama
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Salazar
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Snowe
     Stabenow
     Wyden

                                NAYS--51

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Burr
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Dole
     Domenici
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Frist
     Graham
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     Martinez
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Specter
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Thune
     Vitter
     Voinovich
     Warner
  The amendment (No. 3071) was rejected.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. BOND. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, we are waiting for Senator Conrad. For the 
moment, we will have to skip over Senator Collins. I understand we are 
hopefully going to have an understanding relative to the next two 
amendments, which will be the Grassley and Lincoln amendments.
  That brings us to Senator Inhofe. We will come back to Senators 
Collins, Grassley, and Lincoln after this Inhofe vote.


                           Amendment No. 3093

  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Chafee). The clerk will report the Inhofe 
amendment.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Oklahoma [Mr. Inhofe] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 3093.

  Mr. INHOFE. 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:

       At the appropriate place insert the following:

     SEC.  . TO CONTROL DISCRETIONARY SPENDING

       ``Beginning with fiscal year 2007 and thereafter, all non-
     defense, non-trust-fund, discretionary spending shall not 
     exceed the previous fiscal year's levels, for purposes of the 
     congressional budget process (Section 302 et al of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974), without a 2/3 vote of 
     Members duly chosen and sworn.''

  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, how much time is divided on this 
amendment? I didn't get that.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 1 minute for each side.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, this is kind of a litmus test amendment. 
We have had it up a couple times before. We do intend to pick up votes 
each time. It is an amendment to get into some of the big spending we 
do around here. With the exception of trust votes and national defense, 
it says that any vote on appropriations that exceeds the previous year 
has to have a two-thirds majority.
  This amendment is endorsed by a number of groups, including the 
American Conservative Union, Christian Coalition, and other groups. It 
will be a scored vote. It is a very significant vote. I think it is 
really the only meaningful vote to do something about curbing spending 
that we will have the entire day.
  I reserve the remainder of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, this is truly a sweeping amendment. I hope 
colleagues are listening. This amendment seeks to lock in the current 
level of discretionary spending, not just for this year but 
permanently. I hope colleagues are listening. This seeks to lock in the 
current level of spending for homeland security, for veterans health, 
for NIH, not just for 1 year but permanently because it would take 67 
votes to increase it.
  I hope my colleagues will reject this amendment. This is an amendment 
which goes against every democratic impulse of this body.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that on the five 
amendments we have put in order, the yeas and nays be deemed to have 
been granted, along with the seconds of those yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to that being in order? 
Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 
3093. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. The following Senators were necessarily absent: the 
Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Domenici), the Senator from Mississippi 
(Mr. Lott), and the Senator from Arkansas (Ms. Murkowski).
   The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 35, nays 62, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 65 Leg.]

                                YEAS--35

     Allard
     Allen
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Burr
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Dole
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Frist
     Graham
     Grassley

[[Page S2260]]


     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Kyl
     Martinez
     McCain
     McConnell
     Nelson (NE)
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Sununu
     Thomas
     Thune
     Vitter

                                NAYS--62

     Akaka
     Alexander
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boxer
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Chafee
     Clinton
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Conrad
     Dayton
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lugar
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Obama
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Salazar
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Shelby
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Stevens
     Talent
     Voinovich
     Warner
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--3

     Domenici
     Lott
     Murkowski
  The amendment (No. 3093) was rejected.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Louisiana is recognized.


                           Amendment No. 3064

  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the yeas and 
nays be vitiated on the Collins amendment No. 3064, and I ask unanimous 
consent that it be agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Without 
objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 3064) was agreed to.


             Amendments Nos. 3148, 3127, and 3047 Withdrawn

  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I am prepared to withdraw my amendment No. 
3148 and Senator Hagel is also prepared to have his amendment No. 3127 
withdrawn. We are also prepared to withdraw Lincoln amendment No. 3047. 
We have managed to work out an understanding on all of these matters, 
so I ask unanimous consent to have those amendments withdrawn.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, it is also our understanding that Senator 
Grassley would not offer his amendment that was the matching amendment 
to the Lincoln amendment that has now been withdrawn.
  Mr. GREGG. Under the previous agreement, Mr. President, we are now 
going to turn to the Lincoln amendment No. 3106, followed by the Kerry 
amendment No. 4103, followed by the DeMint amendment No. 3087.


                           Amendment No. 3106

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is now 2 minutes of debate equally 
divided.
  Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, in this administration's budget, time 
and time again rural America has been asked to give disproportionately, 
whether it is to deficit reduction, the war in Iraq, or anything else. 
Quite frankly, I think it is important for us to look seriously at the 
priorities of this budget but, more importantly, to look at rural 
America and what it means to the fabric of this country.
  There are cuts in this budget to supplemental nutrition programs for 
women, infants, and children. USDA's rural housing program is cut by 
$259 million, resource conservation and development council, world 
business enterprise grant, telemedicine, State and private forestry 
programs, cooperative agriculture and food safety research units--all 
of these issues are critical to rural America. They don't have the 
corporate tax base or corporate citizenry out there that is going to 
support them.
  If we want the way of life in this country to be maintained with both 
the fabric of this country being built by our urban areas and our rural 
areas, it is essential that we support the people and the working 
families in those areas.
  I ask my colleagues to look at conservation, WIC, all of these 
programs and how important they are in your State.
  Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I regrettably rise in opposition to 
this amendment. The Senator from Arkansas and I normally agree on every 
issue involving agriculture. Philosophically, I am with her. But the 
problem is it raises the cap a little over $2 billion. It is simply not 
paid for. The things she is seeking to add money for such as research, 
nutrition, various rural development programs, all are great programs, 
but the time to handle that is in the appropriations process, not in 
the budget process. This means we would either have to raise taxes or 
increase the deficit, and now is not the time to have that debate. I 
think it should be in the appropriations process. I urge a ``no'' vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired. The question is on 
agreeing to amendment No. 3106.
  The yeas and nays have been ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  The result was announced--yeas 48, nays 52, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 66 Leg.]

                                YEAS--48

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Burns
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Clinton
     Collins
     Conrad
     Dayton
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Obama
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Salazar
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Snowe
     Stabenow
     Wyden

                                NAYS--52

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burr
     Chafee
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeMint
     DeWine
     Dole
     Domenici
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Frist
     Graham
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     Martinez
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Specter
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Thune
     Vitter
     Voinovich
     Warner
  The amendment (No. 3106) was rejected.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.


                    Amendment No. 3143, As Modified

  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent my modification be 
accepted at the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is so 
modified.
  The amendment, as modified, is as follows:

 (Purpose: To prevent the imposition of excessive TRICARE fees and co-
                       pays on military retirees)

       On page 3, line 13, increase the amount by $592,000,000.
       On page 3, line 15, increase the amount by $1,619,000,000.
       On page 3, line 17, increase the amount by $2,188,000,000.
       On page 3, line 19, increase the amount by $2,685,000,000.
       On page 3, line 21, increase the amount by $3,271,000,000.
       On page 4, line 1, increase the amount by $592,000,000.
       On page 4, line 2, increase the amount by $1,619,000,000.
       On page 4, line 3, increase the amount by $2,188,000,000.
       On page 4, line 4, increase the amount by $2,685,000,000.
       On page 4, line 6, increase the amount by $3,271,000,000.
       On page 4, line 13, increase the amount by $ 735,000,000.
       On page 4, line 15, increase the amount by $1,862,000,000.
        On page 4, line 17, increase the amount by $2,322,000,000.
       On page 4, line 19, increase the amount by $2,816,000,000.
       On page 4, line 21, increase the amount by $3,424,000,000.
       On page 5, line 4, increase the amount by $592,000,000.
       On page 5, line 6, increase the amount by $1,619,000,000.
       On page 5, line 8, increase the amount by $2,188,000,000.
       On page 5, line 10, increase the amount by $2,685,000,000.
       On page 5, line 12, increase the amount by $3,271,000,000.
       On page 9, line 20, increase the amount by $735,000,000.
       On page 9, line 21, increase the amount by $592,000,000.
       On page 9, line 24, increase the amount by $1,862,000,000.
       On page 9, line 25, increase the amount by $1,619,000,000.
       On page 10, line 3, increase the amount by $2,322,000,000.
       On page 10, line 4, increase the amount by $2,188,000,000.

[[Page S2261]]

       On page 10, line 7, increase the amount by $2,816,000,000.
       On page 10, line 8, increase the amount by $2,685,000,000.
       On page 10, line 11, increase the amount by $3,424,000,000.
       On page 10, line 12, increase the amount by $3,271,000,000.
       On page 53, line 1, increase the amount by $735,000,000.
       On page 53, line 2, increase the amount by $592,000,000.
       On page 53, line 4, increase the amount by $1,862,000,000.
       On page 53, line 7, increase the amount by $2,322,000,000.
  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, the Bush budget triples the fees for 
officers who are retired under the age of 65 who put in their 20 years 
of service, and doubles the fees and copays for senior enlisted folks, 
again, after their 20 years of service to the country.
  There are several other ways to cover the costs of increased health 
care under TRICARE. We could stimulate the use of lower cost mail-order 
pharmacies. We could negotiate with drug manufacturers who secure 
discounts under TRICARE, which we don't do. You don't have to take it 
out of the hide of the retirees themselves.
  We pay for this. It is paid for by closing a number of tax loopholes 
and it is fully paid for so we do not have to raise copays on retirees 
who put in 20 years of service in uniform.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Massachusetts 
for highlighting an issue that is important to the Armed Services 
Committee, the authorizing committee. A lot of work is already going on 
to deal with this problem. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Peter 
Pace, said rising health care costs are the No. 1 issue when he spoke 
to our committee.
  This amendment would cost $10.4 billion over 5 years and result in an 
increase in taxes by that amount. The authorizing committee does need 
to focus on it and is focusing on this issue.
  I ask the amendment be defeated.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment, 
as modified. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call 
the roll.
  The bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. The following Senator was necessarily absent: the 
Senator from Montana (Mr. Burns).
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 46, nays 53, as follows:
  The result was announced--yeas 46, nays 53, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 67 Leg.]

                                YEAS--46

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Chafee
     Clinton
     Conrad
     Dayton
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Obama
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Salazar
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Stabenow
     Wyden

                                NAYS--53

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burr
     Carper
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Dole
     Domenici
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Frist
     Graham
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     Martinez
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Thune
     Vitter
     Voinovich
     Warner

                             NOT VOTING--1

       
     Burns
       
  The amendment (No. 3143), as modified, was rejected.
  Mr. GREGG. 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.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, we have made significant progress in 
reducing the number of amendments. This is the good news--really 
dramatic progress. The bad news is, with the amendments that are still 
pending we will be here until 2 o'clock in the morning.
  It is in the hands of Members of this body. If everybody sticks to 
their guns and insists on their amendments, we are going to be here 
until 2 o'clock in the morning.
  I ask colleagues to please show some forbearance. We have other 
vehicles that are coming--the appropriations bills--and other 
opportunities to make Members' views known.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I appreciate the especially hard work of 
the Senator from North Dakota in reducing the number of amendments. I 
just wish we had been a little more successful because we will be here 
until 2 o'clock in the morning at the rate we are going.


