[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 14]
[Senate]
[Pages 19119-19127]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. GRAHAM of South Carolina (for himself, Mr. Schumer, Mr. 
        Cornyn, and Mr. Hatch):
  S. 1445. A bill to provide criminal penalties for false personation 
of a military officer for purposes of

[[Page 19120]]

harassing military families and to clarify the false personation 
statute with respect to officers and employees of the United States; to 
the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise today to speak to an important 
measure that Senators Graham, Schumer, Cornyn, and I have introduced 
entitled The Military Family Hoax Prevention Act. As our country 
concludes major combat activities in Operation Iraqi Freedom, we all 
stand tall with pride over the dedication, courage, and valor displayed 
by the men and women of our Armed Forces.
  We all are grateful to the men and women of the U.S. military who 
selflessly serve our country. They have answered the call of our 
Commander in Chief to go abroad and defend the freedoms and values we 
cherish here at home. While carrying out their mission, they have acted 
admirably during the liberation of an enslaved nation, and continue to 
serve our country honorably. These men and women deserve our profound 
gratitude.
  As we watch the soldiers returning home from deployment, some from 
extended tours of duty, I am reminded of the personal sacrifice these 
men and women make while they are gone. These men and women leave 
behind family and friends who undoubtedly worry constantly about their 
loved ones on deployment. In many instances, family members are not 
able to know of the day-to-day safety of their loved ones during 
deployment. This feeling of helplessness was aptly described by the 
brother of Jessica Lynch upon her return to West Virginia when he 
discussed her family's desire to learn any bit of information following 
her capture.
  It has come to my attention that during Operation Iraqi Freedom some 
military families received cruel hoaxes concerning their deployed 
family members in Iraq. On three separate occasions that I am aware of, 
families of service men and women here in the United States received 
telephone calls from sick pranksters telling them that their family 
members serving in Iraq had either been killed in battle or taken 
prisoner of war.
  You can imagine the devastation and agony of the families who 
received these malicious telephone calls. These families were forced 
into a desperate scramble to learn information about the fate of their 
loved ones. These hoaxes require the military to dedicate resources to 
provide information to military family members.
  Let me talk briefly about one specific hoax and the potentially 
devastating consequences that can flow from it. A family in Arizona 
received a telephone call that a family member had been killed in Iraq. 
After contacting the military, the family was told that only the 
military notifies families in these instances, and that they do so in 
person, not over the telephone. The military told the family that they 
had no information that their family member, the soldier, was killed 
and that they would try to learn more.
  The military discovered that this telephone call was a cruel hoax and 
arranged for the soldier to call home from a satellite telephone to 
reassure his family. Unfortunately, the soldier later wrote to his 
family and told them that another soldier who was transporting a 
satellite telephone to him so that he could call home had been killed 
while trying to deliver the telephone.
  This type of action cannot go unpunished. The current false 
impersonation statute does not punish someone who falsely impersonates 
a military employee engaging in this type of conduct. This legislation, 
the Military Family Hoax Prevention Act, would remedy this loophole in 
the current law. It would prohibit those who derive some perverted 
pleasure terrorizing family members who intensely wait for word from 
abroad from their military family members.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself, Mr. McCain, Mrs. Feinstein, and Mr. 
        Cornyn):
  S. 1447. A bill to establish grant programs to improve the health of 
border area residents and for bioterrorism preparedness in the border 
area, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, 
Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill with 
Senators McCain, Feinstein, and Cornyn entitled the Border Health 
Security Act of 2003. This bill addresses the tremendous health 
problems confronting our Nation's southwestern border.
  The United States-Mexico border region is defined in the U.S.-Mexico 
Border Health Commission authorizing legislation as the area of land 
100 kilometers, or 62.5 miles, north and south of the international 
boundary. It stretches 2,000 miles from California, through Arizona and 
New Mexico to the southern tip of Texas and is estimated to have a 
population of 12 million residents.
  The border region comprises two sovereign nations, 25 Native American 
tribes, and four States in the United States and six States in Mexico.
  Why should we provide some focus to this geographic region? The 
situation along the border is among the most dire in the country. In 
the past, we have recognized problems with other regions, through the 
Denali, Delta, and Appalachian commissions, and have provided targeted 
funding to those areas. The U.S.-Mexico Border Health Commission, 
legislation I sponsored with Senators McCain, Simon and Hutchison, was 
created for the same reasons and annually receives about $4 million in 
funding that is matched by $1 million from the Mexican government for 
administrative purposes to improve international cooperation and 
agreements to tackle health problems in the region. However, we need to 
take the next step and provide resources to address the problems.
  In the border region, three of the ten poorest counties in the United 
States are located in the border area, 21 of the counties have been 
designated as economically distressed, approximately 430,000 people 
live in 1,200 colonias in Texas and New Mexico, which are 
unincorporated communities that are characterized by substandard 
housing, unsafe public drinking water and wastewater systems, very high 
unemployment, and the lowest per capita income as a region in the 
Nation.
  The result is a health system that confronts tremendous health 
problems with little or no resources. Although it is difficult to 
assess the health needs along the border since data is more often 
collected on a statewide basis, we do know that diabetes, cancer, 
infectious disease such as tuberculosis, and health disease rates are 
far greater than the national average but the residents in the area 
have the highest uninsured rates in the country.
  In fact, the States of Texas, New Mexico, and California rank as the 
States with the three worst uninsured rates in the country to begin 
with. Arizona is not much better and ranks 46th in the Nation, just 
ahead of Louisiana and Oklahoma. The uninsured rates of these States 
are: 23.5 percent in Texas, 20.7 percent in New Mexico, 19.5 percent in 
California, and 18.3 percent in Arizona.
  However, the figures along the border are even worse, as the rates of 
uninsured are higher still than that in the four States overall. 
Uninsured rates in many border counties are estimated to be above 30 
percent and as high as 50 percent in certain communities.
  As the U.S.-Mexico Border Commission notes, ``The border is 
characterized by weaknesses in the border health systems and 
infrastructure, lack of public financial resources, poor distribution 
of physicians and other health professionals and hospitals. Moreover, 
the low rates of health insurance coverage and low incomes puts access 
to health services out of reach for many border residents and thus 
keeps the border communities at risk.''
  The U.S.-Mexico Border Commission has identified and approved of an 
agenda through its ``Health Border 2010'' initiative, which seeks to, 
among other things: reduce by 25 percent the population lacking access 
to a primary provider; reduce the female breast cancer death rate by 20 
percent; reduce the cervical cancer death rate by 30 percent; reduce 
deaths due to diabetes by 10 percent; reduce hospitalizations due

