[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 5]
[Senate]
[Pages 7065-7089]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




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

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

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

  Pending:

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

  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Ensign). Under the previous order, the 
Senator from Mississippi, Mr. Cochran, and the Senator from West 
Virginia, Mr. Byrd, will be recognized for up to 10 minutes each.
  The Chair recognizes the Senator from West Virginia.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank the Chair.
  I thank the distinguished and very able chairman of the Senate 
Appropriations Committee, Mr. Cochran, for all of his hard work on this 
bill. He has worked hard. He has again proved himself to be a very able 
chairman, very knowledgeable of the contents of the bill.
  The President has asked the Congress to approve over $92 billion of 
emergency spending--man, that is a lot of money; $92 billion of 
emergency spending--including $72.5 billion for the wars in Iraq and 
Afghanistan and $19.8 billion for the Federal response to the terrible 
hurricanes that struck the Gulf States in August and September of 2005.
  The Appropriations Committee held several hearings on the request, 
and we have now debated the bill for nearly 2 weeks. It is a good bill. 
It is a good bill. I am proud to recommend it to the Senate.
  But, regrettably, the President has threatened to veto the bill based 
on his assertion that it is too expensive. In a Statement of 
Administration Policy that has been made a part of the Record, the 
administration threatens that the President will veto the bill if it 
exceeds $94.5 billion. OK. Have at it. Have at it, Mr. President. 
Currently, the bill totals $108.9 billion. The President complains that 
the Senate has added funding for purposes other than the wars in Iraq 
and Afghanistan and for assisting the victims of Hurricanes Katrina and 
Rita.
  Nowhere--nowhere--is it written in stone, nowhere is it etched in 
brass, on golden pillars, that this supplemental--which is likely to be 
the only supplemental considered for this fiscal year--has to be 
limited to the costs of the war and Hurricane Katrina. Nor is it etched 
in stone that the Congress must approve a bill that is below $94.5 
billion.
  The Senate has added funding for a number of critical programs. 
Despite the administration's rhetoric about securing our borders and 
providing a layered defense of our ports, the President did not request 
a dime--not one thin dime--for border security or port security. He did 
not request a dime for making the coal mines safer for our coal miners. 
He did not request a dime for our farmers who have been hit with 
drought and hurricanes, despite the fact that 78 percent of all U.S. 
counties were designated as primary or contiguous disaster areas by the 
Secretary of Agriculture or the President in 2005. He did not request a 
dime for compensating potential victims of pandemic influenza vaccines. 
The President's request for Katrina victims is inadequate and leaves 
critical gaps in housing and education.
  The Senate recognized the weaknesses of the President's request in 
these areas and judiciously added funds. When the bill is in 
conference, I will urge the conferees to approve these items. You bet.
  The conferees should send to the President a bill that meets the 
needs of this country. That is our duty. If the President wants to veto 
a bill that funds the troops, if he wants to veto a bill that funds 
victims of Hurricane Katrina, if he wants to veto a bill that provides 
critical resources for combating a potential avian flu, if he wants to 
veto a bill that secures our borders and our ports and helps our 
farmers to recover from disaster and makes our coal mines safer, have 
at it, have at it. That is his right under the Constitution. But the 
Congress should not be bullied by the President into neglecting its 
responsibility, our responsibility, to provide required funds to meet 
priority national needs.

[[Page 7066]]

  Because my State of West Virginia is often hit by floods and other 
damaging disasters, such as the recent accidents in our coal mines, I 
am quite sensitive to the ability of our Federal Government to prepare 
for--and respond to--disasters promptly and with competence, which is 
what our citizens need and what our citizens deserve. Sadly, many of 
our Federal agencies are no longer up to these fundamental tasks. But 
this bill includes resources to help Federal agencies restore their 
capabilities.
  I am especially grateful to and I especially thank the chairman for 
including, at my request and the request of others, an amount of $35.6 
million for improved mine safety and health programs. In the wake of 18 
coal-mining deaths in the State of West Virginia this year--18 coal-
mining deaths in the State of West Virginia this year--and another 16 
mining deaths in other States, it is imperative that the Congress act 
immediately to ensure that an adequate number of safety inspectors will 
be provided for our Nation's mines and to expedite the introduction of 
critical safety equipment.
  This week, we have heard testimony from the families of those killed 
in the Sago explosion in January. We have heard from the coal 
operators. We have heard from experts. In all of this testimony, one 
truth is clear: Lives can be saved when the Federal Mine Safety and 
Health Administration places miners' safety and health at the very top 
of its priority list. We must have more inspectors on the job, yes. We 
must have better rescue teams trained and equipped and ready to go at a 
moment's notice. We must have pre-positioned oxygen and emergency 
supplies in our coal mines. And we must have ways to communicate with 
trapped miners. It just has to be. We have to do these things. It is 
simply inexcusable that our miners have oxygen canisters that last only 
1 hour, only 60 minutes, when miners may be trapped under the ground 
for several days, or that the miners may not have emergency 
communications equipment that can reach the surface in the event of an 
extended rescue effort. The chairman has my genuine appreciation for 
including these funds in the committee-reported bill. I also thank 
Senator Specter, Senator Harkin, and Senator Jay Rockefeller for their 
support of the initiative.
  The bill before the Senate also includes a provision to extend the 
Abandoned Mine Land authority through fiscal year 2007. The AML Program 
and combined benefits fund are very important programs that are needed 
by retired coal miners and their families and coalfield communities 
throughout this country. I thank Chairman Cochran and I thank Senator 
Specter and I thank Senator Domenici for supporting me in this effort.
  Finally, the Senate, by a vote of 94 to 0, approved my amendment 
encouraging the President to budget for the cost of the wars in Iraq 
and Afghanistan. You can't fund these wars on the cheap. Upon passage 
of this supplemental bill, the total amount appropriated for the war in 
Iraq, including the cost of reconstruction, will be approximately $320 
billion--that is $3.20 for every minute since Jesus Christ was born; 
think of it, that is a staggering figure--virtually all of it funded 
through ad hoc emergency supplemental appropriations. And the costs 
continue to grow and grow.
  The President refuses to include a realistic estimate of the cost of 
the wars in his annual budget request.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator has expired.
  Mr. BYRD. Would the Chair repeat?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
  Mr. BYRD. I ask unanimous consent to proceed for not to exceed 3 
minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BYRD. He continues to rely on ad hoc, poorly justified emergency 
supplemental requests that he expects the Congress to rubberstamp. As a 
result, there is virtually no debate about how our country is going to 
pay for these massive bills. Nobody seems to be minding the store when 
it comes to controlling the escalating costs of the wars in Iraq and 
Afghanistan. The failure of the President to heed the repeated calls by 
the Senate to budget for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan has resulted 
in more unnecessary spending that is hidden from public view. Until the 
President begins to include a real estimate of the cost of the wars in 
his annual budget, American taxpayers will continue to see billions of 
dollars spent without any true measure of accountability.
  The Senate has given its strong support to this amendment five times, 
and the President continues to disregard this direction by the Senate. 
I hope the 94-to-0 vote on an amendment that encourages the President 
to include the full cost of the wars in the budget finally, finally, 
finally gets his attention.
  I urge adoption of the bill, and I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi.
  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I first thank very sincerely the 
distinguished Senator from West Virginia for his good help and 
assistance, his guidance and his leadership in the development and 
passage of this bill. We have been called upon, as he points out, to 
provide emergency supplemental funding for war costs, providing the 
Department of Defense and the Department of State with funding in 
accounts that have been devoted to that cause and that effort. It is 
very important to the protection of the security interests of the 
people of the United States. So this is an important measure we are 
taking up today and moving to final passage.
  Under the order that was entered last evening, there would be 10 
minutes allocated to the Senator from West Virginia and to this 
Senator, and then there would be consecutive votes on or in relation to 
two amendments, one which is being offered by the Senator from South 
Dakota, Mr. Thune, the other by the Senator from Louisiana, Mr. Vitter, 
as modified, without intervening action or debate, and that following 
those votes, the bill be read a third time and the Senate proceed to a 
vote on passage of the bill without intervening action or debate. So 
the order provides for no debate today but just votes on the final two 
amendments that have been held for votes now.
  There have been several other amendments which have been cleared, but 
I am going to ask unanimous consent that each Senator who has an 
amendment that has not been considered--Senator Thune and Senator 
Vitter--be given 2 minutes each to describe their amendments and that 
the managers of the bill likewise be given 2 minutes each on each 
amendment, if comments are needed, by the managers of the bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, if I 
understand the chairman's request, it is to get 4 minutes of additional 
time on their side. I ask unanimous consent, then, for an additional 4 
minutes on our side for comment only.
  Mr. COCHRAN. I have no objection to that.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. COCHRAN. I thank the Senator for her comments. Let me also point 
out how helpful Senator Murray has been in the handling of this 
legislation. She has served at the request of the Senator from West 
Virginia as the floor manager during much of the consideration of this 
bill and has done a truly outstanding job in helping to explain the 
provisions of the bill, as reported by the committee, and debating 
amendments and helping guide this measure to the point of passage where 
it is right now.
  Before yielding the floor to those who have amendments, let me use 
the remainder of my 10 minutes by presenting to the Senate some 
amendments that have been cleared on both sides of the aisle.


                           Amendment No. 3753

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

[[Page 7067]]

  The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

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

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

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

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

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


                           Amendment No. 3677

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

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

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

(Purpose: To make a technical correction to a project for Rickenbacker 
                        Airport, Columbus, Ohio)

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


                  RICKENBACKER AIRPORT, COLUMBUS, OHIO

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

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


                           Amendment No. 3819

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

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

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

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


                    Amendment No. 3819, as Modified

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

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

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

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


                           Amendment No. 3860

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

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

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

 (Purpose: To extend the availability of certain funds appropriated in 
                          Public Law 106-554)

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

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia is recognized.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, this is a technical amendment. It costs no 
additional funds. It simply fixes a mistake in a grant notice. The 
fiscal year 2001 Labor-HHS bill included funding for West Virginia 
University for construction of the neurosciences building. The HHS 
grant documents sent to the university mistakenly stated that the funds 
would be available until September 30, 2009, and that was incorrect. 
The money is expiring on 
September 30, 2006. This amendment would make the funds available 
consistent with the grant documents.
  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I urge adoption of the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment?

[[Page 7068]]

  If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 3860) was agreed to.
  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mrs. MURRAY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 3592

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

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

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

    (Purpose: To provide emergency funding to upgrade the Fox Point 
             hurricane barrier in Providence, Rhode Island)

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


                      FOX POINT HURRICANE BARRIER

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

  Mr. REED. Mr. President, two important lessons we learned from 
Hurricane Katrina are that our Nation's infrastructure to protect 
Americans from flooding and hurricanes is inadequate and upfront 
investment in this infrastructure can save lives and is a sound 
investment of taxpayers' money in order to prevent costly 
reconstruction.
  The Fox Point Hurricane Barrier in Providence, RI protects the city 
and adjoining communities from the catastrophic effects of hurricane 
storm surge in Narragansett Bay and torrential rains with the 
Providence River basin. Built in the 1960s, as a joint flood control 
project by the city and the Army Corps of Engineers, the barrier 
employs three 35-foot high gates, an electrically driven pumping 
station, and dikes to protect tens of thousands of people and 
approximately $5 billion worth of property. The hurricane barrier is a 
one-half mile long structure that extends from Allens Avenue to India 
Point Park. It was the first structure of its type in the United States 
to be approved for construction.
  The Hurricane of 1938 and Hurricane Carol in 1954 devastated 
communities in Rhode Island. The Hurricane of 1938 generated a storm 
surge of 16 feet that traveled up Narragansett Bay and flooded downtown 
Providence under 10 feet of water. Two hundred and seven Rhode 
Islanders were killed, and damage totaled $125 million--more than $1 
billion in today's dollars. Hurricane Carol in 1954 flooded Providence, 
leaving the city under 8 feet of water and destroying 4,000 houses.
  The Corps and city built the Fox Point Hurricane Barrier to keep a 
storm surge from flowing into downtown Providence. Since its 
construction, sea levels have risen 9 to 10 inches. In addition, Rhode 
Island has lost wetlands and tidal flats that could help mitigate a 
storm surge. According to Jon Boothroyd, a geologist at the University 
of Rhode Island, the filled land will force water into a narrower area, 
causing a higher storm surge. The loss of marshes and fields behind the 
barrier will further exacerbate the problem as water could also move 
faster downstream to the barrier. For these reasons, it is imperative 
that the barrier and pumps work if and when they are needed.
  In recent years, the Army Corps of Engineers and the city of 
Providence have evaluated the barrier and determined that the 
electromechanical control system for the barrier's pumps must be 
replaced. The Corps has reported that during several inspections, the 
pump motors have occasionally failed to start because of faulty relays 
or other related electrical problems. In a letter dated December 7, 
2003, Richard C. Carlson with the New England Director of the Army 
Corps of Engineers stated that ``During the past several inspections 
the pump motors have occasionally failed to start because of faulty 
relays or other electrically related problems. This is symptomatic of 
the age and condition of the electrical components, most of which are 
original.'' The electromechanical control system has been in service 
for 40 years, and due to its age repair parts are nearly impossible to 
obtain.
  We have been lucky as New England has not had a strong hurricane in 
50 years, but that could mean that our luck is running out. The city 
and I are concerned that failure of the system during an actual storm 
could result in the flooding of Providence's downtown business district 
and thousands of residences. The Fox Point Hurricane Barrier is a 
project authorized by the Water Resources Development Act, and the 
Federal Government should fulfill its obligation to provide a safe, 
structural sound barrier that operates when necessary. For this reason, 
I filed an amendment to the supplemental appropriations bill, H.R. 
4939, to provide $1,055,000 to complete upgrades to the Fox Point 
Hurricane Barrier. I am pleased that the Senate accepted my amendment 
for this funding. Senator Chafee and I also sponsored an amendment to 
the bill to turn over responsibility for the annual operations and 
maintenance of the hurricane barrier to the Army Corps of Engineers. I 
am glad that the Senate also decided to accept this amendment. I will 
work with my colleagues to maintain these amendments as this bill moves 
through conference.