 Amendments Nos. 3144, 3085, 3140, 3139, 3053, 3079, 3083, 3033; 3052, 
                  as modified, 3154, and 3059, En Bloc

  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, in an effort to try to move things along, I 
ask unanimous consent that the following amendments be considered and 
agreed to en bloc, and the motions to reconsider be laid upon the 
table:
  Senator Obama's amendment No. 3144; Senator Ensign, amendment No. 
3085; Senator Levin, amendment No. 3140; Senator Landrieu, amendment 
No. 3139; Senator Lincoln, amendment No. 3053; Senator DeWine, 
amendment No. 3079; Senator DeWine, amendment No. 3083; Senator DeWine, 
amendment No. 3033; Senator Santorum, amendment No. 3052, as modified; 
Senator Leahy, amendment No. 3154; and Senator Baucus, amendment No. 
3059.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, we don't 
have on our list the amendment of the Senator from Pennsylvania.
  I am told that is OK. That has been cleared on both sides.
  Mr. COBURN. I object.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I renew my unanimous consent request 
reflecting all those amendments which have been read except for 
amendment No. 3052 of Mr. Santorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Objection, the amendments are agreed to.
  The amendments were agreed to as follows:


                           AMENDMENT NO. 3144

(Purpose: To provide a $40 million increase in FY 2007 for the Homeless 
Veterans Reintegration Program and to improve job services for hard-to-
                            place veterans)

       On page 23, line 24, increase the amount by $40,000,000.
       On page 23, line 25, increase the amount by $5,000,000.
       On page 24, line 4, increase the amount by $25,000,000.
       On page 24, line 8, increase the amount by $6,000,000.
       On page 24, line 12, increase the amount by $3,000,000.
       On page 24, line 16, increase the amount by $1,000,000.
       On page 27, line 23, decrease the amount by $40,000,000.
       On page 27, line 24, decrease the amount by $5,000,000.
       On page 28, line 2, decrease the amount by $25,000,000.
       On page 28, line 5, decrease the amount by $6,000,000.

     On page 28, line 8, decrease the amount by $3,000,000.

       On page 28, line 11, decrease the amount by $1,000,000.


                           AMENDMENT NO. 3085

 (Purpose: To provide funding to hire an additional 500 Border Patrol 
Agents; fully funding the promise Congress made to the American people 
   to hire 2,000 new agents in FY2007 as authorized by the National 
    Intelligence Reform Act of 2004 and as recommended by the 9/11 
                              Commission)

       On page 24, line 24, increase the amount by $153,000,000.
       On page 24, line 25, increase the amount by $122,400,000.
       On page 25, line 4, increase the amount by $15,300,000.
       On page 25, line 8, increase the amount by $15,300,000.
       On page 10, line 20, decrease the amount by $153,000,000.
       On page 10, line 21, decrease the amount by $122,400,000.
       On page 10, line 25, decrease the amount by $15,300,000.
       On page 11, line 4, decrease the amount by $15,300,000.


                           AMENDMENT NO. 3140

(Purpose: To provide funds to establish additional Northern Border Air 
           Wings, offset through reductions in Function 920)

       On page 24, line 24, increase the amount by $6,000,000.
       On page 24, line 25, increase the amount by $4,000,000.
       On page 25, line 4, increase the amount by $2,000,000.
       On page 27, line 23, decrease the amount by $6,000,000.

[[Page S2262]]

       On page 27, line 24, decrease the amount by $4,000,000.
       On page 28, line 2, decrease the amount by $2,000,000.


                           AMENDMENT NO. 3139

(Purpose: To provide funding for maintaining a robust long range bomber 
                   force including 94 B-52 aircraft)

       On page 9, line 20, increase the amount by $77,000,000.
       On page 9, line 21, increase the amount by $43,000,000.
       On page 9, line 24, increase the amount by $239,000,000.
       On page 9, line 25, increase the amount by $188,000,000.
       On page 10, line 3, increase the amount by $270,000,000.
       On page 10, line 4, increase the amount by $238,000,000.
       On page 10, line 7, increase the amount by $217,000,000.
       On page 10, line 8, increase the amount by $240,000,000.
       On page 10, line 11, increase the amount by $263,000,000.
       On page 10, line 12, increase the amount by $246,000,000.
       On page 10, line 20, decrease the amount by $77,000,000.
       On page 10, line 21, decrease the amount by $43,000,000.
       On page 10, line 24, decrease the amount by $239,000,000.
       On page 10, line 25, decrease the amount by $188,000,000.
       On page 11, line 3, decrease the amount by $270,000,000.
       On page 11, line 4, decrease the amount by $238,000,000.
       On page 11, line 7, decrease the amount by $217,000,000.
       On page 11, line 8, decrease the amount by $240,000,000.
       On page 11, line 11, decrease the amount by $263,000,000.
       On page 11, line 12, decrease the amount by $246,000,000.


                           AMENDMENT NO. 3053

(Purpose: To provide for restoring funding for the portion of the COPS 
program devoted to countering methamphetamine, offset by a reduction to 
                       Function 920 (Allowances)

       On page 24, line 24, increase the amount by $23,000,000.
       On page 24, line 25, increase the amount by $3,000,000.
       On page 25, line 3, increase the amount by $23,000,000.
       On page 25, line 4, increase the amount by $9,000,000.
       On page 25, line 7, increase the amount by $23,000,000.
       On page 25, line 8, increase the amount by $15,000,000.
       On page 25, line 11, increase the amount by $23,000,000.
       On page 25, line 12, increase the amount by $20,000,000.
       On page 25, line 15, increase the amount by $23,000,000.
       On page 25, line 16, increase the amount by $23,000,000.
       On page 27, line 23, decrease the amount by $23,000,000.
       On page 27, line 24, decrease the amount by $3,000,000.
       On page 28, line 1, decrease the amount by $23,000,000.
       On page 28, line 2, decrease the amount by $9,000,000.
       On page 28, line 4, decrease the amount by $23,000,000.
       On page 28, line 5, decrease the amount by $15,000,000.
       On page 28, line 7, decrease the amount by $23,000,000.
       On page 28, line 8, decrease the amount by $20,000,000.
       On page 28, line 10, decrease the amount by $23,000,000.
       On page 28, line 11, decrease the amount by $23,000,000.


                           amendment no. 3079

 (Purpose: To increase funding for Child Survival and Maternal Health 
                               Programs)

       On page 10, line 20, increase the amount by $77,000,000.
       On page 10, line 21, increase the amount by $77,000,000.
       On page 27, line 23, decrease the amount by $77,000,000.
       On page 27, line 24, decrease the amount by $77,000,000.


                           amendment no. 3083

  (Purpose: To increase funding for the Children's Hospitals Graduate 
   Medical Education Program under the Public Health Service Act for 
                           fiscal year 2007)

       On page 19, line 24, increase the amount by $198,000,000.
       On page 19, line 25, increase the amount by $198,000,000.
       On page 27, line 23, decrease the amount by $198,000,000.
       On page 27, line 24, decrease the amount by $198,000,000.


                           amendment no. 3033

    (Purpose: To increase funding for NASA aeronautics programs by 
           $179,000,000 in fiscal year 2007, with an offset)

       On page 11, line 21, increase the amount by $179,000,000.
       On page 11, line 22, increase the amount by $179,000,000.
       On page 27, line 23, decrease the amount by $179,000,000.
       On page 27, line 24, decrease the amount by $179,000,000.


                           amendment no. 3154

     (Purpose: To fund grants for bullet proof vests for local law 
           enforcement agencies at the full authorized level)

       On page 24, line 24, increase the amount by $41,000,000.
       On page 24, line 25, increase the amount by $5,000,000.
       On page 25, line 4, increase the amount by $11,000,000.
       On page 25, line 8, increase the amount by $10,000,000.
       On page 25, line 12, increase the amount by $8,000,000.
       On page 25, line 16, increase the amount by $6,000,000.
       On page 27, line 23, decrease the amount by $41,000,000.
       On page 27, line 24, decrease the amount by $5,000,000.
       On page 28, line 2, decrease the amount by $11,000,000.
       On page 28, line 5, decrease the amount by $10,000,000.
       On page 28, line 8, decrease the amount by $8,000,000.
       On page 28, line 11, decrease the amount by $6,000,000.


                           amendment no. 3059

        (Purpose: To improve America's economic competitiveness)

       At the end of section 309, insert the following:
       (d) Finance.--If--
       (1) the Committee on Finance of the Senate reports a bill 
     or joint resolution, or if an amendment is offered thereto, 
     or if a conference report is submitted thereon, that--
       (A) improves America's trade competitiveness or 
     enforcement; or
       (B) fosters health care information technology or pay-for-
     performance; and
       (2) that committee is within its allocation as provided 
     under section 302(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974; 
     the chairman of the Committee on the Budget may make the 
     appropriate adjustments in allocations and aggregates to the 
     extent that such legislation would not increase the deficit 
     for fiscal year 2007 and for the period of fiscal years 2007 
     through 2011.


                      Amendments Nos 3155 and 3156

  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following 
two amendments which have not been filed be considered and agreed to en 
bloc, and the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table:
  Senator Salazar on PILT, and Senator Stabenow on borders.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is 
so ordered.
  The amendments were agreed to, as follows:


                           amendment no. 3155

 (Purpose: To fully fund the Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) program. 
    Adds $152 million to Function 800 (General Government) for PILT)

       On page 25, line 24, increase the amount by $152,000,000.
       On page 25, line 25, increase the amount by $152,000,000.
       On page 27, line 23, decrease the amount by $152,000,000.
       On page 27, line 24, decrease the amount by $152,000,000.


                           amendment no. 3156

  (Purpose: To protect the American People from terrorist attacks and 
threats to public health by collecting a fee for inspection exclusively 
  of international trash shipments at the U.S. border generating $45 
 million in receipts. The fee will help defray the cost of increasing 
 the number and quality of inspections of these potentially dangerous 
    shipments at the border. The fee for inspection service will be 
implemented to be fully compliant with the General Agreement on Tariffs 
            and Trade and other applicable trade agreements)

       On page 24, line 24, decrease the amount by $45,000,000.
       On page 24, line 25, decrease the amount by $45,000,000.
       On page 25, line 3, decrease the amount by $45,000,000.
       On page 25, line 4, decrease the amount by $45,000,000.
       On page 25, line 7, decrease the amount by $45,000,000.
       On page 25, line 8, decrease the amount by $45,000,000.
       On page 25, line 11, decrease the amount by $45,000,000.
       On page 25, line 12, decrease the amount by $45,000,000.
       On page 25, line 15, decrease the amount by $45,000,000.
       On page 25, line 16, decrease the amount by $45,000,000.
       On page 27, line 23, increase the amount by $45,000,000.
       On page 27, line 24, increase the amount by $45,000,000.
       On page 28, line 1, increase the amount by $45,000,000.
       On page 28, line 2, increase the amount by $45,000,000.
       On page 28, line 4, increase the amount by $45,000,000.
       On page 28, line 5, increase the amount by $45,000,000.