[[Page 19121]]

to diabetes by 25 percent; reduce the incidence of HIV cases by 50 
percent; reduce the incidence of tuberculosis cases by 50 percent; 
reduce the incidence of hepatitis A and B cases by 50 percent; reduce 
the infant mortality rate by 15 percent; and increase initiation of 
prenatal care in the first trimester by 85 percent.
  However, the U.S.-Mexico Border Commission lacks the resources that 
are needed to address those important goals. The bipartisan legislation 
I am introducing today with Senators McCain, Feinstein, and Cornyn 
would address that problem by reauthorizing the U.S.-Mexico Border 
Health Commission at $10 million and authorizing another $200 million 
in funding to improve the infrastructure, access, and the delivery of 
health care services along the entire U.S.-Mexico border.
  These grants would be flexible and allow the individual communities 
to establish their own priorities with which to spend these funds for 
the following range of purposes: maternal and child health, primary 
care and preventative health, public health and public health 
infrastructure, health promotion, oral health, behavioral and mental 
health, substance abuse, health conditions that have a high prevalence 
in the border region, medical and health services research, community 
health worker or promotoras, health care infrastructure, including 
planning and construction grants, health disparities, environmental 
health, health education, and outreach and enrollment services with 
respect to Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program, 
CHIP.
  We would certainly expect those grants would be used for the purpose 
of striving to achieve the measurable goals established by the ``Health 
Border 2010'' initiative.
  In addition, the bill contains authorization for $25 million for 
funding to border communities to improve the infrastructure, 
preparedness, and education of health professionals along the U.S.-
Mexico border with respect to bioterrorism. This includes the 
establishment of a health alert network to identify and communicate 
information quickly to health providers about emerging health care 
threats.
  On October 15, 2001, just one month after the September 11, 2001, 
attack on our Nation, Secretary Thompson spoke to the U.S.-Mexico 
Border Health Commission and urged them to put together an application 
for $25 million for bioterrorism and preparedness. The Commission has 
done so but has not seen targeted funding despite the vulnerability 
that border communities have with respect to a bioterrorism attack. Our 
legislation addresses the vulnerability of communities along the border 
and targets funding to those communities specifically to improve 
infrastructure, training, and preparedness.
  I ask unanimous consent to include articles from the El Paso Times 
and the Los Angeles Times from October 2001 with respect to those 
meetings and hope the Secretary will be an advocate with us in the 
passage of this legislation.
  There being no objection, the articles were ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                [From the El Paso Times, Oct. 16, 2001]

               Health Secretary To Fight for Border Funds

                        (By Tammy Fonce-Olivas)

       U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson 
     wants to arm the border with $25 million to combat illnesses.
       ``Diseases don't stop at the border,'' said Thompson, who 
     was in El Paso on Monday. ``We need to work in a 
     collaborative fashion to improve the health of the border 
     neighborhood. It's our neighborhood.''
       He talked about the additional funds he is seeking for 
     border health initiatives while chairing the fourth 
     binational meeting of the U.S.-Mexico Border Health 
     Commission.
       Thompson was joined by Julio Frenk Mora, Mexico's Secretary 
     of Health.
       Thompson said he didn't know if he would get the $25 
     million from Congress but vowed to make a strong effort to 
     get more funding for programs to improve access to public 
     health for those living along the border and bolstering 
     border health research.
       Frenk Mora also said he will be fighting for more money to 
     support border health programs. Frenk is a co-chairman of the 
     commission.
       The group is composed of 26 public-health leaders from both 
     sides of the U.S.-Mexico border, who are devoted to fighting 
     health problems, such as tuberculosis, AIDS and diabetes.
       Dr. Laurence Nickey, El Paso's former city-county health 
     director and member of the commission, said he wants to see 
     more funding concentrated on diabetes.
       He said diabetes is diagnosed in one of five Hispanics on 
     the border by the age of 45. He expects this statistic to 
     become worse unless more work is done in this area.
       Frenk Mora said Mexico understands the importance of public 
     health and will do its share to improve the health and 
     wellness of people residing along the border.
       Mayor Ray Caballero, who attended the meeting, said one of 
     El Paso's biggest problems is a lack of health-care 
     providers.
       ``We are not able to attract or retain enough physicians,'' 
     he said.
       Thompson announced after the meeting that the University of 
     Texas Health Sciences Center in San Antonio has been awarded 
     a $250,000 grant to establish a Regional Center for Health 
     Workforce Studies.


                                workshop

       Today will be the final session of the U.S.-Mexico 
     Binational Tuberculosis Workshop at the Hilton Camino Real.
       Among today's discussions will be a binational information 
     system, as well as talks on consensus building.
                                  ____


              [From the Los Angeles Times, Oct. 17, 2001]

                  U.S., Mexico Team Up on Health Care

                          (By James F. Smith)