                    Amendment No. 3592, as Modified

  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, a modification has been sent to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the modification?
  The amendment is so modified.
  The amendment (No. 3592), as modified, was agreed to.

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

     SEC.  . FOX POINT HURRICANE BARRIER.

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

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


                           Amendment No. 3729

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

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

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

(Purpose: To direct the Secretary of the Army to assume responsibility 
  for the annual operation and maintenance of the Fox Point Hurricane 
                   Barrier, Providence, Rhode Island)

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


         FOX POINT HURRICANE BARRIER, PROVIDENCE, RHODE ISLAND

       Sec. 7___. (a) In this section:

[[Page 7069]]

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

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


                           Amendment No. 3761

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

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

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

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


                           CONTRACT AUTHORITY

       Sec. 70__. (a) Section 1940 of the Safe, Accountable, 
     Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for 
     Users (Public Law 109-59; 119 Stat. 1511) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by striking paragraph (1);
       (B) by redesignating paragraphs (2) through (5) as 
     paragraphs (1) through (4), respectively; and
       (C) by striking ``$10,000,000'' each place that it appears 
     and inserting ``$12,500,000''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Contract Authority.--Except as otherwise provided in 
     this section, funds authorized to be appropriated under this 
     section shall be available for obligation in the same manner 
     as if the funds were apportioned under chapter 1 of title 23, 
     United States Code.''.
       (b) Of the unobligated balances of funds apportioned to 
     each State under chapter 1 of title 23, United States Code, 
     $50,000,000 is rescinded.

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


                           Amendment No. 3805

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

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

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

 (Purpose: To allow nonconforming signs damaged by an act of God to be 
             repaired or replaced under certain conditions)

       At the appropriate place insert the following:


                       SIGN REPAIR OR REPLACEMENT

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


                    Amendment No. 3805, as Modified

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

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


                       Sign Repair or Replacement

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

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


                    Amendment No. 3728, as Modified

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


                Amendment No. 3728, as Further Modified

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

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


                 FLOOD CONTROL AND COASTAL EMERGENCIES

       For an additional amount for ``Flood Control and Coastal 
     Emergencies'', as authorized by section 5 of the Act of 
     August 18, 1941 (33 U.S.C. 701n), for necessary expenses 
     relating to the consequences of Hurricane Katrina and other 
     hurricanes of the 2005 season, $3,299,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That the Secretary of the 
     Army is directed to use the funds appropriated under this 
     heading to modify, at full Federal expense, authorized 
     projects in southeast Louisiana to provide hurricane and 
     storm damage reduction and flood damage reduction in the 
     greater New Orleans and

[[Page 7070]]

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

                    GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER


                      Flood protection, Louisiana

       Sec. 2401.(a) There shall be made available $200,000,000 
     for the Secretary of the Army (referred to in this section as 
     the ``Secretary'') to provide, at full Federal expense--
       (1) removal of the existing pumping stations on the 3 
     interior drainage canals in Jefferson and Orleans Parishes 
     and realignment of the drainage canals to direct interior 
     flows to the new permanent pump stations to be constructed at 
     Lake Pontchartrain;
       (2) repairs, replacements, modifications, and improvements 
     of non-Federal levees and associated protection measures--
       (A) in areas of Terrebonne Parish; and
       (B) on the east bank of the Mississippi River in 
     Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana; and
       (3) for armoring the hurricane and storm damage reduction 
     system in south Louisiana.
       (4) A project under this section shall be initiated only 
     after non-Federal interests have entered into binding 
     agreements with the Secretary to pay 100 percent of the 
     operation and maintenance costs of the project and to hold 
     and save the United States free from damages due to the 
     construction or operation and maintenance of the project, 
     except for damages due to the fault or negligence of the 
     United States or its contractors.
       (5) Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of 
     this act the Secretary in consultation with Plaquemines 
     Parish and the state of Louisiana shall submit to Congress a 
     report detailing a modified plan regarding levels of 
     protection for lower Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana, relating 
     to hurricane protection with a focus on--
       (A) protecting densely populated areas;
       (B) energy infrastructure;
       (C) structural and nonstructural coastal barriers and 
     protection;
       (D) port facilities; and
       (E) the long-term maintenance and protection of the deep 
     draft navigation channel on the Mississippi River, not 
     including the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet.
       (6) Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary shall offer to enter into a contract 
     with the National Academies to provide to the Secretary a 
     report, by not later than 90 days after the date of enactment 
     of this Act, describing, for the period beginning on the date 
     on which the individual system components for hurricane and 
     storm damage reduction was constructed and ending on the date 
     on which the report is prepared, the difference between--
       (A) the portion of the vertical depreciation of the system 
     that is attributable to design and construction flaws, taking 
     into consideration the settling of levees and floodwalls or 
     subsidence; and
       (B) the portion of that depreciation that is attributable 
     to the application of new storm data that may require a 
     higher level of vertical protection in order to comply with 
     100-year floodplain certification and standard protect 
     hurricane.
       (7)(e) The Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief 
     of Engineers, shall use $3,500,000 within the funds provided 
     in Sec. 2401(a) to develop a comprehensive plan, at full 
     Federal expense, to, at a minimum, deauthorize deep draft 
     navigation on the Mississippi river Gulf Outlet established 
     by Pubic Law 84--455 (70 Stat. 65, chapter 112) (referred to 
     in this matter as the ``Outlet)'', extending from the Gulf of 
     Mexico to the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, and address wetland 
     losses attributable to the Outlet, channel bank erosion, 
     hurricane and storm protection, saltwater intrusion, 
     navigation, ecosystem restoration, and related issues: 
     Provided, That the plan shall include recommended 
     authorization modifications to the Outlet regarding what, if 
     any, navigation should continue, measures to provide 
     hurricane and storm protection, prevent saltwater intrusion, 
     and re-establish the storm buffering properties and 
     ecological integrity of the wetland damaged by construction 
     and operation of the Outlet, and complement restoration of 
     coastal Louisiana: Provided further, That the Secretary shall 
     develop the plan in consultation with the Parish of St. 
     Bernard, Louisiana, the State of Louisiana, the Secretary of 
     the Interior, the Secretary of Commerce, the Administrator of 
     the Environmental Protection Agency, and the National Academy 
     of Sciences: Provided further, That the Secretary shall seek 
     input, review, and comment from the public and the scientific 
     community for incorporation into the interim plan: Provided 
     further, That the Secretary shall ensure that an independent 
     panel of experts established by the National Academy of 
     Sciences reviews and provides written comments for 
     incorporation into the interim plan: Provided further, That, 
     not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary shall submit an interim report to Congress 
     comprising the plan, the written comments of the independent 
     panel of experts, and the written explanation of the 
     Secretary for any recommendation of the independent panel of 
     experts not adopted in the plan: Provided further, That the 
     Secretary shall refine the plan, if necessary, to be fully 
     consistent, integrated, and included in the final technical 
     report to be issued in December 2007 pursuant to the matter 
     under the heading ``investigations'' under the heading 
     ``Corps of Engineers--Civil'' of title I of the Energy and 
     Water Development Appropriations Act, 2006 (Public Law 109-
     103, 119 Stat. 2247; Public Law 109-148, 119 Stat. 2814): 
     Provided further, That the amount provided under this heading 
     is designated as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 
     402 of H. Con. Res. 05 (109th Congress), the concurrent 
     resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006: Provided 
     further, That, for the projects identified in the report on 
     the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet due by December 2007, 
     required by this section, the Secretary shall submit such 
     reports to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee 
     and House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee: 
     Provided further, That upon adoption of a resolution 
     authorizing the project by each committee, the Secretary 
     shall be authorized to construct such projects.
       (8)(f) The amounts provided under this heading ar 
     designated as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 
     402 of H. Con. Res. 95 (109th Congress), the concurrent 
     resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006.

     SEC. 2402. USE OF UNEXPENDED FUNDS.

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

                               CHAPTER 5

                    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

                     Customs and Border Protection


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

       For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'' for 
     necessary expenses related to the consequences of Hurricane 
     Katrina

[[Page 7071]]

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


                              CONSTRUCTION

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

                       United States Coast Guard


                           OPERATING EXPENSES

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

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


              ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS

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

                  Federal Emergency Management Agency


                 ADMINISTRATIVE AND REGIONAL OPERATIONS

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


            PREPAREDNESS, MITIGATION, RESPONSE, AND RECOVERY

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


                            DISASTER RELIEF

       For an additional amount for ``Disaster Relief'' for 
     necessary expenses under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster 
     Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), 
     $10,400,000,000, to remain available until expended: 
     Provided, That the amount provided under this heading is 
     designated as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 
     402 of H. Con. Res. 95 (109th Congress), the concurrent 
     resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006.

  Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, this amendment has been worked on quite a 
bit. An agreement has been reached with all relevant Members, 
particularly the chairs and ranking members of all of the relevant 
committees. It doesn't increase the cost of the bill. It addresses a 
number of urgent flood protection needs in Louisiana and, again, 
represents a very solid compromise which I am proud to sponsor.
  With that, I ask that Members agree to the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate?
  If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 3728), as further modified, was agreed to.
  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mrs. MURRAY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Dakota is recognized.
  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I thank the Chair for yielding time on this 
amendment.
  This amendment would provide an additional $20 million for veterans 
health care, offset by striking $20 million that would be appropriated 
under this supplemental for the Americorps program. The Americorps 
program has already received $900 million in appropriations for fiscal 
year 2006, according to the committee report on this bill.
  In 2005, the VA transferred $452 million from its Medical Facilities 
account to its Medical Services account. I would like to replenish the 
VA Medical Facilities account a little, if it's possible to do in a 
fiscally responsible way. This amendment provides the opportunity to do 
so, by taking money from an ineffective and mismanaged program--the 
Americorps National Civilian Community Service Corps program--and 
providing it for veterans health care.
  Mr. President, my amendment would make some resources available to 
carry out the Secretary's Capital Asset Realignment for Enhancement 
Services, or CARES, decision, which mandated that 156 priority 
community-based clinics be established by 2012.
  As I said, talking about AmeriCorps, Senator Mikulski has described 
the overall AmeriCorps Program as ``like Enron's nonprofit.''
  What has been said by GAO--they described it as they have been living 
on the edge, with tracking based on projections instead of real 
accounts.
  My amendment simply helps us understand that the budget process is 
about making choices, about setting priorities, and that providing 
assistance for this program under the VA health care and using as an 
offset to pay for it this AmeriCorps Program, which has already been 
funded at $900 million this year, and, as I have described, has been 
described by many, including those on the other side of the aisle, as a 
program that has serious management problems, serious financial 
accounting and tracking problems.
  So I urge the adoption of the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, the Thune amendment will reduce the 
funding for the National Civilian Community Corps by $20 million. These 
funds are needed to pay the expenses of training and subsistence for 
those who have volunteered to provide emergency assistance in the gulf 
coast region, to help disaster victims recover from the destruction 
caused by Hurricanes Rita and Katrina.
  There have been over 1,600 National Civilian Community Corps members 
in my State of Mississippi since August 30, the day after Hurricane 
Katrina struck our coast. They continue to provide essential 
assistance. The State of Mississippi put our State office of the 
National Civilian Community Corps in charge of the emergency 24-hour 
call center, as well as supply distribution centers. To date, the 
National Civilian Community Corps has assisted 1,140,000 people; 
cleaned out 1,500 homes; contributed nearly 2,000 tons of food and 
2,790 tons of clothing; served 1 million meals; refurbished 732 homes; 
supported 654 emergency response centers; and completed 1,730 damage 
assessments.
  The volunteers of the National Civilian Community Corps receive about 
$4,000 for college expenses. They are modestly housed, fed, and 
provided with health care and uniforms. They remain available at a 
moment's notice for deployment to any emergency in the country. The 
Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Red Cross, and others depend 
upon this group of professionally trained volunteers for assistance and 
support.
  The thousands of volunteers who are helping care for children and 
helping the gulf coast recover and rebuild are the backbone of the 
progress being