[[Page S2263]]

       On page 28, line 7, increase the amount by $45,000,000.
       On page 28, line 8, increase the amount by $45,000,000.
       On page 28, line 10, increase the amount by $45,000,000.
       On page 28, line 11, increase the amount by $45,000,000.


                    Amendment No. 3087, as modified

  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I now believe that we are on the amendment 
by Senator DeMint.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.


                    Amendment No. 3087, as Modified

  Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I have a modified amendment that I would 
like to send to the desk
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
  The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. DeMint] proposes an amendment 
numbered 3087, as modified.
  Mr. DeMINT. 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:
       At the appropriate place, insert the following:

     SEC. __. RESERVE FUND FOR SOCIAL SECURITY REFORM.

       If the Committee on Finance of the Senate reports a bill or 
     joint resolution, or an amendment is offered thereto, or a 
     conference report is submitted thereon, that provides changes 
     to the Federal Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance 
     Benefits Program established under title II of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), by--
       (1) requiring that the Federal Old Age and Survivors Trust 
     Fund and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund are used 
     to finance expenditures to provide retirement and disability 
     income of future beneficiaries of such program;
       (2) ensuring that there is no change to current law 
     scheduled benefits for individuals born before January 1, 
     1950;
       (3) providing the option to voluntarily obtain legally 
     binding ownership of at least some portion of each 
     participant's benefits; and
       (4) ensuring that the funds made available to finance such 
     legislation do not exceed the amounts of the Chief Actuary of 
     the Social Security Administration's intermediate actuarial 
     estimates of the Federal Old Age and Survivors Trust Fund and 
     the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund, as published in 
     the most recent report of the Board of Trustees of such Trust 
     Funds,
     the chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate may 
     make the appropriate adjustments in allocations and 
     aggregates to the extent that such legislation would not 
     increase the deficit for fiscal year 2007 and for the period 
     of fiscal years 2007 through 2011.

  Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, the amendment I have sent to the desk adds 
a reserve fund to the budget resolution for Social Security that would 
allow Congress to begin saving Social Security surpluses for future 
Social Security recipients.
  If the Finance Committee does not report back, then nothing happens. 
The amendment does nothing to change Social Security--no privatization, 
no stock market investment, and it does not add to the deficit.
  The amendment only creates a budget mechanism to allow Congress to 
consider ways to begin saving the Social Security surplus.
  I suspect most Members of this body, Republican and Democrat, are on 
record on the Senate floor or in a campaign saying that it is wrong to 
spend the Social Security surplus on other Government programs.
  While we don't yet agree on how to fix Social Security, every Member 
and I believe every American knows that it is wrong to continue to 
spend Social Security taxes on other Government programs.
  This amendment would open the door to consider ways to stop spending 
Social Security money.
  I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I yield the time on this side to the 
Senator from Montana.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President my colleagues are not being fooled. This is 
privatization of Social Security. Turn to page 29, paragraph 3. It so 
provides.
  We have already gone down the road on privatization of Social 
Security.
  The so-called surplus that the Senator referred to is just to 
privatize Social Security.
  The American public said no to privatizing Social Security. The 
President has realized that it is a bad idea. The Congress should 
realize it. It is a bad idea. The AARP sure knows it is a bad idea. I 
have a letter from the AARP. Let me read from it. They say:

       AARP strongly opposes this attempt to resurrect a proposal 
     that the American public has soundly rejected.

  This is privatization of Social Security, pure and simple. The Senate 
should reject it as the American people have rejected it.
  I ask unanimous consent that the letter be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                                          AARP

                                   Washington, DC, March 16, 2006.
     Hon. Harry Reid,
     Minority Leader, Capitol Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Reid: The Senate will vote on an amendment to 
     S. Con. Res. 83 offered by Senator DeMint to use annual 
     Social Security surpluses to create private accounts. AARP 
     strongly opposes this attempt to resurrect a proposal that 
     the American public has soundly rejected.
       AARP believes this proposal has serious consequences for 
     our nation's overall fiscal health and Social Security's 
     long-term outlook. Ostensibly designed to ``stop the raid on 
     the surplus'', the proposal would still result in the 
     Treasury Department receiving the money to spend on its 
     needs, but the federal deficit and debt would increase by 
     over $700 billion over the next ten years. Our nation cannot 
     afford this unnecessary increase in its already large federal 
     debt, and we should not ask future generations to pay for the 
     added cost.
       Social Security faces a long-term financial shortfall that 
     we should address in a timely manner, but private accounts do 
     nothing to address long-term solvency. AARP believes it is 
     time to put aside polarizing ideas that do not work and get 
     serious about securing Social Security so future generations 
     can count on these important benefits.
           Sincerely,
                                                  David P. Sloane,
        Senior Managing Director, Government Relations & Advocacy.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. 
The yeas and nays have been ordered, and the clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. The following Senator was necessarily absent: the 
Senator from Ohio (Mr. Voinovich).
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 46, nays 53, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 68 Leg.]

                                YEAS--46

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burr
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeMint
     DeWine
     Dole
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Frist
     Graham
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Kyl
     Lott
     Martinez
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Specter
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Thomas
     Thune
     Vitter
     Warner

                                NAYS--53

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Burns
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Chafee
     Clinton
     Collins
     Conrad
     Dayton
     Dodd
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lugar
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Obama
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Salazar
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Smith
     Snowe
     Stabenow
     Talent
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--1

       
     Voinovich
       
  The amendment (No. 3087), as modified, was rejected.
  Mr. GREGG. 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.
  Mr. GREGG. I understand the Senator from Nebraska will offer an 
amendment.


                      Amendment No. 3116 Withdrawn

  Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, many of our colleagues would 
be surprised to learn, as I was, that some agencies are skimming off 
the top a portion of some of the congressional appropriations and 
keeping money in that agency without authorization.
  This amendment is simple. It says if it has been determined that a 
constituency warrants a direct appropriation,

[[Page S2264]]

one that has gone through the scrutinizing process and is supported by 
the House, Senate, and signed into law, that constituency should 
receive the full amount. Bureaucrats at the agencies, who are not the 
fourth branch of Government, should not be unilaterally determining 
that some sort of surcharge should be charged against these projects. 
It amounts to a tax on our constituents, and it usurps the authority of 
Congress by circumventing the legislative process and giving nameless, 
faceless bureaucrats the authority to alter legislation after it has 
been signed into law.
  We have every right to expect that what we appropriate will be 100 
percent provided when we determine that is the way it is, unless we 
determine otherwise. And in the situation where our constituents 
determine that the full amount of the earmark is not needed and turns 
back some of the funding to the government--this amendment says that 
instead of going to bureaucrats in the agencies to spend as they wish--
it should instead go towards deficit reduction.

  I am withdrawing my amendment at this time for the sake of time. But 
we will all see this amendment again because I will bring it back.
  Mr. GREGG. We turn to the Senator from Minnesota.


                           Amendment No. 3097

  Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, I call up amendment numbered 3097 and I 
ask for its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Minnesota [Mr. Dayton], for himself, Mr. 
     Dodd, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Menendez, 
     and Mrs. Clinton, proposes an amendment numbered 3097.

  Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, 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 provide mandatory funding to fully fund the Individuals 
 with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Part B grants to states; paid 
                for by closing corporate tax loopholes)

       On page 3, line 13, increase the amount by $230,000,000.
       On page 3, line 15, increase the amount by $7,591,000,000.
       On page 3, line 17, increase the amount by $3,450,000,000.
       On page 3, line 19, increase the amount by $230,000,000.
       On page 4, line 1, increase the amount by $230,000,000.
       On page 4, line 2, increase the amount by $7,591,000,000.
       On page 4, line 3, increase the amount by $3,450,000,000.
       On page 4, line 4, increase the amount by $230,000,000.
       On page 4, line 13, increase the amount by $11,501,000,000.
       On page 5, line 4, increase the amount by $230,000,000.
       On page 5, line 6, increase the amount by $7,591,000,000.
       On page 5, line 8, increase the amount by $3,450,000,000.
       On page 5, line 10, increase the amount by $230,000,000.
       On page 18, line 24, increase the amount by 
     $11,501,000,000.
       On page 18, line 25, increase the amount by $230,000,000.
       On page 19, line 4, increase the amount by $7,591,000,000.
       On page 19, line 8, increase the amount by $3,450,000,000.
       On page 19, line 12, increase the amount by $230,000,000.

  Mr. DAYTON. I ask unanimous consent Senators Menendez and Clinton be 
added as cosponsors of this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, this amendment is a unique concept. It 
says the Senate will fulfill a 29-year-old commitment to fund 40 
percent of the costs of special education. I appreciate the amendment 
of the Senator from Rhode Island, Mr. Chafee, which was adopted by the 
Senate to bring us to 20 percent, which is half of that goal. That is 
an improvement.
  But if we were to say the Defense Department was half funded, or 
national security or homeland security were half funded, we would find 
a reason to immediately increase that funding. So I respectfully submit 
that closing tax loopholes for corporations that are not paying taxes 
now and providing that money for special education for our students 
across this country is a worthy goal.
  I urge adoption of the amendment. I will accept a voice vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. DeMint). The Senator from New Hampshire.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I yield back time in opposition and ask 
that we proceed to the vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 3097) was rejected.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that if the yeas 
and nays were ordered on that amendment they would be vitiated.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas and nays were not ordered.
  Mr. GREGG. Good.
  Mr. President, we will now turn to the Boxer amendment, No. 3105; 
followed by the Bingaman amendment, No. 3121; followed by the Nelson 
amendment, No. 3001; followed by the Feinstein amendment, No. 3067; 
followed by the Stabenow amendment, No. 3118; followed by the Santorum 
amendment, No. 3052; followed by the Domenici amendment, No. 3128. And 
we reserve the right to offer an amendment after the Nelson amendment 
but before the Feinstein amendment relative to the same topic as the 
Nelson amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.


                           Amendment No. 3105

  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 3105 and ask for 
its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from California [Mrs. Boxer] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 3105.