       The United States and Mexico took some imaginative steps 
     this week to combat health problems that plague border 
     communities and migrant workers, including tuberculosis, 
     diabetes and AIDS.
       Meeting in El Paso and neighboring Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, 
     health experts from the two nations agreed on a 10-year 
     agenda for improving care for the 11.5 million people living 
     along the nearly 2,000-mile border.
       Mexico also launched a program that promises a new approach 
     to treating migrants' health problems. Formally unveiled in 
     Ciudad Juarez on Sunday, the ``Go Healthy, Return Healthy'' 
     initiative seeks to help Mexico migrants in their hometowns, 
     along the routes they travel and during their stays in the 
     United States.
       Elsewhere, California and Mexico kicked off the program by 
     staging their first joint ``health week.'' California is 
     conducting a flurry of activities through Friday for migrants 
     in the state, including vaccinations, checkups and 
     information campaigns. The California Endowment is devoting 
     part of a $50-million agricultural health grant to the 
     initiative.
       The mere fact that U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary 
     Tommy G. Thompson showed up for the U.S.-Mexico Border Health 
     Commission meeting here Monday--despite an international 
     anthrax scare--delighted the Mexicans, who have worried that 
     U.S. relations with their nation would become a low priority 
     for the Bush administration following the Sept. 11 terrorist 
     attacks.
       Officials from both nations emphasized that the border 
     health problems are real and immediate threats, killing many 
     thousands of people each year.
       ``We should not let the anthrax scare kidnap our entire 
     health agenda,'' said Mexican Health Secretary Julio Frenk. 
     ``There are a lot of other very important issues of much 
     higher risk to our populations.''
       Thompson, meanwhile, offered a challenge to the U.S. 
     delegation to the year-old Border Health Commission: He'll 
     try to come up with an additional $25 million for health 
     projects along the frontier if they can come up with 
     specific, effective ways to spend the money.
       A commission study issued Monday detailed the serious 
     health challenges on the border, compounded by population 
     growth of 28% on the U.S. side and 39% on the Mexican side 
     during the 1990s, about twice the national growth rate in 
     each country.
       The study found that rates of communicable diseases such as 
     tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS and hepatitis A are higher in the 
     border region than nationally for both countries. Cancer, 
     asthma and diabetes rates also are higher along the border.
       ``The high level of border crossings between the U.S. and 
     Mexico complicates the development of strategies to address 
     the spread of infectious diseases,'' the report says, 
     heightening the need for coordinated policies.
       While the commission debated overall strategies, a workshop 
     of about 100 experts on tuberculosis met to map out 
     innovative cross-border approaches to tracking and caring for 
     patients. The interruption of tuberculosis treatment is 
     highly dangerous for patients because it can lead to 
     resistance to medication. Yet such breaks in treatment occur 
     frequently when ailing migrants cross illegally into the 
     United States.
       The workshop focused on development of a binational 
     tuberculosis card that would allow patients to continue 
     treatment on either side of the border with confidentiality. 
     The cared would not only ensure continuity in treatment but 
     allow both countries to improve their database of 
     tuberculosis cases.
       Dr. Lincoln Chen, a public health expert from the 
     Rockefeller Foundation, said such

[[Page 19122]]

     initiatives make the border region ``the cutting edge of 
     health in the 21st century . . . This is the front line of 
     global health.''
       Thompson and Frenk visited sites that symbolize the 
     emerging cooperation, from the La Fe health clinic in south 
     El Paso, which treats many Latino AIDS patients, to a U.S. 
     Food and Drug Administration inspection operation. In 
     September, the two governments agreed to expand efforts to 
     ensure the safety of meat, poultry and egg products that are 
     shipped across the border in immense volumes.
       In California, meanwhile, seven counties that are home to 
     large numbers of migrant workers took part in the health week 
     with Mexico. Jose Ignacio Santos, head of child health in 
     Mexico and director of the ``Go Health, Return Healthy'' 
     program, said the initiative brings to the U.S. some of the 
     techniques that have made Mexico's public health system 
     highly regarded. Those included very public community 
     outreach activities, which have helped achieve a 98% 
     immunization rate.
       In Mexico, the thrice-yearly National Public Health Weeks--
     such as one that began Sunday--bring vaccinations to the 
     homes of millions of people. More than 11 million injections 
     will be given in Mexico this week for childhood diseases, in 
     programs supported by nearly 180,000 volunteers.
       Similar efforts are being carried out this week in the 
     seven California counties, with a focus on messages about 
     cervical and breast cancer, immunizations and diabetes. The 
     goal is to reach some of the more than 3 million Mexicans 
     living and working in the state, especially the 1 million 
     agricultural laborers.
       Frenk, the health secretary, said that in the past, Mexico 
     did not clearly understand the differences between treating 
     stable and migrant populations. The new program acknowledges 
     that migrants carry health problems with them as they leave 
     home--and bring back ailments such as AIDS when they return 
     from the United States.
       Now officials are developing preventive programs in 502 
     towns in the 10 Mexican states that produce the most 
     migrants, including Jalisco and Guanajuato.
       The effort will also respond to the seasonal moves of the 
     workers. For example, it calls for information and 
     immunization campaigns in August and September, when migrants 
     often leave home to work during the harvest season. It 
     prepares for treating the workers when they return home at 
     year's end or Easter.
       Frenk said the new model demands a high level of 
     coordination with U.S. authorities. And it will require new 
     levels of trust from illegal migrants that the health 
     information won't be used against them, he said.
       ``The ideal would be a well-coordinated system in which we 
     could say to the U.S. authorities: `There goes a migrant who 
     has tuberculosis. Care for him,''' he said. ``Some day not 
     too far in the future, there will be electronic clinical 
     histories on a card with an intelligent chip, and the person 
     will carry it. But this will require much trust on the part 
     of illegal migrants.''

  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, our relationship with Mexico, like that 
with Canada, is a special one. Those countries are our closest 
neighbors, and yet, we often and wrongly neglect our neighbor to the 
South and the much needed economic development needed in the region. 
Mexico is the United States' second largest trading partner and the 
border is recognized as one of the busiest ports of entry in the world. 
And yet, the region is often neglected.
  As the U.S.-Mexico Border Health Commission points out, ``Without 
increases and sustained federal, state and local governmental and 
private funding for health programs, infrastructure and education, the 
border populations will continue to lag behind the United States in 
these areas.'' If the border were its own state, according to data from 
the Heath Resources and Services Administration, it would: rank last in 
access to health care; second in death rates due to hepatitis; third in 
deaths related to diabetes; last in per capita income; first in the 
number of school children living in poverty; and, first in the numbers 
of the uninsured.
  I would like to thank Senator McCain, who was the original cosponsor 
of the U.S.-Mexico Border Health Commission legislation, Public Law 
103-400, that we passed in 1994 and is the lead cosponsor of this 
legislation as well, for his outstanding leadership on border issues 
throughout his career. I would also thank Senators Feinstein and Cornyn 
for working with us on this important legislation and Senator Hutchison 
for her constant support for the appropriations of the U.S.-Mexico 
Border Commission upon the signed agreement between the United States 
and Mexico, which was signed by President Clinton on July 14, 2000.
  I urge the adoption of this bipartisan legislation by this Congress.
  I ask unanimous consent that a fact sheet and the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