[[Page 7072]]

made in the hurricane-damaged region of our country. They give hope to 
our families, and I urge the Senate to reject the Thune amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington is recognized.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, as we gather this morning, our troops in 
Iraq and Afghanistan need our support, families on the gulf coast need 
help rebuilding their lives, and communities all across this country 
need help moving forward. And now it is down to us. Will we provide 
that support? Will we provide that critical help? Or will we leave our 
troops unfunded, our gulf coast in ruins, and our communities stalled? 
This is the bill that determines whether we move forward as a country 
or whether we make it harder for our troops, for hurricane victims, and 
for American families to make progress. That is the choice before us.
  I am on the floor this morning--as I have been all week--saying we 
need to move our country forward by passing this emergency supplemental 
bill. I do want to address some of the concerns that have been raised 
about this bill.
  For years, this White House has been playing games to hide the cost 
of war. We know we have tremendous expenses in Iraq and Afghanistan. 
Everyone knows that. But when it's time to write the budget--suddenly 
this White House develops amnesia. It somehow ``forgets'' to include 
the cost of war in the regular budget process. On the day the 
administration sends us its budget--the ongoing cost of war is somehow 
unknowable. But a few weeks later--when it sends up an emergency 
supplemental--suddenly we have got this huge document that lists the 
costs of war. It is a fiction, a sham, a game. And for too long--this 
Congress has been going along with it. We don't include the war in the 
budget. We don't fund the war through the Defense Appropriations bill, 
we just expect to pay for it through emergency supple-
mentals, and that is not honest. Moreover, it means that real 
emergencies--unanticipated natural disasters and our own homeland 
security needs--are pushed aside and rendered ``less important'' than 
ongoing war costs.
  All year I have been on the floor saying that if we are not realistic 
with our budgets, we are going to have to make up the difference in 
emergency spending--and that is where we find ourselves today.
  Mr. President, I want to walk through how the size of the 
supplemental has changed to remind my colleagues that it didn't just 
grow mysteriously. Members of both parties added critical priorities to 
the supplemental, and members have stood up for those critical 
investments.
  When the Senate Appropriations Committee gathered in early April to 
mark up this bill, several amendments were adopted that added to the 
cost of the bill. They included bipartisan amendments to address the 
agricultural disasters that we have witnessed across the country. That 
amendment was championed by Senator Dorgan and Senator Burns.
  Senator Harkin added an amendment to make sure that there will be 
adequate funds to finance the administration's preparations to deal 
with a pandemic flu outbreak.
  With the support of Senator Bond, I added an amendment to address the 
backlog of claims for highway emergency relief that still haven't been 
paid for recent declared disasters across the country; including: 
Hurricane Ivan, Hurricane Dennis, the San Simeon Earthquake, Hurricane 
Ophelia, Tropical Storm Gaston, and the tragic floods in Hawaii that we 
debated yesterday evening.
  The gulf coast Senators on the committee, including Senators 
Hutchison, Shelby, Landrieu, and, of course, Chairman Cochran, also 
presented amendments to better address the needs of the gulf coast 
region in its efforts to recover from Hurricane Katrina and the other 
gulf coast hurricanes.
  These amendments were all offered to address the real needs of our 
communities here at home.
  The Appropriations Committee reported this bill to the Senate Floor 
by a vote of 27 to 1. When we brought the bill to the floor, we 
received a statement of administration policy from the Bush white 
house. That statement said that the President would veto any bill that 
exceeded the level of $94.5 billion. Soon after, the Senate was given 
an opportunity to vote on the President's position.
  My friend, Senator Thomas of Wyoming, offered an amendment to delete 
all of the provisions that were not in the administration's original 
request--thus bringing the size of the bill down to the level 
acceptable to the President. That amendment failed overwhelmingly, by a 
veto-proof margin of 72 to 26.
  Just hours later, my friend from Nevada, Senator Ensign, made a 
motion to recommit the bill back to the Appropriations Committee with 
instructions that it be cut back to the level President Bush said he 
would support. That amendment also failed by a veto-proof margin of 68 
to 28.
  Why did those amendments fail, even in the face of the President's 
veto threat? Because Senators from across the country on both sides of 
the aisle recognized that the investments that this bill makes here in 
America are needed.
  Indeed, in the face of those embarrassing votes, the Senate 
Republican leaders frantically scurried around to get enough signatures 
on a letter to the President saying they would uphold the President's 
veto. They were desperate to get that letter out to the media because 
it was clear from the votes on the Senate floor that the Members of the 
Senate--Republican and Democrat alike--were not prepared to ignore our 
needs here at home, even if President Bush is prepared to do so.
  That is how this supplemental developed--one amendment at a time--
Senators from both parties voted to address critical needs. Senators 
have stood by those investments, and now it is time to pass this bill.
  Mr. President, we have critical needs in our war effort and here at 
home that we must address. Those needs have not been addressed through 
the regular budget, so we must address them through this bill. Let's 
pass this supplemental and make sure our troops and our communities 
have the support they need. And as we move forward--let's get real 
about the budget process--let's get real about the cost of war--or we 
are going to find ourselves back here time and again passing emergency 
spending.
  We have heard a lot about the size of the bill, and I want to address 
that. This supplemental is big because the budgets we have passed over 
the years have been unrealistically small.
  Let me say that again: This bill is big because the budgets we have 
passed have been unrealistically small. Time and again, the White House 
has proposed budgets that do not come close to meeting our domestic 
needs--and that completely ignore the costs of war. Those budgets have 
been works of fiction. And if we are not going to be realistic in the 
regular budget process--if we are not going to include the cost of war 
in the regular budget, we are going to have to face reality during this 
supplemental.
  That is where we find ourselves today. So any Member who is troubled 
by the size of this bill should tell the White House it is time to get 
real and send us budgets that include the cost of war and that address 
our domestic needs--or we are going to find ourselves dealing with 
emergency spending time and time again.
  But we can't miss the big picture--either we pass this bill and help 
our troops an our country, or we make it harder for America to move 
forward. Let's have the wisdom to make the right choice.
  Before I go any further, I want to acknowledge the tremendous 
leadership that Senator Byrd has provided throughput this process. He 
knows this body better than anyone. And, more importantly, he brings 
with him a deep commitment to doing the right things not only for the 
Senate, but for the country, and for the families we all represent.
  I also want to thank Chairman Cochran for his leadership and hard 
work on this bill. He has shown extraordinary patience throughout this 
debate, and I appreciate how he has

[[Page 7073]]

worked with all of us to keep this bill on track.
  Mr. President, I yield back the remainder of our time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the Thune 
amendment No. 3704.
  Mr. COCHRAN. I request the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.


                           Amendment No. 3824

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

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

  The amendment is as follows:

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

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

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

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


                    Amendment No. 3824, as Modified

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

       At the appropriate place insert the following:

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

       (a) In General.--Of the unobligated balances available for 
     ``Operation and Maintenance'' under the heading ``CORPS OF 
     ENGINEERS-CIVIL'' of title I of the Energy and Water 
     Development Appropriations Act, 2006 (Public Law 109-103; 119 
     Stat. 2250), $400,000 shall be made available for fiscal year 
     2006 for the maintenance of the Chicago Sanitary and Ship 
     Canal Demonstration Barrier, Illinois, which was constructed 
     under section 1202(i)(3) of the Nonindigenous Aquatic 
     Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 (16 U.S.C. 
     4722(i)(3)).

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


                           Amendment No. 3732

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to call up 
amendment No. 3732.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, we have no objections on this side.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

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

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

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

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

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, the supplemental appropriations bill 
includes $27 billion for disaster-related expenses. But, no money, 
other than a nominal amount for the Inspector General, was provided for 
the Social Security Administration. This amendment would correct this 
omission.
  This amendment would provide $38 million to the Social Security 
Administration, SSA, to reimburse costs incurred as a result of 
Hurricane Katrina and other hurricanes of the 2005 season.
  The Social Security Administration performed a remarkable job in 
response to these recent disasters.
  They assisted more than 528,000 persons in FEMA Disaster Recovery 
Centers and shelters and helped many others who came to SSA field 
offices. Altogether these activities cost the agency $38 million: $6 
million to acquire and outfit temporary space and renovate offices 
damaged by the storm, including costs for computers, furniture and 
supplies; $12 million for processing immediate payments, changing 
addresses, confirming Social Security numbers, and taking new claims 
that resulted from the hurricanes; $7 million to pay for the travel and 
per diem expenses for employees; $12 million for costs related to 
unprocessed workloads--claims, hearings, etc.--due to the storms' 
disruptions; $1 million for salaries of those SSA workers who 
volunteered to work for FEMA in the affected areas.
  SSA cannot easily absorb this $38 million because its budget is 
already $300 million below the President's request for fiscal year 
2006. SSA is already experiencing reductions and delays in service. 
This $38 million would allow an increase in overtime hours to begin to 
address these backlogs.
  Finally, the cost of this amendment is offset by a $38 million 
reduction in the FEMA disaster relief fund. This reduction in FEMA 
would come from the $2.4 billion that is designated for ``other 
needs.'' This designation refers to money that has been made available 
for unspecified, potential future activities. It would not affect any 
specific project or activity in this bill.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise to speak in favor of the bipartisan 
amendment that Finance Committee Chairman Grassley has just offered. As 
ranking Democrat on the Finance Committee, I have worked with Chairman 
Grassley to develop this amendment. The amendment provides $38 million 
to the Social Security Administration, SSA--fully paid for--to 
reimburse the costs SSA incurred as a result of Hurricane Katrina and 
other hurricanes of the 2005 season.
  The supplemental appropriations bill, as reported by the Senate 
Appropriations Committee, would appropriate $106.5 billion, including $ 
67.7 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, $4.5 billion for 
foreign assistance programs, and $27.1 billion for relief needed 
because of last season's hurricanes. In contrast, no funding for SSA to 
make up for its costs from Katrina and the other hurricanes is 
currently provided in the supplemental.
  The Social Security Administration performed superbly in the 
aftermath of these hurricanes. SSA assisted more than 528,000 persons 
in FEMA Disaster

[[Page 7074]]