  The amendment is as follows:

 (Purpose: To increase funding for the 21st Century Community Learning 
   Center program; paid for by rolling back tax cuts for those with 
                        incomes over $1 million)

       On page 3, line 13, increase the amount by $15,000,000.
       On page 3, line 15, increase the amount by $435,000,000.
       On page 3, line 17, increase the amount by $225,000,000.
       On page 3, line 19, increase the amount by $75,000,000.
       On page 4, line 1, increase the amount by $15,000,000.
       On page 4, line 2, increase the amount by $435,000,000.
       On page 4, line 3, increase the amount by $225,000,000.
       On page 4, line 4, increase the amount by $75,000,000.
       On page 4, line 13, increase the amount by $750,000,000.
       On page 5, line 4, increase the amount by $15,000,000.
       On page 5, line 6, increase the amount by $ 435,000,000.
       On page 5, line 8, increase the amount by $225,000,000.
       On page 5, line 10, increase the amount by $75,000,000.
       On page 18, line 24, increase the amount by $750,000,000.
       On page 18, line 25, increase the amount by $15,000,000.
       On page 19, line 4, increase the amount by $435,000,000.
       On page 19, line 8, increase the amount by $225,000,000.
       On page 19, line 12, increase the amount by $75,000,000.
       On page 53, line 1, increase the amount by $750,000,000.
       On page 53, line 2, increase the amount by $15,000,000.

  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I call this amendment the ``Gucci 
afterschool amendment'' because we are asking millionaires to give up 
one Gucci jacket or $2,000 out of their $114,000 tax cut they are going 
to get in 2007 so we can offer 716,000 additional children an 
afterschool program.
  This amendment begins to fulfill the promise this President and this 
Congress made to our children. It will mean a big difference in every 
Senator's children's lives. In other words, I am looking at Senators 
all across this country. Every one of their States will see an increase 
of eligible children: in Alaska, 3,000 more children; in Florida, 
33,000 more; in Indiana, 9,000 more; in Maine, 3,000 more--and it goes 
on--in New Hampshire, 3,000 more; in Ohio, 20,000 more; in 
Pennsylvania, 27,000 more; in Texas, 68,000 more.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
  Mrs. BOXER. So I think the people earning $1 million can give up a 
Gucci jacket to send more children to afterschool. I urge an ``aye'' 
vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, first, we have already approved an extra $7 
billion for these accounts here this

[[Page S2265]]

evening. In addition, in the budget we brought forward, we added $1.5 
billion for these accounts.
  This amendment is very much in the tradition of tax and spend. As the 
Senator from California openly admits, she wants to raise taxes 
significantly to pay for this new spending. But we have already 
committed significant dollars into these accounts, and I do not think 
it is necessary. So I hope we vote this amendment down.
  Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  The result was announced--yeas 43, nays 57, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 69 Leg.]

                                YEAS--43

     Akaka
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Clinton
     Conrad
     Dayton
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Obama
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Salazar
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Snowe
     Stabenow
     Wyden

                                NAYS--57

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Baucus
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Burr
     Carper
     Chafee
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeMint
     DeWine
     Dole
     Domenici
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Frist
     Graham
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     Martinez
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Nelson (NE)
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Specter
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Thune
     Vitter
     Voinovich
     Warner
  The amendment (No. 3105) was rejected.
  Mr. GREGG. I move to reconsider the vote and to lay that motion on 
the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3121

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, this amendment is one Senator Smith and 
I are offering to delete section 406 from the budget resolution. 
Section 406 does for direct spending legislation exactly what the 
Senate determined not to do with discretionary spending about an hour 
and a half ago on the Inhofe amendment. It says that for any bill that 
contains direct spending, a 60-vote point of order can be raised 
against it. That includes the Defense bill, the farm bill, a tremendous 
number of bills that we try to pass through the Senate every year. I 
urge my colleagues to support this amendment and delete that section 
from the budget resolution.
  I yield the rest of my time to Senator Smith.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
  Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, with reluctance I rise in opposition to 
this particular provision, but my reluctance vanishes when I consider 
the programs this would automatically affect--not just Social Security, 
Medicaid, and Medicare but the farm program, county payments, Indian 
water rights, all the things that are dealt with under entitlements. I 
think we need to deal with those eventually as Republicans and 
Democrats and as Americans. We should not do it on the basis of this 
particular formula.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Has the Senator from New Mexico offered the 
amendment?
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I do offer the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from New Mexico [Mr. Bingaman], for himself and 
     Mr. Smith, proposes an amendment numbered 3121.

  The amendment is as follows:

          (Purpose: To strike the direct spending limitation)

       Strike section 406.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, the characterization of this amendment has 
been totally inaccurate. In fact, I haven't heard as inaccurate a 
characterization of an amendment today, and we have heard a lot of talk 
today. This amendment doesn't do what was just represented. What this 
amendment does is, it says that for any 2-year period the trustees of 
the Medicare trust fund tell us that over 45 percent of the cost of 
Medicare or another entitlement--but it would probably be Medicare--is 
coming out of the general fund. Remember, Medicare is supposed to be an 
insurance fund; this is part A. Then at that point, there is an 
opportunity to raise a point of order against new entitlement spending. 
It specifically excludes Social Security.
  The fact is, this is a point of order which will probably not come 
into play for many years, but it is an attempt to address what is a 
looming problem, which is that Medicare is taking more and more assets 
out of the general fund rather than being paid through the insurance 
process. It is good budget discipline.
  Mr. CONRAD. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 3121. The clerk will 
call the roll.
  The assistant journal clerk called the roll.
  The result was announced--yeas 50, nays 50, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 70 Leg.]

                                YEAS--50

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Chafee
     Clinton
     Collins
     Conrad
     Dayton
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Obama
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Salazar
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Wyden

                                NAYS--50

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Burr
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Dole
     Domenici
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Frist
     Graham
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     Martinez
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Nelson (NE)
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Thune
     Vitter
     Voinovich
     Warner
  The amendment (No. 3121) was rejected.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. McCONNELL. 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 Florida is recognized.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. It is my understanding that by unanimous 
consent my amendment is next in order.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Do I need to call up amendment No. 3001?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator does.


                           Amendment No. 3001

  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 3001.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Florida [Mr. Nelson] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 3001.

  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that 
further reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To provide funds ensuring Survivor Benefit Plan annuities are 
not reduced by the amount of dependency and indemnity compensation that 
 military families receive, and to provide funds for ``paid-up'' SBP, 
           offset by closing abusive corporate tax loopholes)

       On page 3, line 13, increase the amount by $975,000,000.

[[Page S2266]]

       On page 3, line 15, increase the amount by $1,037,000,000.
       On page 3, line 17, increase the amount by $792,000,000.
       On page 3, line 19, increase the amount by $826,000,000.
       On page 3, line 21, increase the amount by $861,000,000.
       On page 4, line 1, increase the amount by $975,000,000.
       On page 4, line 2, increase the amount by $1,037,000,000.
       On page 4, line 3, increase the amount by $792,000,000.
       On page 4, line 4, increase the amount by $826,000,000.
       On page 4, line 6, increase the amount by $861,000,000.
       On page 4, line 13, increase the amount by $975,000,000.
       On page 4, line 15, increase the amount by $1,037,000,000.
       On page 4, line 17, increase the amount by $792,000,000.
       On page 4, line 19, increase the amount by $826,000,000.
       On page 4, line 21, increase the amount by $861,000,000.
       On page 5, line 4, increase the amount by $975,000,000.
       On page 5, line 6, increase the amount by $1,037,000,000.
       On page 5, line 8, increase the amount by $792,000,000.
       On page 5, line 10, increase the amount by $826,000,000.
       On page 5, line 12, increase the amount by $861,000,000.
       On page 9, line 20, increase the amount by $975,000,000.
       On page 9, line 21, increase the amount by $975,000,000.
       On page 9, line 24, increase the amount by $1,037,000,000.
       On page 9, line 25, increase the amount by $1,037,000,000.
       On page 10, line 3, increase the amount by $792,000,000.
       On page 10, line 4, increase the amount by $792,000,000.
       On page 10, line 7, increase the amount by $826,000,000.
       On page 10, line 8, increase the amount by $826,000,000.
       On page 10, line 11, increase the amount by $861,000,000.
       On page 10, line 12, increase the amount by $861,000,000.

  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, am I allocated 1 minute?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, this is the widows or orphans 
amendment. You have already voted on this, 92 to 6, last fall. It is 
eliminating the offset between two different programs taking care of 
widows and orphans. It is a cost of war, just as providing equipment 
and ammunition. It is a cost of war to take care of our widows or 
orphans.
  On the one hand, the service member pays for taking care of the 
survivors in the survivors benefit plan. On the other hand, the 
Veterans Department takes care of the dependents indemnity 
compensation. But those two are offset in current law. This eliminates 
the offset. I urge you to support the widows and the orphans.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, would the Senator agree to a voice vote?
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. The Senator will agree to a voice vote as long 
as it passes favorably. I expect the Senator is being advised that 
since the Senate is on record with a 92-to-6 vote, there will be a 
voice vote.
  Mr. GREGG. Why don't we do a voice vote.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. That is acceptable to me.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment 
of the Senator from Florida.
  The amendment (No. 3001) was agreed to.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. GREGG. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan is recognized.


                           Amendment No. 3164

  Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Michigan [Ms. Stabenow] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 3164.

  Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further 
reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

  (Purpose: To establish a reserve fund to allow for deficit-neutral 
legislation that would provide seniors with a prescription drug benefit 
option that is affordable, user-friendly, and administered directly by 
              the Secretary of Health and Human Services)

       At the end of title III, insert the following:

     SEC. ___. RESERVE FUND TO ALLOW FOR DEFICIT-NEUTRAL 
                   LEGISLATION THAT WOULD PROVIDE SENIORS WITH A 
                   PRESCRIPTION DRUG BENEFIT OPTION THAT IS 
                   AFFORDABLE, USER-FRIENDLY, AND ADMINISTERED 
                   DIRECTLY BY THE SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN 
                   SERVICES.

       The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate 
     may revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels and limits in this resolution for a bill or joint 
     resolution, or an amendment thereto or conference report 
     thereon, that would--
       (1) provide all Medicare beneficiaries with a Medicare-
     administered prescription drug plan option, while preserving 
     the private prescription drug plan options;
       (2) ensure that Medicare beneficiaries pay the lowest 
     possible prescription drug prices by directing the Secretary 
     of Health and Human Services to negotiate with pharmaceutical 
     manufacturers with respect to the purchase price of covered 
     part D drugs on behalf of beneficiaries enrolled in the 
     Medicare-administered prescription drug plan;
       (3) improve the part D standard prescription drug benefit; 
     and
       (4) guarantee that Medicare beneficiaries receive the FDA-
     approved drugs they need by preventing prescription drug 
     plans and MA-PD plans from ending coverage of drugs, or 
     imposing restrictions or limitations on coverage of drugs, 
     that were covered when the beneficiary enrolled in the plan 
     until the beneficiary has the opportunity to switch plans, 
     with an exception to such guarantee for brand name drugs for 
     which there is a generic drug approved under section 505(j) 
     of the Food and Drug Cosmetic Act that is placed on the 
     market during the period in which the guarantee applies;
     by the amount provided in such measure for those purposes, 
     provided that such legislation would not increase the deficit 
     for the period of fiscal years 2007 through 2011.

  Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, this amendment would create a deficit-
neutral reserve fund to provide seniors with the one prescription drug 
choice that they want, which they don't currently have, and that is an 
affordable prescription drug benefit administered directly through 
Medicare.
  As you know, the current system has a lot of headaches right now. 
There are a lot of private plans--over 70 in Michigan--and there has 
been mass confusion. A lot of folks are actually paying more for drugs 
under this Part D program than they were before.
  My amendment would give our seniors a new option, a Medicare-
guaranteed option. Seniors today can get their Part A and Part B 
benefits either through a private plan or a traditional Medicare 
benefit plan. But they don't have that choice for their medicine. This 
would give them that choice. It would also direct the Secretary of HHS 
to negotiate drug prices on behalf of seniors choosing to get their 
medicines through Medicare.
  This amendment simply gives seniors and disabled persons the real 
choice they want, which is a Medicare prescription drug benefit, where 
you go to Medicare and you can sign up and you know the copay and the 
premium. You go to the pharmacy and get your medicine. I ask for your 
support.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, it is beyond my understanding when the 
argument is made that this program is too confusing because there are 
too many plans, and then you add yet another plan. That is what this 
amendment does. They say there is too much confusion and there are too 
many plans, and they want to add another plan.
  This amendment is going to destroy the competitive incentives and 
replace them with a Government-controlled regime. It puts the 
Government into the full-time business of setting drug prices and 
determining what drugs are covered. Strong competition has led to lower 
costs. The average premium is $25. That is 20 percent less than we 
expected.
  This amendment would result in higher premiums. This amendment would 
also have a drug safety issue with it. This amendment would force plans 
to keep unsafe drugs in the formulary because what is on at the first 
of the year has to stay on through the whole year. So if Vioxx was on 
in January 2004 and was found unsafe in September 2004, it would still 
have to be on the formulary for another 3 months.
  This is a Government-run plan. It increases costs and has price 
controls and unsafe drugs. This is just not a good amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Chafee). The Senator's time has expired. 
The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 3164.

[[Page S2267]]

  Ms. STABENOW. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. The following Senator was necessarily absent: the 
Senator from Utah (Mr. Bennett).
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 39, nays 60, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 71 Leg.]

                                YEAS--39

     Akaka
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Clinton
     Conrad
     Dayton
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Obama
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Salazar
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Stabenow
     Wyden

                                NAYS--60

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Baucus
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Burr
     Carper
     Chafee
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeMint
     DeWine
     Dole
     Domenici
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Frist
     Graham
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Jeffords
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Lott
     Lugar
     Martinez
     McCain
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Murkowski
     Nelson (NE)
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Thune
     Vitter
     Voinovich
     Warner

                             NOT VOTING--1

       
     Bennett
       
  The amendment (No. 3164) was rejected.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, at this point we are going to go to Senator 
Akaka.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, if we could ask colleagues' indulgence for 
a few more minutes here, we are very close. We have made enormous 
progress in the last 20 minutes, 30 minutes. We are very close. If we 
could have colleagues' indulgence for a few more minutes, we could 
rapidly come to conclusion.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Hawaii is recognized.


                           Amendment No. 3044

  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 3044 and ask for 
its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Hawaii [Mr. Akaka], for himself and Mr. 
     Inouye, proposes an amendment numbered 3044.

  Mr. AKAKA. 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:
       On page 3, line 13, increase the amount by $70,000,000.
       On page 3, line 15, increase the amount by $80,000,000.
       On page 3, line 17, increase the amount by $70,000,000.
       On page 3, line 19, increase the amount by $50,000,000.
       On page 3, line 21, increase the amount by $40,000,000.
       On page 4, line 1, increase the amount by $70,000,000.
       On page 4, line 2, increase the amount by $80,000,000.
       On page 4, line 3, increase the amount by $70,000,000.
       On page 4, line 4, increase the amount by $50,000,000.
       On page 4, line 6, increase the amount by. $40,000,000.
       On page 4, line 13, increase the amount by $70,000,000.
       On page 4, line 15, increase the amount by $80,000,000.
       On page 4, line 17, increase the amount by $70,000,000.
       On page 4, line 19, increase the amount by $50,000,000.
       On page 4, line 21, increase the amount by $40,000,000.
       On page 5, line 4, increase the amount by $70,000,000.
       On page 5, line 6, increase the amount by $80,000,000.
       On page 5, line 8, increase the amount by $70,000,000.
       On page 5, line 10, increase the amount by $50,000,000.
       On page 5, line 12, increase the amount by $40,000,000.
       On page 23, line 24, increase the amount by $70,000,000.
       On page 23, line 25, increase the amount by $70,000,000.
       On page 24, line 3, increase the amount by $80,000,000.
       On page 24, line 4, increase the amount by $80,000,000.
       On page 24, line 7, increase the amount by $70,000,000.
       On page 24, line 8, increase the amount by $70,000,000.
       On page 24, line 11, increase the amount by $50,000,000.
       On page 24, line 12, increase the amount by $50,000,000.
       On page 24, line 15, increase the amount by $40,000,000.
       On page 24, line 16, increase the amount by $40,000,000.

  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, my amendment would provide nonservice-
connected pensions to Filipino veterans of World War II. In 1941, 
President Roosevelt issued an Executive order which called into the 
order of the Armed Forces of the United States all organized military 
forces of the Commonwealth of the Philippines. These veterans fought 
alongside American troops and were commanded by General MacArthur. 
There was no question when they were fighting that they would be 
treated the same as American troops. Congress betrayed these veterans 
by enacting the Rescission Act which deemed the service of soldiers of 
the Commonwealth Army of the Philippines not to be service in the 
United States military. This was after they already served with the 
U.S. military. These veterans have been waiting for 60 years to have 
their benefits reinstated. It is time that the United States fulfill 
its responsibility to these veterans.
  I yield back my time.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I believe we can go to a voice vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 
3044.
  Mr. LEAHY. 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. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 
3044.
  The amendment (No. 3044) was rejected.


                           Amendment No. 3052

  Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 3052 and ask for 
its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. Santorum], for himself, 
     Mr. Durbin, Mr. Dayton, Ms. Stabenow, Mrs. Clinton, Mrs. 
     Boxer, Mr. Sarbanes and Mr. Kerry, proposes an amendment 
     numbered 3052.

  Mr. SANTORUM. 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 continue providing 33 percent of the Global Fund's revenue 
  and to contribute an additional $566,000,000 to the Global Fund for 
fiscal year 2007 to support grant renewals and new proposals to support 
      international HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria programs)

       On page 10, line 20, increase the amount by $566,000,000.
       On page 10, line 21, increase the amount by $566,000,000.
       On page 27, line 23, decrease the amount by $566,000,000.
       On page 27, line 24, decrease the amount by $566,000,000.
       At the appropriate place, insert the following:

     SEC. __. UNITED STATES RESPONSE TO GLOBAL HIV/AIDS, 
                   TUBERCULOSIS, AND MALARIA.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The HIV/AIDS pandemic has reached staggering 
     proportions. Over 40,000,000 people are living with HIV/AIDS 
     worldwide, and 5,000,000 more people become infected each 
     year. HIV/AIDS is estimated to kill 3,000,000 men, women, and 
     children each year.

[[Page S2268]]

       (2) The United States was the first, and remains the 
     largest, contributor to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, 
     Tuberculosis and Malaria (referred to in this section as the 
     ``Global Fund'').
       (3) The Presidential Administration of George W. Bush 
     (referred to in this section as the ``Administration'') has 
     supported legislative language that links United States 
     contributions to the Global Fund to the contributions of 
     other donors, permitting the United States to provide 33 
     percent of all donations, which would match contributions on 
     a 1-to-2 basis.
       (4) As of the date of the approval of this Resolution, 
     Congress has provided \1/3\ of all donations to the Global 
     Fund since its inception.
       (5) The Global Fund currently estimates that during fiscal 
     year 2007, it will renew $1,600,000,000 worth of effective 
     programs that are already operating on the ground, and the 
     Administration and Global Fund Board have said that renewals 
     of existing grants should receive priority funding.
       (6) The Global Fund estimates that during fiscal year 2007, 
     it could award $1,000,000,000 in funding to proposals 
     submitted for Round 6.
       (7) For fiscal year 2007, the President has requested 
     $300,000,000 for the United States contribution to the Global 
     Fund.
       (8) The Global Fund is an important component of the United 
     States efforts to combat AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria, and 
     supports approximately 350 projects in 130 countries.
       (9) Through a mid-year review process, Congress and the 
     Administration will assess contributions to date and 
     anticipated contributions to the Global Fund, and ensure that 
     United States contributions, at year end, are at the 
     appropriate 1-to-2 ratio.
       (10) Congress and the Administration will monitor 
     contributions to the Global Fund to ensure that United States 
     contributions do not exceed \1/3\ of the Global Fund's 
     revenues.
       (11) The United States will need to contribute $566,000,000 
     more than the President's fiscal year 2007 request for the 
     Global Fund to--
       (A) fund \1/3\ of renewals during fiscal year 2007;
       (B) support at least 1 new round of proposals in fiscal 
     year 2007; and
       (C) maintain the 1-to-2 funding ratio.