             Fact Sheet--Border Health Security Act of 2003

       Senators Jeff Bingaman, D-NM, John McCain, R-AZ, Dianne 
     Feinstein, D-CA, and John Cornyn, R-TX, are preparing to 
     introduce the ``Border Health Security Act of 2003.'' The 
     legislation seeks to improve the infrastructure, access, and 
     delivery of health care services to residents along the U.S.-
     Mexico border.
       The legislation would achieve these goals by:
       Improving Border Health Services: Provides for $200 million 
     in funding to States, local governments, tribal governments, 
     institutions of higher education, nonprofit health 
     organizations, or community health centers along the U.S.-
     Mexico border to improve infrastructure, access, and the 
     delivery of health care services.
       These grants are flexible and would allow the community to 
     establish its own priorities with which to spend these funds 
     for the following range of purposes: maternal and child 
     health, primary care and preventative health, public health 
     and public health infrastructure, health promotion, oral 
     health, behavioral and mental health, substance abuse, health 
     conditions that have a high prevalence in the border region, 
     medical and health services research, community health 
     workers or promotoras, health care infrastructure, including 
     planning and construction grants, health disparities, 
     environmental health, health education, and outreach and 
     enrollment services with respect to Medicaid and the State 
     Children's Health Insurance Program, CHIP.
       Providing Border Bioterrorism Preparedness Grants: Provides 
     for $25 million in funding to States and local governments or 
     public health departments to improve the infrastructure, 
     preparedness, and education of health professionals along the 
     U.S.-Mexico border with respect to bioterrorism. This 
     includes the establishment of a health alert network to 
     identify and communicate information quickly to health 
     providers about emerging health care threats.
       Reauthorizing the U.S.-Mexico Border Health Commission: 
     Provides for the reauthorization of the U.S.-Mexico Border 
     Health Commission at $10 million annually.

                                S. 1447

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Border Health Security Act 
     of 2003''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Border area.--The term ``border area'' has the meaning 
     given the term ``United States-Mexico Border Area'' in 
     section 8 of the United States-Mexico Border Health 
     Commission Act (22 U.S.C. 290n-6).
       (2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Health and Human Services.

     SEC. 3. BORDER HEALTH GRANTS.

       (a) Eligible Entity Defined.--In this section, the term 
     ``eligible entity'' means a State, public institution of 
     higher education, local government, tribal government, 
     nonprofit health organization, or community health center 
     receiving assistance under section 330 of the Public Health 
     Service Act (42 U.S.C. 254b), that is located in the border 
     area.
       (b) Authorization.--From funds appropriated under 
     subsection (f), the Secretary, acting through the United 
     States members of the United States-Mexico Border Health 
     Commission, shall award grants to eligible entities to 
     address priorities and recommendations to improve the health 
     of border area residents that are established by--
       (1) the United States members of the United States-Mexico 
     Border Health Commission;
       (2) the State border health offices; and
       (3) the Secretary.
       (c) Application.--An eligible entity that desires a grant 
     under subsection (b) shall submit an application to the 
     Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing such 
     information as the Secretary may require.
       (d) Use of Funds.--An eligible entity that receives a grant 
     under subsection (b) shall use the grant funds for--
       (1) programs relating to--
       (A) maternal and child health;
       (B) primary care and preventative health;
       (C) public health and public health infrastructure;
       (D) health promotion;
       (E) oral health;
       (F) behavioral and mental health;
       (G) substance abuse;
       (H) health conditions that have a high prevalence in the 
     border area;
       (I) medical and health services research;
       (J) workforce training and development;

[[Page 19123]]

       (K) community health workers or promotoras;
       (L) health care infrastructure problems in the border area 
     (including planning and construction grants);
       (M) health disparities in the border area;
       (N) environmental health;
       (O) health education; and
       (P) outreach and enrollment services with respect to 
     Federal programs (including programs authorized under titles 
     XIX and XXI of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 and 
     1397aa)); and
       (2) other programs determined appropriate by the Secretary.
       (e) Supplement, Not Supplant.--Amounts provided to an 
     eligible entity awarded a grant under subsection (b) shall be 
     used to supplement and not supplant other funds available to 
     the eligible entity to carry out the activities described in 
     subsection (d).
       (f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section, $200,000,000 
     for fiscal year 2004, and such sums as may be necessary for 
     each succeeding fiscal year.

     SEC. 4. BORDER BIOTERRORISM PREPAREDNESS GRANTS.

       (a) Eligible Entity Defined.--In this section, the term 
     ``eligible entity'' means a State, local government, tribal 
     government, or public health entity.
       (b) Authorization.--From funds appropriated under 
     subsection (e), the Secretary shall award grants to eligible 
     entities for bioterrorism preparedness in the border area.
       (c) Application.--An eligible entity that desires a grant 
     under this section shall submit an application to the 
     Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing such 
     information as the Secretary may require.
       (d) Uses of Funds.--An eligible entity that receives a 
     grant under subsection (b) shall use the grant funds to--
       (1) develop and implement bioterror preparedness plans and 
     readiness assessments and purchase items necessary for such 
     plans;
       (2) coordinate bioterrorism and emergency preparedness 
     planning in the region;
       (3) improve infrastructure, including syndrome surveillance 
     and laboratory capacity;
       (4) create a health alert network, including risk 
     communication and information dissemination;
       (5) educate and train clinicians, epidemiologists, 
     laboratories, and emergency personnel; and
       (6) carry out such other activities identified by the 
     Secretary, the United States-Mexico Border Health Commission, 
     State and local public health offices, and border health 
     offices.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $25,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2004 and such sums as may be necessary for each 
     succeeding fiscal year.

     SEC. 5. UNITED STATES-MEXICO BORDER HEALTH COMMISSION ACT 
                   AMENDMENTS.

       The United States-Mexico Border Health Commission Act (22 
     U.S.C. 290n et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 9. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
     Act $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2004 and such sums as may be 
     necessary for each succeeding fiscal year.''.

     SEC. 6. COORDINATION OF HEALTH SERVICES AND SURVEILLANCE.

       The Secretary may coordinate with the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security in establishing a health alert system that--
       (1) alerts clinicians and public health officials of 
     emerging disease clusters and syndromes along the border 
     area; and
       (2) is alerted to signs of health threats or bioterrorism 
     along the border area.

