[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 157 (Wednesday, October 17, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12955-S12962]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
proceed to the consideration of H.R. 3043, which the clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 3043) making appropriations for the 
     Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and 
     Education, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending 
     September 30, 2008, and for other purposes.


                           Amendment No. 3325

                (Purpose: In the nature of a substitute)

  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I have an amendment at the desk, and I ask 
for its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Iowa [Mr. Harkin], for himself and Mr. 
     Specter, proposes an amendment numbered 3325.

  Mr. HARKIN. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be 
dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Text of 
Amendments.'')
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, we are now on the appropriations bill for 
Education, Labor, Health and Human Services, and related agencies. 
Before we get into the bill, I want to explain a couple of things. I 
will be yielding to my partner, Senator Specter, for his opening 
statement. Then I will follow with mine. It is not the usual order. 
Usually, the chairman goes first. But Senator Specter is very much 
involved in Judiciary Committee hearings today, and he has to return to 
that. I will respect that and yield to him in a moment.
  I wished to make it clear to our fellow Senators there is a change in 
the bill they will now notice, the substitute at the desk. The 
amendment Senator Specter and I offered basically strikes the language 
in the bill dealing with stem cells. Again, I do this with regret. 
Senator Specter and I have worked together for many years to advance 
the cause of embryonic stem cell research. In fact, we worked together 
on the first bill President Bush vetoed in his first 4 years. That was 
our stem cell bill, the only bill he vetoed in 4 years. We then came 
back with another stem cell bill this year, and he vetoed that also. 
That veto override has not taken place yet.
  So together we put some additional language in this bill to further 
the cause of trying to break through and get embryonic stem cell 
research covered. However, we received a statement of administration 
policy from the administration yesterday saying they opposed our bill 
for two reasons. It says it includes ``an irresponsible and excessive 
level of spending,'' and then it says, ``The administration strongly 
opposes provisions in this bill that overturn the President's policy 
regarding human embryonic stem cell research.''
  I guess in the spirit of compromise, we wanted to show we are willing 
to compromise. We are willing to try to meet the President halfway. We 
know the President's strong feelings against this; they are misguided, 
nonetheless. Plus, the fact that, although not yet before the Senate, 
we will have a veto override vote on a stem cell bill he vetoed earlier 
this year. I don't know if we will have the votes to override. We may. 
With that, we thought we will show our good faith in saying to the 
President: OK, we are willing to compromise. We will take that language 
out. That is what we have done with the amendment that is at the desk. 
We have taken that language out of the bill.
  However, on another aspect in terms of the administration saying it 
is an irresponsible and excessive level of spending, I will say more 
about that in my opening statement, but the fact is, in the last 5 
years, under the leadership of Senator Specter, when I was ranking 
member, this appropriations bill exceeded the President's budget 
request every single year. I thank Senator Specter for that. He 
provided great leadership. But the President never once threatened to 
veto one of those bills and never did, even though we exceeded his 
budget. This year, however, the President has said he is going to veto 
it because we exceeded his budget. What is the difference? Because the 
Congress changed hands? I don't think Senator Specter or I give a hoot 
about that. What we care about is investing in education and health, 
job training, biomedical research, all the other good things this bill 
does.
  I respectfully disagree with the President that it is irresponsible. 
I believe it is responsible. We met our budget allocations. We are 
within our pay-go limitations. We do not exceed our budget allocation 
in this bill whatsoever.
  I wished to make that clear for other Senators. We are on this bill. 
We have dropped the stem cell language. I did this in consultation with 
Senator Specter as a good faith reaching out to the White House to say: 
We are willing to compromise. So we will take it out, but we are going 
to stand firm on our funding levels because they are reasonable. They 
are within our budget allocation. They don't bust the budget.
  I yield the floor to my partner in this for many years, Senator 
Specter, for his opening statement. I know he has to get back to the 
Judiciary Committee. I will return and make my opening statement at 
that time.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I thank the Chair and note for the record 
that the other Senator from Pennsylvania is presiding. I do not use the 
term ``junior Senator'' because Senator Casey is so distinguished, I 
wouldn't want to have any suggestion of limited status.
  We are taking up now the appropriations bill which has no rival for 
greater importance to America. Others may stand alongside it as equals, 
but when you deal with the Nation's health and education and labor, job 
safety, job training and medical research, the Centers for Disease 
Control, and Head Start, we deal with the fundamentals of governmental 
involvement for the general welfare as recited in the Constitution. 
Health is our No. 1 capital asset. Without going into any details

[[Page S12956]]

on that, I know that in depth from personal experience. Without your 
health, you can't do anything. But similarly, or about as important, is 
an education, to be able to do something productive and constructive.
  We have submitted a bill which we believe fairly addresses the needs 
of the country and is not excessive in its expenditures. Last year's 
bill for this committee was $144.8 billion. The President has come in 
with a budget request of $141.3 billion. That is $3.5 billion less than 
last year. If one figures in inflation, we are looking at about a $7.2 
billion cut. We simply can't accommodate that and do the Pell grants, 
the education funding, the title I funding, the President's program on 
Leave No Child Behind or the National Institutes of Health. We are out 
of fat. We are through tissue. We are to the bone and beyond.
  The National Institutes of Health are the crown jewels of the Federal 
Government, maybe the only jewels of the Federal Government. Enormous 
strides have been made in combating the major ailments of our society--
heart disease, cancer, Alzheimer's, and Parkinson's--but in FY06 there 
was a $50 million cut on the National Cancer Institute, which I won't 
call scandalous or outlandish, I will say it is inappropriate. This 
year we have added in this budget only $1 billion. When I say ``only,'' 
at $20 billion, raising it to $29.9, that doesn't keep up with the cost 
of inflation. There are many grants which are now being turned away by 
NIH.
  We had a vote last night on a motion to recommit the bill on 
Commerce-Justice-Science. I voted against recommitment and made a brief 
floor statement that to send the bill back to committee to come back 
with the President's figure would constitute a surrender of the 
congressional responsibility to appropriate.
  Article I gives us that responsibility and the authority. If we are 
going to accept the President's figure, then why don't we start there 
and leave us to fill in the blanks. But so that the record will contain 
a statement on legislative process, if anybody is watching on C-SPAN 2, 
coming to these bills, the one today on Labor, Health and Human 
Services, and Education and coming to the bill which we passed last 
night on Commerce-Justice-Science, it is an elaborate, painstaking 
process. There are hearings. There are deliberations. There are 
meetings. Then there is what is called a markup in the subcommittee. We 
go through the budget.

