Congressional Record, Volume 152 Issue 52 (Thursday, May 4, 2006)

[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 52 (Thursday, May 4, 2006)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4007-S4030]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

MAKING EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING
SEPTEMBER 30, 2006

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will
resume consideration of H.R. 4939, which the clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

A bill (H.R. 4939) making emergency supplemental
appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2006,
and for other purposes.

Pending:

Thune amendment No. 3704, to provide, with an offset,
$20,000,000 for the Department of Veterans Affairs for
Medical Facilities.
Vitter/Landrieu modified amendment No. 3728, to provide for
flood prevention in the State of Louisiana, with an offset.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Ensign). Under the previous order, the
Senator from Mississippi, Mr. Cochran, and the Senator from West
Virginia, Mr. Byrd, will be recognized for up to 10 minutes each.
The Chair recognizes the Senator from West Virginia.
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank the Chair.
I thank the distinguished and very able chairman of the Senate
Appropriations Committee, Mr. Cochran, for all of his hard work on this
bill. He has worked hard. He has again proved himself to be a very able
chairman, very knowledgeable of the contents of the bill.
The President has asked the Congress to approve over $92 billion of
emergency spending--man, that is a lot of money; $92 billion of
emergency spending--including $72.5 billion for the wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan and $19.8 billion for the Federal response to the terrible
hurricanes that struck the Gulf States in August and September of 2005.
The Appropriations Committee held several hearings on the request,
and we have now debated the bill for nearly 2 weeks. It is a good bill.
It is a good bill. I am proud to recommend it to the Senate.
But, regrettably, the President has threatened to veto the bill based
on his assertion that it is too expensive. In a Statement of
Administration Policy that has been made a part of the Record, the
administration threatens that the President will veto the bill if it
exceeds $94.5 billion. OK. Have at it. Have at it, Mr. President.
Currently, the bill totals $108.9 billion. The President complains that
the Senate has added funding for purposes other than the wars in Iraq
and Afghanistan and for assisting the victims of Hurricanes Katrina and
Rita.
Nowhere--nowhere--is it written in stone, nowhere is it etched in
brass, on golden pillars, that this supplemental--which is likely to be
the only supplemental considered for this fiscal year--has to be
limited to the costs of the war and Hurricane Katrina. Nor is it etched
in stone that the Congress must approve a bill that is below $94.5
billion.
The Senate has added funding for a number of critical programs.
Despite the administration's rhetoric about securing our borders and
providing a layered defense of our ports, the President did not request
a dime--not one thin dime--for border security or port security. He did
not request a dime for making the coal mines safer for our coal miners.
He did not request a dime for our farmers who have been hit with
drought and hurricanes, despite the fact that 78 percent of all U.S.
counties were designated as primary or contiguous disaster areas by the
Secretary of Agriculture or the President in 2005. He did not request a
dime for compensating potential victims of pandemic influenza vaccines.
The President's request for Katrina victims is inadequate and leaves
critical gaps in housing and education.
The Senate recognized the weaknesses of the President's request in
these areas and judiciously added funds. When the bill is in
conference, I will urge the conferees to approve these items. You bet.
The conferees should send to the President a bill that meets the
needs of this country. That is our duty. If the President wants to veto
a bill that funds the troops, if he wants to veto a bill that funds
victims of Hurricane Katrina, if he wants to veto a bill that provides
critical resources for combating a potential avian flu, if he wants to
veto a bill that secures our borders and our ports and helps our
farmers to recover from disaster and makes our coal mines safer, have
at it, have at it. That is his right under the Constitution. But the
Congress should not be bullied by the President into neglecting its
responsibility, our responsibility, to provide required funds to meet
priority national needs.
Because my State of West Virginia is often hit by floods and other
damaging disasters, such as the recent accidents in our coal mines, I
am quite sensitive to the ability of our Federal Government to prepare
for--and respond to--disasters promptly and with competence, which is
what our citizens need and what our citizens deserve. Sadly, many of
our Federal agencies are no longer up to these fundamental tasks. But
this bill includes resources to help Federal agencies restore their
capabilities.
I am especially grateful to and I especially thank the chairman for
including, at my request and the request of others, an amount of $35.6
million for improved mine safety and health programs. In the wake of 18
coal-mining deaths in the State of West Virginia this year--18 coal-
mining deaths in the State of West Virginia this year--and another 16
mining deaths in other States, it is imperative that the Congress act
immediately to ensure that an adequate number of safety inspectors will
be provided for our Nation's mines and to expedite the introduction of
critical safety equipment.
This week, we have heard testimony from the families of those killed
in the Sago explosion in January. We have heard from the coal
operators. We have heard from experts. In all of this testimony, one
truth is clear: Lives can be saved when the Federal Mine Safety and
Health Administration places miners' safety and health at the very top
of its priority list. We must have more inspectors on the job, yes. We
must have better rescue teams trained and

[[Page S4008]]

equipped and ready to go at a moment's notice. We must have pre-
positioned oxygen and emergency supplies in our coal mines. And we must
have ways to communicate with trapped miners. It just has to be. We
have to do these things. It is simply inexcusable that our miners have
oxygen canisters that last only 1 hour, only 60 minutes, when miners
may be trapped under the ground for several days, or that the miners
may not have emergency communications equipment that can reach the
surface in the event of an extended rescue effort. The chairman has my
genuine appreciation for including these funds in the committee-
reported bill. I also thank Senator Specter, Senator Harkin, and
Senator Jay Rockefeller for their support of the initiative.
The bill before the Senate also includes a provision to extend the
Abandoned Mine Land authority through fiscal year 2007. The AML Program
and combined benefits fund are very important programs that are needed
by retired coal miners and their families and coalfield communities
throughout this country. I thank Chairman Cochran and I thank Senator
Specter and I thank Senator Domenici for supporting me in this effort.
Finally, the Senate, by a vote of 94 to 0, approved my amendment
encouraging the President to budget for the cost of the wars in Iraq
and Afghanistan. You can't fund these wars on the cheap. Upon passage
of this supplemental bill, the total amount appropriated for the war in
Iraq, including the cost of reconstruction, will be approximately $320
billion--that is $3.20 for every minute since Jesus Christ was born;
think of it, that is a staggering figure--virtually all of it funded
through ad hoc emergency supplemental appropriations. And the costs
continue to grow and grow.
The President refuses to include a realistic estimate of the cost of
the wars in his annual budget request.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator has expired.
Mr. BYRD. Would the Chair repeat?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
Mr. BYRD. I ask unanimous consent to proceed for not to exceed 3
minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. BYRD. He continues to rely on ad hoc, poorly justified emergency
supplemental requests that he expects the Congress to rubberstamp. As a
result, there is virtually no debate about how our country is going to
pay for these massive bills. Nobody seems to be minding the store when
it comes to controlling the escalating costs of the wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan. The failure of the President to heed the repeated calls by
the Senate to budget for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan has resulted
in more unnecessary spending that is hidden from public view. Until the
President begins to include a real estimate of the cost of the wars in
his annual budget, American taxpayers will continue to see billions of
dollars spent without any true measure of accountability.
The Senate has given its strong support to this amendment five times,
and the President continues to disregard this direction by the Senate.
I hope the 94-to-0 vote on an amendment that encourages the President
to include the full cost of the wars in the budget finally, finally,
finally gets his attention.
I urge adoption of the bill, and I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I first thank very sincerely the
distinguished Senator from West Virginia for his good help and
assistance, his guidance and his leadership in the development and
passage of this bill. We have been called upon, as he points out, to
provide emergency supplemental funding for war costs, providing the
Department of Defense and the Department of State with funding in
accounts that have been devoted to that cause and that effort. It is
very important to the protection of the security interests of the
people of the United States. So this is an important measure we are
taking up today and moving to final passage.
Under the order that was entered last evening, there would be 10
minutes allocated to the Senator from West Virginia and to this
Senator, and then there would be consecutive votes on or in relation to
two amendments, one which is being offered by the Senator from South
Dakota, Mr. Thune, the other by the Senator from Louisiana, Mr. Vitter,
as modified, without intervening action or debate, and that following
those votes, the bill be read a third time and the Senate proceed to a
vote on passage of the bill without intervening action or debate. So
the order provides for no debate today but just votes on the final two
amendments that have been held for votes now.
There have been several other amendments which have been cleared, but
I am going to ask unanimous consent that each Senator who has an
amendment that has not been considered--Senator Thune and Senator
Vitter--be given 2 minutes each to describe their amendments and that
the managers of the bill likewise be given 2 minutes each on each
amendment, if comments are needed, by the managers of the bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, if I
understand the chairman's request, it is to get 4 minutes of additional
time on their side. I ask unanimous consent, then, for an additional 4
minutes on our side for comment only.
Mr. COCHRAN. I have no objection to that.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. COCHRAN. I thank the Senator for her comments. Let me also point
out how helpful Senator Murray has been in the handling of this
legislation. She has served at the request of the Senator from West
Virginia as the floor manager during much of the consideration of this
bill and has done a truly outstanding job in helping to explain the
provisions of the bill, as reported by the committee, and debating
amendments and helping guide this measure to the point of passage where
it is right now.
Before yielding the floor to those who have amendments, let me use
the remainder of my 10 minutes by presenting to the Senate some
amendments that have been cleared on both sides of the aisle.

Amendment No. 3753

I ask unanimous consent that it be in order to call up and consider
amendment No. 3753 on behalf of Ms. Landrieu regarding hurricane
disaster-related housing assistance.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Cochran], for Ms.
Landrieu, proposes amendment numbered 3753.

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

(Purpose: To provide project-based housing assistance to repair housing
damaged as a result of Hurricane Katrina and other hurricanes of the
2005 hurricane season)

On page 198, line 18, strike ``Provided further, That'' and
all that follows through ``assistance:'' on page 199, line 1,
and insert the following: ``Provided further, That no less
than $100,000,000 shall be made available as project-based
assistance used to support the reconstruction, rebuilding,
and repair of assisted housing that suffered the consequences
of Hurricane Katrina and other hurricanes of the 2005 season
or new structures supported under the low income tax credit
program: Provided further, That previously assisted HUD
project-based housing and residents of such housing shall be
accorded a preference in the use of such project-based
assistance, except that such funds shall be made available
for 4,500 project-based vouchers for supportive housing units
for persons with disabilities, as that term is defined in
section 422(2) of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act
(42 U.S.C. 11382(2)), elderly families, or previously
homeless individuals and families: Provided further, That the
limitation contained in section 8(o)(13)(B) of the United
States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(13)(B)) shall
not apply to such funds:''

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment? If
not, the question is on agreeing to amendment No. 3753.
The amendment (No. 3753) was agreed to.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mrs. MURRAY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

[[Page S4009]]

Amendment No. 3677

Mr. COCHRAN. I ask unanimous consent that it be in order to call up
and consider amendment No. 3677 on behalf of Mr. Voinovich regarding
Rickenbacker Airport in Ohio.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Cochran], for Mr.
Voinovich, proposes an amendment numbered 3677.

Mr. COCHRAN. 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 make a technical correction to a project for Rickenbacker
Airport, Columbus, Ohio)

On page 253, between lines 19 and 20, insert the following:

RICKENBACKER AIRPORT, COLUMBUS, OHIO

Sec. ____. The project numbered 4651 in section 1702 of the
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity
Act: A Legacy for Users (119 Stat. 1434) is amended by
striking ``Grading, paving'' and all that follows through
``Airport'' and inserting ``Grading, paving, roads, and the
transfer of rail-to-truck for the intermodal facility at
Rickenbacker Airport, Columbus, OH''.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 3677) was agreed to.
Mr. COCHRAN. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mrs. MURRAY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 3819

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be in
order to call up and consider amendment No. 3819 on behalf of Mr.
Vitter regarding fishery finance program loans.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is
so ordered.
The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Cochran], for Mr. Vitter,
proposes amendment numbered 3819.

Mr. COCHRAN. 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:

On page 140, strike from line 8 ``$10,000,000'' through
line 15 ``years:'', and insert in its place on page 140, line
8, after ``appropriated'' the following: ``$30 million shall
be provided for the fishery finance program loans under title
XI of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936, (46 U.S.C. App. 1271 et
seq.) to satisfy loan obligations for loans used to make
expenditures, guarantee or finance to repair, replace or
restore fisheries infrastructure, vessels, facilities, or
fish processing facilities home-ported or located within the
declared fisheries disaster area.''

Amendment No. 3819, as Modified

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, a modification has been sent to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the modification?
The amendment is so modified.
The amendment (No. 3819), as modified, is as follows:

(Purpose: To provide hurricane assistance to certain holders of fishery
finance program loans)

On page 140, strike from line 8 ``$10,000,000'' through
line 16 ``50,000,000'', and insert in its place on page 140,
line 8, after ``appropriated'' the following: ``$66 million
shall be provided for the fishery finance program loans under
title XI of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936, (46 U.S.C. App.
1271 et seq.) to satisfy loan obligations for loans used to
make expenditures, guarantee or finance to repair, replace or
restore fisheries infrastructure, vessels, facilities, or
fish processing facilities home-ported or located within the
declared fisheries disaster area: Provided further, That of
the total amount appropriated, $14,000,000''.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, the question is
on agreeing to the amendment, as modified.
The amendment (No. 3819), as modified, was agreed to.
Mr. COCHRAN. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mrs. MURRAY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 3860

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be in
order to call up and consider an amendment on behalf of Mr. Byrd
regarding the availability of previously appropriated funds to the
Health Resources and Services Administration. The amendment has been
sent to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, the
clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Mississippi [Mr. cochran], for Mr. Byrd,
proposes amendment numbered 3860.

Mr. COCHRAN. 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 extend the availability of certain funds appropriated in
Public Law 106-554)

At the appropriate place, insert the following: Provided
further, that unexpended balances for Health Resources and
Services Administration grant number 7C6HF03601-01-00,
appropriated in P.L. 106-554, shall remain available until
expended.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia is recognized.
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, this is a technical amendment. It costs no
additional funds. It simply fixes a mistake in a grant notice. The
fiscal year 2001 Labor-HHS bill included funding for West Virginia
University for construction of the neurosciences building. The HHS
grant documents sent to the university mistakenly stated that the funds
would be available until September 30, 2009, and that was incorrect.
The money is expiring on
September 30, 2006. This amendment would make the funds available
consistent with the grant documents.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I urge adoption of the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment?
If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 3860) was agreed to.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mrs. MURRAY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 3592

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be in
order to call up and consider amendment No. 3592 on behalf of Mr. Reed
regarding Fox Point Hurricane Barrier, RI.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, the clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Cochran], for Mr. Reed,
proposes amendment numbered 3592.

Mr. COCHRAN. 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 emergency funding to upgrade the Fox Point
hurricane barrier in Providence, Rhode Island)

On page 162, between lines 12 and 13, insert the following:

FOX POINT HURRICANE BARRIER

For an additional amount for the Secretary of the Army,
acting through the Chief of Engineers, for use in upgrading
the electro-mechanical control system of the Fox Point
hurricane barrier in Providence, Rhode Island, $1,055,000, to
remain available until expended: Provided, That the amount
provided under this heading is designated as an emergency
requirement pursuant to section 402 of H. Con. Res. 95 (109th
Congress).

Mr. REED. Mr. President, two important lessons we learned from
Hurricane Katrina are that our Nation's infrastructure to protect
Americans from flooding and hurricanes is inadequate and upfront
investment in this infrastructure can save lives and is a sound
investment of taxpayers' money in order to prevent costly
reconstruction.
The Fox Point Hurricane Barrier in Providence, RI protects the city
and adjoining communities from the catastrophic effects of hurricane
storm surge in Narragansett Bay and torrential rains with the
Providence River basin. Built in the 1960s, as a joint

[[Page S4010]]

flood control project by the city and the Army Corps of Engineers, the
barrier employs three 35-foot high gates, an electrically driven
pumping station, and dikes to protect tens of thousands of people and
approximately $5 billion worth of property. The hurricane barrier is a
one-half mile long structure that extends from Allens Avenue to India
Point Park. It was the first structure of its type in the United States
to be approved for construction.
The Hurricane of 1938 and Hurricane Carol in 1954 devastated
communities in Rhode Island. The Hurricane of 1938 generated a storm
surge of 16 feet that traveled up Narragansett Bay and flooded downtown
Providence under 10 feet of water. Two hundred and seven Rhode
Islanders were killed, and damage totaled $125 million--more than $1
billion in today's dollars. Hurricane Carol in 1954 flooded Providence,
leaving the city under 8 feet of water and destroying 4,000 houses.
The Corps and city built the Fox Point Hurricane Barrier to keep a
storm surge from flowing into downtown Providence. Since its
construction, sea levels have risen 9 to 10 inches. In addition, Rhode
Island has lost wetlands and tidal flats that could help mitigate a
storm surge. According to Jon Boothroyd, a geologist at the University
of Rhode Island, the filled land will force water into a narrower area,
causing a higher storm surge. The loss of marshes and fields behind the
barrier will further exacerbate the problem as water could also move
faster downstream to the barrier. For these reasons, it is imperative
that the barrier and pumps work if and when they are needed.
In recent years, the Army Corps of Engineers and the city of
Providence have evaluated the barrier and determined that the
electromechanical control system for the barrier's pumps must be
replaced. The Corps has reported that during several inspections, the
pump motors have occasionally failed to start because of faulty relays
or other related electrical problems. In a letter dated December 7,
2003, Richard C. Carlson with the New England Director of the Army
Corps of Engineers stated that ``During the past several inspections
the pump motors have occasionally failed to start because of faulty
relays or other electrically related problems. This is symptomatic of
the age and condition of the electrical components, most of which are
original.'' The electromechanical control system has been in service
for 40 years, and due to its age repair parts are nearly impossible to
obtain.
We have been lucky as New England has not had a strong hurricane in
50 years, but that could mean that our luck is running out. The city
and I are concerned that failure of the system during an actual storm
could result in the flooding of Providence's downtown business district
and thousands of residences. The Fox Point Hurricane Barrier is a
project authorized by the Water Resources Development Act, and the
Federal Government should fulfill its obligation to provide a safe,
structural sound barrier that operates when necessary. For this reason,
I filed an amendment to the supplemental appropriations bill, H.R.
4939, to provide $1,055,000 to complete upgrades to the Fox Point
Hurricane Barrier. I am pleased that the Senate accepted my amendment
for this funding. Senator Chafee and I also sponsored an amendment to
the bill to turn over responsibility for the annual operations and
maintenance of the hurricane barrier to the Army Corps of Engineers. I
am glad that the Senate also decided to accept this amendment. I will
work with my colleagues to maintain these amendments as this bill moves
through conference.