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, recognizing that the communities along our 
Nation's border are literally our front line of defense, it is in the 
interest of our national security to ensure that these areas are well 
equipped to respond to health emergencies and potential bioterror 
attacks. To address the critical needs of this vulnerable region, I am 
pleased to once again join my good friends from New Mexico, Senator 
Bingaman, along with Senator Feinstein and Senator Cornyn, in 
introducing the Border Health Security Act of 2003.
  Ten years ago, Senator Bingaman and I introduced a bill which we 
believed represented a first step toward addressing the many health 
challenges confronting the U.S.-Mexico border region as it faced 
growing population and an expanding industrial base. The United States-
Mexico Border Health Commission Act authorized the President to enter 
into a bilateral agreement with Mexico and establish a binational 
commission on border health, and was signed into law in the fall of 
1994.
  Six years later the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services and 
the Secretary of Health of Mexico signed an agreement creating the 
United States-Mexico Border Health Commission. Although still in its 
infancy, the Commission serves to draw attention to the unique needs of 
the border region, while improving and protecting the health and well-
being of the residents on both sides of the border.
  The bill we are introducing today builds upon the effort we began 10 
years ago. This legislation authorizes two new grant programs targeting 
health care and bioterror preparedness in the border area in addition 
to funding for the Commission.
  The first grant program we establish, the Border Health Grants, will 
be competitively awarded to programs that improve health care 
infrastructure or address the unique health care needs of the border 
region. Eligible programs could address health disparities, public 
health, maternal and child health, and conditions with a high 
prevalence in the border area. Acknowledging our national vulnerability 
in the wake of the September 11 attacks and the need to ensure that 
bioterror efforts are specifically focused on the border region, our 
bill establishes bioterror preparedness grants for activities including 
coordination of bioterror and emergency preparedness, improvements in 
infrastructure, and education and training.
  The communities along our Nation's southern border typically have 
high rates of uninsured and underinsured individuals, unemployment, and 
poverty. This region also has higher rates of infections and chronic 
diseases, often exacerbated by migrant populations. Compounding these 
problems is the lack of health care facilities and qualified health 
care professionals. According to the U.S.-Mexico Border Health 
Commission, if the border area were a state, it would rank last in 
access in health care, second in death rates due to hepatitis, third in 
deaths related to diabetes, first in number of TB cases and last in per 
capita income.
  I have long supported legislative initiatives aimed at improving the 
security and quality of life in our border area. This bill is a part of 
that ongoing effort. As our Nation enters a new era of heightened 
national alert, it is incumbent upon us to ensure our border area--our 
front line of defense--is strenghtened and protected.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. MURKOWSKI:
  S. 1448. A bill to provide for the construction of the Yupik Alaskan/
Central Kuskokwim Energy Project, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President today I introduce a very important piece 
of legislation, the Calista Energy and Economic Revitalization Act. 
This legislation will create a profound and positive effect on one of 
the most impoverished parts of my State, the Upper Kuskokwim region by 
providing a major boost to the economy of this area. It will also 
provide affordable energy to this region, which pays some of the 
highest energy costs in the country.
  My legislation will authorize a grant and loan guarantee program to 
permit the construction of a vitally important intertie from the Upper 
Kuskokwim region to Bethel, Alaska. This project will provide low cost 
energy to revitalize this region much as the Tennessee Valley and 
Bonneville Power projects revitalized the South and Northwest, 
respectively.
  Alaska was just a territory when these visionary projects were 
conceived and constructed. It is now time for the State of Alaska to 
join in the national commitment and partnership for economic vitality.
  The Upper Kuskokwim region has been inhabited by the Yupik Eskimo for 
thousands of years and they have developed a unique lifestyle which 
allows them to thrive in a harsh and formidable climate.
  On December 18, 1971, Congress enacted the Alaska Native Claims 
Settlement Act, ANCSA, in recognition and settlement of the aboriginal 
claims of the Yupik Eskimo people in the Upper Kuskokwim regions. 
Pursuant to ANCSA the Calista Corporation was formed by the Yupik 
Eskimo people to represent their needs and interests in implementation 
of ANCSA.
  The Calista Corporation has selected as part of its land entitlement 
under ANCSA the Donlin Creek area of the Upper Kuskokwim region. As 
owner of

[[Page 19124]]

the Donlin Creek area, Calista has made a discovery of international 
significance of gold and other minerals which will aid the country and 
the Yupik Eskimo people if that area is developed. I can assure you, 
that there is wide spread support among the local Yupik population that 
their lands be developed.
  The Donlin Creek area is currently isolated and unconnected by road 
or utility services to the rest of the State of Alaska and the Nation. 
It is fair and equitable that the Congress enacts legislation to aid 
and assist the Yupik Eskimo people, through the Calista Corporation, in 
developing this energy project referenced in my bill. The goal of this 
project is to provide reasonable and adequate utility service to the 
local people and to serve to the development of the minerals in the 
Donlin Creek area.
  The Upper Kuskokwim region contains numerous Yupik Eskimo villages 
which are also isolated from the rest of the State and the Nation. 
According to government reports, the unemployment rate in the region is 
about 25 percent but the actual joblessness rate is much higher. The 
government reports stop counting people as unemployed after that have 
not had a job after several years. There is currently little or no 
opportunity for year round nongovernmental employment in this region.
  For example, one of the few opportunities to participate in the cash 
economy available in the region comes from fishing, but fishing income 
has plunged by about 50 percent from nearly $12,000 to about $5,000 
annually. Because of this drastic decline in fishing income and a 
general lack of available private sector jobs, Federal and State 
transfer payments make up 33 percent of income in the Bethel U.S. 
Census District area and nearly 45 percent of the Wade Hampton U.S. 
Census District in the Upper Kuskokwim region near the Donlin Creek 
site.
  Passage of this legislation will provide a sound economic opportunity 
for the Yupik Eskimo and other residents of the region and give them an 
opportunity to enjoy a better quality of life. Calista is committed to 
turning this project into the private sector engine for this part of 
Alaska. If successful, Federal transfer payments will be reduced and 
local residents will have the ability to support themselves and their 
families with solid, well paying private sector jobs.
  Utility costs are now more than 10 times the national average. By 
providing a year round employment base and more equitable and 
affordable access to utility services, this project will improve the 
lives of all residents of the region.
  I am excited about this bill and will work hard to achieve its 
passage. It is my hope to have a hearing on this bill very soon and 
seek its passage in the Energy and Natural Resources Committee and the 
full Senate before the end of the year. I urge my colleagues to support 
this legislation.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1448