  Meanwhile, staff has worked diligently on it. If it was generally 
known how hard the staff works, people would be amazed. They say if you 
asked: How many people in Washington in the Federal Government work? 
that most people would respond about half. The fact is, this is a very 
difficult job, especially for staff. Senators work too. So do House 
Members. Without going into that, though, we did not come up with these 
figures and pull them out of the air. They were worked through very 
carefully.
  The bill which was passed yesterday had some increases which were 
very vital increases. They were increases on law enforcement which 
America needs. For example, the appropriation for the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation was increased by $383 million over the preceding year.
  The Community Oriented Policing Services, the program known as COPS, 
to get additional law enforcement officers on the street, was increased 
by $1.639 million. That means that America is being better protected. 
It goes to the local governments. It is seed money. They hire 
additional police. The Federal allocation does not last long. Then it 
is our expectation they will keep the police.
  State and local law enforcement assistance was increased by $163 
million. I refer to that only briefly to give you some idea as to what 
we did yesterday and why it seemed to me to be inappropriate to refer 
it back to committee, which means we would take the President's figure, 
which was about $3.2 billion lower, in another subcommittee worked 
under the distinguished leadership of Senator Mikulski and Senator 
Shelby. If we are to discharge our responsibilities under the 
Constitution, we have to stand by our guns as to what we want to do.
  Now, I am not saying the figure on yesterday's bill is not to be 
modified. The President has set the tone on that when he vetoed the 
SCHIP bill. Congress came in at $35 billion over 5 years, and the 
President came in at $4.8 billion. Then he said he was willing to 
negotiate. There are some in the Congress who do not want to negotiate, 
who want to let the program lapse because it would be politically 
disadvantageous to the President if there is no continuation of the 
program for children's health.
  Well, I do not think that will happen. I do not think that should 
happen. Because if some Members of Congress stand in the way of 
negotiations and a compromise, people will find out about it and it 
will be a political detriment to those who stand in the way of 
negotiations.
  So as I said last night on the Senate floor, if you have the Senate 
bill on Commerce, Justice and Science higher than the President's 
figure by $3.2 billion, let's negotiate, just like the President said 
on SCHIP.
  On this bill, we are prepared to negotiate. The first line of 
negotiation has already been announced by Senator Harkin, and that was 
in response to a Statement of Administration Policy issued today from 
the Executive Office of the President:

       The Administration strongly opposes provisions in this bill 
     that overturn the President's policy regarding human 
     embryonic stem cell research.

  Well, Senator Harkin and I have considered this issue very carefully, 
and we have decided, much against our preference, to accede to what the 
President has strongly opposed. We do this in the context--not that we 
agree with the President, because we strongly disagree with him--but we 
would like to get this bill passed, and we are prepared to compromise.
  This stem cell issue is one which is very near and dear to me. We 
found out about the potential for stem cells in November of 1998. Ten 
days, two weeks later--I chaired the subcommittee--we had hearings. We 
had 20 hearings on it. The research has shown me that these stem cells 
are a tremendous potential for curing the maladies of the world. We 
have 400,000 of them that are frozen that are going to be thrown away.
  This is a long, involved subject, but in a nutshell, we are going to 
have Federal funding of stem cell research. It is a matter of when, not 
a matter of whether or if. It will happen. It will happen.
  So in removing this provision from the bill, I do it with great 
reluctance and great regret. But I do it after consultation with the 
groups, the advocacy groups for stem cell research. They have been 
consulted. They are in the middle of all this, and they understand the 
reasons for it. They also understand if we pursue this, there will be a 
great many amendments which could pass and be harmful to the interests 
of the health of this country and to what the advocacy groups are 
seeking to accomplish.
  So we come to a bill which I think America needs. It is worth 
pointing out that our bill is substantially under the bill passed by 
the House of Representatives. We have come in at $152.1 billion. The 
House of Representatives has come in at 154.2 billion. So they are $2.1 
billion higher than we are. But this is our best judgment as to what 
ought to be done.
  If anybody disagrees with it, Senators have the right to come to the 
floor and offer amendments, if they want to reduce the funding. We are 
prepared to listen. And we are prepared to negotiate with the 
President. But I am not prepared to take the figure the President has 
automatically. I am not prepared to do that. If we are going to do 
that, there is no reason to have the hearings and the meetings and the 
markup and the full committee and the laborious work we go through. If 
we are going to take the President's figure, it may as well come out of 
the White House as to what they are doing, if all we are left to do is 
fill in the blanks. I think it would be a dereliction of duty for us 
not to come forward with our conclusions on what appropriations are 
necessary for these three major Departments.
  At the present time we are proceeding here, we have started the 
confirmation proceedings of Judge Michael Mukasey. I was there earlier 
this morning, and I have to return there. So I will be taking care of 
my duties here as best I can. Since I am not twins,

[[Page S12957]]

there will be someone else here to take over on the occasions when I 
cannot be here. But I did want these views to be expressed, and there 
is a long, erudite statement prepared by extraordinary staff, Bettilou 
Taylor--some call her the 101st Senator, but I think that diminishes 
her standing--and Sudip Parikh.
  So, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that statement be printed 
in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                 Floor Statement--Senator Arlen Specter


 FY 2008 LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AND EDUCATION APPROPRIATIONS 
                                  BILL