Amendment No. 3592, as Modified

On page 253, between lines 19 and 20, insert the following:

SEC. . FOX POINT HURRICANE BARRIER.

The Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of
Engineers, for use in upgrading the electro-mechanical
control system of the Fox Point hurricane barrier in
Providence, Rhode Island, $1,055,000, to remain available
until expended: from within available funds of ``OPERATIONS
AND MAINTENANCE'' under the heading ``Corps of Engineer:
Civil'' of Title I of the Energy and Water Development Act,
2006 (Public Law 109-103).

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate?
If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 3592), as modified, was agreed to.
Mr. COCHRAN. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mrs. MURRAY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 3729

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be in
order to call up and consider amendment No. 3729 on behalf of Mr.
Chafee regarding Fox Point Hurricane Barrier, RI.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, the clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Cochran], for Mr. Chafee,
proposes an amendment numbered 3729.

Mr. COCHRAN. 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 direct the Secretary of the Army to assume responsibility
for the annual operation and maintenance of the Fox Point Hurricane
Barrier, Providence, Rhode Island)

On page 253, between lines 19 and 20, insert the following:

FOX POINT HURRICANE BARRIER, PROVIDENCE, RHODE ISLAND

Sec. 7___. (a) In this section:
(1) The term ``Barrier'' means the Fox Point Hurricane
Barrier, Providence, Rhode Island.
(2) The term ``City'' means the city of Providence, Rhode
Island.
(3) The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of the Army,
acting through the Chief of Engineers.
(b) Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of
this Act, the Secretary shall assume responsibility for the
annual operation and maintenance of the Barrier.
(c)(1) The City, in coordination with the Secretary, shall
identify any land and structures required for the continued
operation and maintenance, repair, replacement,
rehabilitation, and structural integrity of the Barrier.
(2) The City shall convey to the Secretary, by quitclaim
deed and without consideration, all rights, title, and
interests of the City in and to the land and structures
identified under paragraph (1).
(d) There are authorized to be appropriated to the
Secretary such funds as are necessary for each fiscal year to
operate and maintain the Barrier (including repair,
replacement, and rehabilitation).

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate?
If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 3729) was agreed to.
Mr. COCHRAN. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mrs. MURRAY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 3761

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be in
order to call up and consider amendment No. 3761 on behalf of Mr.
Baucus regarding transportation contract authority.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, the clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Cochran], for Mr. Baucus,
proposes amendment numbered 3761.

Mr. COCHRAN. 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:

On page 253, between lines 19 and 20, insert the following:

CONTRACT AUTHORITY

Sec. 70__. (a) Section 1940 of the Safe, Accountable,
Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users (Public Law 109-59; 119 Stat. 1511) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking paragraph (1);
(B) by redesignating paragraphs (2) through (5) as
paragraphs (1) through (4), respectively; and

[[Page S4011]]

(C) by striking ``$10,000,000'' each place that it appears
and inserting ``$12,500,000''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(c) Contract Authority.--Except as otherwise provided in
this section, funds authorized to be appropriated under this
section shall be available for obligation in the same manner
as if the funds were apportioned under chapter 1 of title 23,
United States Code.''.
(b) Of the unobligated balances of funds apportioned to
each State under chapter 1 of title 23, United States Code,
$50,000,000 is rescinded.

Mr. COCHRAN. I ask unanimous consent that Senator Burns be added as a
cosponsor of that amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. COCHRAN. I thank the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment?
The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 3761) was agreed to.
Mr. COCHRAN. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mrs. MURRAY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 3805

Mr. COCHRAN. Finally, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order to
call up and consider amendment No. 3805 on behalf of Mr. Bennett
regarding sign repair and replacement.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, the clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Cochran], for Mr.
Bennett, proposes an amendment numbered 3805.

Mr. COCHRAN. 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 allow nonconforming signs damaged by an act of God to be
repaired or replaced under certain conditions)

At the appropriate place insert the following:

SIGN REPAIR OR REPLACEMENT

Sec. __. Notwithstanding part 750 of title 23, Code of
Federal Regulations (or a successor regulation), if permitted
by State law, a nonconforming sign that is damaged,
destroyed, abandoned, or discontinued as a result of an act
of God (as defined by State law) may be repaired, replaced,
or reconstructed if the replacement sign has the same
dimensions as the original sign.

Amendment No. 3805, as Modified

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, a modification has been sent to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the modification?
Without objection, the amendment is so modified.
The amendment (No. 3805), as modified, is as follows:

In lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted, insert the
following:

Sign Repair or Replacement

Sec. Notwithstanding part 750 of title 23, Code of
Federal Regulations (or a successor regulation), if permitted
by state law, a nonconforming sign that is or has been
damaged, destroyed, abandoned, or discontinued as a result of
a hurricane that is determined to be an act of God (as
defined by state law) may be repaired, replaced, or
reconstructed if the replacement sign has the same dimensions
as the original sign, and said sign is located within a state
found within FEMA Region IV or VI. The provisions of this
section shall cease to be in effect thirty-six months
following the date of enactment of this Act.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate?
If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 3805), as modified, was agreed to.
Mr. COCHRAN. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mrs. MURRAY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, that concludes the requests for
consideration of amendments by the Chair. There are two remaining
amendments to be considered, one by Senator Thune and one by Senator
Vitter. I am happy to yield the floor to them to describe their
amendments. I will have a comment about Mr. Thune's amendment. It is my
hope that we can adopt the Vitter amendment on a voice vote. I know of
no objection to it. The Thune amendment does have objections and will
require a recorded vote. So that is for the information of Senators.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana is recognized.

Amendment No. 3728, as Modified

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to call up
amendment No. 3728, as modified, for consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is now pending.

Amendment No. 3728, as Further Modified

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that this
amendment be further modified to reflect the changes which have been
submitted to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the modification? The
amendment is so further modified.
(The amendment (No. 3728), as further modified, is as follows:

Strike line 22, page 160 through line 23 on page 165 and
insert:

FLOOD CONTROL AND COASTAL EMERGENCIES

For an additional amount for ``Flood Control and Coastal
Emergencies'', as authorized by section 5 of the Act of
August 18, 1941 (33 U.S.C. 701n), for necessary expenses
relating to the consequences of Hurricane Katrina and other
hurricanes of the 2005 season, $3,299,000,000, to remain
available until expended: Provided, That the Secretary of the
Army is directed to use the funds appropriated under this
heading to modify, at full Federal expense, authorized
projects in southeast Louisiana to provide hurricane and
storm damage reduction and flood damage reduction in the
greater New Orleans and surrounding areas; of the funds
appropriated under this heading, $200,000,000 shall be used
for section 2401; $530,000,000 shall be used to modify the
17th Street, Orleans Avenue, and London Avenue drainage
canals and install pumps and closure structures at or near
the lakefront; $250,000,000 shall be used for storm-proofing
interior pump stations to ensure the operability of the
stations during hurricanes, storms, and high water events;
$170,000,000 shall be used for armoring critical elements of
the New Orleans hurricane and storm damage reduction system;
$350,000,000 shall be used to improve protection at the Inner
Harbor Navigation Canal; $215,000,000 shall be used to
replace or modify certain non-Federal levees in Plaquemines
Parish to incorporate the levees into the existing New
Orleans to Venice hurricane protection project; and
$1,584,000,000 shall be used for reinforcing or replacing
flood walls, as necessary, in the existing Lake Pontchartrain
and vicinity project and the existing West Bank and vicinity
project to improve the performance of the systems: Provided
further, That any project using funds appropriated under this
heading shall be initiated only after non-Federal interests
have entered into binding agreements with the Secretary to
pay 100 percent of the operation, maintenance, repair,
replacement, and rehabilitation costs of the project and to
hold and save the United States free from damages due to the
construction or operation and maintenance of the project,
except for damages due to the fault or negligence of the
United States or its contractors: Provided further, That the
amount provided under this heading is designated as an
emergency requirement pursuant to section 402 of H. Con. Res.
95 (109th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget
for fiscal year 2006.
For an additional amount for ``Flood Control and Coastal
Emergencies'', as authorized by section 5 of the Act of
August 18, 1941 (33 U.S.C. 701n), for necessary expenses
relating to those hurricanes and other disasters,
$17,500,000, to remain available until expended: Provided,
That the amount provided under this heading is designated as
an emergency requirement pursuant to section 402 of H. Con.
Res. 95 (109th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the
budget for fiscal year 2006: Provided further, That the
Secretary, acting through the Chief of Engineers, is directed
to use funds appropriated under this heading for the
restoration of funds for hurricane-damaged projects in the
State of Pennsylvania: Provided further, That the amount
shall be available for the projects identified above and only
to the extent that an official budget request for a specific
dollar amount, including a designation of the entire amount
of the request as an emergency requirement, is transmitted by
the President to Congress.

GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER

Flood protection, Louisiana

Sec. 2401.(a) There shall be made available $200,000,000
for the Secretary of the Army (referred to in this section as
the ``Secretary'') to provide, at full Federal expense--
(1) removal of the existing pumping stations on the 3
interior drainage canals in Jefferson and Orleans Parishes
and realignment of the drainage canals to direct interior
flows to the new permanent pump stations to be constructed at
Lake Pontchartrain;
(2) repairs, replacements, modifications, and improvements
of non-Federal levees and associated protection measures--
(A) in areas of Terrebonne Parish; and
(B) on the east bank of the Mississippi River in
Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana; and
(3) for armoring the hurricane and storm damage reduction
system in south Louisiana.

[[Page S4012]]

(4) A project under this section shall be initiated only
after non-Federal interests have entered into binding
agreements with the Secretary to pay 100 percent of the
operation and maintenance costs of the project and to hold
and save the United States free from damages due to the
construction or operation and maintenance of the project,
except for damages due to the fault or negligence of the
United States or its contractors.
(5) Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of
this act the Secretary in consultation with Plaquemines
Parish and the state of Louisiana shall submit to Congress a
report detailing a modified plan regarding levels of
protection for lower Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana, relating
to hurricane protection with a focus on--
(A) protecting densely populated areas;
(B) energy infrastructure;
(C) structural and nonstructural coastal barriers and
protection;
(D) port facilities; and
(E) the long-term maintenance and protection of the deep
draft navigation channel on the Mississippi River, not
including the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet.
(6) Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of
this Act, the Secretary shall offer to enter into a contract
with the National Academies to provide to the Secretary a
report, by not later than 90 days after the date of enactment
of this Act, describing, for the period beginning on the date
on which the individual system components for hurricane and
storm damage reduction was constructed and ending on the date
on which the report is prepared, the difference between--
(A) the portion of the vertical depreciation of the system
that is attributable to design and construction flaws, taking
into consideration the settling of levees and floodwalls or
subsidence; and
(B) the portion of that depreciation that is attributable
to the application of new storm data that may require a
higher level of vertical protection in order to comply with
100-year floodplain certification and standard protect
hurricane.
(7)(e) The Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief
of Engineers, shall use $3,500,000 within the funds provided
in Sec. 2401(a) to develop a comprehensive plan, at full
Federal expense, to, at a minimum, deauthorize deep draft
navigation on the Mississippi river Gulf Outlet established
by Pubic Law 84--455 (70 Stat. 65, chapter 112) (referred to
in this matter as the ``Outlet)'', extending from the Gulf of
Mexico to the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, and address wetland
losses attributable to the Outlet, channel bank erosion,
hurricane and storm protection, saltwater intrusion,
navigation, ecosystem restoration, and related issues:
Provided, That the plan shall include recommended
authorization modifications to the Outlet regarding what, if
any, navigation should continue, measures to provide
hurricane and storm protection, prevent saltwater intrusion,
and re-establish the storm buffering properties and
ecological integrity of the wetland damaged by construction
and operation of the Outlet, and complement restoration of
coastal Louisiana: Provided further, That the Secretary shall
develop the plan in consultation with the Parish of St.
Bernard, Louisiana, the State of Louisiana, the Secretary of
the Interior, the Secretary of Commerce, the Administrator of
the Environmental Protection Agency, and the National Academy
of Sciences: Provided further, That the Secretary shall seek
input, review, and comment from the public and the scientific
community for incorporation into the interim plan: Provided
further, That the Secretary shall ensure that an independent
panel of experts established by the National Academy of
Sciences reviews and provides written comments for
incorporation into the interim plan: Provided further, That,
not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Secretary shall submit an interim report to Congress
comprising the plan, the written comments of the independent
panel of experts, and the written explanation of the
Secretary for any recommendation of the independent panel of
experts not adopted in the plan: Provided further, That the
Secretary shall refine the plan, if necessary, to be fully
consistent, integrated, and included in the final technical
report to be issued in December 2007 pursuant to the matter
under the heading ``investigations'' under the heading
``Corps of Engineers--Civil'' of title I of the Energy and
Water Development Appropriations Act, 2006 (Public Law 109-
103, 119 Stat. 2247; Public Law 109-148, 119 Stat. 2814):
Provided further, That the amount provided under this heading
is designated as an emergency requirement pursuant to section
402 of H. Con. Res. 05 (109th Congress), the concurrent
resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006: Provided
further, That, for the projects identified in the report on
the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet due by December 2007,
required by this section, the Secretary shall submit such
reports to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee
and House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee:
Provided further, That upon adoption of a resolution
authorizing the project by each committee, the Secretary
shall be authorized to construct such projects.
(8)(f) The amounts provided under this heading ar
designated as an emergency requirement pursuant to section
402 of H. Con. Res. 95 (109th Congress), the concurrent
resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006.

SEC. 2402. USE OF UNEXPENDED FUNDS.

(a) In General.--Nothwithstanding any other provision of
law, amounts made available to the State of Oklahoma or
agencies or authorities therein (referred to in this section
as the ``State'') before the date of enactment of this act
for general remediation activities being conducted in the
vicinity of the Tar Creek Superfund Site in northeastern
Oklahoma and in Ottawa County, Oklahoma that remain
unexpended as of the date of enactment of this Act are
authorized to be used by the State to assist individuals and
entities in removal from areas at risk or potential risk of
damage caused by land subsidence as determined by the State.
(b) Use of Unexpended Funds.--the use of unexpended funds
in accordance with subsection (a)--
(1) shall not be subject to the Uniform Relocation
Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970
(42 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.); and
(2) may include any general remediation activities
described in section (a) determined to be appropriate by the
State, including the buyout of 1 or more properties to
facilitate a removal described in subsection (a).

CHAPTER 5

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Customs and Border Protection

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'' for
necessary expenses related to the consequences of Hurricane
Katrina and other hurricanes of the 2005 season, $12,900,000:
Provided, That the amount provided under this heading is
designated as an emergency requirement pursuant to section
402 of H. Con. Res. 95 (109th Congress), the concurrent
resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006.

CONSTRUCTION

For an additional amount for ``Construction'' for necessary
expenses related to the consequences of Hurricane Katrina and
other hurricanes of the 2005 season, $4,800,000, to remain
available until expended: Provided, That the amount provided
under this heading is designated as an emergency requirement
pursuant to section 402 of H. Con. Res. 95 (109th Congress),
the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006.

United States Coast Guard

OPERATING EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

For an additional amount for ``Operating Expenses'' for
necessary expenses related to the consequences of Hurricane
Katrina and other hurricanes of the 2005 season, $90,570,900,
to remain available until September 30, 2007, of which up to
$267,000 may be transferred to ``Environmental Compliance and
Restoration'' to be used for environmental cleanup and
restoration of Coast Guard facilities in the Gulf of Mexico
region; and of which up to $470,000 may be transferred to
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation'' to be used for
salvage and repair of research and development equipment and
facilities: Provided, That the amounts provided under this
heading are designated as an emergency requirement pursuant
to section 402 of H. Con. Res. 95 (109th Congress), the
concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006.

ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

For an additional amount for ``Acquisition, Construction,
and Improvements'' for necessary expenses related to the
consequences of Hurricane Katrina and other hurricanes of the
2005 season, $191,844,000, to remain available until
expended: Provided, That such amounts shall be available for
major repair and reconstruction projects for facilities that
were damaged and for damage to vessels currently under
construction, for the replacement of damaged equipment, and
for the reimbursement of delay, loss of efficiency,
disruption, and related costs: Provided further, That amounts
provided are also for equitable adjustments and provisional
payments to contracts for Coast Guard vessels for which funds
have been previously appropriated: Provided further, That the
amount provided under this heading is designated as an
emergency requirement pursuant to section 402 of H. Con. Res.
95 (109th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget
for fiscal year 2006.

Federal Emergency Management Agency

ADMINISTRATIVE AND REGIONAL OPERATIONS

For an additional amount for ``Administrative and Regional
Operations'' for necessary expenses related to the
consequences of Hurricane Katrina and other hurricanes of the
2005 season, $71,800,000, to remain available until expended:
Provided, That the amount provided under this heading is
designated as an emergency requirement pursuant to section
402 of H. Con. Res. 95 (109th Congress), the concurrent
resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006.

PREPAREDNESS, MITIGATION, RESPONSE, AND RECOVERY

For an additional amount for ``Preparedness, Mitigation,
Response, and Recovery'' for necessary expenses related to
the consequences of Hurricane Katrina and other hurricanes of
the 2005 season, $10,000,000, to remain available until
expended: Provided, That the amount provided under this
heading is designated as an emergency requirement pursuant to
section 402 of H. Con. Res. 95 (109th Congress), the
concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006.

DISASTER RELIEF

For an additional amount for ``Disaster Relief'' for
necessary expenses under the

[[Page S4013]]

Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance
Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), $10,400,000,000, to remain
available until expended: Provided, That the amount provided
under this heading is designated as an emergency requirement
pursuant to section 402 of H. Con. Res. 95 (109th Congress),
the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006.

Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, this amendment has been worked on quite a
bit. An agreement has been reached with all relevant Members,
particularly the chairs and ranking members of all of the relevant
committees. It doesn't increase the cost of the bill. It addresses a
number of urgent flood protection needs in Louisiana and, again,
represents a very solid compromise which I am proud to sponsor.
With that, I ask that Members agree to the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate?
If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 3728), as further modified, was agreed to.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mrs. MURRAY. 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 South Dakota is recognized.
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I thank the Chair for yielding time on this
amendment.
This amendment would provide an additional $20 million for veterans
health care, offset by striking $20 million that would be appropriated
under this supplemental for the Americorps program. The Americorps
program has already received $900 million in appropriations for fiscal
year 2006, according to the committee report on this bill.
In 2005, the VA transferred $452 million from its Medical Facilities
account to its Medical Services account. I would like to replenish the
VA Medical Facilities account a little, if it's possible to do in a
fiscally responsible way. This amendment provides the opportunity to do
so, by taking money from an ineffective and mismanaged program--the
Americorps National Civilian Community Service Corps program--and
providing it for veterans health care.
Mr. President, my amendment would make some resources available to
carry out the Secretary's Capital Asset Realignment for Enhancement
Services, or CARES, decision, which mandated that 156 priority
community-based clinics be established by 2012.
As I said, talking about AmeriCorps, Senator Mikulski has described
the overall AmeriCorps Program as ``like Enron's nonprofit.''
What has been said by GAO--they described it as they have been living
on the edge, with tracking based on projections instead of real
accounts.
My amendment simply helps us understand that the budget process is
about making choices, about setting priorities, and that providing
assistance for this program under the VA health care and using as an
offset to pay for it this AmeriCorps Program, which has already been
funded at $900 million this year, and, as I have described, has been
described by many, including those on the other side of the aisle, as a
program that has serious management problems, serious financial
accounting and tracking problems.
So I urge the adoption of the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, the Thune amendment will reduce the
funding for the National Civilian Community Corps by $20 million. These
funds are needed to pay the expenses of training and subsistence for
those who have volunteered to provide emergency assistance in the gulf
coast region, to help disaster victims recover from the destruction
caused by Hurricanes Rita and Katrina.
There have been over 1,600 National Civilian Community Corps members
in my State of Mississippi since August 30, the day after Hurricane
Katrina struck our coast. They continue to provide essential
assistance. The State of Mississippi put our State office of the
National Civilian Community Corps in charge of the emergency 24-hour
call center, as well as supply distribution centers. To date, the
National Civilian Community Corps has assisted 1,140,000 people;
cleaned out 1,500 homes; contributed nearly 2,000 tons of food and
2,790 tons of clothing; served 1 million meals; refurbished 732 homes;
supported 654 emergency response centers; and completed 1,730 damage
assessments.
The volunteers of the National Civilian Community Corps receive about
$4,000 for college expenses. They are modestly housed, fed, and
provided with health care and uniforms. They remain available at a
moment's notice for deployment to any emergency in the country. The
Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Red Cross, and others depend
upon this group of professionally trained volunteers for assistance and
support.
The thousands of volunteers who are helping care for children and
helping the gulf coast recover and rebuild are the backbone of the
progress being made in the hurricane-damaged region of our country.
They give hope to our families, and I urge the Senate to reject the
Thune amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington is recognized.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, as we gather this morning, our troops in
Iraq and Afghanistan need our support, families on the gulf coast need
help rebuilding their lives, and communities all across this country
need help moving forward. And now it is down to us. Will we provide
that support? Will we provide that critical help? Or will we leave our
troops unfunded, our gulf coast in ruins, and our communities stalled?
This is the bill that determines whether we move forward as a country
or whether we make it harder for our troops, for hurricane victims, and
for American families to make progress. That is the choice before us.
I am on the floor this morning--as I have been all week--saying we
need to move our country forward by passing this emergency supplemental
bill. I do want to address some of the concerns that have been raised
about this bill.
For years, this White House has been playing games to hide the cost
of war. We know we have tremendous expenses in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Everyone knows that. But when it's time to write the budget--suddenly
this White House develops amnesia. It somehow ``forgets'' to include
the cost of war in the regular budget process. On the day the
administration sends us its budget--the ongoing cost of war is somehow
unknowable. But a few weeks later--when it sends up an emergency
supplemental--suddenly we have got this huge document that lists the
costs of war. It is a fiction, a sham, a game. And for too long--this
Congress has been going along with it. We don't include the war in the
budget. We don't fund the war through the Defense Appropriations bill,
we just expect to pay for it through emergency supplementals, and that
is not honest. Moreover, it means that real emergencies--unanticipated
natural disasters and our own homeland security needs--are pushed aside
and rendered ``less important'' than ongoing war costs.
All year I have been on the floor saying that if we are not realistic
with our budgets, we are going to have to make up the difference in
emergency spending--and that is where we find ourselves today.
Mr. President, I want to walk through how the size of the
supplemental has changed to remind my colleagues that it didn't just
grow mysteriously. Members of both parties added critical priorities to
the supplemental, and members have stood up for those critical
investments.
When the Senate Appropriations Committee gathered in early April to
mark up this bill, several amendments were adopted that added to the
cost of the bill. They included bipartisan amendments to address the
agricultural disasters that we have witnessed across the country. That
amendment was championed by Senator Dorgan and Senator Burns.
Senator Harkin added an amendment to make sure that there will be
adequate funds to finance the administration's preparations to deal
with a pandemic flu outbreak.
With the support of Senator Bond, I added an amendment to address the
backlog of claims for highway emergency relief that still haven't been
paid for recent declared disasters across the country; including:
Hurricane Ivan, Hurricane Dennis, the San Simeon Earthquake, Hurricane
Ophelia, Tropical Storm Gaston, and the tragic

[[Page S4014]]

floods in Hawaii that we debated yesterday evening.
The gulf coast Senators on the committee, including Senators
Hutchison, Shelby, Landrieu, and, of course, Chairman Cochran, also
presented amendments to better address the needs of the gulf coast
region in its efforts to recover from Hurricane Katrina and the other
gulf coast hurricanes.
These amendments were all offered to address the real needs of our
communities here at home.
The Appropriations Committee reported this bill to the Senate Floor
by a vote of 27 to 1. When we brought the bill to the floor, we
received a statement of administration policy from the Bush white
house. That statement said that the President would veto any bill that
exceeded the level of $94.5 billion. Soon after, the Senate was given
an opportunity to vote on the President's position.
My friend, Senator Thomas of Wyoming, offered an amendment to delete
all of the provisions that were not in the administration's original
request--thus bringing the size of the bill down to the level
acceptable to the President. That amendment failed overwhelmingly, by a
veto-proof margin of 72 to 26.
Just hours later, my friend from Nevada, Senator Ensign, made a
motion to recommit the bill back to the Appropriations Committee with
instructions that it be cut back to the level President Bush said he
would support. That amendment also failed by a veto-proof margin of 68
to 28.
Why did those amendments fail, even in the face of the President's
veto threat? Because Senators from across the country on both sides of
the aisle recognized that the investments that this bill makes here in
America are needed.
Indeed, in the face of those embarrassing votes, the Senate
Republican leaders frantically scurried around to get enough signatures
on a letter to the President saying they would uphold the President's
veto. They were desperate to get that letter out to the media because
it was clear from the votes on the Senate floor that the Members of the
Senate--Republican and Democrat alike--were not prepared to ignore our
needs here at home, even if President Bush is prepared to do so.
That is how this supplemental developed--one amendment at a time--
Senators from both parties voted to address critical needs. Senators
have stood by those investments, and now it is time to pass this bill.
Mr. President, we have critical needs in our war effort and here at
home that we must address. Those needs have not been addressed through
the regular budget, so we must address them through this bill. Let's
pass this supplemental and make sure our troops and our communities
have the support they need. And as we move forward--let's get real
about the budget process--let's get real about the cost of war--or we
are going to find ourselves back here time and again passing emergency
spending.
We have heard a lot about the size of the bill, and I want to address
that. This supplemental is big because the budgets we have passed over
the years have been unrealistically small.
Let me say that again: This bill is big because the budgets we have
passed have been unrealistically small. Time and again, the White House
has proposed budgets that do not come close to meeting our domestic
needs--and that completely ignore the costs of war. Those budgets have
been works of fiction. And if we are not going to be realistic in the
regular budget process--if we are not going to include the cost of war
in the regular budget, we are going to have to face reality during this
supplemental.
That is where we find ourselves today. So any Member who is troubled
by the size of this bill should tell the White House it is time to get
real and send us budgets that include the cost of war and that address
our domestic needs--or we are going to find ourselves dealing with
emergency spending time and time again.
But we can't miss the big picture--either we pass this bill and help
our troops an our country, or we make it harder for America to move
forward. Let's have the wisdom to make the right choice.
Before I go any further, I want to acknowledge the tremendous
leadership that Senator Byrd has provided throughput this process. He
knows this body better than anyone. And, more importantly, he brings
with him a deep commitment to doing the right things not only for the
Senate, but for the country, and for the families we all represent.
I also want to thank Chairman Cochran for his leadership and hard
work on this bill. He has shown extraordinary patience throughout this
debate, and I appreciate how he has worked with all of us to keep this
bill on track.
Mr. President, I yield back the remainder of our time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the Thune
amendment No. 3704.
Mr. COCHRAN. I request the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.

Amendment No. 3824

Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, thank you very much for recognizing me. I
ask unanimous consent to call up amendment No. 3824.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Will the Senator restate the number.
Mr. OBAMA. Amendment No. 3824.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Illinois [Mr. Obama], for Mr. Voinovich,
for himself and Mr. Obama, proposes an amendment numbered
3824.

The amendment is as follows:

In lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted, insert the
following:

SEC. ____. CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL DEMONSTRATION
BARRIER, ILLINOIS.

(a) In General.--Of the unobligated balances available for
``Operation and Maintenance'' under the heading ``CORPS OF
ENGINEERS-CIVIL'' of title I of the Energy and Water
Development Appropriations Act, 2006 (Public Law 109-103; 119
Stat. 2250), $400,000 shall be made available for fiscal year
2006 for the maintenance of the Chicago Sanitary and Ship
Canal Demonstration Barrier, Illinois, which was constructed
under section 1202(i)(3) of the Nonindigenous Aquatic
Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 (16 U.S.C.
4722(i)(3)).
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 1202(i)(3)(C)
of the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control
Act of 1990 (16 U.S.C. 4722(i)(3)(C)), is amended by striking
``, to carry out this paragraph, $750,000'' and inserting
``such sums as are necessary to carry out the dispersal
barrier demonstration project under this paragraph''.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment?

Amendment No. 3824, as Modified

Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I ask that the amendment be modified.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the modification? If
not, the amendment is so modified.
The amendment (No. 3824), as modified, reads as follows:

At the appropriate place insert the following:

SEC. ____. CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL DEMONSTRATION
BARRIER, ILLINOIS.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment? If
not, the question is on agreeing to amendment No. 3824, as modified.
The amendment (No. 3824), as modified, was agreed to.
Mr. OBAMA. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. DURBIN. 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 Iowa.

Amendment No. 3732

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to call up
amendment No. 3732.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, we have no objections on this side.

[[Page S4015]]

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Iowa [Mr. Grassley], for himself and Mr.
Baucus, proposes an amendment numbered 3732.

Mr. GRASSLEY. 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 transfer funds from the Disaster Relief fund to the Social
Security Administration for necessary expenses and direct or indirect
losses related to the consequences of Hurricane Katrina and other
hurricanes of the 2005 season)

On page 186, after line 22, add the following:
Sec. 2704. Of the funds made available under the heading
``Disaster Relief'' under the heading ``Federal Emergency
Management Agency'' in chapter 5 of this title, $38,000,000
is hereby transferred to the Social Security Administration
for necessary expenses and direct or indirect losses related
to the consequences of Hurricane Katrina and other hurricanes
of the 2005 season: Provided, That the amount transferred by
this section is designated as an emergency requirement
pursuant to section 402 of H. Con. Res. 95 (109th Congress),
the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, the supplemental appropriations bill
includes $27 billion for disaster-related expenses. But, no money,
other than a nominal amount for the Inspector General, was provided for
the Social Security Administration. This amendment would correct this
omission.
This amendment would provide $38 million to the Social Security
Administration, SSA, to reimburse costs incurred as a result of
Hurricane Katrina and other hurricanes of the 2005 season.
The Social Security Administration performed a remarkable job in
response to these recent disasters.
They assisted more than 528,000 persons in FEMA Disaster Recovery
Centers and shelters and helped many others who came to SSA field
offices. Altogether these activities cost the agency $38 million: $6
million to acquire and outfit temporary space and renovate offices
damaged by the storm, including costs for computers, furniture and
supplies; $12 million for processing immediate payments, changing
addresses, confirming Social Security numbers, and taking new claims
that resulted from the hurricanes; $7 million to pay for the travel and
per diem expenses for employees; $12 million for costs related to
unprocessed workloads--claims, hearings, etc.--due to the storms'
disruptions; $1 million for salaries of those SSA workers who
volunteered to work for FEMA in the affected areas.
SSA cannot easily absorb this $38 million because its budget is
already $300 million below the President's request for fiscal year
2006. SSA is already experiencing reductions and delays in service.
This $38 million would allow an increase in overtime hours to begin to
address these backlogs.
Finally, the cost of this amendment is offset by a $38 million
reduction in the FEMA disaster relief fund. This reduction in FEMA
would come from the $2.4 billion that is designated for ``other
needs.'' This designation refers to money that has been made available
for unspecified, potential future activities. It would not affect any
specific project or activity in this bill.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise to speak in favor of the bipartisan
amendment that Finance Committee Chairman Grassley has just offered. As
ranking Democrat on the Finance Committee, I have worked with Chairman
Grassley to develop this amendment. The amendment provides $38 million
to the Social Security Administration, SSA--fully paid for--to
reimburse the costs SSA incurred as a result of Hurricane Katrina and
other hurricanes of the 2005 season.
The supplemental appropriations bill, as reported by the Senate
Appropriations Committee, would appropriate $106.5 billion, including $
67.7 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, $4.5 billion for
foreign assistance programs, and $27.1 billion for relief needed
because of last season's hurricanes. In contrast, no funding for SSA to
make up for its costs from Katrina and the other hurricanes is
currently provided in the supplemental.
The Social Security Administration performed superbly in the
aftermath of these hurricanes. SSA assisted more than 528,000 persons
in FEMA Disaster Recovery Centers and shelters and helped many others
who came to its field offices. To provide such assistance, SSA urgently
invoked emergency procedures and issued approximately 85,000 immediate
payments for displaced beneficiaries and those who could not access
their bank or other financial accounts. In addition, SSA changed the
addresses of displaced beneficiaries, provided individuals who had lost
their identification documents with confirmation of their Social
Security numbers, and took applications from many people from the
affected areas who had become newly eligible for Social Security
disability or survivors benefits or benefits from the Supplemental
Security Income program. SSA even passed along messages to
beneficiaries from worried family members. Finally, some SSA employees
drove hours to provide relief to overstretched field offices, sometimes
sleeping on air mattresses set up in the offices because there were no
other places to stay.
Together, these activities caused SSA to redirect $38 million from
funding for its normal tasks and obligations. There were costs to SSA
of $6 million to acquire and outfit temporary space and renovate
offices damaged by the storm, including costs for computers, furniture
and supplies. SSA estimates that there were $12 million in costs for
new workloads, including processing immediate payments, changing
addresses, confirming Social Security numbers, and taking new claims
that resulted from the hurricanes. It cost SSA $7 million to pay for
the travel and per diem expenses for employees who came to the affected
areas from other regions to help, as well as for employees who were
forced to relocate because of damaged or destroyed homes and offices
and who continued to work in other offices. Costs related to
unprocessed work include $12 million for SSA workloads, such as claims,
hearings, that were not processed as a result of the storms'
disruptions. Nearly $1 million was spent to pay the salaries of those
SSA workers who volunteered to work for FEMA in the affected areas, and
thus were not doing their regular SSA work.