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Calista Energy and Economic 
     Revitalization Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) the Yupik Eskimo people have--
       (A) inhabited the Upper Kuskokwim region for thousands of 
     years; and
       (B) developed a unique lifestyle that allows the people to 
     thrive in a harsh and formidable climate;
       (2) on December 18, 1971, Congress enacted the Alaska 
     Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) in 
     recognition and settlement of the aboriginal claims of the 
     Yupik Eskimo people in the Upper Kuskokwim regions;
       (3) under that Act--
       (A) the Calista Regional Corporation was formed by the 
     Yupik Eskimo people to represent the needs and interests of 
     the Yupik Eskimo people in implementing the Act; and
       (B) the Corporation has selected as part of the land 
     entitlement the Donlin Creek area of the Upper Kuskokwim 
     region;
       (4) as owner of the Donlin Creek area, Calista Regional 
     Corporation has made a discovery of international 
     significance of gold and other minerals that would aid the 
     Yupik Eskimo people if developed;
       (5) there is widespread support among the local Yupik 
     population for development of the Donlin Creek area;
       (6) the Donlin Creek area is currently isolated and 
     unconnected by road or utility services to the rest of the 
     State of Alaska;
       (7) the Upper Kuskokwim region contains many Yupik Eskimo 
     villages that are not connected to the rest of the State of 
     Alaska;
       (8) the unemployment rate in the region is almost 25 
     percent, and there is currently little or no opportunity for 
     year-round nongovernmental employment;
       (9) it is fair and equitable that Congress enact 
     legislation to aid and assist the Yupik Eskimo people, 
     through the Calista Regional Corporation, in providing 
     reasonable and adequate utility services to the area; and
       (10) Congress should act to provide a sound economic 
     opportunity for the Yupik Eskimo and other residents of the 
     region to enjoy an improved quality of life by providing a 
     year round employment base.

     SEC. 3. CALISTA ENERGY PROJECT AUTHORIZATION.

       (a) Financial Assistance.--The Secretary of Energy shall, 
     subject to any terms and conditions that the Secretary 
     determines to be appropriate, provide the Calista Regional 
     Corporation grants and loan guarantees to assist in the 
     construction of the Calista Energy Project as generally 
     identified in the document entitled ``Calista Region Energy 
     Needs Study'' and dated July 1, 2002.
       (b) Federal Share.--The Federal share of the cost of 
     construction of the Calista Energy Project shall be not more 
     than 80 percent.
       (c) Limitation.--The total amount of financial assistance 
     that the Secretary may provide under subsection (a) is--
       (1) $100,000,000 for grants; and
       (2) $50,000,000 for loan guarantees.

     SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are 
     necessary to carry out this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CRAPO (for himself and Mrs. Lincoln):
  S. 1449. A bill to improve the capacity of the Secretary of 
Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to prepare and conduct 
hazardous fuels reduction projects on National Forest System land and 
Bureau of Land Management land that are aimed at protecting 
communities, watersheds, and certain other at-risk land from 
catastrophic wildfire, to enhance efforts to protect watersheds and 
address threats to forest and rangeland health on public and private 
land, including catastrophic wildfire, to increase research on forest 
health and forest-damaging agents, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
  Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, Idaho faces grim news this morning as the 
deaths of two young wildland firefighters are reported. They were 
killed late Tuesday afternoon while fighting the Cramer fire in the 
Salmon-Challis National Forest west of the town of Salmon near the 
confluence of the middle fork of the Salmon River and the main Salmon. 
These men are heroes of battle, just as the men and women fighting 
overseas. They fought a faceless, terrifying enemy with bravery, 
heroism, and selfless dedication to the families and communities of 
central Idaho. Their sacrifice will be remembered for years to come as 
their names are added to the list of those fallen in service to their 
country in the capacity of wildland firefighters. I pray that those who 
continue to fight fires in Idaho and across the West this summer remain 
out of harm's way as they perform their valiant and critical work to 
preserve homes, property, and life.
  The tragedy is that two more people have died. We hope it is not 
followed by more as we enter another fire season. The truth is that our 
forests are overgrown, dead and dying, and this kind of tragedy was 
inevitable. Legislation that I supported in the past would have made a 
difference. Had it been enacted last year or the year before, these 
senseless deaths could very well have been avoided. Idaho's wildfire 
season is just getting into its full swing, and we are asking our 
wildland firefighters in Idaho and throughout the rest of the Nation to 
do a dangerous job. We in Congress owe it to them and to the family 
members of those who didn't make it to provide them with the tools 
necessary to get the job done as safely and quickly as possible. These 
deaths are a tragic reminder of the sacrifices

[[Page 19125]]