       Mr. President, the Labor, Health and Human Services and 
     Education bill before the Senate today totals $152.1 billion, 
     an increase of $7.3 billion over the FY'07 level and $10.8 
     billion over the President's budget. The bill that passed the 
     House of Representatives contains $154.2 billion, an increase 
     of $2.1 billion over the Senate.
       The funds contained in this bill address this nation's 
     public health problems and continue to strengthen our 
     biomedical research, assure a quality education for America's 
     children, and offer opportunities for individuals seeking to 
     improve job skills.
       At this time, I want to take this opportunity to thank the 
     distinguished Chairman of the Subcommittee, Senator Tom 
     Harkin, for his hard work. This bill is not an easy one to 
     maneuver through the subcommittee and full committee and it 
     is a major accomplishment getting it to the floor for 
     consideration.
       Some of the key funding levels in the bill include:
       $29.9 billion for the National Institutes of Health, $1 
     billion over FY'07
       $4 million for Embryo Adoption
       $2.170 billion for Ryan White AIDS programs
       $75 million for mentoring programs
       $300 million for Family Planning programs
       $100 million for Mentoring Programs
       $12 million for a Cord Blood Stem Cell Bank
       $2 million for administering asbestos claims
       $1.1 million for mesothelioma registry and tissue bank
       $220 million to continue construction projects at the 
     Centers for Disease Control
       $2.161 billion for Low Income Home Energy Assistance
       $200 million for Children's Hospital Graduate Medical 
     Education
       $2.3 billion for Community Health Centers
       $102 million for Healthy Start
       $7.1 billion for Head Start
       $828.5 million for Worker Protection Programs
       $5.25 billion for Job Training Programs
       $13.9 billion for Title I Grants to Disadvantaged Students
       $11.2 billion for Special Education State Grants
       $14.5 billion for Pell Grants to support a maximum grant of 
     $4,310
       $313.4 million for Gear Up
       $43.5 million for youth offender programs
       $420 million for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, 
     in addition
       Let me discuss in detail the major elements of this bill:


                            MEDICAL RESEARCH

       The bill before the Senate contains $29.9 billion for the 
     National Institutes of Health. The $1 billion increase over 
     the FY'07 level will continue the important work of thousands 
     of researchers across this nation. These additional funds are 
     critical in catalyzing scientific discoveries that will lead 
     to a better understanding in preventing and treating the 
     disorders that afflict men, women, and children in our 
     society.
       Each year, the Labor-HHS Subcommittee holds numerous 
     hearings on medical research issues. Testimony is heard from 
     the NIH Institute Directors, medical experts, patients, 
     family members, and advocates asking for increased biomedical 
     research funding to find the causes and cures for autism, 
     Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease, spinal cord injury, 
     muscular dystrophy, ALS, AIDS, diabetes, heart disease, and 
     the many cancers affecting millions of Americans. But the 
     diseases I just mentioned are the ones that everyone knows. 
     However, there are a number of orphan diseases, those 
     affecting 200,000 people or less, that are just as important 
     but not often talked about. Research also needs to be 
     specifically focused on orphan diseases such as spinal 
     muscular atrophy, Ataxia's, Batten disease, fibromyalgia, 
     Fragile X and spina bifida.


               CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION

       The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is the lead 
     Federal agency for protecting the health and safety of 
     Americans at home and abroad. To address these needs the bill 
     includes $6.4 billion for programs at the CDC. The CDC's 
     ability to respond quickly to address this nation's health 
     concerns has been proven over the last several years. Within 
     minutes of the September 11 attack, CDC set up an emergency 
     operations center and began to deploy supplies and staff, 
     issuing health alerts and responding to State needs. CDC 
     redirected more than 2,000 staff to focus their resources on 
     the anthrax crisis to identifying the disease and ensuring 
     that health professionals were properly trained in 
     recognizing the signs of anthrax. During the gulf coast 
     hurricanes, the CDC staff was on the ground to assess and 
     mitigate the infectious disease risk to residents of flooded 
     areas. Last June, CDC also quickly identified a patient with 
     a drug resistant strain of TB and took steps to isolate the 
     patient and protect the American public. The Committee has 
     included $1.7 billion to improve this nation's research 
     capacities and to detect and control emerging infectious 
     disease threats in the U.S. and around the world. The 
     Committee has included $220 million to continue the 
     renovation of the CDC facilities in Atlanta. With the funds 
     provided in FY'08, we will only need one more year of funding 
     to complete the modernization of the CDC campus.


                    PANDEMIC INFLUENZA PREPAREDNESS

       Although press attention regarding pandemic influenza has 
     waned, the threat of a pandemic influenza resulting in 
     millions of deaths worldwide remains high. The Committee has 
     included $888 million for pandemic influenza preparedness 
     activities. These dollars are to purchase pre-pandemic 
     vaccine stockpiles, spur vaccine development, purchase 
     antivirals, and for the development of diagnostic tests. The 
     remaining dollars are for on-going pandemic preparedness 
     activities within the Department of Health & Human Services 
     and the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention.


                               MENTORING

       In this nation it is estimated that more than 772,500 
     juveniles are members of gangs, dropout rates in some school 
     districts exceed 60% and the direct and indirect cost of 
     youth violence exceeds $158 billion a year.
       Mentoring programs have proven to steer children away from 
     gangs, violence and crime. Studies show that mentored 
     children are less likely to start using drugs and alcohol or 
     commit violent acts. They are also more likely to graduate 
     from high school and go on to a higher education. 
     Unfortunately, the demand for mentors far exceeds the supply.
       To address these concerns the bill includes $75 million, 
     including $50 million to support mentoring programs for 
     children who are at risk of failing academically, dropping 
     out of school, or involved in criminal or delinquent 
     activities. These funds will be awarded to local education 
     agencies and non-profit community-based organizations to 
     support mentoring programs. Also included is $25 million 
     targeted to areas with the highest dropout rates and schools 
     designated as persistently dangerous. Funds will be used to 
     increase the number of mentors, identify children at an early 
     age and link them with mentors to provide support before 
     children get involved in criminal behavior.


                 MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION

       This Subcommittee has always been concerned about mine 
     safety, but the many accidents in recent years have sharpened 
     the Subcommittee's focus.
       The regulations governing mine safety have evolved slowly 
     from primitive beginnings in 1891. In the 1930's, well over 
     2300 people were dying annually in mining accidents. In 1941, 
     Congress established the forerunner of the Mine Safety and 
     Health Administration. The passage of the Mine Act in 1977 
     established MSHA, placed it in the Department of Labor, and 
     established the current regulatory framework. The Congress 
     amended the Mine Act in 2006 to strengthen its safety 
     provisions in response to the recent incidents. Within the 
     total provided, the bill includes $330.1 million for the Mine 
     Safety and Health Administration, including $2 million for 
     mine rescue and recovery activities. This is an increase 
     of $16.5 million over the FY'07 level. The increase will 
     be used to accelerate the implementation of the MINER act 
     to improve health and safety conditions for miners.