Recovery Centers and shelters and helped many others who came to its 
field offices. To provide such assistance, SSA urgently invoked 
emergency procedures and issued approximately 85,000 immediate payments 
for displaced beneficiaries and those who could not access their bank 
or other financial accounts. In addition, SSA changed the addresses of 
displaced beneficiaries, provided individuals who had lost their 
identification documents with confirmation of their Social Security 
numbers, and took applications from many people from the affected areas 
who had become newly eligible for Social Security disability or 
survivors benefits or benefits from the Supplemental Security Income 
program. SSA even passed along messages to beneficiaries from worried 
family members. Finally, some SSA employees drove hours to provide 
relief to overstretched field offices, sometimes sleeping on air 
mattresses set up in the offices because there were no other places to 
stay.
  Together, these activities caused SSA to redirect $38 million from 
funding for its normal tasks and obligations. There were costs to SSA 
of $6 million to acquire and outfit temporary space and renovate 
offices damaged by the storm, including costs for computers, furniture 
and supplies. SSA estimates that there were $12 million in costs for 
new workloads, including processing immediate payments, changing 
addresses, confirming Social Security numbers, and taking new claims 
that resulted from the hurricanes. It cost SSA $7 million to pay for 
the travel and per diem expenses for employees who came to the affected 
areas from other regions to help, as well as for employees who were 
forced to relocate because of damaged or destroyed homes and offices 
and who continued to work in other offices. Costs related to 
unprocessed work include $12 million for SSA workloads, such as claims, 
hearings, that were not processed as a result of the storms' 
disruptions. Nearly $1 million was spent to pay the salaries of those 
SSA workers who volunteered to work for FEMA in the affected areas, and 
thus were not doing their regular SSA work.
  Unfortunately for SSA, it had already had its funding cut by a total 
of $300 million below the President's request for fiscal year 2006. 
Rather than being able to absorb the $38 million caused by the 
hurricanes, SSA found its $300 million shortfall being exacerbated by 
these additional $38 million of costs.
  The Social Security Administration could make very good use of an 
additional $38 million of funding for fiscal year 2006 at this time by 
increasing overtime hours. This would allow SSA to make up for a small 
piece of the reductions and delays of service to its normal applicants 
and beneficiaries.
  In the Senate-passed supplemental, many Federal agencies are 
reimbursed for costs arising from these hurricanes. Surprisingly, that 
is not the case for the Social Security Administration. This is 
especially ironic in view of the efforts of the Social Security 
Administration and its employees to help the gulf coast and its 
citizens, including some efforts that were above and beyond the call of 
duty.
  This bipartisan amendment will address this funding shortfall for the 
Social Security Administration by providing it with an additional $38 
million for the current fiscal year. The amendment is fully paid for. 
As reported by the Appropriations Committee, the supplemental 
appropriations bill provides $10.6 billion to FEMA for disaster relief 
from Hurricane Katrina and other hurricanes of the 2005 season. Of this 
amount, according to the committee report, $2.4 billion is provided for 
``other needs.'' Although the report provides some examples of such 
``other needs,'' there is no list of specific projects and activities 
whose costs total $2.4 billion. This amendment increases SSA's funding 
for fiscal year 2006 by $38 million and reduces the $10.6 billion 
appropriated for the FEMA Disaster Relief account in this bill. The 
$2.4 billion provided by this bill for ``other needs'' is part of the 
$10.6 billion appropriated for the FEMA Disaster Relief account in the 
bill. This amendment will not result in the loss of any specific 
project or activity provided for by this bill. Nor will it cause this 
bill to result in any additional costs to the Federal Government.
  This amendment will restore the loss of resources for the Social 
Security Administration that has resulted from the 2005 season's 
hurricanes. I believe this is the right thing to do. I urge my 
colleagues to support this bipartisan amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment? If 
not, the question is on agreeing to amendment No. 3732.
  The amendment (No. 3732) was agreed to.
  Mrs. MURRAY. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. COCHRAN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           amendment no. 3704

  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I rise today in opposition to the amendment 
from the Senator from South Dakota. This is not an amendment designed 
to help our veterans. It is an amendment designed to cut funding for 
the National Civilian Community Corps, NCCC, that the sponsor of the 
amendment apparently thought would be more likely to pass if the funds 
were allocated to veterans health care facilities.
  The Senator is proposing to strike from the bill the entire $20 
million allocated to support the NCCC effort to help Katrina victims. 
NCCC members deployed to the gulf within 24 hours of Katrina making 
landfall and have been there ever since. In total, nearly 1,600 NCCC 
members have provided 320,000 hours of volunteer service. These young 
people are 18 to 24 years old. They muck out homes, remove debris, 
rebuild schools and community centers, coordinate the work of episodic 
volunteers, help families and senior citizens rebuild their homes and 
lives, and support other needs.
  The $20 million in the supplemental will support 800 NCCC members who 
will provide more than 1.2 million hours of service in the gulf coast 
hurricane recovery effort. Among NCCC's gulf coast accomplishments so 
far: assisted 1,063,000 people, mucked out 1,500 homes, distributed 
1,714 tons of food, distributed 2,790 tons of clothing, served 
1,000,000 meals, refurbished 732 homes, supported 542 emergency 
response centers, leveraged 7,715 volunteers, and completed 1,325 
damage assessments.
  It is important to fund health care for our veterans. That is why I 
voted for the Akaka amendment to add $430 million to the bill for that 
purpose. I am pleased that it passed, and I hope the President requests 
the funds.
  Veterans deserve every penny of the $430 million added to this bill, 
but those who have had their lives turned upside down by Hurricane 
Katrina also deserve the support of the young men and women of the 
national Civilian Conservation Corps. We should not rob Peter to pay 
Paul. Therefore, I will vote against this amendment.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to Senator Thune's 
amendment and to set the record straight on my ongoing and passionate 
support for AmeriCorps and the National Civilian Community Corps, NCCC. 
The Senator from South Dakota said that I described the overall 
AmeriCorps program as, ``It's like Enron's gone nonprofit.'' Senator 
Thune was absolutely wrong to say that is the way I describe 
AmeriCorps. I love AmeriCorps. I love what they do for communities. I 
love what they do for America.
  Senator Thune took that quote totally out of context. I made that 
statement back in 2002 when a bureaucratic boondoggle led to the 
overenrollment of 20,000 volunteers. When that happened, I led the 
efforts to organize the national service groups and to strengthen 
AmeriCorps. Along with Senator Bond, I introduced and passed the 
``Strengthen AmeriCorps Program Act of 2003'' which established new 
accounting procedures for AmeriCorps. I urged the President to appoint 
a new CEO for the Corporation of National Service--a CEO with the 
management skills necessary to restore confidence in the Corporation's 
abilities to make a

[[Page 7075]]

real difference to our volunteers--and in our communities. I also asked 
for a reinvigorated Board of Directors that would take greater 
oversight and responsibility and I have consistently called for 
increased funding so that AmeriCorps could support 75,000 volunteers 
each year.
  AmeriCorps is stronger than ever. Since its creation, over 300,000 
volunteers have served in communities and earned education awards to go 
to college or to pay off student debt. To date, 7,500 Maryland 
residents have earned education awards. The NCCC program, which has a 
campus in Perry Point, MD, is a full-time residential program for 18 to 
24 year olds designed to strengthen communities and develop leaders 
through team-based service projects. Each year, approximately 1,100 
participants reside in its five campuses nationwide. The Perry Point 
campus houses 200 AmeriCorps members every year, and since 1994 its 
residents have logged more than 350,000 service hours. Most recently, 
NCCC members have provided more than 250,000 service hours valued at 
$3.8 million to projects in the Gulf Coast region, which reflects their 
critical service during every American natural disaster since the 
program started.
  The funds that Senator Thune wants to cut are specifically dedicated 
to support volunteer recovery activities in the gulf and would pay for 
800 NCCC members who will provide more than 1.2 million hours of 
service in the gulf coast hurricane recovery effort. These teams will 
rebuild schools and community centers, remove debris, and help senior 
citizens rebuild their homes and lives. This funding demonstrates the 
Senate's commitment to keeping this valuable program alive, despite 
President Bush's efforts to cut the Federal funds it needs to survive.
  I fought to create AmeriCorps, I fought to strengthen AmeriCorps, and 
I will fight to save AmeriCorps. Today's Federal investment, like these 
fine volunteers, are needed now more than ever. I strongly encourage my 
Senate colleagues to make sure this money is included as a part of this 
emergency spending package, and I urge them to oppose Senator Thune's 
amendment which would divert these critical funds away from NCCC.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 
3704. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the 
roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. The following Senator was necessarily absent: the 
Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch).
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. 
Rockefeller) is necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 39, nays 59, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 111 Leg.]

                                YEAS--39

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

                                NAYS--59

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

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Hatch
     Rockefeller
       
  The amendment (No. 3704) was rejected.
  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mrs. MURRAY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the clerk will read 
the bill for the third time.
  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I know we are getting ready to go to 
final passage, but I ask unanimous consent to go to amendment No. 3851, 
as modified.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate is not in order.


                    Amendment No. 3851, as Modified

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


                    amendment no. 3851, as modified

              (Purpose: To provide a complete substitute)

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

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


                            salmon spawning

  Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, last week I proposed an amendment to the 
supplemental appropriations bill that would provide relief to 
individuals facing an unfolding economic crisis along the Oregon and 
California coast.
  For the third consecutive year, the number of naturally spawning 
Klamath River Chinook salmon is expected to fall below the conservation 
floor called for in the fishery management plan. As a result, the 
Pacific Fishery Management Council undertook a careful review of the 
stock status as well as the economic needs of local communities.
  After conducting its review, the Council voted to recommend to the 
Secretary of Commerce the use of an emergency rule to allow for a 
severely restricted salmon season along 700 miles of the Oregon and 
California coast.

[[Page 7076]]

  Last week, Secretary Gutierrez approved the council's recommendation 
for an emergency rule. While this limited season is helpful, it will 
not be enough to sustain Oregon's rural, fishery-dependent economies. 
It is estimated that the impact to Oregon and California coastal 
communities could exceed $100 million. Many of the communities affected 
by these fishery restrictions are still recovering from the devastation 
caused by the collapse of the timber economy in 1990s.
  The funding provided in my amendment would help fishermen and 
supporting businesses in Oregon weather what will certainly be a very 
trying year. However, because this crisis is the result of a regulatory 
action rather than a natural disaster, I have been told that my 
amendment is not germane to the bill that is before us now. This 
parliamentary hair-splitting is lost on my constituents.
  I would like to engage the Chairman of the Appropriations Committee 
in a brief colloquy. I realize that we are facing tight budgetary times 
and numerous disasters, many of which receive assistance under the 
current bill. Will you agree to work with me to secure funding or 
reprogram funds to address the pending crisis on the Oregon coast?
  Mr. COCHRAN. The Senator is certainly right that these are very 
difficult budgetary times. Funds for nondefense discretionary programs 
are particularly constrained, while the demand for those funds has not 
slackened one bit. Having said that, I appreciate the Senator 
acquainting me with the challenges facing fishing communities on the 
Oregon coast, and I will work with him and the subcommittee Chairman 
Shelby and try to identify an appropriate federal response for affected 
communities.
  Mr. SMITH. I thank the Chairman. I yield the floor.


                               avian flu

  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished colleagues 
from North Carolina and Kansas, Senators Burr and Brownback, for their 
commitment to avian flu preparedness and to putting in place an 
effective system for the surveillance of wild birds, which is 
instrumental to our capacity to prepare for the outbreak of an avian 
flu pandemic. I am happy to support the amendment of my distinguished 
colleague from North Carolina.
  Mr. BURR. Mr. President, my amendment builds upon work Senator 
Lieberman and Senator Brownback undertook last year in the fiscal year 
2006 Defense appropriations bill, which also included the first avian 
flu supplemental. It enhances our domestic capacity to undertake wild 
bird surveillance coming into and across the United States by utilizing 
the expertise of the Smithsonian Institute to support our Federal 
agencies.
  Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, indeed, there is growing concern that 
wild birds can carry the avian flu virus, which has now spread from 
Southeast Asia to China, Europe, Africa, and to the Middle East. Wild 
birds are one of the key vectors for spreading the virus to domestic 
animal populations or carry it to wild bird markets, where the virus is 
further propagated. At this time, the virus does not spread easily from 
birds to humans and there are limited reports of human to human 
transfer. Importantly, the virus has not yet entered the United States 
to our knowledge. We must understand how this virus moves to prepare 
communities in its path.
  At the same time we work to develop a vaccine and procure antivirals, 
we can also track the movement of the virus in wild birds. GAINS can 
track wild birds in the same way the National Hurricane Center tracks 
hurricanes. By analyzing, storing, and reporting using a real time 
computerized data mapping system and interface, we can see the viral 
strains wild birds carry, where they are carrying the virus along 
migratory routes, and how the virus is genetically evolving. This will 
make it possible for us to develop vaccines more quickly using the most 
recent strain available and will help us warn vulnerable populations in 
wild bird flight paths should the avian flu strain turn deadly.
  Mr. BURR. I agree that avian flu surveillance is critical to our 
ability to protect public health. Mr. President, I ask Senator 
Lieberman, is the global program he supported in the fiscal year 2006 
appropriations process for international surveillance currently up and 
running? The Smithsonian Institute and the domestic surveillance 
program they are working on and his international surveillance program 
will be important partners. We urge all parties to begin their 
activities immediately.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. It is. USAID and CDC have partnered with the Wildlife 
Conservation Society to establish the Wild Bird Global Avian Influenza 
Network for Surveillance or GAINS. GAINS is a smart and targeted 
investment in the U.S. Government's fight against avian flu. CDC and 
USAID are investing $6 million from fiscal year 2006 avian flu 
supplemental appropriations to establish GAINS. GAINS comprises 5 
million conservation, wild bird, poultry, health, and vaccine experts 
and builds upon the robust international network of the Wildlife 
Conservation Society, or WCS, which through partnerships has presence 
in virtually every key country related to Avian Influenza--56 in all. 
The Wildlife Conservation Society, founded in 1895 and headquartered at 
the Bronx Zoo has a long history in the wild bird surveillance field 
around the world. They were the organization that first diagnosed West 
Nile virus when it arrived on U.S. shores, and the human avian flu 
vaccine we are currently working on is partially derived from wild 
migratory bird samples, WCS wild bird samples collected in Mongolia.
  Of course, the GAINS relates to robust sampling of wild birds--alive 
and dead--in the wild and in captivity, and even in markets, but most 
importantly GAINS will display the results of sampling on a user-
friendly real time computerized data mapping system so that wherever 
you are in the world, public officials will be able to warn populations 
at risk and scientists will have a powerful tool to fight this virus.
  I am confident that the Smith-
sonian's domestic efforts will be fully compatible with GAINS.
  Mr. BURR. The Smithsonian has agreed to provide the samples and the 
data it collects to United States agency partners without delay. In 
turn, we will count on the DOI, USDA, HHS, and any other agencies to 
negotiate the full coordination and integration of the Smithsonian 
domestic component, the GAINS network, and any other ongoing effort 
into a public database. This way we know samples will be stored and 
shared between governmental and nongovernmental organizations and that 
data will work with additional efforts in the future.
  Mr. BROWNBACK. I am glad we agree that we should all work together. 
We cannot have efforts that are not collaborative and coordinated 
domestically and internationally. We will build on the GAINS 
infrastructure by boosting our domestic capacity through the 
Smithsonian Institute and ensuring all partners work together and share 
data in a compatible manner using the GAINS system.
  Mr. BURR. I understand that Senator Lieberman has an amendment 
related to GAINS.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Yes I do. The current GAINS program is underfunded by 
$4,000,000 in year one and year two will require an additional 
$10,000,000 to be fully functional. Our amendment specifies GAINS as a 
particular program for CDC to fund in its domestic and global 
surveillance efforts, which in general is receiving robust funding 
thanks to your foresight and that of your health subcommittee. Such an 
effort as we have discussed must include animal surveillance because of 
its relation to human health.
  Mr. BURR. An international avian flu surveillance component is an 
important investment and I hope HHS and CDC recognize the need to 
enhance our surveillance capabilities. I encourage the Appropriations 
Committee and Chairman Cochran to give it full consideration.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Senator Brown-
back and I thank the Senator from North Carolina for this. I personally 
thank you Senator Burr for working with us on this important issue, 
which I always say is the big bird in the room that few people are 
looking at. It always feels better to wrap our arms