and risks wildland firefighters make to ensure the safety of our 
communities. Congress must act to reduce this threat to our communities 
and improve the safety of our firefighters. Today, Senator Lincoln and 
I are introducing bipartisan legislation to address the forest health 
crisis facing our nation.
  As Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Agriculture Committee's 
Subcommittee on Forestry, Conservation, and Rural Revitalization, 
Senator Lincoln and I have learned of the similarities between the 
problems facing the ecosystems of eastern and western forests. We know 
that when Congress acts to address the health of forests in the West--
forests that have been devastated by fires that garner national 
attention--we must also reduce the risks to our forests across the 
country. The threat is not just to our property and lives, but clean 
air, clean water, and wildlife habitat. We must take a comprehensive 
approach to protecting our resources, and Senator Lincoln and I attempt 
to do that in this bill.
  The America's Healthy Forests Restoration and Research Act builds on 
the bipartisan legislation that passed the House of Representatives and 
is now under consideration in the Senate.
  Like the House proposal, our bill addresses the ``analysis 
paralysis'' that prevents us from taking actions to protect our lands. 
For lands that are at risk of catastrophic fire or that have been 
severely damaged by insect or disease infestations or the aftermath of 
severe weather events, such as windthrow or ice storms, the bill 
creates an expedited process to allow for treatment. For these specific 
projects on Forest Service or Bureau of Land Management lands--with the 
exception of lands that are wilderness areas or Wilderness Study 
Areas--the bill provides for time limits on appeals, reforms the 
appeals process, and provides guidance to the courts.
  The per-acre costs of fuel reduction projects is higher and the 
amount of time to consider a project is longer with each alternative 
the agencies are required to consider. Each of these alternatives 
requires a complete and thorough environmental analysis. By selecting 
projects through the collaborative process and requiring an in-depth 
analysis of the environmental impacts of the specific project, we can 
ensure that the impacts of the project are addressed, without the 
analysis paralysis caused by the examination of additional 
alternatives--especially when projects are most often appealed based on 
failure to complete adequate analysis on alternatives rather than the 
substance of the project.
  The time for action is now, we should not let fuels reduction 
projects be delayed or lose their effectiveness through frivolous 
appeals. By requiring the Forest Service to develop a new process that 
allows for public collaboration, by requiring substantive comments to 
the project, and by requiring participation in the process before 
allowing litigation, the bill ensures that public comment is meaningful 
and constructive. No longer will these important projects be stopped 
simply by 33 cents on a postcard.
  Our bill also requires that the courts balance the long term effects 
with the short term effects of a project. This balance of harm should 
be common sense, but that has not been the case. The courts are 
reminded they should balance the impact of inaction in their decision 
making.
  This streamlining of the appeals and judicial review process will 
counter the growing use of appeals and litigation as delaying and 
frustrating techniques rather than the constructive recourse they were 
intended for. Cutting through the bureaucratic red tape and ensuring 
for robust public participation--as outlined in the widely-supported 
Western Governors Association's collaborative strategy--is a win-win 
for our forests and our communities. In addition, by streamlining the 
process, we get more money on the ground and in action to protect our 
forests. Appeals, litigation, and extensive analysis of unneeded 
alternatives mean less money for projects. Some estimate that only 
sixty percent of funds allocated for fuels reduction actually makes it 
to the ground. Streamlining the process should result in significantly 
more resources to address forest health.
  I have long been an advocate of better utilization of biomass and 
small diameter materials. This bill addresses the need for more 
research and more markets. Our bi-partisan bill provides grants to 
those who would use biomass for fuel or other beneficial purposes. 
Instead of leaving fuels in our forests to burn or tossing them in 
landfills, we can reduce the risks to our environment and create an 
incentive to use what has traditionally not been cost effective to use. 
Unlike the house bill, we expand eligible uses beyond just useful 
fuels. In Idaho, we have companies that can use this material for 
environmental restoration. We need to do more to create incentives to 
use this material.
  To that end, our bill also includes expanded research into 
utilization and harvesting of small diameter materials. Light on the 
land techniques that find more and better uses of biomass and small 
diameter materials can revitalize our rural communities. Research into 
the costs and obstacles to using these materials will go a long way 
toward expanded markets and rural development. The bill also provides 
direction for technology transfer to get this information from the 
universities and scientists to the communities and small businesses in 
rural parts of America.
  Our bipartisan bill makes research a central tenet. From research 
into biomass, forests conditions, upland hardwoods, the measure brings 
a new focus to forest threats. Our legislation expands the research to 
allow for landscape level research on forest-damaging agents. Fire, 
insects and disease, and weather events pose a significant threat to 
our forest ecosystems. The bill provides for cooperation with colleges 
and universities in applied research to combat these threats.
  The bill also focuses research on preserving upland hardwoods. Not 
enough is known about preserving and restoring the upland hardwood 
forests of the South. The creation of an upland hardwood forest 
research center will go a long way toward finding ways to better 
protect, rehabilitate, restore, and utilize these important resources.
  The proposal includes a watershed program that will help foresters 
enhance water quality in our forests. As many know, our forests serve 
as critical watersheds that provide drinking water to our communities. 
This bill provides for grants to allow for technical assistance, 
education, and financial assistance to enhance our efforts to ensure 
clean waters for our communities and wildlife.
  A program to maintain forested habitat for threatened and endangered 
species is also an important part of this legislation. By providing for 
short and long-term restoration agreements the program offers 
incentives to maintain and utilize efforts that protect species and 
prevent others from being listed.
  The legislation provides assistance to address the problem of 
nonnative invasive plants, trees, shrubs, and vines. Across the 
country, the expansion of nonnative invasive plants has changed 
ecosystems making them more susceptible to threats that could result in 
catastrophic fires. Our proposal provides assistance to landowners in 
addressing these invasives.
  Finally, the bill declares that the enhanced community fire 
protection program is an important program in reducing risks to 
communities. This program, which we enacted as part of the 2002 Farm 
Bill, provides assistance to communities in reducing fire threats. 
Providing funding for this program, coupled with the savings from 
streamlining the process, will provide for meaningful progress in 
reducing the wildfire threat.
  I agree with Forest Service Chief Dale Bosworth, who says we need to 
move the focus from what we take to what we leave. As he has 
identified, too many are looking at this as a zero-sum game. They seek 
someone to blame for forest health problems or argue that logging is 
inherently bad. We need to get beyond that fallacious argument and 
realize that what is important is restoring a healthy ecosystem: an 
ecosystem that allows for a natural fire

[[Page 19126]]