                                GEAR UP

       The bill provides $313.4 million for Gaining Early 
     Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs. These 
     funds will be used to assist high schools to help low-income 
     students prepare for and pursue postsecondary education.


             CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL GRADUATE MEDICAL EDUCATION

       To support health professions training in children's 
     teaching hospitals, the bill provides $200 million. The 
     amount provided is a $97 million cut below the FY'07 level. 
     However, the bill that passed the House contains $307 million 
     and I will support the House figure during conference 
     negotiations.


                        COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS

       To help provide primary health care services to the 
     medically indigent and underserved populations in rural and 
     urban areas, the bill contains $2.2 billion for community 
     health centers. This amount represents an increase of $250 
     million over the FY 2007 level.


                            SUBSTANCE ABUSE

       For prevention and treatment of substance abuse, the bill 
     includes $3.4 billion, including $2.1 billion for treatment 
     programs, $197.1 million for prevention and $923.1 million 
     for mental health programs. The latest estimates indicate 
     that millions of Americans with serious substance abuse 
     problems go untreated each year. The amounts provided will 
     help address the treatment gap.


                                 LIHEAP

       The bill provides $2.161 billion for the Low Income Home 
     Energy Assistance Program

[[Page S12958]]

     (LIHEAP) the key heating and cooling program for low income 
     families in Pennsylvania and states throughout the nation. 
     Funding supports grants to states to deliver critical 
     assistance to low income households to help meet higher 
     energy costs.


                             AGING PROGRAMS

       For programs serving the elderly, the bill before the 
     Senate recommends $3.3 billion. Including $483.6 million for 
     the community service employment program to provide part-time 
     employment opportunities for low-income elderly; $350.6 
     million for supportive services and senior centers; $217.6 
     million for the national senior volunteer corps.; $773.6 
     million for senior nutrition programs; $1.1 billion for 
     research conducted at the National Institute on Aging; $162.6 
     million for family and native American caregiver support 
     programs; and $35 million for the Medicare insurance 
     counseling program.


                                  AIDS

       The bill includes $6.5 billion for AIDS research, 
     prevention and services. Included in this amount is $2.1 
     billion for Ryan White programs; $930.4 million for AIDS 
     prevention at the Centers for Disease Control; $2.9 billion 
     for AIDS research at the National Institutes of Health; and 
     $300 million for the Global Fund for HIV/AIDS.


                               HEAD START

       To enable all children to develop and function at their 
     highest potential, the bill includes $7.1 billion for the 
     Head Start program, an increase of $200 million over last 
     year's appropriation.


                               EDUCATION

       To enhance this Nation's investment in education, the bill 
     before the Senate contains $58.1 billion for discretionary 
     education programs, an increase of $532 million over last 
     year's funding level and $1.5 billion more than the 
     President's budget request.


                  EDUCATION FOR DISADVANTAGED CHILDREN

       The bill includes $13.9 billion, an increase of $1.1 
     billion for Title I grants to school districts. These 
     funds will provide services to approximately 15 million 
     school children in nearly all school districts across the 
     United states.


                               IMPACT AID

       For Impact Aid programs, the bill includes $1.24 billion. 
     Included in the recommendation is: $49.5 million for payments 
     for children with disabilities; $1.1 billion for basic 
     support payments; and $65.7 million for payments for Federal 
     property. In addition, $17.8 million is available for 
     construction activities at certain Impact Aid-eligible 
     schools.


                           SPECIAL EDUCATION

       For special education state grants, the bill includes $12.3 
     billion, an increase of $527.5 million more than provided in 
     FY'07. These funds will help local educational agencies meet 
     the requirement that all children--ages 3 through 21--with 
     disabilities have access to a free, appropriate public 
     education, and all infants and toddlers with disabilities 
     have access to early intervention services.


                            READING PROGRAMS

       The bill includes $800 million for Reading First State 
     Grants to implement comprehensive reading instruction to 
     ensure that every child can read by the end of the third 
     grade. Also included is $117.7 million for Early Reading 
     First designed for preschools to enhance the verbal skills, 
     phonological awareness, letter knowledge and early language 
     development of children ages 3 through 5. To help struggling 
     middle and high school students improve their reading skills, 
     the bill includes $36 million.


                21st CENTURY COMMUNITY LEARNING CENTERS

       For community learning centers activities, such as before- 
     and after-school, recreational, drug, violence prevention and 
     family literacy programs, the bill includes $1 billion.


                                  TRIO

       To improve post-secondary education opportunities for low-
     income first-generation college students, the Committee 
     recommendation includes $858.2 million for the TRIO program, 
     to assist in more intensive outreach and support services for 
     low income youth.


           CHARTER SCHOOLS AND VOLUNTARY PUBLIC SCHOOL CHOICE

       The bill includes $214.8 million for charter school grants 
     which help in the planning, development and implementation of 
     charter schools. Also included is $26.2 million for voluntary 
     public school choice to expand programs, especially for 
     parents whose children attend low-performing public schools.


                    STUDENT AID AND HIGHER EDUCATION

       For student aid and higher education programs, the bill 
     provides $18.4 billion. Pell grants, the cornerstone of 
     student financial aid is funded at $14.5 billion which will 
     provide a maximum grant award of $4,310. The bill also 
     includes $770.9 million for the supplemental educational 
     opportunity grants, and $980.5 million for the Federal work 
     study program. Also included are $858.2 million for TRIO 
     programs and $507.2 million for aid to institutional 
     development.


                              JOB TRAINING

       In this nation, we know all too well that unemployment 
     wastes valuable talent and potential, and ultimately weakens 
     our economy. The bill before us today provides $5.59 billion 
     for job training programs. This includes $1.65 billion for 
     the Job Corps; $864.2 million for Adult training; and $1.19 
     billion for retraining dislocated workers.


                                CLOSING

       There are many other notable accomplishments in this bill, 
     but for the sake of time, I mentioned just several of the key 
     highlights, so that the nation may grasp the scope and 
     importance of this bill.
       In closing, Mr. President, I again want to thank Senator 
     Harkin and his staff and the other Senators on the 
     Subcommittee for their cooperation.