Unfortunately for SSA, it had already had its funding cut by a total
of $300 million below the President's request for fiscal year 2006.
Rather than being able to absorb the $38 million caused by the
hurricanes, SSA found its $300 million shortfall being exacerbated by
these additional $38 million of costs.
The Social Security Administration could make very good use of an
additional $38 million of funding for fiscal year 2006 at this time by
increasing overtime hours. This would allow SSA to make up for a small
piece of the reductions and delays of service to its normal applicants
and beneficiaries.
In the Senate-passed supplemental, many Federal agencies are
reimbursed for costs arising from these hurricanes. Surprisingly, that
is not the case for the Social Security Administration. This is
especially ironic in view of the efforts of the Social Security
Administration and its employees to help the gulf coast and its
citizens, including some efforts that were above and beyond the call of
duty.
This bipartisan amendment will address this funding shortfall for the
Social Security Administration by providing it with an additional $38
million for the current fiscal year. The amendment is fully paid for.
As reported by the Appropriations Committee, the supplemental
appropriations bill provides $10.6 billion to FEMA for disaster relief
from Hurricane Katrina and other hurricanes of the 2005 season. Of this
amount, according to the committee report, $2.4 billion is provided for
``other needs.'' Although the report provides some examples of such
``other needs,'' there is no list of specific projects and activities
whose costs total $2.4 billion. This amendment increases SSA's funding
for fiscal year 2006 by $38 million and reduces the $10.6 billion
appropriated for the FEMA Disaster Relief account in this bill. The
$2.4 billion provided by this bill for ``other needs'' is part of the
$10.6 billion appropriated for the FEMA Disaster Relief account in the
bill. This amendment will not result in the loss of any specific
project or activity provided for by this bill. Nor will it cause

[[Page S4016]]

this bill to result in any additional costs to the Federal Government.
This amendment will restore the loss of resources for the Social
Security Administration that has resulted from the 2005 season's
hurricanes. I believe this is the right thing to do. I urge my
colleagues to support this bipartisan amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment? If
not, the question is on agreeing to amendment No. 3732.
The amendment (No. 3732) was agreed to.
Mrs. MURRAY. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. COCHRAN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

amendment no. 3704

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I rise today in opposition to the amendment
from the Senator from South Dakota. This is not an amendment designed
to help our veterans. It is an amendment designed to cut funding for
the National Civilian Community Corps, NCCC, that the sponsor of the
amendment apparently thought would be more likely to pass if the funds
were allocated to veterans health care facilities.
The Senator is proposing to strike from the bill the entire $20
million allocated to support the NCCC effort to help Katrina victims.
NCCC members deployed to the gulf within 24 hours of Katrina making
landfall and have been there ever since. In total, nearly 1,600 NCCC
members have provided 320,000 hours of volunteer service. These young
people are 18 to 24 years old. They muck out homes, remove debris,
rebuild schools and community centers, coordinate the work of episodic
volunteers, help families and senior citizens rebuild their homes and
lives, and support other needs.
The $20 million in the supplemental will support 800 NCCC members who
will provide more than 1.2 million hours of service in the gulf coast
hurricane recovery effort. Among NCCC's gulf coast accomplishments so
far: assisted 1,063,000 people, mucked out 1,500 homes, distributed
1,714 tons of food, distributed 2,790 tons of clothing, served
1,000,000 meals, refurbished 732 homes, supported 542 emergency
response centers, leveraged 7,715 volunteers, and completed 1,325
damage assessments.
It is important to fund health care for our veterans. That is why I
voted for the Akaka amendment to add $430 million to the bill for that
purpose. I am pleased that it passed, and I hope the President requests
the funds.
Veterans deserve every penny of the $430 million added to this bill,
but those who have had their lives turned upside down by Hurricane
Katrina also deserve the support of the young men and women of the
national Civilian Conservation Corps. We should not rob Peter to pay
Paul. Therefore, I will vote against this amendment.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to Senator Thune's
amendment and to set the record straight on my ongoing and passionate
support for AmeriCorps and the National Civilian Community Corps, NCCC.
The Senator from South Dakota said that I described the overall
AmeriCorps program as, ``It's like Enron's gone nonprofit.'' Senator
Thune was absolutely wrong to say that is the way I describe
AmeriCorps. I love AmeriCorps. I love what they do for communities. I
love what they do for America.
Senator Thune took that quote totally out of context. I made that
statement back in 2002 when a bureaucratic boondoggle led to the
overenrollment of 20,000 volunteers. When that happened, I led the
efforts to organize the national service groups and to strengthen
AmeriCorps. Along with Senator Bond, I introduced and passed the
``Strengthen AmeriCorps Program Act of 2003'' which established new
accounting procedures for AmeriCorps. I urged the President to appoint
a new CEO for the Corporation of National Service--a CEO with the
management skills necessary to restore confidence in the Corporation's
abilities to make a real difference to our volunteers--and in our
communities. I also asked for a reinvigorated Board of Directors that
would take greater oversight and responsibility and I have consistently
called for increased funding so that AmeriCorps could support 75,000
volunteers each year.
AmeriCorps is stronger than ever. Since its creation, over 300,000
volunteers have served in communities and earned education awards to go
to college or to pay off student debt. To date, 7,500 Maryland
residents have earned education awards. The NCCC program, which has a
campus in Perry Point, MD, is a full-time residential program for 18 to
24 year olds designed to strengthen communities and develop leaders
through team-based service projects. Each year, approximately 1,100
participants reside in its five campuses nationwide. The Perry Point
campus houses 200 AmeriCorps members every year, and since 1994 its
residents have logged more than 350,000 service hours. Most recently,
NCCC members have provided more than 250,000 service hours valued at
$3.8 million to projects in the Gulf Coast region, which reflects their
critical service during every American natural disaster since the
program started.
The funds that Senator Thune wants to cut are specifically dedicated
to support volunteer recovery activities in the gulf and would pay for
800 NCCC members who will provide more than 1.2 million hours of
service in the gulf coast hurricane recovery effort. These teams will
rebuild schools and community centers, remove debris, and help senior
citizens rebuild their homes and lives. This funding demonstrates the
Senate's commitment to keeping this valuable program alive, despite
President Bush's efforts to cut the Federal funds it needs to survive.
I fought to create AmeriCorps, I fought to strengthen AmeriCorps, and
I will fight to save AmeriCorps. Today's Federal investment, like these
fine volunteers, are needed now more than ever. I strongly encourage my
Senate colleagues to make sure this money is included as a part of this
emergency spending package, and I urge them to oppose Senator Thune's
amendment which would divert these critical funds away from NCCC.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No.
3704. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the
roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. The following Senator was necessarily absent: the
Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch).
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr.
Rockefeller) is necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 39, nays 59, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 111 Leg.]

YEAS--39

Allard
Allen
Brownback
Burns
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Collins
Cornyn
DeMint
DeWine
Dole
Ensign
Enzi
Frist
Gregg
Hagel
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Johnson
Kyl
Lott
Lugar
Martinez
McConnell
Nelson (FL)
Pryor
Roberts
Sessions
Snowe
Stabenow
Sununu
Talent
Thomas
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner

NAYS--59

Akaka
Alexander
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Bunning
Byrd
Cantwell
Carper
Chafee
Clinton
Cochran
Coleman
Conrad
Craig
Crapo
Dayton
Dodd
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Graham
Grassley
Harkin
Inouye
Jeffords
Kennedy
Kerry
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
McCain
Menendez
Mikulski
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Reed
Reid
Salazar
Santorum
Sarbanes
Schumer
Shelby
Smith
Specter
Stevens
Wyden

NOT VOTING--2

Hatch
Rockefeller

The amendment (No. 3704) was rejected.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mrs. MURRAY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the clerk will read
the bill for the third time.
Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I know we are getting ready to go to
final passage, but I ask unanimous consent to go to amendment No. 3851,
as modified.

[[Page S4017]]

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate is not in order.

Amendment No. 3851, as Modified

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I know we are getting ready to go to
final passage. I know it is unanimous consent. But I am asking
unanimous consent to bring up amendment No. 3851, which has been
cleared on both sides by four committees. It has to do with a
definition.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
Mr. McCAIN. Reserving the right to object, I will not object if the
Senator from Louisiana will add to that unanimous consent request that
this will be the last amendment considered?
Ms. LANDRIEU. I will be happy to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Senators should be informed that this is a
second-degree amendment.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, is the
amendment that has been sent to the desk the modified amendment?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is the amendment modified to be a first-degree
amendment?
Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, this is under the jurisdiction of the
Education Committee. We have taken a look at it. FEMA just has a
different definition that needs to be changed from what other schools
have. It clears up some language. It is not any problem.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, we cannot hear what is going on.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will be in order.
Is there objection to the amendment as modified? Without objection,
it is so ordered.
The amendment (No. 3851), as modified, is as follows:

amendment no. 3851, as modified

(Purpose: To provide a complete substitute)

On page 165, line 23 after ``fiscal year 2006'' insert the
following:
Provided further, That any charter school, as that term is
defined in section 5210 of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 722(i)), regardless of
whether the facility of such charter school is privately or
publicly owned, shall be considered for reimbursement for
damages incurred to public schools due to the effects of
Hurricane Katrina or Hurricane Rita.
Provided further, That if the facility that houses the
charter school is privately owned, then such facility shall
reimburse FEMA for any improvements or repairs made to the
facility that would not otherwise have been reimbursed by
FEMA but for the existence of the charter school, if such
charter school vacates such facility before the end of 5
years following completion of construction and approved
inspection by a government entity, unless it is replaced by
another charter school during that 5-year period.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 3851), as modified, was agreed to.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. COCHRAN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

salmon spawning

Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, last week I proposed an amendment to the
supplemental appropriations bill that would provide relief to
individuals facing an unfolding economic crisis along the Oregon and
California coast.
For the third consecutive year, the number of naturally spawning
Klamath River Chinook salmon is expected to fall below the conservation
floor called for in the fishery management plan. As a result, the
Pacific Fishery Management Council undertook a careful review of the
stock status as well as the economic needs of local communities.
After conducting its review, the Council voted to recommend to the
Secretary of Commerce the use of an emergency rule to allow for a
severely restricted salmon season along 700 miles of the Oregon and
California coast.
Last week, Secretary Gutierrez approved the council's recommendation
for an emergency rule. While this limited season is helpful, it will
not be enough to sustain Oregon's rural, fishery-dependent economies.
It is estimated that the impact to Oregon and California coastal
communities could exceed $100 million. Many of the communities affected
by these fishery restrictions are still recovering from the devastation
caused by the collapse of the timber economy in 1990s.
The funding provided in my amendment would help fishermen and
supporting businesses in Oregon weather what will certainly be a very
trying year. However, because this crisis is the result of a regulatory
action rather than a natural disaster, I have been told that my
amendment is not germane to the bill that is before us now. This
parliamentary hair-splitting is lost on my constituents.
I would like to engage the Chairman of the Appropriations Committee
in a brief colloquy. I realize that we are facing tight budgetary times
and numerous disasters, many of which receive assistance under the
current bill. Will you agree to work with me to secure funding or
reprogram funds to address the pending crisis on the Oregon coast?
Mr. COCHRAN. The Senator is certainly right that these are very
difficult budgetary times. Funds for nondefense discretionary programs
are particularly constrained, while the demand for those funds has not
slackened one bit. Having said that, I appreciate the Senator
acquainting me with the challenges facing fishing communities on the
Oregon coast, and I will work with him and the subcommittee Chairman
Shelby and try to identify an appropriate federal response for affected
communities.
Mr. SMITH. I thank the Chairman. I yield the floor.

avian flu

Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished colleagues
from North Carolina and Kansas, Senators Burr and Brownback, for their
commitment to avian flu preparedness and to putting in place an
effective system for the surveillance of wild birds, which is
instrumental to our capacity to prepare for the outbreak of an avian
flu pandemic. I am happy to support the amendment of my distinguished
colleague from North Carolina.
Mr. BURR. Mr. President, my amendment builds upon work Senator
Lieberman and Senator Brownback undertook last year in the fiscal year
2006 Defense appropriations bill, which also included the first avian
flu supplemental. It enhances our domestic capacity to undertake wild
bird surveillance coming into and across the United States by utilizing
the expertise of the Smithsonian Institute to support our Federal
agencies.
Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, indeed, there is growing concern that
wild birds can carry the avian flu virus, which has now spread from
Southeast Asia to China, Europe, Africa, and to the Middle East. Wild
birds are one of the key vectors for spreading the virus to domestic
animal populations or carry it to wild bird markets, where the virus is
further propagated. At this time, the virus does not spread easily from
birds to humans and there are limited reports of human to human
transfer. Importantly, the virus has not yet entered the United States
to our knowledge. We must understand how this virus moves to prepare
communities in its path.
At the same time we work to develop a vaccine and procure antivirals,
we can also track the movement of the virus in wild birds. GAINS can
track wild birds in the same way the National Hurricane Center tracks
hurricanes. By analyzing, storing, and reporting using a real time
computerized data mapping system and interface, we can see the viral
strains wild birds carry, where they are carrying the virus along
migratory routes, and how the virus is genetically evolving. This will
make it possible for us to develop vaccines more quickly using the most
recent strain available and will help us warn vulnerable populations in
wild bird flight paths should the avian flu strain turn deadly.
Mr. BURR. I agree that avian flu surveillance is critical to our
ability to protect public health. Mr. President, I ask Senator
Lieberman, is the global program he supported in the fiscal year 2006
appropriations process for international surveillance currently up and
running? The Smithsonian Institute and the domestic surveillance
program they are working on and his international surveillance program
will be important partners. We urge all parties to begin their
activities immediately.
Mr. LIEBERMAN. It is. USAID and CDC have partnered with the Wildlife
Conservation Society to establish the Wild Bird Global Avian Influenza
Network for Surveillance or GAINS. GAINS is a smart and targeted
investment in the U.S. Government's fight against avian flu. CDC and
USAID are investing $6 million from fiscal year

[[Page S4018]]

2006 avian flu supplemental appropriations to establish GAINS. GAINS
comprises 5 million conservation, wild bird, poultry, health, and
vaccine experts and builds upon the robust international network of the
Wildlife Conservation Society, or WCS, which through partnerships has
presence in virtually every key country related to Avian Influenza--56
in all. The Wildlife Conservation Society, founded in 1895 and
headquartered at the Bronx Zoo has a long history in the wild bird
surveillance field around the world. They were the organization that
first diagnosed West Nile virus when it arrived on U.S. shores, and the
human avian flu vaccine we are currently working on is partially
derived from wild migratory bird samples, WCS wild bird samples
collected in Mongolia.
Of course, the GAINS relates to robust sampling of wild birds--alive
and dead--in the wild and in captivity, and even in markets, but most
importantly GAINS will display the results of sampling on a user-
friendly real time computerized data mapping system so that wherever
you are in the world, public officials will be able to warn populations
at risk and scientists will have a powerful tool to fight this virus.
I am confident that the Smithsonian's domestic efforts will be fully
compatible with GAINS.
Mr. BURR. The Smithsonian has agreed to provide the samples and the
data it collects to United States agency partners without delay. In
turn, we will count on the DOI, USDA, HHS, and any other agencies to
negotiate the full coordination and integration of the Smithsonian
domestic component, the GAINS network, and any other ongoing effort
into a public database. This way we know samples will be stored and
shared between governmental and nongovernmental organizations and that
data will work with additional efforts in the future.
Mr. BROWNBACK. I am glad we agree that we should all work together.
We cannot have efforts that are not collaborative and coordinated
domestically and internationally. We will build on the GAINS
infrastructure by boosting our domestic capacity through the
Smithsonian Institute and ensuring all partners work together and share
data in a compatible manner using the GAINS system.
Mr. BURR. I understand that Senator Lieberman has an amendment
related to GAINS.
Mr. LIEBERMAN. Yes I do. The current GAINS program is underfunded by
$4,000,000 in year one and year two will require an additional
$10,000,000 to be fully functional. Our amendment specifies GAINS as a
particular program for CDC to fund in its domestic and global
surveillance efforts, which in general is receiving robust funding
thanks to your foresight and that of your health subcommittee. Such an
effort as we have discussed must include animal surveillance because of
its relation to human health.
Mr. BURR. An international avian flu surveillance component is an
important investment and I hope HHS and CDC recognize the need to
enhance our surveillance capabilities. I encourage the Appropriations
Committee and Chairman Cochran to give it full consideration.
Mr. LIEBERMAN. Senator Brownback and I thank the Senator from North
Carolina for this. I personally thank you Senator Burr for working with
us on this important issue, which I always say is the big bird in the
room that few people are looking at. It always feels better to wrap our
arms around problems on a bipartisan basis. The leadership of the
Senator from North Carolina on this issue and in general is noticed and
laudable.
Mr. BURR. Mr. President, I thank my colleagues.
Mr. BROWNBACK. I thank my colleagues.
Mr. LIEBERMAN. I thank my colleagues for their commitment to these
activities.

customs and border protection

Mr. LEVIN. I would like to enter into a colloquy with my friend from
New Hampshire, Senator Gregg, and my friend from North Dakota, Senator
Conrad, regarding funds that have been included in this bill for
customs and border protection, CBP, air and marine interdiction,
operations, maintenance, and procurement.
The Northern Border Air Wing, NBAW, initiative was launched by the
Department of Homeland Security, DHS, in 2004 to provide air and marine
interdiction and enforcement capabilities along the Northern Border.
Original plans called for DHS to open five NBAW sites in New York,
Washington, North Dakota, Montana, and Michigan.
The New York and Washington NBAW sites have been operational since
2004. Unfortunately, none of the other three sites have yet been stood
up, leaving large portions of our Northern Border unpatrolled from the
air. In the conference report accompanying the fiscal year 2006 DHS
appropriations bill, the conferees noted that these remaining gaps in
our air patrol coverage of the northern border should be closed as
quickly as possible.
Given that the threat from terrorists, drug traffickers, and others
who seek to enter our country illegally has not diminished, I believe
an adequate portion of the funds included in this bill for air and
marine interdiction, operations, maintenance, and procurement should be
used by customs and border protection to complete the remaining
assessments, evaluations, and other activities necessary to prepare and
equip the Michigan, North Dakota, and Montana NBAW sites with
appropriate CBP air and marine assets.
This bill requires that DHS submit an expenditure plan to the
appropriations committee before any of the funds may be obligated. I
urge DHS to include in their plan the funds necessary to stand up,
equip, and begin operations at the three remaining northern border air
wing sites in Michigan, North Dakota, and Montana.
Mr. CONRAD. I agree with my friend from Michigan. The fiscal year
2006 DHS appropriations bill included a small amount of funds to begin
initial preparations for a NBAW site in my home state of North Dakota,
but more funds are needed for the site to become operational. Secretary
Chertoff has told us that the establishment of the three additional
northern border air wings will be complete in fiscal year 2007.
A small portion of the air and marine interdiction funds in this bill
would go a long way toward meeting this deadline and the goal of
securing our long and currently porous northern border. I join Senator
Levin in encouraging the DHS to include funds sufficient to stand up
and equip the North Dakota, Michigan, and Montana sites.
Mr. GREGG. My friends from Michigan and North Dakota raise important
points. I agree the establishment and equipping of the three remaining
northern border air wings is a priority. The northern border has long
been neglected compared to the southern border. As my colleagues are
aware, funds were appropriated in the fiscal year 2006 Department of
Homeland Security Appropriations Act to initiate funding of the third
northern border air wing in North Dakota. I am committed to seeing that
the establishment of the remaining northern border air wings is
accomplished as expeditiously as possible.