[[Page 7077]]

around problems on a bipartisan basis. The leadership of the Senator 
from North Carolina on this issue and in general is noticed and 
laudable.
  Mr. BURR. Mr. President, I thank my colleagues.
  Mr. BROWNBACK. I thank my colleagues.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. I thank my colleagues for their commitment to these 
activities.


                     customs and border protection

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


                           Emerald Ash Borer

  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask if the chairman of the Appropriations 
Subcommittee on Agriculture is aware of my amendment regarding the 
urgent need for additional funding for combating the Emerald Ash Borer, 
and if he is open to accepting the amendment by unanimous consent.
  Mr. BENNETT. I would say to the Senator from Michigan that I am aware 
of his amendment, but unfortunately cannot support any amendment to the 
agriculture title of the supplemental appropriations bill which does 
not have an adequate offset. It is my understanding the amendment 
Senator Levin has introduced with Senators Stabenow, DeWine, Voinovich 
and Durbin does not contain any offset for the $15 million requested.
  Mr. LEVIN. The Senator from Utah is correct in that I was not able to 
offset the costs of the amendment as the funding in that title is very 
tight. I would ask my friend though if he is aware that there is a need 
in my State alone of over $30 million to combat and contain this 
invasive species that has destroyed virtually all of Southeast 
Michigan's ash stock?
  Mr. BENNETT. I have been advised of the urgent need for funds in the 
Midwest.
  Mr. LEVIN. During consideration of the fiscal year 2006 Agriculture 
Appropriations Act, Senators Stabenow, DeWine and I had a similar 
amendment seeking additional funds for the Animal and Plant Health 
Inspection Service at the USDA. We decided not to offer the amendment 
as we received assurances that the chairman and ranking member of the 
subcommittee would push for the House approved level of funding of $14 
million. Unfortunately the final bill contained only $10 million to 
deal with the Emerald Ash Borer epidemic.
  Mr. BENNETT. I say to my friend that we did indeed work with our 
House counterparts in crafting the final 2006 appropriation, but 
unfortunately were only able to allocate $10 million in the end.
  Mr. LEVIN. I thank the Senator from Utah for all of his help over the 
years in seeking funding for this problem. I hope that he and the 
ranking member would be mindful of the urgent need of Ohio, Indiana and 
Michigan for funding for Emerald Ash Borer eradication efforts when 
crafting the fiscal year 2007 Agriculture Appropriations Act over the 
coming months.
  Mr. BENNETT. I tell my friend from Michigan that I will do all I can, 
in consultation with Members from the affected states and the 
Department of Agriculture, to craft an appropriations bill which 
contains adequate funding to combat the Emerald Ash Borer.
  Mr. LEVIN. I thank the chairman and know that my colleagues 
appreciate his support as well.
  Ms. STABENOW. I thank my colleague, Senator Bennett, for his 
continued work to help Michigan, Ohio, and Indiana battle this invasive 
pest that has devastated our states. Senator Bennett worked closely 
with us last year during consideration of the Agriculture 
Appropriations bill, and I appreciate his commitment to working with us 
during the fiscal year 2007 appropriations bill.
  Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I would like to associate myself with the 
comments of my friends from Michigan. Ohio is home to more than 3.8 
billion ash trees and the Emerald Ash Borer is causing destruction to 
trees in northwest Ohio and the Columbus area. I would appreciate your 
help in the future to prevent the spread of the Emerald Ash Borer to 
southern Ohio.
  Mr. VOINOVICH. Mr. President, I thank my colleagues and the chairman 
of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture for providing this 
colloquy. As my colleagues know, the Emerald Ash Borer poses an 
enormous threat, and I wish to be associated with their remarks. This 
is important for this Senator from Ohio because nearly 4 billion ash 
trees are threatened in my State alone. The Ohio Department of 
Agriculture and the Ohio Department of Natural Resources call the 
Emerald Ash Borer the most serious forest health issue facing Ohio's 
forests today. They remain highly concerned and vigilant, but we must 
provide them with sufficient resources to eradicate this problem. 
According to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, the potential 
economic impact of EAB to Ohio citizens over the next 10 years could 
possibly reach $3 billion. Again, I thank my friend from Michigan for 
his leadership on this issue, as well as the Senator from Utah, Senator 
Bennett,

[[Page 7078]]

for his indulgence in entering into this colloquy.
  Mr. COBURN. Mr. President, in the past week, the Senate has voted to 
reduce the overall cost of H.R. 4939, the Emergency Supplemental 
Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Hurricane 
Recovery, 2006, now totaling nearly $110 billion by a mere $15 million. 
I am delighted that President Bush has pledged to veto this bill 
because Congress has, once again, been unable to resist the temptation 
to load up a must-pass bill with pork.
  I offered several amendments to eliminate nonemergency items in this 
bill. I appreciate the patience of my colleagues. I am very pleased and 
encouraged that this body is increasingly willing to depart from our 
business-as-usual practices.
  That is good because the American people are paying attention to this 
process. In a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, the American people 
said that ending earmarks should be the No. 1 priority for Congress 
this session. Thirty-nine percent said that members should be 
prohibited from ``directing federal funds to specific projects 
benefiting only certain constituents.'' It is interesting to note that 
ending earmarks was ranked ahead of immigration reform, which was cited 
as the No. 1 priority by 32 percent of Americans.
  I hope that these results, combined with polls showing a 22-percent 
approval rating for Congress, will encourage conferees to avoid a 
confrontation with President Bush over spending. I would hope that when 
conferees look for items to remove from this bill they take a close 
look at my amendments that lost by a narrow margin as well as those I 
withdrew.
  I believe that in this time of war and disaster recovery the American 
people expect us to make hard choices about spending. Taxpayers want us 
to be serving in a spirit of service and sacrifice, not searching for 
new ways to raid the public Treasury.
  Congress is raiding the Treasury in two ways with this bill. First, 
many of the items in this bill should be considered in the regular 
appropriations process and through the regular order. The war on terror 
is no longer a surprise. We are entering our fifth year of this war. It 
shouldn't come as a surprise to Congress that we have needs related to 
this effort. We have also developed a good understanding about many of 
the priorities in the gulf coast that could have been addressed in the 
regular budget process.
  Congress has also added billions of dollars for items that have no 
connection to the war on terror and the gulf coast recovery. Again, few 
of these items are true emergencies. The American people deserve to 
understand what defines a true emergency. According to the budget 
resolution for fiscal year 2006 all of the following five criteria must 
be met to be considered an emergency: necessary, essential, or vital; 
sudden, quickly coming into being, and not building up over time; an 
urgent, pressing, and compelling need requiring immediate action; 
unforeseen, unpredictable, and unanticipated; and not permanent, 
temporary in nature.
  Designating a project as an ``emergency'' excuses Congress from 
paying for a project. The result of abusing the ``emergency'' 
designation is an even greater emergency. Our Nation's debt is nearly 
$8.4 trillion. Each American's share of this debt is $27,964.86. Our 
national debt is increasing by an average of $1.95 billion per day. 
Social Security, Medicare and the standard of living of future 
generations of Americans are in jeopardy as a result of decades of 
fiscal irresponsibility and rationalizations for spending more money 
today without considering the consequences tomorrow.
  The Social Security trustees reported this week the program will 
exhaust its trust fund and begin running annual cash deficits in 2040. 
A year ago, that prediction was 2041, effectively meaning 2 years have 
been lost by a refusal to act. The trustees reported Social Security's 
unfunded liability is $13.4 trillion.
  Of course, the real problem with Social Security and Medicare is much 
worse because the Federal Government uses an Enron-style accounting 
scheme. We habitually borrow or, more accurately, steal money from 
these trust funds to pay for more spending today.
  When the 77 million baby boomers begin to retire in 2011, our Nation 
will be faced with the greatest economic challenge in our history. If 
we continue to indulge in earmarks, the gateway drug to spending 
addictions, we will never address these complex challenges, 
particularly if we can't resist the urge to abuse the earmark process 
on a bill designed to address the emergency needs of our troops and 
displaced people in the gulf coast.
  Another reason we must act today to rein in wasteful spending is 
because our ability to influence world events is diminished by our debt 
to other nations. We now have the distinction of being the world's 
largest debtor nation, and this bill will add to that debt. Many 
serious economists are warning that our excessive borrowing from 
foreign sources could cause the value of the dollar to collapse, which 
would lead to a disaster for our economy. It is incredibly shortsighted 
for this body to sell Treasury bills to countries such as China so we 
can finance economic development programs and other pet projects while, 
at the same time, we hope to encourage China to be more aggressive in 
terms of discouraging Iran from developing nuclear weapons. This is not 
just a numbers game. The future vitality of our nation is at stake. We 
are slowly but surely whittling away our national power and ability to 
leverage other nations away by our refusal to make hard choices about 
spending.
  Many of the items in this bill are obviously not emergencies, which 
is why this bill will be vetoed by President Bush if it is sent to him 
in its current form. Again, I hope conferees do not force the President 
to take this step. I am confident the President will veto this bill. He 
understands that it is more important to secure the next generation 
rather than the next election.
  Past Presidents and Congresses have made hard choices during 
difficult times. Between 1939 and 1942, Congress and FDR cut spending 
for nondefense programs by 22 percent. In 1950, President Truman and 
Congress cut nonmilitary spending by 28 percent. I suggest to my 
colleagues that if we want to be here past 2006, we better do the same.
  Still, I agree with my colleagues who say that the President's 
priorities don't come down from heaven. I suggest, however, that we are 
all subject to the judgment that comes down from the taxpayers. If we 
flippantly disregard the President's insistence that we make hard 
choices, the judgment of the taxpayers will not be kind to any of us.
  Families across this country are faced with hard choices every day in 
order to live within their budget. They have elected us to make hard 
choices. Our refusal to do this only reinforces the perception that we 
are disconnected from the priority-setting reality that governs the 
rest of the country.
  It is wrong, for example, for this body to fund pork projects such as 
grape research in the State of California force the taxpayers in my 
State and every other State to pay for a so-called emergency project 
that has been ongoing for the last 46 years and has already received 
more than $130 million from the American taxpayer. Where this body sees 
an emergency the taxpayers often see a series of misplaced priorities.
  The State of California received 549 Federal earmarks this year 
totaling $733 million. That included $10 million in Federal resources 
alone for museums. Is it more important to protect the residents at 
risk from flooding by the Sacramento River or to fund grape research? 
Congress is spending over $3.6 million on a grape research center in 
California this year. We are spending another $1 million on a 
pedestrian walkway project in Calimesa and a half million on 
pedestrian/bike improvements on Tower Bridge in Sacramento? What is 
more important for Sacramento? Why can't we prioritize today so future 
generations are not forced to make even tougher choices between massive 
tax hikes, drastic cuts to Medicare and Social Security, or the defense 
of our Nation?