  Mr. SPECTER. Before I yield the floor, I wish to compliment my 
distinguished colleague, Senator Tom Harkin. Senator Harkin and I have 
worked side by side. Sometimes I have been chairman; sometimes he has 
been chairman. I like it better when I am chairman. But I also like it 
when he is chairman. We have what we call a seamless transfer of the 
gavel.
  People complain there is a lot of bickering in Washington, DC, and 
there is too much infighting. Well, Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter do not 
do that. We try to set an example of working together in the public 
interest.
  May I also add, I do the same thing with Senator Robert P. Casey, 
Jr., my colleague from Pennsylvania. We meet frequently and go over the 
key issues. When there are major events--we had a big hearing in 
Philadelphia on juvenile gang violence. I invited Senator Casey to come 
along. He has had some ideas and some programs he has advocated, and he 
has invited me.
  We went to Pittsburgh to swear in some judges. I made sure it suited 
Senator Casey's schedule. People like to see Democrats and Republicans 
working together. Senator Casey and I do, and, I say to the Senator 
from Iowa, certainly you and I do, Mr. Chairman. So I thank you. I 
thank Ellen Murray and Sudip for their extraordinary work.
  Mr. HARKIN. I appreciate that.
  Mr. SPECTER. There is a story that behind every successful man there 
is a surprised mother-in-law. But in the case of Tom Harkin and Arlen 
Specter, it is Ellen and Bettilou.
  Mr. HARKIN. That is right.
  Mr. SPECTER. I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I thank my good friend, Senator Specter, 
for his very kind words, his generosity of spirit, and respond in kind 
that I have said many times to people that during the interregnum when 
the Republicans controlled the Senate--I say that jocularly--I was very 
fortunate and blessed to have Senator Specter as the chairman of this 
committee. He is right, we have worked together very closely over the 
years, and I thank him for that very close partnership and working 
relationship. He is a great leader in areas of health and education and 
medical research and so many other items. So I thank Senator Specter 
for that very close working relationship.
  I am pleased to bring to the floor the fiscal year 2008 
appropriations bill for Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, 
and related agencies.
  It has been said many times that the Defense appropriations bill is 
the bill that defends America. But this appropriations bill, the bill 
we have before us--the bill that funds Education and Health and Human 
Services and biomedical research and the Centers for Disease Control 
and Prevention--is the bill that defines America.
  This bill funds the most basic, essential, life-sustaining, and 
lifesaving services for millions of people in this country, including 
the most needy among us. It provides for the education of our children. 
It provides health care for many of our poorest citizens. It helps 
students from low- and middle-income families afford college. It funds 
medical research to help ease human suffering. It gives displaced 
workers a chance to get back on their feet.
  This bill does define us and says who we are as Americans. Despite 
extreme budget constraints, I believe we have produced a good bill. I 
wish we could have done more for these programs because we have some 
catching up to do. But we also have to be fiscally responsible. This 
bill fits within the budget resolution. It conforms to pay-go. It 
reflects the priorities of Senators on both sides of the aisle, and it 
reflects the values, ideals, and priorities of the American people.
  Again, I commend our ranking member, Senator Specter, for his 
leadership in helping to craft this bill. As Senator Specter said, we 
have had an amazingly productive partnership for

[[Page S12959]]

the last, as I count it, about 17, almost 18 years. As control of the 
Senate has switched between the two parties, we have passed the gavel 
back and forth, but there has been one constant and that is our shared 
commitment to investing in job training, in essential human services, 
in education, and cutting-edge biomedical research.
  One notable accomplishment of our bipartisan partnership was the 
doubling of funding at the National Institutes of Health over a 5-year 
period between 1998 and 2003. It started under a Democratic President, 
finished under a Republican President. But today, sadly, that 
achievement seems like ancient history. Today, it is an achievement in 
this bill simply to prevent a cut at the National Institutes of Health 
because that is what the President proposed in his budget. The 
President proposed a $279 million cut in funding for NIH, in things 
such as cancer research, Alzheimer's research, ALS research, and other 
lifesaving research being done through NIH.
  The National Institutes of Health is just one of the critical 
programs in this bill that the President's budget underfunds. Head 
Start, special education, job training all would face cuts if the 
President had his way.
  Overall, for all the programs in this appropriations bill, his budget 
request was $3.5 billion below last year's level. Let me repeat that. 
The President's budget was $3.5 billion below last year's level--not 
below an inflationary increase, below last year's level. So not only 
did his budget fail to keep up with inflation, it would take us back. 
That is unacceptable.