regime to exist without threatening our communities and lives.
  I hope my colleagues will join me moving beyond the narrow focus that 
currently passes for forest policy, this zero-sum game, and look at the 
needs of our forest ecosystems. This bill is a bipartisan effort that 
enhances the House-passed legislation. It sets a mark that the majority 
of the Senate can and should support.
  The skies over Idaho's capitol city, Boise, are smoke-filled this 
afternoon, and another tiny town on the edge of Idaho's Frank Church 
River of No Return Wilderness, Atlanta, is threatened as fire 
encroaches on the homes there. Firefighting resources are stretched to 
the limit as wildland fires are burning throughout Idaho and the West. 
Wildfires this year have charred some 1.46 million acres nationwide. 
The National Interagency Fire Center said there were 49 large fires 
burning in the West, with more than 350 thousand areas of active 
wildfires. Let us in Congress take a stand now to help protect our 
forests and keep them from going up in smoke every year.
  I look forward to working with my colleagues to garner their support 
for this much-needed, bipartisan legislation, and know that they join 
me in sending condolences to the families of the two young men who died 
fighting a fire that may very well have been preventable.
  Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I rise today to join my good friend 
Senator Crapo of Idaho in introducing legislation aimed at 
rehabilitating this Nation's public and private forestlands. Senator 
Crapo and I serve as the Chair and Ranking Member of the Agriculture 
Subcommittee on Forestry, and we have worked together extensively in 
watching over our Nation's forestlands.
  Our bipartisan legislation builds upon the Healthy Forest Restoration 
Act, which passed the House of Representatives earlier this year. Our 
bill will ensure that we can address the many problems affecting all of 
our Nation's forests--both on public and private forestlands, in 
southern and western forests, and throughout both hardwood and pine 
ecosystems. Our legislation is intended to be a marker for the 
direction we believe forest legislation should move in this country.
  Both Senator Crapo and I have been working closely with the Senate 
Agriculture Committee to ensure that the goals of our legislation are 
incorporated into the chairman's mark of the Senate's Healthy Forest 
legislation.
  Our legislation is intended to accomplish a few, very specific goals.
  First and foremost, we must provide the Forest Service with the tools 
necessary to immediately address the epidemic of oak decline and 
mortality in the Ozark highlands of Arkansas and Missouri.
  Oak decline is a natural occurrence in older forests or in areas 
where trees are stressed by conditions such as old age, over population 
of the forest, poor soil conditions, and the effects of several years 
of severe drought. And under normal conditions, oak decline is not 
necessarily fatal to the tree.
  However, these conditions have allowed insects such as the red oak 
borer to flourish throughout the forest and has led to an epidemic of 
oak mortality throughout our forests.
  In fact, many estimates now suggest that potentially up to one 
million acres of red oaks have been affected in Ozark highlands. And it 
is important to note that this epidemic has not been long in coming--it 
was only first discovered in the late 1990s. I am concerned that this 
epidemic will lead to a complete loss of red oak from the Ozark 
highlands and cause long-term changes to the health of the forest 
ecosystem.
  It is also important to remember that the epidemic has not been 
limited to public lands. Private forest landowners and homeowners 
throughout the Ozarks face the same problem. The past several years of 
extremely dry summer conditions have weakened trees throughout the 
region.
  The legislation also contains provisions that are intended to 
streamline and improve the environmental, administrative, and judicial 
review process for hazardous fuel reduction projects under this 
legislation. I join Senator Crapo in believing that the review process 
for hazardous fuel reduction projects, while necessary and beneficial, 
often consumes more time, effort, and resources than the initial intent 
of the project.
  I am also aware that there are ongoing discussions regarding these 
environmental, administrative, and judicial review issues. I look 
forward to working with my colleagues on the Agriculture Committee and 
in the entire Senate to modify and improve the environmental, 
administrative, and judicial review provisions of this legislation in 
order to address my colleagues' concerns.
  As we have seen with the epidemic of oak mortality in Arkansas, the 
Forest Service must have the ability to quickly respond to insect 
infestation in order to protect, preserve, and rehabilitate the entire 
forest. Streamlining of the environmental, administrative, and judicial 
review process for hazardous fuel reduction projects will ensure that 
we can quickly address what ails our forests.
  Secondly, our legislation also provides increased funding and 
direction for forestland research in this country. Our legislation will 
ensure that our Nation's colleges and universities are able to devote 
more research into the insects and diseases affecting our forests. We 
also require that any forestland research be conducted at a scale 
appropriate to the forest damage, and that it be conducted within the 
requirements of each individual forest management plan. Our legislation 
also includes requirements to ensure this research has clearly stated 
forest restoration objectives and is peer reviewed by scientific 
experts in forestland health.
  Our legislation includes authorization for a new upland hardwood 
research center designed to study the myriad of insects, disease, and 
problems affecting our ability to rehabilitate, restore, and utilize 
our upland hardwood forests. As we have seen, Arkansas was caught 
almost flatfooted as the epidemic of oak mortality swept through the 
Ozarks and severely endangered the health of our forests. Establishing 
this new research center will help ensure that this does not happen 
again.
  The new research center will specifically research the effects of 
pests and pathogens on upland hardwoods, hardwood stand regeneration 
and reproductive biology, upland hardwood stand management and forest 
health, threatened, endangered and sensitive aquatic and terrestrial 
fauna, ecological processes and hardwood ecosystem restoration, and 
education and outreach to nonindustrial private forest landowners and 
associations.
  The establishment of this new research center is necessary to ensure 
we can quickly identify and respond to the multitude of pests, disease, 
and other damaging agents that can dramatically affect our beloved 
forests.
  Third, our legislation also includes funding for emergency grants to 
immediately remove the invasive plants that have become so pervasive 
throughout this Nation's forests. And when we talk about invasive plant 
species in the South, we are talking about one thing--Kudzu. Some call 
it the vine that ate the South. Kudzu was brought into this country 
several decades ago to be used as cover for bare hillsides and has 
since spread to cover everything including shrubs, bushes, and entire 
trees. The grant program included in our legislation will provide the 
means for landowners to immediately remove kudzu and the myriad other 
invasive plants that are choking out our forests.
  Finally, our legislation also includes widely agreed upon language 
that would provide for grants to remove non-commercial biomass from our 
private forested watersheds, and provide for grants to establish 
private, healthy forest reserves throughout the nation. Many of these 
important provisions were included in the Senate-passed farm bill last 
year, but they were not included in the final legislation, 
unfortunately. Providing grants to remove noncommercial biomass will 
immediately reduce the amount of fuel on the forest floor and directly 
reduce the

[[Page 19127]]

fire danger in our forests and around our communities. Similarly, 
providing grants to protect our forest watersheds will ensure that we 
can address our water quality concerns with a voluntary, incentive 
based approach. And finally, providing funding to establish new healthy 
forest reserves from willing private landowners will encourage the 
preservation and rehabilitation of this Nation's forestlands.
  Mr. President, I believe that our bipartisan legislation will focus 
needed attention on a number of extremely critical goals for our 
national forest policy. One lesson that we have learned over the years 
is that if we value our forests, if want to conserve our woodland and 
resources, if we want to preserve their natural beauty, if we want to 
ensure that the natural bounty of our forestlands is available to 
future generations, then it is important that we manage those lands and 
resources with a careful eye toward their long-term health.

                          ____________________