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, Senator Santorum and I come to the floor 
today to offer our amendment to increase funding for global AIDS by 
$566 million, raising the U.S. contribution to the Global Fund to Fight 
AIDS, TB, and Malaria for fiscal year 2007 to $866 million. This 
amendment would raise the U.S. contribution to the fight against global 
AIDS to $4.8 billion in total for bilateral and multilateral programs 
combined.
  This money is desperately needed.
  This year we mark the 25 anniversary of the discovery of AIDS.
  A generation has been born and come of age since then.
  Twenty-five years ago, the Centers for Disease Control published what 
turned out to be one of the first descriptions of acquired immune 
deficiency syndrome in a short article in a weekly report. That article 
described five cases of pneumonia. It stated that these five cases 
``suggest the possibility of a cellular-immune dysfunction.''
  AIDS did not yet have a name, but it had an identity.
  In the quarter century since those first cases were diagnosed, 
roughly 70 million people have been infected with HIV.
  More than 22 million have died.
  More than 12 million children in Africa alone have been orphaned.
  Last year, 3 million people died, and 5 million people were newly 
infected.
  Every 60 seconds, there are five more deaths from AIDS and nine more 
infections.
  Over the next decade, an estimated 50 million more people will 
contract HIV.
  Those numbers are devastating.
  But the trajectory of destruction that AIDS has followed over the 
last quarter century can be changed. It is changing. In the last 
decade, new research and new international efforts have begun to alter 
that deadly equation.
  Antiretrovirals mean that an HIV/AIDS diagnosis is no longer a death 
sentence, if one can get access to the drugs. Successful programs in 
Africa and elsewhere have convinced doubters that you can administer 
ARVs under extremely difficult circumstances. Effective prevention 
strategies in countries such as Uganda offer hope that the epidemic's 
relentless spread can be slowed.
  But millions who are infected receive no treatment, and tens of 
millions more remain at risk.
  The United States is a world leader in the battle against global 
AIDS. And the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB, and Malaria is one of the 
most effective and widest reaching weapons in our arsenal.
  The amendment that Senator Santorum and I are offering today seeks to 
ensure that we maintain that leadership and maintain the extraordinary 
leveraging potential of our contribution.
  For every dollar that the United States has provided to the Global 
Fund, the rest of the world has contributed two more.
  The U.S. Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act 
of 2003 linked U.S. contributions to the fund to those of other 
contributors.
  We believe that the United States must live up to the commitment we 
have made to reach our one-third match. We also believe that it is very 
much in our interests to do so.
  As Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has stated, ``HIV/AIDS is not 
only a human tragedy of enormous magnitude; it is also a threat to the 
stability of entire countries and to entire regions of the world.''
  I strongly support fully funding the President's request for 
bilateral HIV/AIDS programs. These programs are vitally important.
  The Global Fund is a complement to our other HIV/AIDS programs, not a 
competitor with them. The Global Fund offers unique leveraging 
opportunities. It also expands our reach, well beyond PEPFAR focus 
countries, thus giving our assistance breadth and depth. The Global 
Fund reaches 130 countries around the world. It provides one-quarter of 
all donor HIV/AIDS spending, two-thirds of all donor TB spending, and 
half of all donor spending on malaria.
  As of December 2005, the Global Fund was providing voluntary 
counseling and testing to 3.9 million people. The Global Fund is 
currently supporting community outreach efforts to 7 million people. It 
is providing antiretrovirals--ARVs--for 384,000 people.
  The fund has also provided 7.7 million bed nets to prevent malaria 
and treated 1 million cases of TB through directly observed therapy. 
Malaria and TB kill 3 million people a year. There are proven, cost-
effective solutions to prevent and treat these diseases, and the Global 
Fund helps provide them.
  The President's request included $300 million for the Global Fund. 
But this level of funding falls far short.
  It falls short of our previous contributions, it falls short of our 
commitment, and it falls far short of the actual need.
  First, $300 million is less than what the United States has 
contributed to the Global Fund last year, and the year before that. 
Last year, the United States provided $550 million. To cut that level 
almost in half would have a devastating effect.
  As the AIDS crisis grows ever greater, our funding should be 
increasing, not decreasing.
  Second, funding at that level will either fall well short of the one-
to-two match from the international community or, even worse, will 
encourage other donors to lowball their own contributions.
  Just as our generosity has been matched by the rest of the world, the 
reverse may also be true.
  Third, the President's request falls far short of what is needed.
  This year, the fund estimates that it will need $1.6 billion just to 
renew current grants. That would require a $533 million contribution 
from the United States. This figure is based on the assumption that 
about one in six grants will not be renewed, as part of the fund's 
screening mechanism. The programs that will be renewed are already on 
the ground, providing care and treatment. Three hundred million dollars 
will not come close to funding renewals of proven, lifesaving programs.
  That is where we must begin, with $533 million for renewals.
  However, the need for expanded prevention, care, and treatment of 
these terrible diseases does not stay stable: it grows.
  Our potential to help also increases, through proven interventions 
and demonstrated best practices and through the elimination of programs 
that do not meet standards of effectiveness or honesty.
  The Global Fund must not remain static in the face of an expanding 
epidemic: it must grow to meet it.
  Therefore, Senator Santorum and I believe that the United States must

[[Page S2269]]

also make a one third contribution to a new round of grants, at $333 
million.
  That would mean a total contribution of $866 million for the Global 
Fund from the United States.
  On average, every $100 million contribution to the Global Fund will 
generate the following results: The Fund can provide 630,000 bed nets 
to fight malaria; it can deliver 150,000 treatments for malaria; it can 
provide 80,000 highly-effective DOTS treatments for TB; it can supply 
370,000 people with HIV tests; and it can provide 11,000 people with 
lifesaving AIDS treatment.
  Lives hang in the balance. We must not shortchange this vital 
program, which dramatically extends the reach of U.S. foreign 
assistance.
  Our amendment offsets the $566 million increase in global AIDS funds 
with the 920 function, administrative allowances. This offset asks 
appropriators to find $566 million in savings across all budget 
functions.
  We do not believe that this money should come at the expense of other 
international humanitarian programs.
  Out of a discretionary budget of $873 billion, I don't think $566 
million is too much to ask in the global fight against these diseases.
  Senator Santorum and I will be working together through the 
appropriations process to make sure we find these savings.
  We believe it is important to set the U.S. mark now for the Global 
Fund at $866 million.
  This sends a clear signal to other donors that they need to step up 
their contributions to match this U.S. level.
  I know there are many budgetary pressures, but this is literally a 
matter of life and death.
  Twenty-five years ago, doctors first began to diagnose AIDS cases, 
but they could do almost nothing to save people. Then they began using 
AZT, which could slow the disease and, 10 years ago, ARVs, which could 
give people their lives back.
  Sadly, for the first 10, even 20 years of this pandemic, the response 
of the international community to the tragedy unfolding before them was 
dreadfully slow.
  Jan Eliasson, President of the U.N. General Assembly, has rightly 
declared that our slow response marks a scar ``on the conscience of our 
generation.''
  Eliasson continues, ``We cannot turn back the clock. We must ensure 
that, when historians look at the way the world responded to HIV and 
AIDS, they see that 2006 was the year when the international community 
finally stepped up to the mark the year when . . . the world began to 
`keep the promise.' ''
  In 25 years we have made enormous strides, and yet the disease has 
moved faster.
  I urge you to join me in supporting this amendment to ensure that the 
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB, and Malaria can both renew ongoing, 
proven programs and expand its lifesaving efforts.
  Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, this amendment adds $566 million for the 
Global AIDS Fund. This is a fund that historically the United States 
has participated at one-third funding level. It is an encouragement and 
incentive for the rest of the world to contribute to end the scourge of 
HIV/AIDS, particularly on the continent of Africa. To be able to meet 
that requirement for this funding year required an additional $566 
million above the President's request of $300 million. That will fund 
85 percent of the renewals that are coming due this year, in addition 
to round six of new funding for this initiative by the Global Fund.
  This is a commitment that the United States has made. We have been a 
leader on this. We need to continue to lead in an area that does cry 
out for humanitarian support and compassion by the people of the United 
States.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time in opposition?
  Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that all time be 
yielded back.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 3052.
  The amendment (No. 3052) was agreed to.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mrs. CLINTON. 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 New Hampshire.


      Amendments Nos. 3111, 3110, 3057, 3067, 3147, 3089, En Bloc

  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, we have a series of amendments we wish to 
agree to at this time. I ask unanimous consent that the following 
amendments be considered and agreed to en bloc, and that the motions to 
reconsider be laid upon the table: Dodd amendment No. 3111, Hutchison 
amendment No. 3110, Kohl amendment No. 3057, Feinstein amendment No. 
3067, Clinton amendment No. 3147, Salazar amendment No. 3089.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. CONRAD. No objection on this side.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendments were agreed to, as follows:


                           AMENDMENT NO. 3111

 (Purpose: To establish a reserve fund for the FIRE and SAFER programs)

       At the end of title III, insert the following:

     SEC. __. RESERVE FUND FOR THE FIRE AND SAFER PROGRAMS.

       If a bill or joint resolution is offered, or an amendment 
     is offered thereto, or a conference report is submitted 
     thereon, that provides firefighters and fire departments with 
     critical resources under the Assistance to Firefighters Grant 
     and the Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response 
     Firefighters Grant, the Chairman of the Committee on Budget 
     shall adjust the revenue aggregates and other appropriate 
     aggregates, levels, and limits in their resolution to reflect 
     such legislation to the extent that such legislation would 
     not increase the deficit for fiscal year 2007 and for the 
     period of fiscal years 2007 through 2011.


                           amendment no. 3110

  (Purpose: To provide a reserve fund to ensure that physicians will 
 receive an appropriate reimbursement rate under Medicare instead of a 
 scheduled cut which would threaten the adequate provision of care for 
                     seniors and disabled citizens)

       ``Sec.   . Reserve Fund for Physician Payment Increase 
     under Medicare. If--
       (1) the Committee on Finance Reports a bill, or if an 
     amendment is offered thereto, or if a conference report is 
     submitted thereon, that has the effect of increasing the 
     reimbursement rate for physician services under Section 
     1848(d) of the Social Security Act; and
       (2) that committee is within its allocation as provided 
     under section 102(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974; 
     the chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate may 
     make the appropriate adjustments in allocations and 
     aggregates to the extent that such legislation would not 
     increase the deficit for fiscal year 2007 and for the period 
     of fiscal years 2007 through 2011.


                           AMENDMENT NO. 3057

 (Purpose: To restore $380 million to juvenile justice programs funded 
  by the Department of Justice, offset by a reduction to Function 920 
                             (Allowances))

       On page 24, line 24, increase the amount by $380,000,000.
       On page 24, line 25, increase the amount by $46,000,000.
       On page 25, line 4, increase the amount by $106,000,000.
       On page 25, line 8, increase the amount by $95,000,000.
       On page 25, line 12, increase the amount by $76,000,000.
       On page 25, line 16, increase the amount by $57,000,000.
       On page 27, line 23, decrease the amount by $380,000,000.
       On page 27, line 24, decrease the amount by $46,000,000.
       On page 28, line 2, decrease the amount by $106,000,000.
       On page 28, line 5, decrease the amount by $95,000,000.
       On page 28, line 8, decrease the amount by $76,000,000.
       On page 28, line 11, decrease the amount by $57,000,000.


                           AMENDMENT NO. 3067

   (Purpose: To provide $390,000,000 in fiscal year 2007 for cancer 
 funding in the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease 
     Control and Prevention, and the Health Resources and Services 
      Administration paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes)

       On page 3, line 13, increase the amount by $111,000,000.
       On page 3, line 15, increase the amount by $199,000,000.
       On page 3, line 17, increase the amount by $55,000,000.
       On page 3, line 19, increase the amount by $12,000,000.
       On page 3, line 21, increase the amount by $3,000,000.
       On page 4, line 1, increase the amount by $111,000,000.
       On page 4, line 2, increase the amount by $199,000,000.
       On page 4, line 3, increase the amount by $55,000,000.
       On page 4, line 4, increase the amount by $12,000,000.