  President John Kennedy once said that ``to govern is to choose''--a 
famous line. Well, I tend to agree. Governing is also about setting 
priorities. The President has set his priorities. He is just days away 
from sending up a supplemental budget request for the war in Iraq. We 
hear it to be as much as $190 billion, and he will insist that we 
appropriate every single penny. Meanwhile, 2 weeks ago, rejecting pleas 
from many members of his own party, he vetoed the SCHIP bill, which 
would preserve health coverage for 6 million children nationwide and 
cover millions more who are currently uninsured. Now, the President, 
with his statement of policy that he sent up yesterday, is threatening 
to veto this bill.
  So think about it. The President is demanding that we continue to 
spend more than $12 billion a month in Iraq on the war, yet he is 
threatening to veto this appropriations bill because it spends $11 
billion a year more than what he wanted, for 1 year. The President says 
he wants $12 billion a month for the war in Iraq, but we shouldn't 
spend $11 billion over his budget for 1 full year for all of the other 
things we do in education and in health care and in human services.
  Under the Constitution, we know that the President proposes, the 
Congress disposes. So we in Congress get to set our priorities too. We 
also get to choose about governing. Rather than cut the essential 
programs and services in this bill, we have chosen in a bipartisan 
fashion to provide a very modest increase. So we respectfully disagree 
with the President. We believe it is time to make investments in this 
country. It is time for the President to put our own needs here at home 
first. For 5 years we have poured untold billions of U.S. taxpayers' 
dollars into schools, job programs, hospitals, and human services in 
Iraq. It is time we looked after those same needs here in America. That 
is exactly what we propose to do in this bill.
  This bill provides a modest increase of $1 billion for the National 
Institutes of Health. That is 3.5 percent. That is less than biomedical 
inflation. But the President's budget would slash investments in NIH, 
cutting 800 research grants that could lead to cures or treatments for 
heart disease, cancer, diabetes, or other diseases ravaging our people. 
This is a very exciting time in biomedical research. We are reaping the 
benefits of the Human Genome Project. It would be unconscionable and I 
think totally irresponsible to short-circuit this progress by cutting 
the funding for NIH. So we have, as I said, provided a modest increase 
of $1 billion for NIH in this bill.
  In this bill, we increase funding for Head Start by $200 million. I 
wish it were more. It should be more. We are just beginning to make up 
for the tens of thousands of children who have been lost to the program 
because of stagnant funding over the last several years. The 
President's budget would cut Head Start funding by $100 million. So the 
President's budget cuts it by $100 million; we increase it by $200 
million. The President's budget would cut thousands more children from 
the rolls of Head Start; ours would add to it. That is the difference. 
We believe the President's approach is unacceptable.
  In this bill, we provide an additional $457 million for special 
education. Again, it really ought to be more, and I will explain what I 
mean by that. If we accepted the President's budget, it would cut 
special education by $291 million.
  When IDEA passed--the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act--
when it passed the Congress--I guess it was about 30 years ago; yes, it 
has been about 30 years--when we passed the Individuals with 
Disabilities Education Act, we committed ourselves, we committed the 
Federal Government to paying up to 40 percent of the additional cost of 
educating kids with disabilities in our schools. Now, consider this: 
Prior to that time, most kids with disabilities were shunned aside. 
They were sent to State institutions, warehoused, and many of them 
never even went to school. But because of a decision--and I say to the 
Senator sitting in the chair, it was a Pennsylvania case, PARC, 
Pennsylvania Association of Retarded Citizens v. Pennsylvania, a 
landmark case.
  From that case, it was decided that if a State decided to provide a 
free public education for all its children, if it decided to do that, 
it could not then discriminate against kids with disabilities in 
providing that free, appropriate public education. Well, that then led, 
of course, to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act that 
passed the Congress. In that, we said: We are going to help. We think 
States should do this. States are mandated to do this under the 
Constitution, but we are going to help. So we are going to try over the 
years to build this up to where we provide at least 40 percent of the 
additional funding to mainstream kids with disabilities in our public 
schools.
  Where are we? Under President Bush, we are going backward. Two years 
ago, the Federal Government got up to 18 percent of this additional 
funding for kids with disabilities. We got up to 18 percent 2 years 
ago. In the last fiscal year, the Federal share dropped to 17 percent. 
If the President gets his way with his budget in 2008, we will be down 
to 16 percent. We have had a number of amendments on this floor, sense-
of-the-Senate resolutions, to get this up to 40 percent. Republicans 
and Democrats have voted for this. Yet the President's budget is taking 
us in the opposite direction, and that, of course, again is 
unacceptable. When we don't pick up the tab, when we don't do our share 
and our part in providing for special education, who gets stuck with 
the bill? Local property taxpayers. The States have to increase and 
keep increasing the share of local property taxes to pay for this. 
Again, that is unacceptable.
  Turning now to college education, we all know the cost of a college 
education is rising. It hits all of us pretty hard. It hits all middle-
class families and anyone who wants to get a college education. 
Obviously, it hits the poorest families the hardest. This bill provides 
an increase of more than $800 million for Pell grants over last year--
Pell grants, so that our poorest students have a chance to get a higher 
education. Building on that increase we put in the bill earlier, 
Senator Kennedy and Senator Enzi, the chair and ranking member of the 
authorizing committee on education, wrote a budget reconciliation 
bill that raises the maximum Pell grant award from $4,310 to $4,800. 
That is a boost of almost $500 a year for the neediest students--the 
largest increase in more than 30 years. But under the President's 
budget, the increase would be less than half that--about $230 a year. 
So again, our bill would increase that and provide for $800 million 
more for Pell grants over last year.

  One other item which is something of importance to every Senator is 
this bill increases funding for administering Social Security by $125 
million above the President's request. Now, why is that important? I 
will bet my colleagues

[[Page S12960]]