Emerald Ash Borer

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask if the chairman of the Appropriations
Subcommittee on Agriculture is aware of my amendment regarding the
urgent need for additional funding for combating the Emerald Ash Borer,
and if he is open to accepting the amendment by unanimous consent.
Mr. BENNETT. I would say to the Senator from Michigan that I am aware
of his amendment, but unfortunately cannot support any amendment to the
agriculture title of the supplemental appropriations bill which does
not have an adequate offset. It is my understanding the amendment
Senator Levin has introduced with Senators Stabenow, DeWine, Voinovich
and Durbin does not contain any offset for the $15 million requested.
Mr. LEVIN. The Senator from Utah is correct in that I was not able to
offset the costs of the amendment as the funding in that title is very
tight. I would ask my friend though if he is aware that there is a need
in my State alone of over $30 million to combat and contain this
invasive species that has destroyed virtually all of Southeast
Michigan's ash stock?
Mr. BENNETT. I have been advised of the urgent need for funds in the
Midwest.
Mr. LEVIN. During consideration of the fiscal year 2006 Agriculture
Appropriations Act, Senators Stabenow,

[[Page S4019]]

DeWine and I had a similar amendment seeking additional funds for the
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service at the USDA. We decided not
to offer the amendment as we received assurances that the chairman and
ranking member of the subcommittee would push for the House approved
level of funding of $14 million. Unfortunately the final bill contained
only $10 million to deal with the Emerald Ash Borer epidemic.
Mr. BENNETT. I say to my friend that we did indeed work with our
House counterparts in crafting the final 2006 appropriation, but
unfortunately were only able to allocate $10 million in the end.
Mr. LEVIN. I thank the Senator from Utah for all of his help over the
years in seeking funding for this problem. I hope that he and the
ranking member would be mindful of the urgent need of Ohio, Indiana and
Michigan for funding for Emerald Ash Borer eradication efforts when
crafting the fiscal year 2007 Agriculture Appropriations Act over the
coming months.
Mr. BENNETT. I tell my friend from Michigan that I will do all I can,
in consultation with Members from the affected states and the
Department of Agriculture, to craft an appropriations bill which
contains adequate funding to combat the Emerald Ash Borer.
Mr. LEVIN. I thank the chairman and know that my colleagues
appreciate his support as well.
Ms. STABENOW. I thank my colleague, Senator Bennett, for his
continued work to help Michigan, Ohio, and Indiana battle this invasive
pest that has devastated our states. Senator Bennett worked closely
with us last year during consideration of the Agriculture
Appropriations bill, and I appreciate his commitment to working with us
during the fiscal year 2007 appropriations bill.
Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I would like to associate myself with the
comments of my friends from Michigan. Ohio is home to more than 3.8
billion ash trees and the Emerald Ash Borer is causing destruction to
trees in northwest Ohio and the Columbus area. I would appreciate your
help in the future to prevent the spread of the Emerald Ash Borer to
southern Ohio.
Mr. VOINOVICH. Mr. President, I thank my colleagues and the chairman
of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture for providing this
colloquy. As my colleagues know, the Emerald Ash Borer poses an
enormous threat, and I wish to be associated with their remarks. This
is important for this Senator from Ohio because nearly 4 billion ash
trees are threatened in my State alone. The Ohio Department of
Agriculture and the Ohio Department of Natural Resources call the
Emerald Ash Borer the most serious forest health issue facing Ohio's
forests today. They remain highly concerned and vigilant, but we must
provide them with sufficient resources to eradicate this problem.
According to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, the potential
economic impact of EAB to Ohio citizens over the next 10 years could
possibly reach $3 billion. Again, I thank my friend from Michigan for
his leadership on this issue, as well as the Senator from Utah, Senator
Bennett, for his indulgence in entering into this colloquy.
Mr. COBURN. Mr. President, in the past week, the Senate has voted to
reduce the overall cost of H.R. 4939, the Emergency Supplemental
Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Hurricane
Recovery, 2006, now totaling nearly $110 billion by a mere $15 million.
I am delighted that President Bush has pledged to veto this bill
because Congress has, once again, been unable to resist the temptation
to load up a must-pass bill with pork.
I offered several amendments to eliminate nonemergency items in this
bill. I appreciate the patience of my colleagues. I am very pleased and
encouraged that this body is increasingly willing to depart from our
business-as-usual practices.
That is good because the American people are paying attention to this
process. In a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, the American people
said that ending earmarks should be the No. 1 priority for Congress
this session. Thirty-nine percent said that members should be
prohibited from ``directing federal funds to specific projects
benefiting only certain constituents.'' It is interesting to note that
ending earmarks was ranked ahead of immigration reform, which was cited
as the No. 1 priority by 32 percent of Americans.
I hope that these results, combined with polls showing a 22-percent
approval rating for Congress, will encourage conferees to avoid a
confrontation with President Bush over spending. I would hope that when
conferees look for items to remove from this bill they take a close
look at my amendments that lost by a narrow margin as well as those I
withdrew.
I believe that in this time of war and disaster recovery the American
people expect us to make hard choices about spending. Taxpayers want us
to be serving in a spirit of service and sacrifice, not searching for
new ways to raid the public Treasury.
Congress is raiding the Treasury in two ways with this bill. First,
many of the items in this bill should be considered in the regular
appropriations process and through the regular order. The war on terror
is no longer a surprise. We are entering our fifth year of this war. It
shouldn't come as a surprise to Congress that we have needs related to
this effort. We have also developed a good understanding about many of
the priorities in the gulf coast that could have been addressed in the
regular budget process.
Congress has also added billions of dollars for items that have no
connection to the war on terror and the gulf coast recovery. Again, few
of these items are true emergencies. The American people deserve to
understand what defines a true emergency. According to the budget
resolution for fiscal year 2006 all of the following five criteria must
be met to be considered an emergency: necessary, essential, or vital;
sudden, quickly coming into being, and not building up over time; an
urgent, pressing, and compelling need requiring immediate action;
unforeseen, unpredictable, and unanticipated; and not permanent,
temporary in nature.
Designating a project as an ``emergency'' excuses Congress from
paying for a project. The result of abusing the ``emergency''
designation is an even greater emergency. Our Nation's debt is nearly
$8.4 trillion. Each American's share of this debt is $27,964.86. Our
national debt is increasing by an average of $1.95 billion per day.
Social Security, Medicare and the standard of living of future
generations of Americans are in jeopardy as a result of decades of
fiscal irresponsibility and rationalizations for spending more money
today without considering the consequences tomorrow.
The Social Security trustees reported this week the program will
exhaust its trust fund and begin running annual cash deficits in 2040.
A year ago, that prediction was 2041, effectively meaning 2 years have
been lost by a refusal to act. The trustees reported Social Security's
unfunded liability is $13.4 trillion.
Of course, the real problem with Social Security and Medicare is much
worse because the Federal Government uses an Enron-style accounting
scheme. We habitually borrow or, more accurately, steal money from
these trust funds to pay for more spending today.
When the 77 million baby boomers begin to retire in 2011, our Nation
will be faced with the greatest economic challenge in our history. If
we continue to indulge in earmarks, the gateway drug to spending
addictions, we will never address these complex challenges,
particularly if we can't resist the urge to abuse the earmark process
on a bill designed to address the emergency needs of our troops and
displaced people in the gulf coast.
Another reason we must act today to rein in wasteful spending is
because our ability to influence world events is diminished by our debt
to other nations. We now have the distinction of being the world's
largest debtor nation, and this bill will add to that debt. Many
serious economists are warning that our excessive borrowing from
foreign sources could cause the value of the dollar to collapse, which
would lead to a disaster for our economy. It is incredibly shortsighted
for this body to sell Treasury bills to countries such as China so we
can finance economic development programs and other pet projects while,
at the same time, we hope to encourage China to be more aggressive in
terms of discouraging Iran from developing nuclear weapons. This is not
just a numbers game. The future

[[Page S4020]]

vitality of our nation is at stake. We are slowly but surely whittling
away our national power and ability to leverage other nations away by
our refusal to make hard choices about spending.
Many of the items in this bill are obviously not emergencies, which
is why this bill will be vetoed by President Bush if it is sent to him
in its current form. Again, I hope conferees do not force the President
to take this step. I am confident the President will veto this bill. He
understands that it is more important to secure the next generation
rather than the next election.
Past Presidents and Congresses have made hard choices during
difficult times. Between 1939 and 1942, Congress and FDR cut spending
for nondefense programs by 22 percent. In 1950, President Truman and
Congress cut nonmilitary spending by 28 percent. I suggest to my
colleagues that if we want to be here past 2006, we better do the same.
Still, I agree with my colleagues who say that the President's
priorities don't come down from heaven. I suggest, however, that we are
all subject to the judgment that comes down from the taxpayers. If we
flippantly disregard the President's insistence that we make hard
choices, the judgment of the taxpayers will not be kind to any of us.
Families across this country are faced with hard choices every day in
order to live within their budget. They have elected us to make hard
choices. Our refusal to do this only reinforces the perception that we
are disconnected from the priority-setting reality that governs the
rest of the country.
It is wrong, for example, for this body to fund pork projects such as
grape research in the State of California force the taxpayers in my
State and every other State to pay for a so-called emergency project
that has been ongoing for the last 46 years and has already received
more than $130 million from the American taxpayer. Where this body sees
an emergency the taxpayers often see a series of misplaced priorities.
The State of California received 549 Federal earmarks this year
totaling $733 million. That included $10 million in Federal resources
alone for museums. Is it more important to protect the residents at
risk from flooding by the Sacramento River or to fund grape research?
Congress is spending over $3.6 million on a grape research center in
California this year. We are spending another $1 million on a
pedestrian walkway project in Calimesa and a half million on
pedestrian/bike improvements on Tower Bridge in Sacramento? What is
more important for Sacramento? Why can't we prioritize today so future
generations are not forced to make even tougher choices between massive
tax hikes, drastic cuts to Medicare and Social Security, or the defense
of our Nation?
Martin Luther King Jr. once said, ``Cowardice asks the question--is
it safe? Expediency asks the question--is it popular? Vanity asks the
question--is it popular? But conscience asks the question--is it
right?''
I plead with my colleagues. Do what is right. Our Nation is on an
unsustainable course, and that course correction must begin today, not
when it is too late.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I support our troops and their families.
I am behind them 100 percent. They deserve our gratitude, not just with
words but with deeds. We must do right by our troops and their
families. This strong emergency supplemental appropriations bill helps
us do just that. This supplemental also provides needed funds to the
victims of the devastating hurricanes that hit our gulf coast last
summer.
In this bill we have provided $15.6 billion to fix or replace
equipment that has been damaged during combat operations and to buy
additional force protection equipment desperately needed by our brave
men and women on the battlefield.
To help protect our troops from deadly improvised explosive devices,
IEDs, this bill creates the joint improvised explosive device defeat
fund and provides the fund with nearly $2 billion to develop and field
the necessary tactics, equipment, and training to defeat these deadly
weapons.
Another way we can support our troops is to make our intentions in
Iraq clear to the Iraqis and the international community. To this end,
I supported the amendment introduced by Senator Biden that prohibits
the building of any permanent military bases in Iraq. This will send a
clear message to the Iraqi people--we are committed to withdrawing our
troops once their mission is accomplished.
To ensure that we do all we can to care for soldiers when they are
injured, this bill includes an additional $1.15 billion for the defense
health program. This money ensures that we can continue to provide
world-class services including rapid aero-medical evacuation to our
most severely wounded soldiers.
The veterans health care system is stretched to the limit at a time
when more and more veterans are turning to VA. That is why I
cosponsored an amendment by Senator Akaka to increase veterans funding
by $430 million to meet the health care needs of soldiers returning
from Iraq and Afghanistan and other war veterans.
The rank-and-file employees of the Federal Government are the unsung
heroes of this country. Unfortunately, they are often required to work
in substandard or often hazardous conditions. It was recently reported
that employees within this very building are forced to enter tunnels
full of asbestos and on the verge of collapse. That is why I
cosponsored an amendment by Senator Allard that provides over $27
million for critical emergency structural repairs to the Capitol
Complex utilities tunnels. I will continue to fight for our Federal
workforce to ensure they have safe working environments and proper
safety equipment.
We know that nearly 40 percent of the soldiers deployed today in Iraq
and Afghanistan are citizen soldiers who come from the National Guard
and Reserves. More than half of these will suffer a loss of income when
they are mobilized, because their military pay is less than the pay
from their civilian job.
Many patriotic employers and State governments eliminate this pay gap
by continuing to pay them the difference between their civilian and
military pay. The reservist pay security amendment, which I worked on
with Senator Durbin, will ensure that the U.S. Government also makes up
for this pay gap for Federal employees who are activated in the Guard
and Reserves.
Mr. President, last year, we provided emergency relief for the
victims of the horrible tsunami in Asia. Today with this bill, we are
providing over $27 billion in support to our own citizens so badly hurt
by the devastating hurricanes that hit the gulf coast last year. This
money will not only help with the rebuilding of New Orleans, but will
provide a host of economic incentives and subsidies to help the people
of Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas, and Alabama get back to work and
rebuild their lives following the destruction of Hurricanes Katrina and
Rita. Additionally, this bill provides emergency funding to help
immediately rebuild the levees and install flood control equipment that
will help prevent another terrible tragedy from occurring when this
year's hurricane season arrives in less than 4 weeks.
After 9/11 we realized that our borders were not secure. Since then,
we have waged the war on terror and made great strides at protecting
our homeland. We have made significant investments in law enforcement
and security; however, the infrastructure that supports our border
security has been allowed to crumble. To counter this, I supported an
amendment proposed by Senator Gregg which adds $2 billion for border
security initiatives to include buying additional vehicles, airplanes,
helicopters, and ships. It also builds state of the art facilities for
use in ensuring the security of our borders.
We have all seen the devastating effects of natural disasters and
terrorism and are working hard to prevent future occurrences from
affecting our Nation and the world. We have recently learned of another
potential threat: a worldwide flu epidemic that could cost millions of
lives if we are unprepared. In response to this threat, this bill
provides $2.3 billion to prepare for and respond to an influenza
pandemic. Making this money available now will help expand the domestic
production capacity of influenza vaccine, and will help develop and
stockpile the right vaccines, antivirals, and other medical supplies
necessary to protect and preserve lives in the event of an outbreak.

[[Page S4021]]

Because it is just as important to support our communities at home as
it is to support our troops in the field, I will continue to fight for
responsible military budgets. For that reason, I joined Senator Byrd's
call for the President to fund our operations in Iraq and Afghanistan
through the regular budget and appropriations process. After 4 years in
Afghanistan and 3 years in Iraq, we should not be funding these
operations as if they were surprise emergencies.
Mr. President, this bill is a Federal investment in supporting our
troops and their families and providing relief for those impacted by
the devastating hurricanes.
We support our troops by getting them the best equipment and the best
protection we can provide. We support them by making it easier for our
citizen soldiers in the National Guard and Reserves to serve their
country. And we support them by ensuring they are cared for with the
best possible medical system when they are injured or ill.
With this bill, we are also helping our neighbors rebuild their
homes, their communities, and their lives, and I am proud to give it my
support.
Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I will cast my vote in favor of H.R.
4939, the fiscal year 2006 supplemental appropriations bill. This bill
takes the important step of supporting disaster relief efforts and
helps fund our ongoing military and intelligence operations in Iraq and
Afghanistan. I support the intent of this bill, but I have some
significant reservations regarding the growing cost of the war and how
it is being funded.
In supporting our troops, I believe we must do what is necessary to
ensure that the men and women risking their lives for our country have
everything they need to carry out their mission. I do not support the
administration's policy of funding the war in Iraq through emergency
supplemental bills. According to a Congressional Budget Office report,
in 2005 the Department of Defense obligated $83.6 billion--nearly $7
billion per month--for the global war on terror, much of which was
appropriated through emergency supplemental funding. This is a fiscally
irresponsible approach that masks the true magnitude of the war's
costs. Therefore, I voted in favor of an amendment offered by my
colleagues, Senators Byrd and Carper, which expresses the sense of the
Senate that any request for funds after fiscal year 2007 for military
operations in Iraq and Afghanistan should be included in the
President's annual budget. I was encouraged that the amendment passed
with a vote of 94 to 0. I urge the administration to heed the Senate's
resolution and commit to making the costs of the Iraq war more
transparent.
I also believe that the administration must be held accountable for
progress in the Iraq war. As a member of the Senate Armed Services
Committee and ranking minority member of the Readiness Subcommittee, I
am committed to finding a way to bring our soldiers home as soon as
possible. I do not believe that we should leave before the Iraqi people
are equipped with the tools necessary to support a stable democratic
society, but we must ensure that progress is being made. Toward that
end, I support the plan outlined in the amendment submitted by my
colleague Senator Carl Levin, ranking member of the Senate Committee on
Armed Services, which establishes clear reporting requirements
regarding the political situation in Iraq. According to this plan, the
President is required to submit a report to Congress every 30 days
outlining Iraq's progress toward the formation of a national unity
government. The plan also requires the administration to inform Iraqi
political, religious and tribal leaders that meeting their own
deadlines with regards to amending the Iraqi Constitution is a
condition for the continued presence of a U.S. military force in Iraq.
While the Senate did not consider Senator Levin's amendment due to
germaneness, this is an important issue that Congress must address.
Notwithstanding my concerns regarding the continued use of emergency
supplementals to fund the conflict in Iraq, there are a number of
provisions in this bill that I wholeheartedly support. In particular, I
was pleased to see that we did not forget our Nation's veterans during
consideration of the emergency supplemental. Our returning soldiers and
sailors have earned the right to the best health care that this Nation
can provide, and I believe we should strive to carry out this
obligation to our servicemembers. With the backing of my Senate
colleagues, I successfully passed an amendment to the emergency
supplemental adding $430 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs,
VA. These funds will be specifically used to supplement direct health
care, mental health care, and prosthetics services at VA. As the
ranking member on the Veterans Affairs Committee, I am pleased that the
Senate took this important step of supporting our Nation's veterans.
Another appropriate use of the emergency supplemental was
appropriations for disaster relief. Our Nation has been hit hard by
many significant natural disasters that could not have been planned for
in advance. I believe that we, as Government leaders, should continue
to provide assistance to help those devastated by natural disasters
including the severe flooding that deluged Hawaii earlier this year.
On May 2, 2006, President George W. Bush declared that a major
disaster exists in the State of Hawaii that Federal funds to help the
people and communities recover. I am pleased that the Senate
Appropriations Committee included $33.5 million in the emergency
supplemental for disaster assistance in Kauai and Windward Oahu, and $6
million for sugarcane growers in the State whose crops were destroyed
by the floods earlier this spring.
In March, I introduced S. 2444, the Dam Rehabilitation and Repair Act
of 2006. This bill would amend the National Dam Safety Program Act to
establish a program to provide grant assistance to States for the
rehabilitation and repair of deficient dams. I also supported Senator
Inouye's efforts to include an amendment to H.R. 3499 to provide $1.4
million to assess the security and safety of critical reservoirs and
dams in Hawaii, including monitoring dam structures. I am extremely
disappointed that this amendment did not pass because the failure of
Kaloko Dam on Kauai led to the severe flooding and loss of life. I am
hopeful that my colleagues will recognize the importance of addressing
the dam problem for the sake of Hawaii and our Nation and that my bill
will receive floor consideration.
Senator Inouye also introduced a timely amendment that provides $1
million for environmental monitoring of waters in and around Hawaii. In
March of this year, I had the opportunity to visit the hardest hit
areas of our State and meet victims, emergency responders, and State
officials. To date, the situation for many of our residents remains
very grave. With hundreds of homes and businesses damaged or destroyed,
critical infrastructure crippled, and many hours spent engaged in
search and rescue activities, the resources of our State have been
severely strained. I supported this amendment, and I am encouraged that
this amendment passed. It is clear that Hawaii will not be able to
fully recover without substantial Federal assistance.
Mr. President, I wish to reiterate that a clear distinction needs to
be made for true emergencies and natural disasters such as Hurricane
Katrina and the floods in Hawaii, which could not have been
anticipated.
It is fiscally irresponsible for the current administration to
continue to treat this war as an emergency in order to hide the true
cost of the war and circumvent the normal budgeting and oversight
process. If the current administration continues to refuse to make hard
choices and insist on a policy of funding the war through emergency
appropriations, succeeding generations of Americans will face even more
difficult choices.
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I had intended to offer an amendment, No.
3755, to this Emergency Supplemental Appropriations bill to provide for
full funding of the Help America Vote Act. However, once cloture was
invoked, my amendment would have been ruled non-germane and
consequently, I will not call it up.
But the parliamentary circumstances of this bill do not change the
fact that we have reached a critical juncture in the ability of States
to be prepared for Federal elections this November.
The amendment I intended to offer would have ensured that States have