[[Page S2270]]

       On page 4, line 6, increase the amount by $3,000,000.
       On page 4, line 13, increase the amount by $390,000,000.
       On page 5, line 4, increase the amount by $111,000,000.
       On age 5, line 6, increase the amount by $199,000,000.
       On page 5, line 8, increase the amount by $55,000,000.
       On page 5, line 10, increase the amount by $12,000,000.
       On age 5, line 12, increase the amount by $3,000,000.
       On page 19, line 24, increase the amount by $390,000,000.
       On page 19, line 25, increase the amount by $111,000,000.
       On page 20, line 4, increase the amount by $199,000,000.
       On page 20, line 8, increase the amount by $55,000,000.
       On page 20, line 12, increase the amount by $12,000,000.
       On page 20, line 16, increase the amount by $3,000,000.
       On page 53, line 1, increase the amount by $390,000,000.
       On page 53, line 2, increase the amount by $111,000,000.


                           amendment no. 3147

   (Purpose: To restore funding for the Alzheimer's Association 24/7 
Contact Center (under Training, Research and Discretationary Programs), 
 Alzheimer's Disease Demonstration Grants, Preventive Health Services, 
 Home-Delivered Nutrition Services, Congregate Nutrition Services, the 
  Nutrition Services Incentive Program, the National Family Caregiver 
   Support Program, and the Long Term Care Ombudsmen Program in the 
  Administration on Aging, fully offset through closing corporate tax 
                               loopholes)

       On page 3, line 13, increase the amount by $26,000,000.
       On page 3, line 15, increase the amount by 13,000,000.
       On page 3, line 17, increase the amount by $1,000,000.
       On page 4, line 1, increase the amount by $26,000,000.
       On page 4, line 2, increase the amount by $13,000,000.
       On page 4, line 3, increase the amount by $1,000,000.
       On page 4, line 13, increase the amount by $41,000,000.
       On page 5, line 4, increase the amount by $26,000,000.
       On page 5, line 6, increase the amount by $13,000,000.
       On page 5, line 8, increase the amount by $1,000,000.
       On page 18, line 24, increase the amount by $41,000,000.
       On page 18, line 25, increase the amount by $26,000,000.
       On page 19, line 4, increase the amount by $13,000,000.
       On page 19, line 8, increase the amount by $1,000,000.
       On page 53, line 1, increase the amount by $41,000,000.
       On page 53, line 2, increase the amount by $26,000,000.


                           AMENDMENT NO. 3089

(Purpose: Restore $100 million to the Land and Water Conservation Fund 
 Stateside Grant Program. Paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes)

       On page 3, line 13, increase the amount by $25,000,000.
       On page 3, line 15, increase the amount by $30,000,000.
       On page 3, line 17, increase the amount by $30,000,000.
       On page 3, line 19, increase the amount by $10,000,000.
       On page 3, line 21, increase the amount by $5,000,000.
       On page 4, line 1, increase the amount by $25,000,000.
       On page 4, line 2, increase the amount by $30,000,000.
       On page 4, line 3, increase the amount by $30,000,000.
       On page 4, line 4, increase the amount by $10,000,000.
       On page 4, line 6, increase the amount by $5,000,000.
       On page 4, line 13, increase the amount by $100,000,000.
       On page 5, line 4, increase the amount by $25,000,000.
       On page 5, line 6, increase the amount by $30,000,000.
       On page 5, line 8, increase the amount by $30,000,000.
       On page 5, line 10, increase the amount by $10,000,000.
       On page 5, line 12, increase the amount by $5,000,000.
       On page 13, line 21, increase the amount by $100,000,000.
       On page 13, line 22, increase the amount by $25,000,000.
       On page 14, line 1, increase the amount by $30,000,000.
       On page 14, line 5, increase the amount by $30,000,000.
       On page 14, line 9, increase the amount by $10,000,000.
       On page 14, line 13, increase the amount by $5,000,000.
       On page 53, line 1, increase the amount by $100,000,000.
       On page 53, line 2, increase the amount by $25,000,000.


                           amendment no. 3111

  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise to discuss S.A. 3111 to the fiscal 
year 2007 budget resolution which I sponsored with my colleague, 
Senator DeWine. This amendment, which helps our Nation's firefighters 
perform their critical duties more safely, was adopted by unanimous 
consent. I thank the Chairman of the Budget Committee, Senator Gregg, 
and the committee's ranking member, Senator Conrad, both for their work 
on the budget resolution and for their consideration of this important 
issue.
  I would imagine that this amendment, which creates a special reserve 
fund to pay for the assistance to firefighters grants, is not the way 
that everyone would choose first to provide critical resources to the 
FIRE Act and SAFER Act grants. However, this amendment does demonstrate 
the commitment of the Senate to increase conditionally funding for our 
firefighters in a manner consistent with the need to be fiscally 
responsible.
  Clearly, the need for these grants is irrefutable. Across our 
country, fire departments are in desperate need of obtaining updated 
equipment and more expensive firefighter training--two activities that 
are crucial to ensuring that firefighters can carry out their expanded 
responsibilities safely and effectively in this post-9/11 world.
  In fiscal year 2002, there were over 19,000 FIRE grant applications 
seeking almost $2 billion in support for eligible activities. In fiscal 
year 2005, there were over 27,000 FIRE grant applications seeking over 
$4 billion for such activities. The manmade and natural hazards that 
firefighters are expected to face today have strapped the ability of 
municipalities and States to provide for their needs. Therefore, it is 
imperative that the Federal Government expand its commitment to support 
our firefighters.
  I think that very few people who are not firefighters stop and think 
about how much we ask of our firefighters in today's world. They still 
perform their traditional duties of extinguishing fires, delivering 
emergency medical services, and ensuring that fire codes are inspected. 
However, many firefighters have also taken on new homeland security 
responsibilities that include responding to and handling hazardous 
biological and radiological agents.
  According to a national needs assessment study of the U.S. Fire 
Service published in December 2002, most fire departments lack the 
necessary resources and training to properly handle terrorist attacks 
and large-scale emergencies.
  More specifically, the study found that, first, using local 
personnel, only 11 percent of fire departments can handle a rescue with 
emergency medical services at a structural collapse of a building with 
50 occupants. Nearly half of all fire departments consider such an 
incident beyond their scope. Second, using local personnel, only 13 
percent of fire departments say that they can handle a hazardous 
material incident involving chemical and/or biological agents with 10 
injuries. Only 21 percent have a written agreement to direct the use of 
nonlocal resources to handle the situation. Third, an estimated 40 
percent of fire department personnel involved in hazardous material 
response lack formal training in those duties. And finally, the study 
found an estimated 60 to 75 percent of fire departments do not have 
enough fire stations to achieve widely used response-time guidelines. 
Many fire departments are often stretched so thin that they cannot 
respond to fires with sufficient personnel to initiate an interior 
attack on a structural fire safely.

  Moreover, the need for additional firefighters--both paid and 
volunteer--on our Nation's streets is great. According to National Fire 
Protection Association standards, a minimum of four firefighters is 
required to initiate an interior attack on a house fire. The study goes 
on to conclude that 73 percent of fire departments serving populations 
between 10,000 and 25,000 lack such personnel, 82 percent of 
departments serving populations between 25,000 and 50,000, 76 percent 
of departments serving populations between 50,000 and 100,000, 56 
percent of departments serving populations between 100,000 and 250,000, 
41 percent of departments serving populations between 250,000 and 
500,000 people, 40 percent of departments serving populations between 
500,000 and 1 million people, and

[[Page S2271]]

zero percent of departments serving populations at least 1 million 
people.
  Over the past 5 years, FIRE and SAFER grants have been highly 
successful in enabling fire departments to acquire the resources they 
demand and hire the people they need. Over $3 billion in assistance as 
been provided to well over 20,000 fire departments in all 50 States 
thus far. Yet the job of ensuring that all communities receive the 
assistance they need and deserve is far from done.
  America's firefighters are always the first ones in and the last ones 
out. They risk their own lives to save the lives of others. They stare 
danger in the face every single day because they know they have a duty 
to fulfill. We must recognize their contribution to our domestic safety 
to see to it that they have the necessary equipment and personnel they 
demand in order to perform their critical duties safely.
  I look forward to working with Senator DeWine and my colleagues 
during the appropriations season to help ensure that the maximum amount 
of aid is delivered to all of our firefighters.
  Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I have offered an amendment to the budget 
resolution with Senator Biden to significantly restore funding for 
juvenile justice programs. Our amendment will increase funding for 
these programs funded by the Department of Justice by adding $380 
million to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention--
OJJDP--budget. The amendment accomplishes this by raising the 
functional total for the justice allocation by $380 million offset in 
function 920--which gives the Appropriations Committee the flexibility 
to design the exact offsets.
  Let me briefly illustrate why we must put money back into these 
programs. Following the administration's lead, the Senate Budget 
Committee allocated $176 million to the OJJDP budget, which is about 
$167 million less than what we appropriated last year and $380 million 
less than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. I am particularly 
disturbed that the Senate budget resolution assumes complete 
elimination of the Juvenile Accountability Block Grant Program--JABG--
which received a little less than $50 million last year. JABG provides 
funding for intervention programs that address the urgent needs of 
juveniles who have had run-ins with the law. Positive intervention and 
treatment at this early stage of delinquency can prevent further 
violent behavior and steer a young person in the right direction before 
it's too late.
  That said, the Budget Committee seems to feel that the JABG program 
is ineffective. An example from my homestate of Wisconsin proves 
otherwise. Using Federal dollars from the JABG program, the Southern 
Oaks Girls School, a juvenile detention center outside of Racine, WI, 
built a new mental health wing to provide much-needed counseling 
services for the girl inmates. The administrator of this school cites a 
56-percent drop in violent behavior since the new mental services have 
been offered. This is just one example of JABG's many successes--a 
record that supports keeping JABG alive and well-funded.
  The same is true of title V Local Delinquency Prevention Program, the 
only Federal program solely dedicated to juvenile crime prevention. 
Title V programs include preschool and parent training programs, youth 
mentoring, afterschool activities, tutoring, truancy reduction, 
substance abuse prevention and gang prevention outreach. Nonetheless, 
the Senate budget assumes a 50-percent cut to title--V penny pinching 
now that will cost us dearly in the future. According to many experts 
in the field, every dollar spent on prevention saves $3 or $4 in costs 
attributable to juvenile crime. And who can put a dollar value on the 
hundreds, even thousands of young lives turned from crime and into 
productive work and community life by the juvenile crime prevention 
programs supported by title V?
  The downward spiral of juvenile justice funding is a disturbing 
budget trend with ugly real world implications. Juvenile crime is an 
ongoing challenge and it is not a problem that is going to solve 
itself. Boosting funding for successful juvenile justice programs is 
the first step in addressing this challenge. Just a few short years ago 
in fiscal year 2002, juvenile justice programs received $556 million. 
Of that amount, more than $94 million went to the title V program and 
nearly $250 million was dedicated to JABG. We need to restore these 
initiatives to those robust levels and our amendment will do just that 
by adding $380 million to the OJJDP budget for juvenile justice 
programs.
  We have a choice in this Congress of where we want to invest our 
money. We can choose to address the roots of crime and invest in our 
children by preventing a life of criminal behavior. We can choose to 
intervene in a positive manner to work with those teens that have 
fallen through the cracks and have had a few scrapes with the law--we 
can turn many of those kids around. I urge my colleagues to make the 
right choice this year and support our amendment which will increase 
funding for juvenile justice programs. We can and must do better.