every Senator here and their State offices have been getting all kinds 
of cases coming in from people who have disability claims, but they are 
backlogged, backlogged, backlogged. They wait months and months, 
sometimes years, to get their disability claims administered. Well, 
this increase would allow us to make a dent in that backlog of 
disability claims. Again, we ought to be even more aggressive in 
reducing the backlog. But make no mistake, if we accept the President's 
budget, the Social Security Administration would have to institute a 
hiring freeze and the backlog of claims would skyrocket. It is bad 
enough the way it is right now, but under the President's budget, it 
would be unacceptable. So our bill would provide $125 million more for 
Social Security to begin to reduce the disability claims backlog.
  I think one of the most disturbing problems with the President's 
budget is it is kind of a total disregard, I would say, for the needs 
of our poorest people, the poorest citizens of our country. Just 
consider three programs that serve low-income children and families in 
this country. The three programs are the LIHEAP program, which is the 
Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, the Community Services Block 
Grant Program, and the Social Services Block Grant Program. Let's look 
at those three. These all serve the lowest income people in our 
country.
  The President's budget would cut LIHEAP by $379 million despite 
predictions of record energy prices this winter. This cut would force 
States to lower their benefits or serve fewer low-income individuals, 
many of whom are elderly and poor, many who are going without medical 
care, some cutting down on their food and other necessities in order to 
pay their heating bills.
  Then, the two block grants I mentioned, the community services block 
grant and the social services block grant, many of the States tie these 
together to provide essential services for our most disadvantaged 
people in this country.
  The community services block grant is a key safety net, providing 
assistance in areas such as job training, housing, and emergency food 
aid. This bill increases funding for the community services block grant 
by just a modest $40 million. The President's budget eliminated--the 
President's budget didn't just cut community services block grants, 
they zeroed it out--all $630 million zeroed out.
  The other block grant, the social services block grant, addresses 
some of our country's most vital human services needs, such as 
protecting children from abuse and neglect, caring for homeless 
seniors, providing services to children and families with severe 
disabilities, to mention just a few. The President's budget slashed the 
social services block grant by 30 percent. Our bill says no.
  The President has already cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans. We 
are not going to decimate programs for the poor at the same time. 
Enough is enough.
  So the bill we have before us invests in job training and employment 
services programs to help Americans develop the skills they need to 
find work. The President's budget cut job-training programs by $1 
billion; that is, from $3.6 billion last year, he would cut it to $2.6 
billion. This bill rejects that. This bill also provides $483 million 
for community services jobs for older Americans. The President's 
request was $350 million, which would have actually cut a lot of 
seniors from the program, seniors who are already working in that 
program.
  America's working families also count on the Labor Department to 
ensure that their workplaces are safe and that employers comply with 
labor laws. Unfortunately, the President has consistently underfunded 
the agencies that enforce these laws. Since 2001, OSHA--that is the 
Occupational Safety and Health Administration--has lost almost 10 
percent of its enforcement staff because of the President's budgets. 
This bill charts a new course. We invest $12 million over last year to 
rebuild OSHA staffing.
  When I describe the funding choices in this bill as ``investments,'' 
I choose my word carefully. It is a simple fact that when we invest in 
these programs, we save money in the long run and our country saves 
money in the long run. When the Minneapolis bridge collapsed this 
summer, we all talked about the large costs of failing to invest in our 
infrastructure, our physical infrastructure, our roads, our bridges, 
our highways, our rails.
  Well, what about failing to invest in our human infrastructure, our 
people? What can be more important than that investment? We know some 
things. We know that early childhood education pays many dividends 
later on in life and saves us money. We know that quality K-12 
education pays big dividends. We know that enabling kids to go to 
college and not be burdened with a lot of debt pays off with big 
dividends. We know that adding community health centers pays off, pays 
dividends by preventing emergency care and disability down the road. We 
know that job training pays big dividends by getting workers who are 
laid off of jobs--maybe they have gone overseas--retrained and equipped 
for new kinds of jobs so they can be productive, taxpaying citizens. 
All of what I mention pays huge future dividends.
  I said earlier that this bill defines America. It is important that 
this bill defines America as a compassionate nation, a nation that 
invests in its future, a nation, as the late Senator Hubert Humphrey 
used to say, that meets the needs of those at the beginning of life, 
those in the twilight of life, and those in the shadows of life.
  Again, I ask, how can we continue to pour endless billions of dollars 
into Iraq--more than $12 billion a month now, and counting--and yet we 
cut funding for the basic essential services here at home for our most 
needy citizens? This is a case of seriously misplaced priorities. We 
are doing our best to correct it in the bill before us today. 
Obviously, we have not been able to do everything we want or need to 
do, but this bill reflects the priorities of Senators on both sides of 
the aisle, and, as I said, we stayed within our budget allocation.
  Again, given all of this, I am genuinely saddened that the President 
has already pledged to veto the bill. I really cannot believe the 
President wants us to cut funding for cancer research and other 
lifesaving research through the NIH. I cannot believe the President 
wants to cut children from the rolls of Head Start. I cannot believe 
the President wants to eliminate the community services block grant, 
which is a basic life support for many of our neediest citizens. I 
cannot believe the President wants to cut funding for home heating 
assistance for poor elderly. Yet the President's budget would require 
all of these cuts to essential programs and services. It would be 
unconscionable.
  So all I can assume is that the President is getting very bad advice. 
Perhaps his advisers have told him to veto this bill to score some 
political points--whatever that might be. If so, it is bad advice 
because there is not an ounce of extravagance in the bill. It meets the 
essential needs of the American people in terms of education, health 
and human services, and job training. It passed out of committee 26 to 
3. You cannot get much more bipartisan than that.
  I might again point out, as I did earlier, that over the last 5 
years, this appropriations bill--again, it was under the leadership of 
Senator Specter, and I was ranking member--every year was above the 
President's request. Not once did the President threaten to veto it. 
Well, this year, some games are being played. The President's budget 
slashes all these programs. We come in to replenish the money and put 
it in and to give modest increases, all within our budget allocation, 
but for the first time in 6 years the President says he is going to 
veto it. What is the difference? Is the only difference now that the 
Democrats are now in charge? Because, as I said, every year, Senator 
Specter's bill was higher than the President's request, but he never 
threatened to veto one of those bills and he never did. This year, he 
says he will. It sounds to me like the last Karl Rove tactic before he 
left town. This sounds like a Rove tactic.
  I say to the President that he is gone, he is history--bad history, 
but he is history. Now, Mr. President, do the right thing. Do what we 
have for the last 5 years and work with Congress. We are willing to 
meet you halfway, as I said earlier.
  One of the objections in the President's veto threat, which he sent 
down

[[Page S12961]]

here yesterday and I have here, was that he opposes overturning the 
President's policy regarding human embryonic stem cell research. All 
right. We took it out, even though Senator Specter and I and our 
committee feel very strongly about this. We have had hearings and 
hearings on this since 1998. Under Senator Specter's leadership, we 
have passed legislation to overturn the President's policy. I think we 
got, if I am not mistaken, about 66 votes in the Senate to do that. I 
think I am right on that. So, again, we feel strongly about that, as 
strongly as the President may feel about it, but in the spirit of 
compromise and getting our bill done and moving it ahead, we decided to 
take it out, and we did.
  So I hope that in the next 24 hours the White House will listen to 
the debate and they know what is going on and they have their people up 
here; this is no secret--I hope the President will revisit this, and I 
would like to see a new Statement of Administration Policy coming down 
saying: You did, in good will, take out the stem cell thing, and that 
was half of our objection. We will meet you halfway and accept the bill 
as you have it.
  Mr. President, that would be the good thing to do. I still am hopeful 
that the President will do that. There is really no justification now 
for vetoing this bill. If we are over what he wanted, we have been over 
what he wanted for the last 5 years and he never vetoed the bill. So I 
hope the President will send down a new statement of policy and that 
they will support this bill because I think the bill is going to have 
big support here. It passed committee 26 to 3. If I am not mistaken, 
those three votes were opposed to the stem cell provisions we had in 
the bill. Had they not been there, we would have had a unanimous vote 
in committee.
  I think this bill will get a big vote here on the Senate floor. It 
would be helpful and would ease things and would, I believe, lift a lot 
of the contentiousness that goes on around town here if the President 
would come out and say: OK, we will meet you halfway; you took that 
out, so we will take the bill as it is. That would make things go very 
smoothly.
  Again, we look forward to the consideration of the bill on the floor 
this week. We want to use our time productively. I encourage Senators, 
if they have amendments, to bring them to the floor in a timely fashion 
today so we can complete our work and get the bill to conference as 
soon as possible.
  Senator Reid said on Monday that we would stay in this week--and 
Saturday, if necessary--to finish this important bill. Well, I have 
placed all my plans on hold. I intend to be here, if necessary, Friday 
and Saturday--or Sunday, if necessary--to finish this vitally important 
bill. I take the leader at his word that we will be here Friday and 
Saturday if we need to be. However, if Senators come over today and 
offer amendments today and tomorrow, hopefully, we can finish this bill 
in a timely manner. Again, Mr. President, we are on the bill, and I 
hope Senators will come over and offer their amendments.