[[Page S4022]]

the resources necessary to conduct fair and accurate elections this
fall. It would have fulfilled the promise made by Congress to be a full
partner in the funding of Federal election reform by providing full
funding for payments to State governments to meet the election reform
requirements mandated by Congress over 3 years ago under the Help
America Vote Act, HAVA.
HAVA was overwhelmingly enacted by Congress and signed into law by
President Bush on October 29, 2002.
HAVA mandates that by the Federal elections this year, States must
implement certain minimum requirements for the administration of
Federal elections. These requirements were phased in over roughly a 2-
year period with the final requirements mandated to be in place by this
year.
To ensure that the States could meet these requirements, Congress
authorized nearly $4 billion to pay for 95 percent of the costs of HAVA
implementation. In order to receive Federal funding, States had to
provide 5 percent matching funds.
All 50 States, the District of Columbia, and the territories have
raised their 5 percent matching funds under this Federal-State
partnership.
Only the Federal Government is coming up short on its end of the
deal. To date, Congress has appropriated only $3.1 billion of the
nearly $4 billion it promised the States in funding. That means the
States are short nearly $800 million in promised Federal funds needed
to implement these reforms.
With 2 Federal primary elections already over and with 10 upcoming
primaries scheduled in May, there is precious little time left to get
these needed funds to the States in time to ensure that the Federal
elections this year are conducted in compliance with Federal law.
This amendment would provide full funding for HAVA. Arguably, this is
the last opportunity we may have to ensure that the States have the
promised funds in time to meet the 2006 deadlines for reform.
The amendment would fund the balance of the requirement payments to
States under section 251 of HAVA in the amount of $724 million. It
would also make up the shortfall of $74 million in funding to date for
disability access grants and protection and advocacy payments to serve
the voting needs of persons with disabilities.
It is simply unconscionable that Congress has not kept up its end of
this funding bargain. As Thomas Paine observed, the right to vote for
representatives is the primary right by which other rights are
protected. That statement is still true today. The right to vote in a
democracy is the fundamental right on which all others are based.
As we witnessed in the Presidential election debacle of 2000, the
confidence of the American public in our system of elections was
shattered after witnessing hanging chads, confusing ballots, missing
names on voter lists, malfunctioning machines, and different standards
to recount ballots.
Congress responded with the first ever comprehensive requirements for
the administration of Federal elections.
The HAVA requirements effective for the 2004 Federal elections
provided that all States offer provisional ballots to any voter
challenged, for any reason, at the polls as ineligible to vote. Because
of the HAVA requirement, 2 million more ballots were counted in the
2004 elections than would have otherwise been counted.
In 2004, States also had to have in place measures designed to ensure
the identity of certain first-time voters who registered by mail.
States had to ensure voter education by posting certain voter
information in the polling place.
But the most far-reaching, and arguably most expensive reforms, must
be in place for the Federal elections this year. Effective January 1,
2006, all voting systems used in Federal elections must meet the
following minimum voting system standards:

Provide all voters with the right to verify their ballot,
before it is cast and counted, to ensure that it accurately
reflects his or her choices;
Provide a permanent paper record with a manual audit
capacity, which can be used as an official record in the case
of a recount;
Provide full accessibility to persons with disabilities,
including the blind and visually impaired, allowing for the
same privacy and independence as other voters;
Provide alternative language accessibility to language
minorities, consistent with the requirements under the Voting
Rights Act;
Meet current machine error rates; and
Establish a standard for defining what constitutes a vote
and what will be counted as a vote.

In the aftermath of the November 2000 election, there were
allegations that voter registration lists contained numerous
irregularities and errors, including multiple registrations and the
names of deceased individuals. Registration lists were also subject to
questionable purges by State and local governments, conducted in a
manner inconsistent with the National Voter Registration Act.
HAVA addressed those concerns with a balanced response by requiring
each State to implement a computerized voter registration list for use
as the official list of registered voters. For many, this requirement
is the single most important reform for ensuring the accuracy and
integrity of elections.
But it is a significant, and expensive, task when you consider there
were more than 142 million registered voters in the United States in
2004.
Depending upon the data used, that number represents between 65
percent to 85 percent of the total eligible voters. With more than 15
percent of Americans moving every year, it is crucial that State
registration lists remain current and accurate in order to ensure the
public's confidence in the outcome of Federal elections.
The 2006 reforms are absolutely critical to the successful
implementation of HAVA nationwide and to achieving our twin goals of
making it easier to vote and harder to defraud the system.
This amendment that I filed to this bill is supported by a broad
coalition of organizations, lead by the Leadership Conference on Civil
Rights and the National Association of Secretaries of State,
representing the civil rights and voting rights communities,
disabilities groups, State and local governments and election
officials.
The LCCR/NASS letter, dated April 20, 2006, notes, and I quote:

Without the full federal funding, state and local
governments will encounter serious fiscal shortfalls and will
not be able to afford complete implementation of important
HAVA mandates.

I will ask that this letter appear in the record following my
remarks.
I am grateful to the LCCR and NASS for their continuing leadership on
this issue and for their support of full funding of the HAVA
requirements. It would have been my preference that 100 percent of the
HAVA costs be covered by the Federal Government, but I agreed to a 95
to 5 split to ensure that the States became vested in reform. All of
the States and the District of Columbia and the territories are
vested--they have met their required 5-percent match. Only the Federal
Government appears to be less than committed to reform.
Unless and until we can assure the American public that we have done
all that we can to ensure the accuracy and access to the ballot box for
all eligible voters, there will be a cloud hanging over the final
results of any given Federal election. That is not productive for
democracy and undermines the very authority of our system of elected
government.
Congress enacted HAVA in response to the crisis in confidence of the
American electorate following the 2000 Presidential elections. We
promised the States we would be a full partner in funding those
reforms.
To help restore the public's confidence in the results of our Federal
elections, Congress intended that HAVA ensure that every eligible
American voter has an equal opportunity to cast a vote and have that
vote counted.
Without the promised funding, Congress has created an unfunded
mandate and State governments have indicated they will not be able to
fully implement the requirements on time. This amendment would have
ensured that the minimum Federal requirements would be implemented on
time nationwide.
Since Congress mandated that these requirements be effective by
January 1, 2006, it is critical that Congress now provide these funds
no later than fiscal year 2006 in order to ensure that the statutory
requirements are met.
It is past time to live up to our promise. While my amendment may not
be in order to this bill, I am serving notice that I will continue to
look for ways to ensure that Congress makes

[[Page S4023]]

good on its promise to be a full partner in funding election reform.
I ask unanimous consent that the before-mentioned letter be printed
in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

April 20, 2006.

Make Election Reform a Reality--Support Implementation and Full Funding
for HAVA

Dear Senators: We, the undersigned organizations, urge you
to support full funding for the Help America Vote Act of 2002
(HAVA) and include the remaining $798 million of authorized
funding in the upcoming Emergency Supplemental legislation.
Of that amount, $724 million is for the federally-mandated
processes and equipment that state and local governments must
have in place for federal elections in 2006 and $74 million
is for assisting state and local governments in making all
polling places accessible. It is imperative that the states
and localities receive all of the funding they were promised
so they can fully implement these important requirements of
HAVA.
State and local governments have worked hard on these
reforms such as improving disability access to polling
places, updating voting equipment, implementing new
provisional balloting procedures, developing and implementing
a new statewide voter registration database, training poll
workers and educating voters on new procedures and new
equipment. State and local election officials have always had
a difficult struggle when competing for the funding necessary
to effectively administer elections and they were counting on
the funding promised by Congress to ensure that all the new
federal mandates were implemented effectively.
To help state and local governments pay for these reforms,
HAVA authorized $3.9 billion over three fiscal years. Between
FY03 and FY04, it was clear that Congress saw the importance
of fully funding HAVA and provided $3 billion of the $3.9
billion for HAVA implementation. Unfortunately, in FY 05 and
FY 06 no federal funds were appropriated for states to
implement the HAVA requirements.
State officials incorporated the federal amounts Congress
promised when developing their required HAVA budgets and
plans. Without the full federal funding, state and local
governments will encounter serious fiscal shortfalls and will
not be able to afford complete implementation of important
HAVA mandates. According to a state survey, lack of federal
funding for HAVA implementation will result in many states
scaling back their voter and poll worker education
initiatives and on voting equipment purchase plans, all of
which are vital components to making every vote count in
America.
We are thankful that you have seen the importance of
funding the work of the Election Assistance Commission.
States, localities and civic organizations can utilize the
work products of the EAC to effectively implement the
requirements of HAVA i.e., the voting system standards, the
statewide database guidance, and the studies on provisional
voting, voter education, poll worker training, and voter
fraud and voter intimidation.
We thank you for your support of funding for the Help
America Vote Act, and we look forward to working with you on
this critical issue. Should you have any questions, please
contact Leslie Reynolds of the National Association of
Secretaries of State or Rob Randhava of the Leadership
Conference on Civil Rights, or any of the individual
organizations listed below.
Sincerely,

organizations representing state and local election officials

International Association of Clerks, Recorders, Election
Officials and Treasurers.
National Association of Counties.
National Association of Election Officials.
National Association of Secretaries of State.
National Association of State Election Directors.
National Conference of State Legislatures.

civil and disability rights organizations

Alliance for Retired Americans.
American Association of People with Disabilities.
Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund.
Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance.
Brennan Center for Justice.
Common Cause.
Demos: A Network for Ideas & Action.
FairVote.
Leadership Conference on Civil Rights.
League of Women Voters of the United States.
Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
(MALDEF).
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
(NAACP).
National Disability Rights Network.
Paralyzed Veterans of America.
People For the America Way.
The Arc of the United States.
United Auto Workers.
United Cerebral Palsy.
U.S.
PIRG.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, first, let me acknowledge the work of
Chairman Cochran, Senator Shelby, and the Appropriations Committee in
crafting this bill.
I would also like to commend Dr. Coburn, Senator McCain, Senator
Ensign, and so many a number of my colleagues who have been out on the
floor discussing the need for fiscal restraint.
As much good as there is in this bill, and it is mostly good, I will
be voting against it.
We must stop the practice of using emergency spending designations to
meet needs that can be met in the normal budget process.
This supplemental has some important provisions in it related to the
war on terror and the Hurricane Katrina recovery.
For example, in relation to the war on terror, $10.2 billion is
allocated for the Department of Defense's military personnel; $39
billion is allocated for operation and maintenance accounts in support
of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom; $15 billion
for procurement for various accounts; and $8 billion for various other
defense-related expenses.
Other war related expenditures: $82 million for the FBI operations in
Iraq and Afghanistan, $5 million for the DEA's Intelligence Program,
and $4 million for ATF's costs in Iraq.
These are all important programs that should be funded to help fight
terrorists abroad.
The bill provides needed funds for Hurricane Katrina.
It provides $2 billion for border security, fully offset, which was
included in Senator Gregg's amendment.
That being said, there are a number of items in this bill that do not
belong in an emergency supplemental appropriations bill.
Many of these are very important projects that have merit.
Many of these programs are worthy of Federal funding, and, when the
regular appropriations season gets underway, I will work to see if
there is a way we can fund them.
But the question before us today is not whether they have merit
because undoubtably most do.
The question is not even whether they should receive Federal funding.
Here is the question we must ask with respect to each of the needs
that are being funded in this bill: Are they emergencies?
The Senate version of the appropriations supplemental bill is $106.49
billion, over $14 billion more than the President's request of $92.22
billion.
Because these are designated as ``emergency funds,'' they are not
factored into the budget.
As far as Washington is concerned, they ``don't count.''
But they do count.
There is no magic pot of money that can be tapped for emergency
needs.
This is straight deficit spending.
There are times when emergency spending is justified, but if we abuse
it, we might as well not even have a budget.
What is emergency spending?
The emergency appropriations process is set up to be an exception to
the normal appropriations cycle so that money can be spent for
unexpected occurrences that come up throughout the year, such as
additional war costs or unexpected disasters.
This money is not factored into the regular budget.
The other body exercised fiscal restraint when they took up the
supplemental bill and actually managed to bring the bill's top line
number down from the Presidents's request to $91.95 billion.
However, during the Senate markup, the bill expanded rapidly.
According to the National Journal, money was added at a rate of more
than $80 million per minute during the 2-hour markup.
Of course, it is not important how fast the money was added or how
much is in the bill.
The only things that matter are:
Are these meritorious programs?
Are they Federal responsibilities?
Are they emergencies?
Senator Gregg, a distinguished member of the Appropriations Committee
and my chairman on the Budget Committee, wrote a piece in the Wall
Street Journal on April 18 entitled ``The Safety Valve Has Become a
Fire Hose.''
The piece gives an excellent explanation of the problem with abusing
the emergency spending process.

[[Page S4024]]

While Senator Gregg and I disagree with regard to 2-year budgeting,
we have no disagreement on the proposal he outlines in his article,
which is 1-year budgeting, which means, let's live under the budget we
have now and have a sequester if we exceed it.
In the piece, Senator Gregg states:

there are two sets of books, and [only] one is subject to
the budget controls.

Adding superfluous spending to the emergency supplemental is a way to
cheat the system and get around having to actually pay for the money we
spend.
Here are a few of the most egregious provisions in the bill:
First, some of the funds in this bill are spent as far out as fiscal
year 2010 and beyond.
Money being spent 5 years from now is not an emergency, and can be
allocated and paid for through the regular budget process each year.
If we need money to start these projects, we can give money for the
first year. But all other money should be subject to the oversight of
an authorizing committee and the regular budget process.
Secondly, $594 million allocated for the Federal Highway
Administration to go to projects on ``the current FHWA ER backlog
table,'' which lists storms back to 1999.
Our budget specifically outlines the criteria for emergency spending.
It is as follows:

(A) necessary, essential, or vital (not merely useful or
beneficial);
(B) sudden, quickly coming into being, and not building up
over time;
(C) an urgent, pressing, and compelling need requiring
immediate action;
(D) subject to paragraph (2), unforeseen, unpredictable,
and unanticipated; and
(E) not permanent, temporary in nature.

If funds are in fact needed to meet needs from a hurricane in 1999 or
an ice storm in 2001, that should have been reasonably foreseen in
2005, when we were drawing up this year's budget.
The backlogged highway repairs for these storms could have been paid
for through the regular appropriations process or the $286 billion
transportation bill that passed last year.
Emergency supplementals are for unanticipated costs, not costs
anticipated 5 years ago.
Emergency spending should be an exception to the appropriations
process--not the rule.
There are ways to pay for emergencies, and there are ways to pay for
past emergencies.
The items on this chart that predate the last fiscal year are not
emergencies and should not be treated as such in the appropriations
process.
They should be paid for, just like the relief efforts on all other
past emergencies.
According to National Taxpayers Union President John Berthoud, since
1996 the Federal Government has spent over $450 billion under the
``emergency'' designation--an extra $1,500 for every person in America.
Nearly all of our 50 States maintain emergency, contingency, reserve,
or ``rainy day'' funds to help cover unanticipated spending needs. This
would not only help to smooth out spikes in deficit spending but also
help to prevent politicians from taking advantage of urgent situations
to grow other Government programs.
We need to better prepare for these type expenses, like our States
do.
The President in the Statement of Administration Policy on this bill
drew a clear line in the sand. Let me read from the SAP:

However, the Senate reported bill substantially exceeds the
President's request, primarily for items that are unrelated
to the GWOT and hurricane response. The Administration is
seriously concerned with the overall funding level and the
numerous unrequested items included in the Senate bill that
are unrelated to the war or emergency hurricane relief needs.
The final version of the legislation must remain focused on
addressing urgent national priorities while maintaining
fiscal discipline.
Accordingly, if the President is ultimately presented a
bill that provides more than $92.2 billion, exclusive of
funding for the President's plan to address pandemic
influenza, he will veto the bill.