[[Page 7079]]

  Martin Luther King Jr. once said, ``Cowardice asks the question--is 
it safe? Expediency asks the question--is it popular? Vanity asks the 
question--is it popular? But conscience asks the question--is it 
right?''
  I plead with my colleagues. Do what is right. Our Nation is on an 
unsustainable course, and that course correction must begin today, not 
when it is too late.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I support our troops and their families. 
I am behind them 100 percent. They deserve our gratitude, not just with 
words but with deeds. We must do right by our troops and their 
families. This strong emergency supplemental appropriations bill helps 
us do just that. This supplemental also provides needed funds to the 
victims of the devastating hurricanes that hit our gulf coast last 
summer.
  In this bill we have provided $15.6 billion to fix or replace 
equipment that has been damaged during combat operations and to buy 
additional force protection equipment desperately needed by our brave 
men and women on the battlefield.
  To help protect our troops from deadly improvised explosive devices, 
IEDs, this bill creates the joint improvised explosive device defeat 
fund and provides the fund with nearly $2 billion to develop and field 
the necessary tactics, equipment, and training to defeat these deadly 
weapons.
  Another way we can support our troops is to make our intentions in 
Iraq clear to the Iraqis and the international community. To this end, 
I supported the amendment introduced by Senator Biden that prohibits 
the building of any permanent military bases in Iraq. This will send a 
clear message to the Iraqi people--we are committed to withdrawing our 
troops once their mission is accomplished.
  To ensure that we do all we can to care for soldiers when they are 
injured, this bill includes an additional $1.15 billion for the defense 
health program. This money ensures that we can continue to provide 
world-class services including rapid aero-medical evacuation to our 
most severely wounded soldiers.
  The veterans health care system is stretched to the limit at a time 
when more and more veterans are turning to VA. That is why I 
cosponsored an amendment by Senator Akaka to increase veterans funding 
by $430 million to meet the health care needs of soldiers returning 
from Iraq and Afghanistan and other war veterans.
  The rank-and-file employees of the Federal Government are the unsung 
heroes of this country. Unfortunately, they are often required to work 
in substandard or often hazardous conditions. It was recently reported 
that employees within this very building are forced to enter tunnels 
full of asbestos and on the verge of collapse. That is why I 
cosponsored an amendment by Senator Allard that provides over $27 
million for critical emergency structural repairs to the Capitol 
Complex utilities tunnels. I will continue to fight for our Federal 
workforce to ensure they have safe working environments and proper 
safety equipment.
  We know that nearly 40 percent of the soldiers deployed today in Iraq 
and Afghanistan are citizen soldiers who come from the National Guard 
and Reserves. More than half of these will suffer a loss of income when 
they are mobilized, because their military pay is less than the pay 
from their civilian job.
  Many patriotic employers and State governments eliminate this pay gap 
by continuing to pay them the difference between their civilian and 
military pay. The reservist pay security amendment, which I worked on 
with Senator Durbin, will ensure that the U.S. Government also makes up 
for this pay gap for Federal employees who are activated in the Guard 
and Reserves.
  Mr. President, last year, we provided emergency relief for the 
victims of the horrible tsunami in Asia. Today with this bill, we are 
providing over $27 billion in support to our own citizens so badly hurt 
by the devastating hurricanes that hit the gulf coast last year. This 
money will not only help with the rebuilding of New Orleans, but will 
provide a host of economic incentives and subsidies to help the people 
of Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas, and Alabama get back to work and 
rebuild their lives following the destruction of Hurricanes Katrina and 
Rita. Additionally, this bill provides emergency funding to help 
immediately rebuild the levees and install flood control equipment that 
will help prevent another terrible tragedy from occurring when this 
year's hurricane season arrives in less than 4 weeks.
  After 9/11 we realized that our borders were not secure. Since then, 
we have waged the war on terror and made great strides at protecting 
our homeland. We have made significant investments in law enforcement 
and security; however, the infrastructure that supports our border 
security has been allowed to crumble. To counter this, I supported an 
amendment proposed by Senator Gregg which adds $2 billion for border 
security initiatives to include buying additional vehicles, airplanes, 
helicopters, and ships. It also builds state of the art facilities for 
use in ensuring the security of our borders.
  We have all seen the devastating effects of natural disasters and 
terrorism and are working hard to prevent future occurrences from 
affecting our Nation and the world. We have recently learned of another 
potential threat: a worldwide flu epidemic that could cost millions of 
lives if we are unprepared. In response to this threat, this bill 
provides $2.3 billion to prepare for and respond to an influenza 
pandemic. Making this money available now will help expand the domestic 
production capacity of influenza vaccine, and will help develop and 
stockpile the right vaccines, antivirals, and other medical supplies 
necessary to protect and preserve lives in the event of an outbreak.
  Because it is just as important to support our communities at home as 
it is to support our troops in the field, I will continue to fight for 
responsible military budgets. For that reason, I joined Senator Byrd's 
call for the President to fund our operations in Iraq and Afghanistan 
through the regular budget and appropriations process. After 4 years in 
Afghanistan and 3 years in Iraq, we should not be funding these 
operations as if they were surprise emergencies.
  Mr. President, this bill is a Federal investment in supporting our 
troops and their families and providing relief for those impacted by 
the devastating hurricanes.
  We support our troops by getting them the best equipment and the best 
protection we can provide. We support them by making it easier for our 
citizen soldiers in the National Guard and Reserves to serve their 
country. And we support them by ensuring they are cared for with the 
best possible medical system when they are injured or ill.
  With this bill, we are also helping our neighbors rebuild their 
homes, their communities, and their lives, and I am proud to give it my 
support.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I will cast my vote in favor of H.R. 
4939, the fiscal year 2006 supplemental appropriations bill. This bill 
takes the important step of supporting disaster relief efforts and 
helps fund our ongoing military and intelligence operations in Iraq and 
Afghanistan. I support the intent of this bill, but I have some 
significant reservations regarding the growing cost of the war and how 
it is being funded.
  In supporting our troops, I believe we must do what is necessary to 
ensure that the men and women risking their lives for our country have 
everything they need to carry out their mission. I do not support the 
administration's policy of funding the war in Iraq through emergency 
supplemental bills. According to a Congressional Budget Office report, 
in 2005 the Department of Defense obligated $83.6 billion--nearly $7 
billion per month--for the global war on terror, much of which was 
appropriated through emergency supplemental funding. This is a fiscally 
irresponsible approach that masks the true magnitude of the war's 
costs. Therefore, I voted in favor of an amendment offered by my 
colleagues, Senators Byrd and Carper, which expresses the sense of the 
Senate that any request

[[Page 7080]]

for funds after fiscal year 2007 for military operations in Iraq and 
Afghanistan should be included in the President's annual budget. I was 
encouraged that the amendment passed with a vote of 94 to 0. I urge the 
administration to heed the Senate's resolution and commit to making the 
costs of the Iraq war more transparent.
  I also believe that the administration must be held accountable for 
progress in the Iraq war. As a member of the Senate Armed Services 
Committee and ranking minority member of the Readiness Subcommittee, I 
am committed to finding a way to bring our soldiers home as soon as 
possible. I do not believe that we should leave before the Iraqi people 
are equipped with the tools necessary to support a stable democratic 
society, but we must ensure that progress is being made. Toward that 
end, I support the plan outlined in the amendment submitted by my 
colleague Senator Carl Levin, ranking member of the Senate Committee on 
Armed Services, which establishes clear reporting requirements 
regarding the political situation in Iraq. According to this plan, the 
President is required to submit a report to Congress every 30 days 
outlining Iraq's progress toward the formation of a national unity 
government. The plan also requires the administration to inform Iraqi 
political, religious and tribal leaders that meeting their own 
deadlines with regards to amending the Iraqi Constitution is a 
condition for the continued presence of a U.S. military force in Iraq. 
While the Senate did not consider Senator Levin's amendment due to 
germaneness, this is an important issue that Congress must address.
  Notwithstanding my concerns regarding the continued use of emergency 
supplementals to fund the conflict in Iraq, there are a number of 
provisions in this bill that I wholeheartedly support. In particular, I 
was pleased to see that we did not forget our Nation's veterans during 
consideration of the emergency supplemental. Our returning soldiers and 
sailors have earned the right to the best health care that this Nation 
can provide, and I believe we should strive to carry out this 
obligation to our servicemembers. With the backing of my Senate 
colleagues, I successfully passed an amendment to the emergency 
supplemental adding $430 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs, 
VA. These funds will be specifically used to supplement direct health 
care, mental health care, and prosthetics services at VA. As the 
ranking member on the Veterans Affairs Committee, I am pleased that the 
Senate took this important step of supporting our Nation's veterans.
  Another appropriate use of the emergency supplemental was 
appropriations for disaster relief. Our Nation has been hit hard by 
many significant natural disasters that could not have been planned for 
in advance. I believe that we, as Government leaders, should continue 
to provide assistance to help those devastated by natural disasters 
including the severe flooding that deluged Hawaii earlier this year.
  On May 2, 2006, President George W. Bush declared that a major 
disaster exists in the State of Hawaii that Federal funds to help the 
people and communities recover. I am pleased that the Senate 
Appropriations Committee included $33.5 million in the emergency 
supplemental for disaster assistance in Kauai and Windward Oahu, and $6 
million for sugarcane growers in the State whose crops were destroyed 
by the floods earlier this spring.
  In March, I introduced S. 2444, the Dam Rehabilitation and Repair Act 
of 2006. This bill would amend the National Dam Safety Program Act to 
establish a program to provide grant assistance to States for the 
rehabilitation and repair of deficient dams. I also supported Senator 
Inouye's efforts to include an amendment to H.R. 3499 to provide $1.4 
million to assess the security and safety of critical reservoirs and 
dams in Hawaii, including monitoring dam structures. I am extremely 
disappointed that this amendment did not pass because the failure of 
Kaloko Dam on Kauai led to the severe flooding and loss of life. I am 
hopeful that my colleagues will recognize the importance of addressing 
the dam problem for the sake of Hawaii and our Nation and that my bill 
will receive floor consideration.
  Senator Inouye also introduced a timely amendment that provides $1 
million for environmental monitoring of waters in and around Hawaii. In 
March of this year, I had the opportunity to visit the hardest hit 
areas of our State and meet victims, emergency responders, and State 
officials. To date, the situation for many of our residents remains 
very grave. With hundreds of homes and businesses damaged or destroyed, 
critical infrastructure crippled, and many hours spent engaged in 
search and rescue activities, the resources of our State have been 
severely strained. I supported this amendment, and I am encouraged that 
this amendment passed. It is clear that Hawaii will not be able to 
fully recover without substantial Federal assistance.
  Mr. President, I wish to reiterate that a clear distinction needs to 
be made for true emergencies and natural disasters such as Hurricane 
Katrina and the floods in Hawaii, which could not have been 
anticipated.
  It is fiscally irresponsible for the current administration to 
continue to treat this war as an emergency in order to hide the true 
cost of the war and circumvent the normal budgeting and oversight 
process. If the current administration continues to refuse to make hard 
choices and insist on a policy of funding the war through emergency 
appropriations, succeeding generations of Americans will face even more 
difficult choices.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I had intended to offer an amendment, No. 
3755, to this Emergency Supplemental Appropriations bill to provide for 
full funding of the Help America Vote Act. However, once cloture was 
invoked, my amendment would have been ruled non-germane and 
consequently, I will not call it up.
  But the parliamentary circumstances of this bill do not change the 
fact that we have reached a critical juncture in the ability of States 
to be prepared for Federal elections this November.
  The amendment I intended to offer would have ensured that States have 
the resources necessary to conduct fair and accurate elections this 
fall. It would have fulfilled the promise made by Congress to be a full 
partner in the funding of Federal election reform by providing full 
funding for payments to State governments to meet the election reform 
requirements mandated by Congress over 3 years ago under the Help 
America Vote Act, HAVA.
  HAVA was overwhelmingly enacted by Congress and signed into law by 
President Bush on October 29, 2002.
  HAVA mandates that by the Federal elections this year, States must 
implement certain minimum requirements for the administration of 
Federal elections. These requirements were phased in over roughly a 2-
year period with the final requirements mandated to be in place by this 
year.
  To ensure that the States could meet these requirements, Congress 
authorized nearly $4 billion to pay for 95 percent of the costs of HAVA 
implementation. In order to receive Federal funding, States had to 
provide 5 percent matching funds.
  All 50 States, the District of Columbia, and the territories have 
raised their 5 percent matching funds under this Federal-State 
partnership.
  Only the Federal Government is coming up short on its end of the 
deal. To date, Congress has appropriated only $3.1 billion of the 
nearly $4 billion it promised the States in funding. That means the 
States are short nearly $800 million in promised Federal funds needed 
to implement these reforms.
  With 2 Federal primary elections already over and with 10 upcoming 
primaries scheduled in May, there is precious little time left to get 
these needed funds to the States in time to ensure that the Federal 
elections this year are conducted in compliance with Federal law.
  This amendment would provide full funding for HAVA. Arguably, this is 
the last opportunity we may have to ensure that the States have the 
promised funds in time to meet the 2006 deadlines for reform.
  The amendment would fund the balance of the requirement payments to