  Mr. President, on August 2, 2007, by a vote of 83 to 14 this Senate 
approved S. 1, the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007. 
The President signed the legislation on September 14, 2007. This ethics 
reform legislation will significantly improve the transparency and 
accountability of the legislative process.
  Pursuant to the new rule XLIV, it is required that the chairman of 
the committee of jurisdiction certify that certain information related 
to congressionally directed spending be identified and that the 
required information be available on a publicly accessible 
congressional Web site in a searchable format at least 48 hours before 
a vote on the pending bill. In addition, Members who request such items 
are required to certify in writing that neither they nor their 
immediate family have a pecuniary interest in the items they requested, 
and the committee is required to make those certification letters 
available on the Internet. The information provided includes 
identification of the congressionally directed spending and the name of 
the Senator who requested such spending. This information is contained 
in the committee report numbered 110-107, dated June 29, 2007, and has 
been available on the Internet for 8 weeks. The Member letters 
concerning pecuniary interests are also available on the Internet.
  I am submitting for the Record the certification by the chairman of 
the Committee on Appropriations, Senator Byrd. I ask unanimous consent 
to have it printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

       Senator BYRD. I certify that the information required by 
     Senate Rule XLIV, related to congressionally directed 
     spending, has been identified in the Committee report 
     numbered 110-107, filed on June 27, 2007, and that the 
     required information has been available on a publicly 
     accessible congressional website in a searchable format at 
     least 48 hours before a vote on the pending bill.

  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence 
of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Menendez). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.


                         CIA Inspector General

  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, there was discussion on the floor this 
morning about intelligence matters. I wanted to spend a few minutes to 
discuss a matter of bipartisan concern in the Senate. What I am talking 
about is the very troubling development that came to light last week 
indicating that the head of the CIA, General Hayden, has decided to 
launch an investigation into the Agency's inspector general.
  I and others--and I particularly commend Senator Bond, our vice 
chairman of the committee, for his excellent statement on this matter--
are very concerned about this new development. It is particularly 
important that the inspector general of the Central Intelligence Agency 
function with independence. Because our work by its very nature--
entrusted with those secrets essential to protect our country's 
security--has to be done in private and is classified, we need an 
independent inspector general to ensure accountability.
  Because of a development such as this, I think this can have a 
chilling effect on the independence of the inspector general at the 
Central Intelligence Agency.
  The Congress created these inspector general positions for a reason, 
and that is to ensure accountability, to ensure Government efficiency. 
Virtually all of the agencies have these key positions and, of course, 
it is their job to report findings to the Congress.
  Perhaps General Hayden is concerned about the work of Mr. Helgerson, 
the inspector general for the Agency. There is an appropriate process 
for bringing up those concerns. If the head of the Central Intelligence 
Agency is concerned about how the CIA inspector general is doing his 
job, he ought to bring them to the President's Council on Integrity and 
Effectiveness.
  It is my view that particular body has been handling complaints 
against inspectors general, and it is my view they are doing their job 
well and appropriately. But to have an investigation such as this, in 
my view, is going to interfere with the inspectors general 
independence. If the Director of the CIA is ordering investigations 
into the inspector general's activities and plans to ``suggest 
improvements'' for the inspector general to consider, my view is that 
can undermine the inspector general's independence.
  I do not want to see inspectors general intimidated. That is the 
bottom line here, and I do not want the Director of the CIA interfering 
with the extraordinarily important activities of the inspector general 
at the Agency.
  Let me also state that my concern is part of a view that there has 
been a pattern at the Agency of being less than transparent. I and, 
again, senior Members of this body, particularly Senator Bond and 
Senator Roberts, have worked very closely and in a bipartisan way to 
ensure that the inspector general's report on the role of the Agency in 
the runup to 9/11 was going to be made public. I can tell you that, 
unfortunately, General Hayden fought that bipartisan effort every step 
of the way.
  The fact is, it was a balanced effort. The particular recommendations 
of the

[[Page S12962]]

inspector general were modest in nature. They did not require that 
anybody be fired or cavalierly dismissed. It called for what is known 
as an accountability board, something, again, to ensure that the 
watchdogs are in place to protect this country's security and do it in 
a fashion that is committed to the American principles of transparency 
and openness.
  I have written Admiral McConnell who, of course, is the head of the 
national intelligence community, and asked him to direct General Hayden 
to cease and cease immediately the investigation that is now going on 
into the work of the inspector general at the Central Intelligence 
Agency.
  It is my view that people who know they are doing the right thing are 
not afraid of oversight. It is time for the head of the intelligence 
community, Admiral McConnell, to put an end, and an immediate end, to 
General Hayden's attempt to muzzle the CIA's inspector general.
  I wrap up by saying, again, we are not talking about a matter that is 
partisan. Senator Bond, who has been so cooperative on these matters 
relating to accountability and transparency, said it very well. Senator 
Bond said the inspector general had done great work. In his statement 
on this matter, Senator Bond noted that the Agency regrettably has a 
track record of resisting accountability.
  So that is what this is all about. The ball is now in Admiral 
McConnell's court. It is my hope that in the next few days, Admiral 
McConnell will direct General Hayden to cease this investigation into 
the work of the CIA's inspector general.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.

                          ____________________