The statement could not be clearer.
The day after he sent up the SAP, I sent a letter to the President,
which was signed by 35 other Senators, committing to sustain any veto
of this bill which violates the principles outlined in the SAP.
I have every confidence that our congressional leadership and our
President, and their ability, working with the distinguished chairman
of the Appropriations Committee, can find a way to make a good bill fit
within the numbers outlined by the President.
This supplemental debate highlights a larger issue.
We need budget process reform.
We need a line-item veto. Senator Frist's bill, S. 2381, Provides
that rescissions packages submitted by the President shall be treated
with fast-track authority. But this bill is just the beginning.
We need to reform Congressional Budget Office scoring in the
following ways:
Dynamic scoring. Senator Ensign's bill, S. 287, addresses this issue.
Changes in tax law will be scored to take into account real-life
effects on the economy.
Tax/spending parity. CBO scores should treat tax expirations and
spending expirations the same.
Long-term scoring. We should require CBO scores to have more detailed
estimates for long-term costs of authorizations and direct spending.
Database of authorizations. We should require CBO to produce a
database with a comprehensive catalog of all authorized spending, user-
friendly, searchable and sortable by expiration date and category, and
total authorized amounts, appropriated amounts. Database should be
available online, searchable, sortable, and provide overall total
amounts.
We also ought to move to a 2-year budget.
Senator Domenici has been spearheading this issue. His bill, S. 877,
is an excellent bill. Under his bill, all budgeting and appropriating
occurs in first year of a Congress. The second session focuses on
oversight.
Database for Federal grantees. We should require the creation of a
database of Federal grantees so taxpayers can log on and find out who
is spending their money and how.
Government shutdown protection. This provision would provide that if
appropriations bills are not enacted by the beginning of the fiscal
year, programs continue at previous year's level.
Spending firewall. We should create four firewalled categories of
Federal spending: defense, international, domestic, and homeland, which
would be binding and in the budget. This would ensure that security
needs would be met and could not be raided during the appropriations
process to pay for social spending.
Pay-go for emergency spending. Automatic across-the-board reduction
in spending for emergencies. Provide that emergency spending
automatically triggers an across-the-board rescission in all spending.
Senator Gregg mentioned a program like this in his Wall Street Journal
piece.
Mutiyear caps. We should provide that 302(a) discretionary caps carry
over for the life of a budget resolution, including the ability for the
Appropriations Committee to issue 302(b) suballocations. Currently, if
we have no budget, we have a top-line discretionary cap but no way to
enforce it. We should provide a mechanism for the Appropriations
chairman to issue suballocations in the event that a budget is not
passed.
Commission on Accountability and Review of Federal Agencies. Senator
Brownback's bill, S. 1155, takes the concept of BRAC and applies it to
wasteful domestic spending programs.
Efficencies. We should allow up to 2 percent of any Department to be
transferred to pay down the national debt if efficiencies are found.
The current system requires bureaucrats to be inefficient. We give them
a big pot of money and say: You must spend this. We should encourage,
not discourage, frugality.
Entitlement commission. We should provide for a commission to review
entitlements, provide recommendations for reform, and provide fast-
track consideration for reform proposals.
Earmark reform. Finally, we need to finish the process we started on
the lobbying reform package, which is earmark reform. Senators McCain
and Lott have led on this important issue.
I look forward to consideration of budget process reform later this
year.
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I am extremely disappointed that the
Senate did not get the chance to vote on my amendment to strengthen the
oversight and monitoring of over $1.6 billion included in this
supplemental for

[[Page S4025]]

Iraq reconstruction. This amendment, designed to extend the oversight
of the Special Inspector General for Iraq, SIGIR, over reconstruction
funding in the supplemental, would have helped the SIGIR continue its
valuable work in ensuring that U.S. taxpayer dollars are being used
efficiently and effectively.
We should not be spending money on Iraqi reconstruction without
ensuring there is appropriate oversight and auditing. My amendment
would have strengthened the capabilities of the Special IG to monitor,
audit, and inspect funds made available for assistance for Iraq in both
the Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund, IRRF, and in other important
accounts. It is frankly baffling to me that anyone would oppose this
amendment being included in the supplemental.
As we continue to pour tens of billions of dollars in to Iraq, I
believe that we must not lose oversight of U.S. taxpayer dollars.
American taxpayers deserve to know where their money is going in this
costly war and that it is being used effectively and efficiently and
ending up in the right hands.
The Iraq IG's work to date has been extremely valuable to the U.S.
Government and to Congress. The Iraq IG has now completed 55 audit
reports, issued 165 recommendations for program improvement, and has
seized $13 million in assets. In its latest report, released over the
weekend, the Iraq IG indicated that it has completed 29 audits and
released 58 recommendations for program improvement in this quarter
alone. Overall, the SIGIR estimates that its operations have resulted
in saving $24 million. Throughout 2005, the Iraq IG provided aggressive
oversight to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse in the at-times lethal
operating environment in Iraq. Its emphasis on real-time auditing--
where guidance is provided immediately to management authorities upon
the discovery of a need for change--provides for independent
assessments while effecting rapid improvements.
In its January report to Congress, the SIGIR concluded that massive
unforeseen security costs, administrative overhead, and waste have
crippled original reconstruction strategies and have prevented the
completion of up to half of the work originally called for in critical
sectors such as water, power, and electricity. The Iraq IG's work has
resulted in the arrest of five individuals who were defrauding the U.S.
Government, and it has shed light on millions of dollars of waste. It
is this kind of investigation and reporting that helps shape the
direction of reconstruction funding and ensures that the money is being
used and allocated as transparently and effectively as possible.
Mr. President, I originally drafted legislation to create the Special
Inspector General for Iraq, known as SIGIR, in order to ensure that
there is critical oversight of the Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund,
IRRF, allocated for Iraq reconstruction projects. I believed then, and
I believe now, that it is crucial that we have an effective oversight
capability over American taxpayer dollars spent in Iraq. Last year, I
fought to extend the life of this office, which has been recognized by
the Department of State and Defense as a valuable and necessary office.
I do not intend to let this week's setback prevent me from pushing for
continued transparency and accountability in the administration's
policies in Iraq.
Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, over the March recess, I joined the
leaders of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator John Warner of
Virginia and Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, on a trip to Iraq to hear
the on-the-ground perspective of our military leaders, our troops in
the field, and Iraqi officials. I returned to the United States as
always overwhelmed by my pride and admiration for our service men and
women, who continue to work with commitment and professionalism even in
the most difficult circumstances. I cast my vote in support of this
supplemental package before us because I am completely committed to
providing our men and women in uniform with the support they need to
continue their excellent work. Toward that end, I am very pleased that
an amendment I authored calling for regular reports on the Pentagon's
efforts to train our troops in methods of detecting and defeating
improvised explosive devices has been added to this bill.
I also cast this vote today because when it comes to funding our
service men and women, right now this supplemental is the only game in
town. And because the administration refuses, year after year, to
incorporate the costs of ongoing operations in Iraq into the regular
budget, we have no choice but to fund these efforts through these
emergency supplementals--essentially putting hundreds of billions on
our national tab. The Senate voted overwhelmingly in support of Senator
Byrd's amendment urging the administration to stop these irresponsible
budget games. I hope the President heeds that message.
In addition to reaffirming my admiration for our military, my recent
trip to Iraq also gave me a deeper understanding of the importance of
success in Iraq and the truly daunting nature of the challenges ahead.
In addition to the extremely serious fiscal issues confronting us, we
have the even more serious policy issue to consider--how should U.S.
policy proceed in Iraq?
A failed Iraqi state would threaten our national interests,
destabilizing an already volatile region and creating a lasting haven
for terrorists. Our national security imperatives mandate our
commitment to Iraq's success.
Success in Iraq is dependent on several factors: controlling
violence, creating a stable government of national unity, delivering
basic services and the promise of economic development to the Iraqi
people, and establishing strong and supportive relations between Iraq
and its neighbors in the region. If any of these pillars are missing,
Iraq's future becomes uncertain and unstable.
America can help, but ultimately the Iraqis must achieve these goals
on their own. The Iraqi people and Iraqi security forces have made
significant strides, but much more remains before Iraq can govern and
protect Iraqis. And Iraq's neighbors, who know the region best and will
suffer most from a failed state in their midst, must step up to the
plate to help end the political deadlock in Iraq.
We all recognize that U.S. forces cannot and should not remain in
Iraq indefinitely. The U.S. military presence in Iraq should depend
upon Iraqi leaders promptly making the compromises necessary to achieve
the broad-based, sustainable, political settlement necessary to form a
government of national unity and defeat the insurgency. We need
partners within Iraq and outside its borders who are committed to
stability and sharing power in order to achieve the mission of a truly
democratic Iraq, and to share in that success with Iraq's people.
We also need to ensure that the magnitude of the challenge before us
in Iraq does not distract all our attention from the vitally important,
ongoing mission in Afghanistan. This bill also provides much needed
support for that mission. We have made tremendous progress, working
with the Afghan people, in helping to turn Afghanistan from a state
sponsor of terrorism to a stable, responsible member of the
international community. But our work is by no means complete, and the
American troops and Afghani leaders I met with in Kabul just weeks ago
underscored how important it is that we continue our strong support for
the stabilizing mission.
This bill also provides support for the communities devastated by
last year's hurricane season. I am afraid that, thus far, the story of
the Government's response to Katrina has been a story of failure not
only in the preparations for the storm and in the midst of the crisis
but also in the recovery effort. Too many promises have not been kept,
and too many American families continue to live in an atmosphere of
uncertainty. The provisions in this bill will help, but our commitment
does not end here. Congress needs to make sure that the gulf region has
the necessary resources to recover from last year's hurricanes and
respond to future storms, but it must also make sure that the
administration has fixed the incompetence at FEMA and DHS which
disturbed so many Americans. I look forward to continuing to work on
these important issues in the upcoming months.
Over the past 6 years, Colorado has suffered from ongoing natural
disasters including drought. Unfortunately,

[[Page S4026]]

many areas in Colorado continue to suffer from ongoing extreme weather
conditions including drought, hail, and frost. In particular, Colorado
wheat producers are estimating that this will be the fifth below-
average wheat crop in 6 years.
In addition, many Colorado farmers and ranchers are suffering from
economic losses due to continually rising gas prices. And what is true
in Colorado is true in many other States across the country. That is
why I am an original cosponsor of Senator Conrad's emergency
agriculture disaster assistance package, and I am so pleased that it
was included as part of this supplemental bill. Toward that end, I
especially thank Senators Conrad and Cochran, who worked very hard on
these important provisions. I am so pleased that the Senate has voted
to provide immediate assistance to producers across the country who
have been devastated by a variety of natural disasters.
While, overall, we are lucky in Colorado that this has been a better
year for many of our farmers and ranchers who have suffered from
continuing natural disasters over the past several years, many
producers in southern and eastern Colorado have been hit by drought
conditions once again.
It has been downhill for the 2005 Colorado winter wheat crop since
last May. In fact, estimates show that it will be the fifth below-
average winter wheat crop in 6 years--with potential losses to
producers of over $60 million.
In addition, increasing gas prices have hit our rural communities
hard, making it virtually impossible for many producers to cover the
unexpected additional costs. During harvest, agricultural producers are
some of the largest fuel consumers in the United States and producers
are facing enormous fuel costs. Farm fuel has increased by 79 percent
from $1.40 per gallon in September of 2004 to around $2.60 per gallon
in September 2005. Colorado wheat producers have told me that it would
take a 40-bushel average yield per acre and an average price of $4.00
per bushel to cover all of these additional costs and break even.
Unfortunately, the average yield in 2005 was 24 bushels per acre, and
the average price is projected at $3.34 per bushel.
Finally, Mr. President, I wish to express again how pleased I am that
the Senate adopted my amendment to provide an additional $30 million to
reduce the risk of catastrophic fires and mitigate the effects of
widespread insect infestations throughout the entire National Forest
System. In the West, the seasonal wildfire potential outlook map shows
above-normal fire danger across the Western United States and several
Southern States, too, have increased fire dangers. One of the most
alarming factors in the wildfire outlook this year is insect
infestation. For example, my State of Colorado has over 1.5 million
acres that have been infested by bark beetles. After these infestations
come through a forest, they leave behind entire stands of trees--
sometimes thousands of acres--that are more susceptible to fire due to
the dried-out conditions and increased fuel loads in those forests.
Just today, I learned from the U.S. Forest Service that Colorado has
280,000 acres of approved hazardous fuel reduction projects that are
awaiting treatment, with Forest Service funding only sufficient to
conduct about a quarter of those projects under the best circumstances.
This situation represents a true emergency, and I am relieved that we
were able to address it in this bill.
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I am voting for this legislation because
it provides important funding for our troops and for the people
recovering from the devastation caused by last year's hurricanes.
Unfortunately, I do so with great reluctance because of two fundamental
problems with this measure.
First, this bill continues the administration's fiscally
irresponsible practice of funding our Iraq and Afghanistan operations
outside of the regular budget process. That problem is compounded by
the administration's failure to enunciate a clear policy for how we
will conclude our military mission in Iraq. Our country needs a new
vision for strengthening our national security, and it starts by
redeploying U.S. forces from Iraq and refocusing our attention on the
global terrorist threats that face us. As I noted earlier in the week,
when I was prevented from offering an amendment that would have
required redeploying the bulk of our troops in Iraq by the end of the
year, we should not be appropriating billions of dollars for Iraq
without debating--and demanding--a strategy to complete our military
mission there. Not when the lives of our soldiers and the safety of our
country are at risk.
Second, this bill has become the most recent vehicle for the
explosion of unauthorized spending that is finding its way onto
appropriations bills. In addition to providing funding for military
operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, this bill was supposed to be
limited to addressing the very real needs arising from Hurricane
Katrina and other disasters.
Unfortunately, there seems to be an attitude in Congress that is
reflected in the comments of one former Member of the other body, who
was especially skilled at advancing spending items: ``I never saw a
disaster that wasn't also an opportunity.''
Regrettably, this bill has provided just such an opportunity to
interests seeking to circumvent the scrutiny of the authorizing
committees or of a competitive grant process. As a result, this measure
is larded up with spending for unauthorized programs. Worse, none of
this spending is paid for. It is all added to the already massive tab
we are leaving our children and grandchildren.
I supported efforts on the floor to strip some of the funding that
does not belong in the bill. I opposed efforts to table an amendment by
Senator Thomas and a motion by Senator Ensign that would have forced
the Senate to consider a bill with a smaller, and more reasonable price
tag. I also supported several amendments offered by Senator Coburn and
Senator McCain to eliminate funding in the bill for projects that,
while they might have some merit, do not necessarily warrant emergency
spending. If we are going to pass emergency appropriations bills that
aren't offset, we should be sure that the spending in those bills is
fully justified.
A portion of the floor debate on this legislation was devoted to
skyrocketing energy prices. While significant increases in fuel costs
have affected all Americans, they have put the American farmer in an
especially tough situation. Unfortunately, I have serious concerns with
how this problem has been addressed in this bill.
Under this bill, growers of program crops--rice, feed grains,
oilseeds, wheat, cotton and peanuts--who are only about a quarter of
farm income receive $1.5 billion or 90 percent of assistance, while
only $74.5 million is provided for specialty crops, dairy and livestock
producers through a block grant to States. Moreover, only the producers
of program crops will receive assistance directly. The remaining 75
percent of farmers will not receive direct assistance, nor will they be
assured that any funds will find their way to them since those funds
can also be used for nutrition programs or marketing. Clearly there is
a disconnect between the avowed purpose of this farm assistance and the
details of how the program will operate, which is why I supported
Senator McCain's amendment to strike a portion of this program.
I urge my colleagues in conference to take a close look at the
details of this program. If the program's intent is to help all farmers
with their spiraling fuel-related costs, the proposal falls seriously
short. Even the modest step of placing a payment limit on the $1.5
billion for direct payments could provide hundreds of millions of
dollars for both a more equitable program and savings for taxpayers.
I am pleased that a compromise was reached among my colleagues
regarding the K-12 educational funding for schools that have taken in
displaced students. Schools across the country, including some in
Wisconsin, have opened their doors to the hundreds of thousands of
students who were displaced by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. I strongly
support continued efforts to assist the schools that are educating
these students. I am glad that this funding will be provided through
title V of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which allows
local school districts to provide specific educational services to the
schools, rather