[[Page 7081]]

States under section 251 of HAVA in the amount of $724 million. It 
would also make up the shortfall of $74 million in funding to date for 
disability access grants and protection and advocacy payments to serve 
the voting needs of persons with disabilities.
  It is simply unconscionable that Congress has not kept up its end of 
this funding bargain. As Thomas Paine observed, the right to vote for 
representatives is the primary right by which other rights are 
protected. That statement is still true today. The right to vote in a 
democracy is the fundamental right on which all others are based.
  As we witnessed in the Presidential election debacle of 2000, the 
confidence of the American public in our system of elections was 
shattered after witnessing hanging chads, confusing ballots, missing 
names on voter lists, malfunctioning machines, and different standards 
to recount ballots.
  Congress responded with the first ever comprehensive requirements for 
the administration of Federal elections.
  The HAVA requirements effective for the 2004 Federal elections 
provided that all States offer provisional ballots to any voter 
challenged, for any reason, at the polls as ineligible to vote. Because 
of the HAVA requirement, 2 million more ballots were counted in the 
2004 elections than would have otherwise been counted.
  In 2004, States also had to have in place measures designed to ensure 
the identity of certain first-time voters who registered by mail. 
States had to ensure voter education by posting certain voter 
information in the polling place.
  But the most far-reaching, and arguably most expensive reforms, must 
be in place for the Federal elections this year. Effective January 1, 
2006, all voting systems used in Federal elections must meet the 
following minimum voting system standards:

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

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

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

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

                                                   April 20, 2006.

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

       Dear Senators: We, the undersigned organizations, urge you 
     to support full funding for the Help America Vote Act of 2002 
     (HAVA) and include the remaining $798 million of authorized 
     funding in the upcoming Emergency Supplemental legislation. 
     Of that amount, $724 million is for the federally-mandated 
     processes and equipment that state and local governments must 
     have in place for federal elections in 2006 and $74 million 
     is for assisting state and local governments in making all 
     polling places accessible. It is imperative that the states 
     and localities receive all of the funding they were promised 
     so they can fully implement these important requirements of 
     HAVA.
       State and local governments have worked hard on these 
     reforms such as improving disability access to polling 
     places, updating voting equipment, implementing new 
     provisional balloting procedures, developing and implementing 
     a new statewide voter registration database, training poll 
     workers and educating voters on new procedures and new 
     equipment. State and local election officials have always had 
     a difficult struggle when competing for the funding necessary 
     to effectively administer elections and they were counting on 
     the funding promised by Congress to ensure that all the new 
     federal mandates were implemented effectively.
       To help state and local governments pay for these reforms, 
     HAVA authorized $3.9 billion over three fiscal years. Between 
     FY03 and FY04, it was clear that Congress saw the importance 
     of fully funding HAVA and provided $3 billion of the $3.9 
     billion for HAVA implementation. Unfortunately, in FY 05 and

[[Page 7082]]

     FY 06 no federal funds were appropriated for states to 
     implement the HAVA requirements.
       State officials incorporated the federal amounts Congress 
     promised when developing their required HAVA budgets and 
     plans. Without the full federal funding, state and local 
     governments will encounter serious fiscal shortfalls and will 
     not be able to afford complete implementation of important 
     HAVA mandates. According to a state survey, lack of federal 
     funding for HAVA implementation will result in many states 
     scaling back their voter and poll worker education 
     initiatives and on voting equipment purchase plans, all of 
     which are vital components to making every vote count in 
     America.
       We are thankful that you have seen the importance of 
     funding the work of the Election Assistance Commission. 
     States, localities and civic organizations can utilize the 
     work products of the EAC to effectively implement the 
     requirements of HAVA i.e., the voting system standards, the 
     statewide database guidance, and the studies on provisional 
     voting, voter education, poll worker training, and voter 
     fraud and voter intimidation.
       We thank you for your support of funding for the Help 
     America Vote Act, and we look forward to working with you on 
     this critical issue. Should you have any questions, please 
     contact Leslie Reynolds of the National Association of 
     Secretaries of State or Rob Randhava of the Leadership 
     Conference on Civil Rights, or any of the individual 
     organizations listed below.
           Sincerely,


     organizations representing state and local election officials

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


               civil and disability rights organizations

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

  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, first, let me acknowledge the work of 
Chairman Cochran, Senator Shelby, and the Appropriations Committee in 
crafting this bill.
  I would also like to commend Dr. Coburn, Senator McCain, Senator 
Ensign, and so many a number of my colleagues who have been out on the 
floor discussing the need for fiscal restraint.
  As much good as there is in this bill, and it is mostly good, I will 
be voting against it.
  We must stop the practice of using emergency spending designations to 
meet needs that can be met in the normal budget process.
  This supplemental has some important provisions in it related to the 
war on terror and the Hurricane Katrina recovery.
  For example, in relation to the war on terror, $10.2 billion is 
allocated for the Department of Defense's military personnel; $39 
billion is allocated for operation and maintenance accounts in support 
of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom; $15 billion 
for procurement for various accounts; and $8 billion for various other 
defense-related expenses.
  Other war related expenditures: $82 million for the FBI operations in 
Iraq and Afghanistan, $5 million for the DEA's Intelligence Program, 
and $4 million for ATF's costs in Iraq.
  These are all important programs that should be funded to help fight 
terrorists abroad.
  The bill provides needed funds for Hurricane Katrina.
  It provides $2 billion for border security, fully offset, which was 
included in Senator Gregg's amendment.
  That being said, there are a number of items in this bill that do not 
belong in an emergency supplemental appropriations bill.
  Many of these are very important projects that have merit.
  Many of these programs are worthy of Federal funding, and, when the 
regular appropriations season gets underway, I will work to see if 
there is a way we can fund them.
  But the question before us today is not whether they have merit 
because undoubtably most do.
  The question is not even whether they should receive Federal funding.
  Here is the question we must ask with respect to each of the needs 
that are being funded in this bill: Are they emergencies?
  The Senate version of the appropriations supplemental bill is $106.49 
billion, over $14 billion more than the President's request of $92.22 
billion.
  Because these are designated as ``emergency funds,'' they are not 
factored into the budget.
  As far as Washington is concerned, they ``don't count.''
  But they do count.
  There is no magic pot of money that can be tapped for emergency 
needs.
  This is straight deficit spending.
  There are times when emergency spending is justified, but if we abuse 
it, we might as well not even have a budget.
  What is emergency spending?
  The emergency appropriations process is set up to be an exception to 
the normal appropriations cycle so that money can be spent for 
unexpected occurrences that come up throughout the year, such as 
additional war costs or unexpected disasters.
  This money is not factored into the regular budget.
  The other body exercised fiscal restraint when they took up the 
supplemental bill and actually managed to bring the bill's top line 
number down from the Presidents's request to $91.95 billion.
  However, during the Senate markup, the bill expanded rapidly.
  According to the National Journal, money was added at a rate of more 
than $80 million per minute during the 2-hour markup.
  Of course, it is not important how fast the money was added or how 
much is in the bill.
  The only things that matter are:
  Are these meritorious programs?
  Are they Federal responsibilities?
  Are they emergencies?
  Senator Gregg, a distinguished member of the Appropriations Committee 
and my chairman on the Budget Committee, wrote a piece in the Wall 
Street Journal on April 18 entitled ``The Safety Valve Has Become a 
Fire Hose.''
  The piece gives an excellent explanation of the problem with abusing 
the emergency spending process.
  While Senator Gregg and I disagree with regard to 2-year budgeting, 
we have no disagreement on the proposal he outlines in his article, 
which is 1-year budgeting, which means, let's live under the budget we 
have now and have a sequester if we exceed it.
  In the piece, Senator Gregg states:

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

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


[[Page 7083]]

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

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

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

  The statement could not be clearer.
  The day after he sent up the SAP, I sent a letter to the President, 
which was signed by 35 other Senators, committing to sustain any veto 
of this bill which violates the principles outlined in the SAP.
  I have every confidence that our congressional leadership and our 
President, and their ability, working with the distinguished chairman 
of the Appropriations Committee, can find a way to make a good bill fit 
within the numbers outlined by the President.
  This supplemental debate highlights a larger issue.
  We need budget process reform.
  We need a line-item veto. Senator Frist's bill, S. 2381, Provides 
that rescissions packages submitted by the President shall be treated 
with fast-track authority. But this bill is just the beginning.
  We need to reform Congressional Budget Office scoring in the 
following ways:
  Dynamic scoring. Senator Ensign's bill, S. 287, addresses this issue. 
Changes in tax law will be scored to take into account real-life 
effects on the economy.
  Tax/spending parity. CBO scores should treat tax expirations and 
spending expirations the same.
  Long-term scoring. We should require CBO scores to have more detailed 
estimates for long-term costs of authorizations and direct spending.
  Database of authorizations. We should require CBO to produce a 
database with a comprehensive catalog of all authorized spending, user-
friendly, searchable and sortable by expiration date and category, and 
total authorized amounts, appropriated amounts. Database should be 
available online, searchable, sortable, and provide overall total 
amounts.
  We also ought to move to a 2-year budget.
  Senator Domenici has been spearheading this issue. His bill, S. 877, 
is an excellent bill. Under his bill, all budgeting and appropriating 
occurs in first year of a Congress. The second session focuses on 
oversight.
  Database for Federal grantees. We should require the creation of a 
database of Federal grantees so taxpayers can log on and find out who 
is spending their money and how.
  Government shutdown protection. This provision would provide that if 
appropriations bills are not enacted by the beginning of the fiscal 
year, programs continue at previous year's level.
  Spending firewall. We should create four firewalled categories of 
Federal spending: defense, international, domestic, and homeland, which 
would be binding and in the budget. This would ensure that security 
needs would be met and could not be raided during the appropriations 
process to pay for social spending.
  Pay-go for emergency spending. Automatic across-the-board reduction 
in spending for emergencies. Provide that emergency spending 
automatically triggers an across-the-board rescission in all spending. 
Senator Gregg mentioned a program like this in his Wall Street Journal 
piece.
  Mutiyear caps. We should provide that 302(a) discretionary caps carry 
over for the life of a budget resolution, including the ability for the 
Appropriations Committee to issue 302(b) suballocations. Currently, if 
we have no budget, we have a top-line discretionary cap but no way to 
enforce it. We should provide a mechanism for the Appropriations 
chairman to issue suballocations in the event that a budget is not 
passed.
  Commission on Accountability and Review of Federal Agencies. Senator 
Brownback's bill, S. 1155, takes the concept of BRAC and applies it to 
wasteful domestic spending programs.
  Efficencies. We should allow up to 2 percent of any Department to be 
transferred to pay down the national debt if efficiencies are found. 
The current system requires bureaucrats to be inefficient. We give them 
a big pot of money and say: You must spend this. We should encourage, 
not discourage, frugality.
  Entitlement commission. We should provide for a commission to review 
entitlements, provide recommendations for reform, and provide fast-
track consideration for reform proposals.
  Earmark reform. Finally, we need to finish the process we started on 
the lobbying reform package, which is earmark reform. Senators McCain 
and Lott have led on this important issue.
  I look forward to consideration of budget process reform later this 
year.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I am extremely disappointed that the 
Senate did not get the chance to vote on my amendment to strengthen the 
oversight and monitoring of over $1.6 billion included in this 
supplemental for Iraq reconstruction. This amendment, designed to 
extend the oversight of the Special Inspector General for Iraq, SIGIR, 
over reconstruction funding in the supplemental, would have helped the 
SIGIR continue its valuable work in ensuring that U.S. taxpayer dollars 
are being used efficiently and effectively.
  We should not be spending money on Iraqi reconstruction without 
ensuring there is appropriate oversight and auditing. My amendment 
would have strengthened the capabilities of the Special IG to monitor, 
audit, and inspect funds made available for assistance for Iraq in both 
the Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund, IRRF, and in other important 
accounts. It is frankly baffling to me that anyone would oppose this 
amendment being included in the supplemental.
  As we continue to pour tens of billions of dollars in to Iraq, I 
believe that we must not lose oversight of U.S. taxpayer dollars. 
American taxpayers deserve to know where their money is