              Amendments Nos. 3167, 3168, and 3169 En Bloc

  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following 
amendments which have not been filed be considered en bloc, and that 
the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table: Senator Brownback on 
a commission on accountability and review of Federal agencies, Senator 
Baucus on high intensity drug trafficking, and Senator Graham relative 
to the Port of Charleston.
  Mr. CONRAD. No objection.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendments were agreed to, as follows:


                           AMENDMENT NO. 3167

      (Purpose: To establish a reserve fund for a Commission for 
             Accountability and Review of Federal Agencies)

       At the end of title III, insert the following:

     SEC. __. RESERVE FUND A COMMISSION FOR ACCOUNTABILITY AND 
                   REVIEW OF FEDERAL AGENCIES.

       If--
       (1) the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 
     Committee of the Senate reports a bill or joint resolution, 
     or an amendment is offered thereto or a conferecne report is 
     submitted thereon, that creates a Commission for the review 
     of the performances of Federal agencies, with the purpose of 
     recommending legislation to realign or eliminate programs or 
     agenices that are wasteful, duplicative, inefficient, 
     outdated, irrelevant, or failed; and
       (2) the committee is within its allocation as provided 
     under section 302(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974;

     the chairman of the Committee on Budget may make the 
     appropriate adjustments in allocations and aggregates to the 
     extent that such legislation would not increase the deficit 
     for fiscal year 2007 and for the period of fiscal years 2007 
     through 2011.


                           AMENDMENT NO. 3168

  (Purpose: To expand funding for the High Intensity Drug Trafficking 
  Area (HIDTA) Program, offset through reductions in Function 920. To 
              ensure that HIDTA funding remains in ONDCP)

       On page 24, line 24, increase the amount by $19,000,000.
       On page 24, line 25, increase the amount by $5,000,000.
       On page 25, line 4, increase the amount by $11,000,000.
       On page 25, line 8, increase the amount by $2,000,000.
       On page 25, line 12, increase the amount by $1,000,000.
       On page 27, line 23, decrease the amount by $19,000,000.
       On page 27, line 24, decrease the amount by $5,000,000.
       On page 28, line 2, decrease the amount by $11,000,000.
       On page 28, line 5, decrease the amount by $2,000,000.
       On page 28, line 8, decrease the amount by $1,000,000.


                           Amendment NO. 3169

    (Purpose: To restore funding for a pilot project in the Port of 
  Charleston that coordinates over 50 State and local law enforcement 
agencies to prevent and detect acts of terrorism and criminal activity)

       On page 24, line 24, increase the amount by $27,000,000.
       On page 24, line 25, increase the amount by $21,600,000.
       On page 25, line 4, increase the amount by $2,700,000.
       On page 25, line 8, increase the amount by $2,700,000.
       On page 27, line 23, decrease the amount by $27,000,000.
       On page 27, line 24, decrease the amount by $21,600,000.
       On page 28, line 2, decrease the amount by $2,700,000.
       On page 28, line 5, decrease the amount by $2,700,000.

  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, at this point we are ready to go to the 
Vitter amendment. Is the Senator from North Dakota ready?
  Mr. CONRAD. No, we are not. We have people looking at that amendment. 
Could we go to Senator Domenici's amendment?

[[Page S2272]]

  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant Journal clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I know Senator Vitter wants to be heard on 
his amendment and Senator Domenici wants to be heard on his amendment. 
There was a prior order that said Senator Domenici would occur after 
Senator Santorum--not an order but sort of a collegial understanding--
so we will go to Senator Domenici, then Senator Vitter.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico.


                           Amendment No. 3128

  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, last year the Senate by an overwhelming 
majority--74 Senators voted to support the Energy Policy Act. A number 
of programs, projects, and activities within that act were not 
contained in the President's budget.
  What this does, it supports an energy reserve fund paid for by ANWR 
receipts. In other words, ANWR is in the bill, and we allocate part of 
the receipts in a reserve fund to the Secretary of Energy to pay for 
various projects that were already voted on by the Congress that we 
thought were good projects. Therefore, this would fund $150 million a 
year for 5 years from the ANWR receipts.
  I think we should do it. I urge the Senate to adopt this. It is a 
good way to use the funds, an appropriate way, and I believe it would 
add to the validity of our Energy Policy Act and make those things 
happen more quickly.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the amendment by 
the Senator from New Mexico. This is a debate we have been through over 
and over again. There are some who believe that drilling for oil in the 
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is the answer to America's energy 
challenge. This amendment says the proceeds from that drilling will 
fund all the other energy policies in our Nation.
  This makes no sense whatsoever. There is no possible way that in the 
next fiscal year, even if we approved the drilling in ANWR, there will 
be proceeds that can be contributed to the Energy Policy Act funding.
  Yesterday, this body had a chance to vote for real money to fund the 
Energy Policy Act when Senator Bingaman offered the amendment, and it 
was defeated by opposition from the other side of the aisle.
  I rise in opposition to this amendment. This is no way to fund energy 
policy, and ANWR is not the answer to our energy prayers.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
  The assistant journal clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from New Mexico [Mr. Domenici] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 3128.

  Mr. DOMENICI. 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 provide funding for implementing the Energy Policy Act of 
                            2005 from ANWR)

       On page 4, line 17, increase the amount by $151,593,000.
       On page 4, line 19, increase the amount by $156,269,000.
       On page 4, line 21, increase the amount by $162,937,000.
       On page 5, line 8, increase the amount by $69,093,000.
       On page 5, line 10, increase the amount by $133,769,000.
       On page 5, line 12, increase the amount by $155,437,000.
       On page 5, line 23, decrease the amount by $69,093,000.
       On page 5, line 25, decrease the amount by $133,769,000.
       On page 6, line 2, decrease the amount by $155,437,000.
       On page 6, line 12, increase the amount by $69,093,000.
       On page 6, line 14, increase the amount by $202,862,000.
       On page 6, line 16, increase the amount by $358,299,000.
       On page 7, line 2, increase the amount by $69,093,000.
       On page 7, line 4, increase the amount by $202,862,000.
       On page 7, line 6, increase the amount by $358,299,000.
       On page 13, line 4, increase the amount by $150,000,000.
       On page 13, line 5, increase the amount by $67,500,000.
       On page 13, line 8, increase the amount by $150,000,000.
       On page 13, line 9, increase the amount by $127,500,000.
       On page 13, line 12, increase the amount by $150,000,000.
       On page 13, line 13, increase the amount by $142,500,000.
       On page 41, strike lines 8 through 11 and insert the 
     following:

     ``ate may make the adjustments described in subsections (b) 
     and (c).
       (b) Adjustment for Implementation of Energy Policy Act of 
     2005.--If the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate 
     reports a bill or joint resolution, or if an amendment is 
     offered thereto or a conference report is submitted thereon 
     that makes available a portion of the receipts resulting from 
     enactment of the legislation described in subsection (a) for 
     programs to implement the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Public 
     Law 109-58), the chairman of the Committee on the Budget may 
     revise committee allocations for that committee and other 
     appropriate budgetary aggregates and allocations of new 
     budget authority and outlays by the amount provided by that 
     measure for that purpose, but the adjustment may not exceed 
     $150,000,000 in new budget authority in each of fiscal years 
     2009 through 2011.
       (c) Adjustment for the Land and Water Conservation Fund 
     Programs and Additional Land Conservation Programs.--If the 
     Committee on Appro-* * *

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, 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 amendment.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  The result was announced--yeas 51, nays 49, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 72 Leg.]

                                YEAS--51

     Akaka
     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Burr
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Dole
     Domenici
     Enzi
     Frist
     Graham
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Isakson
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Lott
     Lugar
     Martinez
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Specter
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Thune
     Vitter
     Voinovich
     Warner

                                NAYS--49

     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Chafee
     Clinton
     Coleman
     Collins
     Conrad
     Dayton
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Ensign
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Harkin
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Obama
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Salazar
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Smith
     Snowe
     Stabenow
     Wyden
  The amendment (No. 3128) was agreed to.
  Mr. GREGG. 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.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I yield to the Senator from Louisiana.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.


                           Amendment No. 3165

  Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The senior assistant journal clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Louisiana [Mr. Vitter] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 3165.

  Mr. VITTER. 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 create a Reserve Fund for Gulf Coast, Protection, 
                   Reconstruction and Recovery Fund)

       On page 43, after line 22, add the following:
       If--
       (1) the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 
     of the Senate or the Committee on Energy and Natural 
     Resources of the Senate, or both Committees, reports a bill 
     or joint resolution, or if an amendment is offered thereto, 
     or if a conference report is submitted thereon, that creates 
     a Gulf Coast

[[Page S2273]]

     Protection, Reconstruction and Recovery Fund to provide 
     assistance to coastal states for coastal conservation, 
     mitigation and resource protection activities, or other 
     purposes, based on the allocation formula provided in Section 
     31 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act that is funded 
     $10 billion from the following sources or any combination of 
     funds thereof--
       (A) Receipts deposited into the Digital Television 
     Transition and Public Safety Fund that exceed estimates of 
     the Congressional Budget Office for the Deficit Reduction Act 
     of 2005 at the time of enactment;
       (B) Receipts (including bonus bids, rents, royalties, and 
     payments associated with royalties in kind) from the Arctic 
     National Wildlife Refuge, if the Committee on Energy and 
     Natural Resources of the Senate reports a bill, and such 
     measure is enacted, to establish oil exploration and 
     production in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge;
       (C) Receipts equal to the amount of receipts received by 
     the United States government attributable to offshore energy 
     production (including bonus bids, rents, royalties, and 
     payments associated with royalties in kind) for each year 
     that exceed estimates of the Congressional Budget Office as 
     of March 16, 2006; and
       (2) that committee is within its allocation as provided 
     under section 302(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974;

     the chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate may 
     make the appropriate adjustments in allocations and 
     aggregates to the extent that such legislation would not 
     increase the deficit for fiscal year 2007 and for the period 
     of fiscal years 2007 through 2011.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant journal clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 3165) was agreed to.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. CONRAD. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

                          ____________________