[[Page S4027]]

than direct funding to private schools. This agreement will best serve
our educators and students as they continue to recover and heal from
the devastation wrought by the hurricanes.
This legislation also includes significant funding to address
critical foreign policy concerns. An amendment introduced by Senator
Biden sets aside funding for a special envoy for Sudan. A special envoy
is desperately needed to help bring peace to Darfur and to help ensure
that the peace agreement between the north and south is adhered to.
This bill also includes key funding needed for strengthening a
peacekeeping mission in Darfur to help bring an end to what has become
one of the world's greatest tragedies.
This bill also includes funding for Liberia's fragile postelection
period, and support for Haiti's tentative transition to a democracy and
for the Democratic Republic of the Congo's upcoming elections. This
funding is needed urgently to help these countries make the much-needed
transition to peace and democratic rule.
I have noted some of the important measures funded in this emergency
supplemental and there are many more. Emergency supplemental spending
measures are needed at times to deal with true emergencies. However, to
borrow a line from the President, this Congress is addicted to
supplementals. I am glad that the Senate adopted Senator Byrd's sense-
of-the-Senate amendment insisting that future war costs be included in
the regular budget. With this bill, total war-related funding paid for
through supplementals will reach approximately $440 billion. That is an
enormous sum of money and that does not even include the nearly half
trillion dollar annual defense budget. I hope the Senate will stand
firm on this issue and insist that any future spending for the Iraq war
goes through the regular budget process.
Mr. President, I will vote for this measure with the hope that the
administration will work with conferees to eliminate the unjustified
spending slipped into this bill, and with a renewed determination to
make sure that this body fully debates and votes on my proposal to
redeploy our troops out of Iraq by the end of the year, and refocus our
resources on the fight against terrorism.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I rise today to speak in support of the
provisions in the supplemental spending bill to assist agricultural
producers suffering from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, drought,
wildfires, and other natural disasters. I would like to thank Chairman
Cochran and Senator Byrd for their work on this bill, as well as my
colleagues who have worked with me on this matter since last summer's
Midwest drought.
This has not been an easy year for our Nation's farmers and ranchers.
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita wreaked havoc on producers throughout the
gulf coast. Losses to livestock and crop production in the gulf coast
total in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Many farmers in that part
of the country will not even have the opportunity to plant their crops
this season due to saltwater intrusion on their lands.
In addition, for farmers outside the gulf coast, the hurricane
brought about higher fuel prices and increased the cost of shipping as
the Port of New Orleans was temporarily closed. In my home State of
Illinois, producers have suffered one of the worst droughts since 1895.
The period from March 2005 to February 2006 was the third driest March
to February period since 1895. Even with some very fortunate late
rains, these drought conditions significantly lowered both yields and
the value of the year's harvest.
According to the USDA's National Agricultural Statistics Service,
NASS, the value of Illinois' corn crop decreased by more than $1.1
billion, or about 25 percent, from 2004 to 2005 even as corn acreage
increased. At least 10 counties in northeast and western Illinois
sustained greater than 20 percent losses in corn yields. Unfortunately,
farmers and ranchers are not expecting this crop year to reverse last
year's trend. USDA's Economic Research Service, ERS, expects net farm
income to drop 23.2 percent this year, from $72.7 billion to $56.2
billion, due in large part to stagnant crop prices and rising energy
costs.
To make matters more difficult, the price of diesel fuel has doubled
since the summer of 2004. Fertilizer prices have taken off as well,
increasing by more than 30 percent per acre since 2001. Even with
increased efficiency, these rising prices are hurting our Nation's
farming families.
Because farmers use so much energy running their tractors and
combines, applying fertilizers, and hauling their products by truck to
buyers and markets, these prices are squeezing the already thin profit
margins of our Nation's producers. Especially when we keep in mind that
commodity prices have stayed fairly level over the past 2 years we can
see why these natural disasters and high energy costs may be putting
our farmers at risk of losing their farms.
The provisions that some of my colleagues and the Bush administration
seek to strike would provide assistance to producers who suffered crop
losses due to natural disasters such as the drought in the Corn Belt
and flooding in various parts of the country, and to those who lost
livestock, such as Texas ranchers in this year's wildfires. The
measures that are under attack here would also provide a direct payment
to producers who are struggling to keep their heads above water due to
the rapidly increasing cost of fuel and other inputs.
This is what surprises me most--at this trying time for our Nation's
farmers and ranchers, Members of Congress are actively working to
prevent this much needed assistance from reaching our farmers and
ranchers. The Bush administration has even gone so far as to say that
there has been no disaster at all, even though the Secretary of
Agriculture designated 101 of 102 counties in Illinois as disaster
areas. Well, the Bush administration budget crunchers aren't talking to
their own disaster experts, let alone farmers in western Illinois or
ranchers in Texas or anyone who is trying to pay rising energy costs
while growing the wheat, corn, and soybeans that keep our people fed.
Now is not the time to turn away from the thousands of farmers who
will depend on this assistance to purchase equipment and stay in
business this season. I ask my colleagues to join me in expressing
their support for these important provisions that will provide some
much needed relief for our nation's agricultural producers. I hope the
Senate will insist that agricultural assistance be included in the
final supplemental spending bill, notwithstanding the misguided
positions of the White House and House on this important matter.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, yesterday I spoke on the floor about
amendment 3662 filed by Senator Feingold and cosponsored by myself and
Senators Byrd, Salazar, Lieberman and Collins, concerning the Special
Inspector General for Iraq.
In that statement I pointed out that because of the administration's
decision to request funds for Iraq reconstruction under traditional
Foreign Operations accounts even though the funds would be used to
continue many of the same activities previously funded under the Iraq
Relief and Reconstruction Fund, it would end the Special IG's oversight
of these funds.
The Feingold amendment would have ensured that the Special IG's
oversight continued, but the Majority opposed his amendment.
As a result, we now have only the State Department Inspector General
to oversee these funds, even though that office has no people in Iraq
and no capacity to undertake a job of this size and complexity any time
soon.
I understand that my friend from Wisconsin went to the floor prior to
the vote on cloture and waited for an opportunity to offer his
amendment, but he was unable to obtain floor time. After cloture was
invoked his amendment was ruled nongermane, and he was out of luck as
far as getting a vote on his amendment.
The Special IG has uncovered widespread waste, fraud and abuse.
Shocking sums have been wasted by unqualified contractors who spent the
taxpayer's money as if it grew on trees, with little to show for it.
Many projects that have absorbed millions or tens of millions of
dollars will never be completed.
The Special IG has not won any popularity contests with the agencies
whose performance he is responsible for overseeing, nor with some in
the majority in Congress. However, they have

[[Page S4028]]

never offered a substantive explanation for ending his oversight of the
Iraq reconstruction funds.
I do want to correct one of my statements yesterday, when I said that
members of the majority party, in opposing the Feingold amendment, were
``acting on behalf of some in the Pentagon and the White House who want
to shut down the office of the Special IG.''
I am informed that members of the majority party were not acting on
behalf of the Pentagon and the White House. It was not my intention to
impugn the integrity or character of my friends in the majority who I
respect and have worked closely with for years, but rather to convey my
strong disagreement and disappointment with their opposition to the
Feingold amendment and to the continued oversight of these funds by the
Special IG.
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, today I wish to speak about the emergency
supplemental bill and about the amendments related to the ongoing
conflict in Iraq and other pressing issues of the day.
For example, I am deeply disappointed that Senator Levin and others
who had Iraq-related amendments were not allowed to offer them
postcloture. I would have supported the Levin amendment, just as I
supported the underlying emergency supplemental earlier today.
Having said that, I think there is something very wrong with a
process that doesn't allow for full and open debate on the emergency
funding for Iraq and Afghanistan just passed by this body. That is why
I voted against cloture on the underlying bill earlier this week.
Indeed, the Senate just approved more than $67 billion in emergency
supplemental funding for our combined military engagements in Iraq and
Afghanistan. But because of the special rules of the Senate related to
the consideration of appropriations matters, most amendments which
would have spoken to United States policy in Iraq or Afghanistan were
ruled out of order and never received an up-or-down vote, or even an
opportunity for full debate. This fact has done a real disservice to
the American people and, I believe, left the false impression that
Congress is fully on board with our current policies.
By limiting debate on this bill, I'm afraid this body has also missed
an important opportunity to address other issues of serious concern to
the American people, including, importantly, the high prices Americans
are paying at the pump for gas. The energy issue, I would add, is
central in our efforts not only to promote a strong economy and
supplies for Americans at home, but to our global efforts to secure
U.S. national security interests.
Since 2000, the price of a gallon of gas has more than doubled, even
when adjusted for inflation. In my home state of Connecticut, the
average price for a gallon of gas hit $3.04 last weekend. In some parts
of the country, prices are even higher. And this winter, only mild
weather kept people in colder parts of the country like New England
from seeing record increases in their heating bills.
Anyone who drives a car, buys or sells anything shipped by truck or
plane, or turns on the heat when it's cold, is paying record prices for
energy and enduring serious financial hardship.
At current prices, the average driver can expect to spend about
$1,440 more on transportation this year than they did just a year ago.
That's a big chunk of money coming out of consumers' wallets and
businesses' bottom line. It's also a real cause for concern for the
overall economy--it has the potential to create inflation and act as a
drag on economic growth.
Meanwhile, while consumers are paying more, a few large oil companies
continue to reap record profits. Let me be clear that I do not begrudge
a company--any company--from making a profit. The ability to earn a
profit is central to our capitalist system and the American spirit of
entrepreneurship. But there is a big difference between profits and
profiteering. And in the opinion of many, the big oil companies--who
control the market for their products--have been engaging in
profiteering on the backs of the American consumer.
Regrettably, by invoking cloture on this bill, this body chose not to
consider measures that would have provided timely relief to American
consumers and would have strengthened our ability to prevent
profiteering at the expense of American families and businesses.
I was ready to offer one such measure with my colleague, the junior
senator from North Dakota. Many of my other colleagues were planning to
offer measures of their own that also deserved consideration by this
body. The senior senator from Oregon, for one, held the floor for
several hours last Thursday asking for a vote on his amendment, only to
be refused by the majority.
America has an energy policy that is rooted in the 19th century. We
depend on fossil fuels that are increasing in cost and limited in
supply; that contaminate our air, water, and food supplies; and that
are found predominantly in parts of the world that are politically
unstable. Meanwhile, global demand is growing as countries like China
require greater fuel supplies to power their increasingly modern
economies.
This antiquated policy is having many adverse effects on our national
security. Frankly, if the industrialized world had a secure alternative
supply of energy, we would likely better be able to address any number
of major international security crises--including the genocide in Sudan
and Iranian nuclear ambitions. Serious action to address either issue
is being stymied by nations reliant on other nations' oil exports.
We cannot keep running away from this problem. By failing to act on--
or even consider--any of the measures that were ready to be offered
this week and last week, this body missed an important opportunity to
provide tangible energy policy solutions for the American public, and
an important opportunity to strengthen U.S. national security. And the
end result, in my view, is a great disservice to the American people
and to U.S. national security.
I will vote for the emergency supplemental bill because while our
troops are in harm's way, I believe that we need to provide them with
every necessary resource so they can come home safely. But I frankly
think that having more time to debate these issues and amendments would
have done much to ensure the safety and security of our troops and all
Americans in the years to come.
Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, as Chair of the Senate Committee on Small
Business and Entrepreneurship, I rise today to address the impact of
amendment No. 3810 proposed by the distinguished Senator from Illinois,
Mr. Obama. Strengthening competition in the Hurricanes Katrina and Rita
reconstruction contracts is a worthy goal. Along with my Senate
colleagues from both sides of the aisle, I have watched with
disappointment the rush of Federal agencies such as the Department of
Homeland Security, DHS, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency,
FEMA, to award hundreds of millions in no-bid contracts. Since last
fall, my Committee held three oversight hearings on the Gulf Coast
hurricane response and reconstruction efforts. Testimony at these
hearings clearly established that small businesses have often been the
victims of no-bid reconstruction contracting. We received strong
commitments from the Army Corps of Engineers, the Department of
Homeland Security, and the Small Business Administration to work hard
to remedy this problem.
In response to the efforts of my committee and our counterpart
committee in the House, positive results are already starting to show
for small contractors. As recently as March 31, 2006, the SBA and FEMA
jointly announced 36 contracts valued at $3.6 billion which will be set
aside for small and small disadvantaged businesses, aimed at
maintenance and deactivation of roughly 150,000 housing units. Priority
for award of these contracts would go to local businesses. Federal
agencies are also beginning to award disaster relief contracts to small
businesses located in Historically Underutilized Business Zones,
HUBZones, as called for by the Office of Management and Budget
Guidelines for Using Emergency Procurement Flexibilities. The Senate
fully supported these efforts by unanimously passing amendment No. 3627
cosponsored by myself and Senators Vitter, Kerry, Landrieu, and

[[Page S4029]]

Lott to make the gulf coast area a HUBZone and to waive a law
prohibiting small business set-asides in certain industries. All these
acquisition strategies enlarge the Federal Government's supplier base,
and are mandated by the Federal Acquisition Regulation when qualified
small businesses are available. It is my understanding that amendment
No. 3810 was not intended to prohibit spending on these and similar
efforts. I ask whether my distinguished colleague, the sponsor of the
amendment, Senator Obama, had the same understanding?
Mr. OBAMA. I thank the distinguished Chair of the Senate Committee on
Small Business and Entrepreneurship for the opportunity to discuss this
issue. I believe small businesses are the heart of the American economy
and I am committed to expanding opportunities for small businesses to
compete for Federal contracts.
One of the reasons I offered the amendment was my concern that
noncompetitive contracts have shut out small, local and disadvantaged
businesses from contracting opportunities in the gulf coast. If we are
serious about restoring the gulf coast, we must ensure that small and
disadvantaged businesses have the tools and opportunities necessary to
create the local jobs and provide the local services that are essential
to a quick and sustainable recovery. The SBA has an important role to
play and should be actively using its authority to promote small
business growth and competitiveness.
I want to be clear that it was not the intent of the amendment to
interfere with small business set-aside programs that use appropriate
competitive procedures in the awarding of contracts. I have been
troubled by reports of outrageous overhead charges going to large firms
that just end up subcontracting the work anyway to small businesses. It
is important to preserve Federal Acquisition Regulations that require
contracts to be directed to small businesses where responsible small
firms are available to provide the government with quality products and
services at fair prices.
My amendment is directed at large Government contracts and seeks to
prevent no-bid deals that deprive all of us of the benefits of fair
competition. My amendment should not limit Federal funds for contracts
legitimately set aside for competition among small business concerns.
Small businesses help competition and competition helps small
businesses. When a conference committee gets appointed on this bill, I
will communicate this understanding to the conferees.
Again, I thank the distinguished leader of the Senate Committee on
Small Business and Entrepreneurship, and I look forward to continuing
to work with her to strengthen small businesses and to expand
opportunity throughout the American economy.
Ms. SNOWE. I thank the distinguished Senator from Illinois for his
clarification and his support of small business contracting.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the question is on
the engrossment of the amendments and third reading of the bill.
The amendments were ordered to be engrossed and the bill to be read a
third time.
The bill was read the third time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill having been read the third time, the
question is, Shall the bill pass?
Mr. COCHRAN. Have the yeas and nays been ordered, Mr. President?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. They have not.
Mr. COCHRAN. 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 assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. The following Senator was necessarily absent: the
Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch).
Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch)
would have voted ``yea.''
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr.
Rockefeller) is necessarily absent.
The result was announced--yeas 77, nays 21, as follows:
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Graham). Are there any other Senators in
the Chamber desiring to vote?

[Rollcall Vote No. 112 Leg.]

YEAS--77

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

NAYS--21

Alexander
Allard
Bunning
Burr
Chambliss
Coburn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
Ensign
Enzi
Frist
Graham
Gregg
Hagel
Inhofe
Isakson
McCain
Sessions
Sununu
Thomas

NOT VOTING--2

Hatch
Rockefeller

The bill (H.R. 4939), as amended, was passed, as follows:
(The bill will be printed in a future edition of the Record.)

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mrs. MURRAY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Change of Vote

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, on rollcall No. 112, I voted yea. It was
my intention to vote nay. Therefore, I ask unanimous consent that I be
permitted to change my vote since it will not affect the outcome.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(The foregoing tally has been changed to reflect the above order.)
The Presiding Officer appointed Mr. Cochran, Mr. Stevens, Mr.
Specter, Mr. Domenici, Mr. Bond, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Burns, Mr. Shelby,
Mr. Gregg, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Craig, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. DeWine, Mr.
Brownback, Mr. Allard, Mr. Byrd, Mr. Inouye, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Harkin, Ms.
Mikulski, Mr. Reid, Mr. Kohl, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Dorgan, Mrs. Feinstein,
Mr. Durbin, Mr. Johnson, and Ms. Landrieu conferees on the part of the
Senate.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I wanted to take a minute to express my
deep gratitude to Chairman Cochran who, as I stated earlier, has
demonstrated extraordinary patience over the past 2 weeks we have been
debating this supplemental bill.
I also want to express my thanks to the ranking member, Senator Byrd,
who has continued to demonstrate his strong and resolute leadership on
this bill.
I also want to thank the many members of our Appropriations Committee
staff who have worked very hard.
First and foremost, I thank our staff director and deputy staff
director on our side, Terry Sauvain and Chuck Kieffer.
I also thank the majority staff director, Keith Kennedy, and his
staff, Clayton Heil and Les Spivey.
I want to make special mention of the extraordinary hard work of B.G.
Wright, Kate Fitzpatrick, and Rachael Taylor. They have been keeping us
all on track on this side as to which of the hundreds of filed
amendments have been cleared and which have not.
Finally, I thank Peter Rogoff who has dedicated his life on the
Senate floor for the last 2 weeks above and beyond the call.
I thank all our staff and floor staff for being here many long hours
for the completion of this bill.
I yield the floor.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Senator from
Washington for her kind remarks and for her leadership and assistance
in getting this bill prepared by our committee, and for handling the
duties of managing the bill on the floor of the Senate.
Senator Byrd, of course, the senior Democrat on the committee, has
been an inspiration to me and a true leader in every sense of the word
in our committee and in the Senate for a long

[[Page S4030]]

time. He continues to be a very important friend to me. I am very
grateful for that friendship. I join Senator Murray in commending our
staff. But, first of all, I think I should mention my appreciation for
the majority leader, Bill Frist; and Harry Reid, the Democratic leader,
for giving us the latitude and the authority to manage this bill on the
floor of the Senate for the Committee on Appropriations to help ensure
that every Senator had an opportunity to speak and offer amendments, to
be a part of the passage of this bill in every sense of the word. We
appreciate the leaders giving us that authority and for not trying to
manage the bill from their offices. I really appreciate that.
Also, I have to commend the staff members on our side: Keith Kennedy,
staff director, who has been working in the Senate for the
Appropriations Committee for a good many years. He has a lot of
experience. He is a person of great integrity, and I am very fortunate
that he has agreed to serve as staff director of this committee and
continue to provide guidance and supervision for all of the members of
the staff of the Committee on Appropriations.
We are very proud of all of the staff. Those who have been
particularly helpful to me during the handling of this bill, in
addition to Keith, include Clayton Heil, our counsel for the committee,
who has been on the floor of the Senate for much of the handling of the
bill; Les Spivey, who is also a member of the full committee staff, he
does a good job as well. I guess you could say he is our token
Mississippian who is on the first team of the committee staff.
Terry Sauvain has been someone with whom I have enjoyed working for a
number of years. He has worked closely with Senator Byrd for a good
many years. We appreciate Terry's continued good assistance,
particularly in the handling of this bill.
Chuck Keiffer and Peter Rogoff--Peter works for Senator Murray on the
committee staff and has a lot of experience. He has been very helpful
to us as we have managed this bill in the Senate.
I thank David Schiappa, Laura Dove, and Jodie Hernandez. They have
been at the desk keeping up with all of the amendments, colloquies, and
order of business, and keeping people advised through cloakroom
telephones and answering Member's questions when they come onto the
Senate floor. They go to that spot and ask for the pending business or
what the order of amendments may be. They have been absolutely
professional and diligent and helpful in every way.
On the Democratic side, I thank Marty Paone and Lula Davis for
helping to keep up with things for the Democrats and helping to provide
advice and counsel to all of us who have been involved in the handling
of this bill. We are deeply grateful for their assistance.

____________________