[[Page 7084]]

going in this costly war and that it is being used effectively and 
efficiently and ending up in the right hands.
  The Iraq IG's work to date has been extremely valuable to the U.S. 
Government and to Congress. The Iraq IG has now completed 55 audit 
reports, issued 165 recommendations for program improvement, and has 
seized $13 million in assets. In its latest report, released over the 
weekend, the Iraq IG indicated that it has completed 29 audits and 
released 58 recommendations for program improvement in this quarter 
alone. Overall, the SIGIR estimates that its operations have resulted 
in saving $24 million. Throughout 2005, the Iraq IG provided aggressive 
oversight to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse in the at-times lethal 
operating environment in Iraq. Its emphasis on real-time auditing--
where guidance is provided immediately to management authorities upon 
the discovery of a need for change--provides for independent 
assessments while effecting rapid improvements.
  In its January report to Congress, the SIGIR concluded that massive 
unforeseen security costs, administrative overhead, and waste have 
crippled original reconstruction strategies and have prevented the 
completion of up to half of the work originally called for in critical 
sectors such as water, power, and electricity. The Iraq IG's work has 
resulted in the arrest of five individuals who were defrauding the U.S. 
Government, and it has shed light on millions of dollars of waste. It 
is this kind of investigation and reporting that helps shape the 
direction of reconstruction funding and ensures that the money is being 
used and allocated as transparently and effectively as possible.
  Mr. President, I originally drafted legislation to create the Special 
Inspector General for Iraq, known as SIGIR, in order to ensure that 
there is critical oversight of the Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund, 
IRRF, allocated for Iraq reconstruction projects. I believed then, and 
I believe now, that it is crucial that we have an effective oversight 
capability over American taxpayer dollars spent in Iraq. Last year, I 
fought to extend the life of this office, which has been recognized by 
the Department of State and Defense as a valuable and necessary office. 
I do not intend to let this week's setback prevent me from pushing for 
continued transparency and accountability in the administration's 
policies in Iraq.
  Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, over the March recess, I joined the 
leaders of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator John Warner of 
Virginia and Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, on a trip to Iraq to hear 
the on-the-ground perspective of our military leaders, our troops in 
the field, and Iraqi officials. I returned to the United States as 
always overwhelmed by my pride and admiration for our service men and 
women, who continue to work with commitment and professionalism even in 
the most difficult circumstances. I cast my vote in support of this 
supplemental package before us because I am completely committed to 
providing our men and women in uniform with the support they need to 
continue their excellent work. Toward that end, I am very pleased that 
an amendment I authored calling for regular reports on the Pentagon's 
efforts to train our troops in methods of detecting and defeating 
improvised explosive devices has been added to this bill.
  I also cast this vote today because when it comes to funding our 
service men and women, right now this supplemental is the only game in 
town. And because the administration refuses, year after year, to 
incorporate the costs of ongoing operations in Iraq into the regular 
budget, we have no choice but to fund these efforts through these 
emergency supplementals--essentially putting hundreds of billions on 
our national tab. The Senate voted overwhelmingly in support of Senator 
Byrd's amendment urging the administration to stop these irresponsible 
budget games. I hope the President heeds that message.
  In addition to reaffirming my admiration for our military, my recent 
trip to Iraq also gave me a deeper understanding of the importance of 
success in Iraq and the truly daunting nature of the challenges ahead.
  In addition to the extremely serious fiscal issues confronting us, we 
have the even more serious policy issue to consider--how should U.S. 
policy proceed in Iraq?
  A failed Iraqi state would threaten our national interests, 
destabilizing an already volatile region and creating a lasting haven 
for terrorists. Our national security imperatives mandate our 
commitment to Iraq's success.
  Success in Iraq is dependent on several factors: controlling 
violence, creating a stable government of national unity, delivering 
basic services and the promise of economic development to the Iraqi 
people, and establishing strong and supportive relations between Iraq 
and its neighbors in the region. If any of these pillars are missing, 
Iraq's future becomes uncertain and unstable.
  America can help, but ultimately the Iraqis must achieve these goals 
on their own. The Iraqi people and Iraqi security forces have made 
significant strides, but much more remains before Iraq can govern and 
protect Iraqis. And Iraq's neighbors, who know the region best and will 
suffer most from a failed state in their midst, must step up to the 
plate to help end the political deadlock in Iraq.
  We all recognize that U.S. forces cannot and should not remain in 
Iraq indefinitely. The U.S. military presence in Iraq should depend 
upon Iraqi leaders promptly making the compromises necessary to achieve 
the broad-based, sustainable, political settlement necessary to form a 
government of national unity and defeat the insurgency. We need 
partners within Iraq and outside its borders who are committed to 
stability and sharing power in order to achieve the mission of a truly 
democratic Iraq, and to share in that success with Iraq's people.
  We also need to ensure that the magnitude of the challenge before us 
in Iraq does not distract all our attention from the vitally important, 
ongoing mission in Afghanistan. This bill also provides much needed 
support for that mission. We have made tremendous progress, working 
with the Afghan people, in helping to turn Afghanistan from a state 
sponsor of terrorism to a stable, responsible member of the 
international community. But our work is by no means complete, and the 
American troops and Afghani leaders I met with in Kabul just weeks ago 
underscored how important it is that we continue our strong support for 
the stabilizing mission.
  This bill also provides support for the communities devastated by 
last year's hurricane season. I am afraid that, thus far, the story of 
the Government's response to Katrina has been a story of failure not 
only in the preparations for the storm and in the midst of the crisis 
but also in the recovery effort. Too many promises have not been kept, 
and too many American families continue to live in an atmosphere of 
uncertainty. The provisions in this bill will help, but our commitment 
does not end here. Congress needs to make sure that the gulf region has 
the necessary resources to recover from last year's hurricanes and 
respond to future storms, but it must also make sure that the 
administration has fixed the incompetence at FEMA and DHS which 
disturbed so many Americans. I look forward to continuing to work on 
these important issues in the upcoming months.
  Over the past 6 years, Colorado has suffered from ongoing natural 
disasters including drought. Unfortunately, many areas in Colorado 
continue to suffer from ongoing extreme weather conditions including 
drought, hail, and frost. In particular, Colorado wheat producers are 
estimating that this will be the fifth below-average wheat crop in 6 
years.
  In addition, many Colorado farmers and ranchers are suffering from 
economic losses due to continually rising gas prices. And what is true 
in Colorado is true in many other States across the country. That is 
why I am an original cosponsor of Senator Conrad's emergency 
agriculture disaster assistance package, and I am so pleased that it 
was included as part of this supplemental bill. Toward that

[[Page 7085]]

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

[[Page 7086]]

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

[[Page 7087]]

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

[[Page 7088]]

Business Zones, HUBZones, as called for by the Office of Management and 
Budget Guidelines for Using Emergency Procurement Flexibilities. The 
Senate fully supported these efforts by unanimously passing amendment 
No. 3627 cosponsored by myself and Senators Vitter, Kerry, Landrieu, 
and Lott to make the gulf coast area a HUBZone and to waive a law 
prohibiting small business set-asides in certain industries. All these 
acquisition strategies enlarge the Federal Government's supplier base, 
and are mandated by the Federal Acquisition Regulation when qualified 
small businesses are available. It is my understanding that amendment 
No. 3810 was not intended to prohibit spending on these and similar 
efforts. I ask whether my distinguished colleague, the sponsor of the 
amendment, Senator Obama, had the same understanding?
  Mr. OBAMA. I thank the distinguished Chair of the Senate Committee on 
Small Business and Entrepreneurship for the opportunity to discuss this 
issue. I believe small businesses are the heart of the American economy 
and I am committed to expanding opportunities for small businesses to 
compete for Federal contracts.
  One of the reasons I offered the amendment was my concern that 
noncompetitive contracts have shut out small, local and disadvantaged 
businesses from contracting opportunities in the gulf coast. If we are 
serious about restoring the gulf coast, we must ensure that small and 
disadvantaged businesses have the tools and opportunities necessary to 
create the local jobs and provide the local services that are essential 
to a quick and sustainable recovery. The SBA has an important role to 
play and should be actively using its authority to promote small 
business growth and competitiveness.
  I want to be clear that it was not the intent of the amendment to 
interfere with small business set-aside programs that use appropriate 
competitive procedures in the awarding of contracts. I have been 
troubled by reports of outrageous overhead charges going to large firms 
that just end up subcontracting the work anyway to small businesses. It 
is important to preserve Federal Acquisition Regulations that require 
contracts to be directed to small businesses where responsible small 
firms are available to provide the government with quality products and 
services at fair prices.
  My amendment is directed at large Government contracts and seeks to 
prevent no-bid deals that deprive all of us of the benefits of fair 
competition. My amendment should not limit Federal funds for contracts 
legitimately set aside for competition among small business concerns. 
Small businesses help competition and competition helps small 
businesses. When a conference committee gets appointed on this bill, I 
will communicate this understanding to the conferees.
  Again, I thank the distinguished leader of the Senate Committee on 
Small Business and Entrepreneurship, and I look forward to continuing 
to work with her to strengthen small businesses and to expand 
opportunity throughout the American economy.
  Ms. SNOWE. I thank the distinguished Senator from Illinois for his 
clarification and his support of small business contracting.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the question is on 
the engrossment of the amendments and third reading of the bill.
  The amendments were ordered to be engrossed and the bill to be read a 
third time.
  The bill was read the third time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill having been read the third time, the 
question is, Shall the bill pass?
  Mr. COCHRAN. Have the yeas and nays been ordered, Mr. President?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. They have not.
  Mr. COCHRAN. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a 
sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. The following Senator was necessarily absent: the 
Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch).
  Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch) 
would have voted ``yea.''
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. 
Rockefeller) is necessarily absent.
  The result was announced--yeas 77, nays 21, as follows:
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Graham). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote?

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 112 Leg.]

                                YEAS--77

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

                                NAYS--21

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

                             NOT VOTING--2

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

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


                             Change of Vote

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

[[Page 7089]]

floor for the last 2 weeks above and beyond the call.
  I thank all our staff and floor staff for being here many long hours 
for the completion of this bill.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Senator from 
Washington for her kind remarks and for her leadership and assistance 
in getting this bill prepared by our committee, and for handling the 
duties of managing the bill on the floor of the Senate.
  Senator Byrd, of course, the senior Democrat on the committee, has 
been an inspiration to me and a true leader in every sense of the word 
in our committee and in the Senate for a long time. He continues to be 
a very important friend to me. I am very grateful for that friendship. 
I join Senator Murray in commending our staff. But, first of all, I 
think I should mention my appreciation for the majority leader, Bill 
Frist; and Harry Reid, the Democratic leader, for giving us the 
latitude and the authority to manage this bill on the floor of the 
Senate for the Committee on Appropriations to help ensure that every 
Senator had an opportunity to speak and offer amendments, to be a part 
of the passage of this bill in every sense of the word. We appreciate 
the leaders giving us that authority and for not trying to manage the 
bill from their offices. I really appreciate that.
  Also, I have to commend the staff members on our side: Keith Kennedy, 
staff director, who has been working in the Senate for the 
Appropriations Committee for a good many years. He has a lot of 
experience. He is a person of great integrity, and I am very fortunate 
that he has agreed to serve as staff director of this committee and 
continue to provide guidance and supervision for all of the members of 
the staff of the Committee on Appropriations.
  We are very proud of all of the staff. Those who have been 
particularly helpful to me during the handling of this bill, in 
addition to Keith, include Clayton Heil, our counsel for the committee, 
who has been on the floor of the Senate for much of the handling of the 
bill; Les Spivey, who is also a member of the full committee staff, he 
does a good job as well. I guess you could say he is our token 
Mississippian who is on the first team of the committee staff.
  Terry Sauvain has been someone with whom I have enjoyed working for a 
number of years. He has worked closely with Senator Byrd for a good 
many years. We appreciate Terry's continued good assistance, 
particularly in the handling of this bill.
  Chuck Keiffer and Peter Rogoff--Peter works for Senator Murray on the 
committee staff and has a lot of experience. He has been very helpful 
to us as we have managed this bill in the Senate.
  I thank David Schiappa, Laura Dove, and Jodie Hernandez. They have 
been at the desk keeping up with all of the amendments, colloquies, and 
order of business, and keeping people advised through cloakroom 
telephones and answering Member's questions when they come onto the 
Senate floor. They go to that spot and ask for the pending business or 
what the order of amendments may be. They have been absolutely 
professional and diligent and helpful in every way.
  On the Democratic side, I thank Marty Paone and Lula Davis for 
helping to keep up with things for the Democrats and helping to provide 
advice and counsel to all of us who have been involved in the handling 
of this bill. We are deeply grateful for their assistance.

                          ____________________