[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 11]
[Issue]
[Pages 14741-14885]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]
[[Page 14741]]
VOLUME 154--PART 11
SENATE--Monday, July 14, 2008
The Senate met at 2 p.m. and was called to order by the Honorable Jim
Webb, a Senator from the Commonwealth of Virginia.
______
prayer
The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, offered the following prayer:
Let us pray.
Most holy and gracious God, who turns the shadow of night into
morning, satisfy our hearts with Your mercy that we may rejoice and be
glad all the day. Abide with the Members of this body, permitting the
light of Your countenance to calm every troubled thought, and to guide
their feet in the way of peace. Perfect Your strength in their weakness
and help them to serve You and country to the glory of Your Name. Lord,
in a world so uncertain about many things, make our Senators sure of no
light but Yours and no refuge but You. Give them courage to seek the
truth and wisdom to humbly follow where it leads. We pray in the
Redeemer's Name. Amen.
____________________
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Honorable Jim Webb led the Pledge of Allegiance, as follows:
I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of
America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
____________________
APPOINTMENT OF ACTING PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will please read a communication to
the Senate from the President pro tempore (Mr. Byrd).
The assistant legislative clerk read the following letter:
U.S. Senate,
President pro tempore,
Washington, DC, July 14, 2008.
To the Senate:
Under the provisions of rule I, paragraph 3, of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, I hereby appoint the Honorable
Jim Webb, a Senator from the Commonwealth of Virginia, to
perform the duties of the Chair.
Robert C. Byrd,
President pro tempore.
Mr. WEBB thereupon assumed the chair as Acting President pro tempore.
____________________
RECOGNITION OF THE MAJORITY LEADER
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader is recognized.
____________________
SCHEDULE
Mr. REID. Mr. President, we are going to have an hour of morning
business as soon as Senator McConnell and I finish our opening remarks,
if any.
Following morning business, the Senate will proceed to the
consideration of S. 2731, the global AIDS legislation. As I announced
on Friday, there will be no rollcall votes today. Senators should be
permitted to vote on amendments tomorrow morning before the recess for
the caucus luncheons; if not on amendments, there will be things to
vote on.
This week, in addition to considering the global AIDS bill, the
Senate may turn to the consideration of LIHEAP, gas prices/market
manipulation, Medicare veto override, if, in fact, the President does
override that veto on Medicare. We have to wait until the House acts
first on that.
____________________
MEASURE PLACED ON THE CALENDAR--S. 3257
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I understand that S. 3257 is at the desk and
due for a second reading.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will read the title of
the bill for the second time.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 3257) to extend immigration programs, to promote
legal immigration, and for other purposes.
Mr. REID. I object to any further proceedings with respect to the
bill.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Objection is heard. The bill will
be placed on the calendar.
Mr. REID. I will come later today and give a full statement on some
of the things we will try to do this week. I have other matters now,
and I am unable to take care of it. But it should be a very productive
week. We had a very good week last week. I would hope we can move
through these amendments. We have a finite number of them. I hope
people will offer their amendments and use whatever time they feel is
appropriate.
I hope we can finish this bill as quickly as possible. It is an
important piece of legislation. The President, Senator Biden, and
Senator Lugar have been waiting to move this legislation for many
months. Hopefully, we can do that this week.
____________________
RESERVATION OF LEADER TIME
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the
leadership time is reserved.
____________________
MORNING BUSINESS
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, there
will now be a period of morning business for up to 1 hour, with
Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk the call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
____________________
EXTENSION OF MORNING BUSINESS
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that morning
business be extended until 4 p.m. today under the same conditions as
under the previous order.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
[[Page 14742]]
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
____________________
ORDER OF PROCEDURE
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following my
remarks, the Senator from North Dakota, Mr. Dorgan, be recognized.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
____________________
TAKING SENATE ACTION
Mr. REID. Mr. President, on this day, in 1965, former Governor and
Democratic Presidential nominee Adlai Stevenson died. Governor
Stevenson was the last Presidential nominee from the State of Illinois
until this year. We have every hope and confidence that Senator Obama
will be the next President of the United States.
Governor Stevenson once said:
Public confidence in the integrity of the government is
indispensable to faith in democracy; and when we lose faith
in the system, we have lost faith in everything we fight . .
. for.
With our economy slumping deeper into recession, our financial
institutions facing ever-greater challenges, and two wars overseas with
little progress or end in sight, the American people are rightly
frustrated with their Government. But the progress we made in Congress
last week should give the American people a renewed faith that when
Republicans abandon their favored path of obstruction to embrace
compromise and common ground, we can make progress.
We passed a housing bill that will help 8,500 American families who
lose their homes to foreclosure every day and help eliminate the
irresponsible practices that created the housing crisis to prevent it
from happening again. Sadly, it took us about 130,000 foreclosures to
finally get this bill passed. The obstructionism of the Republicans led
to 130,000 other homes being foreclosed upon.
With Senator Kennedy leading the way, we passed the Medicare doctors
fix by a veto-proof majority that included all Democrats and 18
Republicans.
We completed work on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a
bill I opposed but the majority of Senators supported.
After weeks of delay, Republicans surprised us by allowing us to
proceed to PEPFAR, a bill to increase our investment in the fight
against HIV/AIDS in Africa. I appreciate very much the decision by the
Republican leaders to abandon their stalling of PEPFAR, which had been
going on for months. This legislation is supported by President Bush
and virtually every Senator. Just a handful of Republicans have blocked
its passage. We should have passed PEPFAR by unanimous consent weeks
ago, but now we have a chance to move forward on this legislation.
For the small handful of Republicans who still object to PEPFAR, rest
assured that we have done everything reasonable to assuage your
concerns. The current version of the bill took many of those concerns
into account, and we will allow up to 10 additional amendments. We make
a lot out of the 10 amendments, but prior to that agreement being made
Friday night, Senators Biden and Lugar changed the bill many times,
trying to pacify those who objected to the bill. I am confident that
with this agreement in place, we can have a productive debate and send
this legislation to the President so that we can reestablish our
commitment to the world that America will join and lead this global
fight.
The housing stimulus legislation we passed last week is now back in
the House of Representatives. The White House plans to send us
legislation to include in that bill that will support the success of
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac so that American families will continue to
have access to home financing. We certainly wish the President had
become engaged in working with us to address this growing crisis long
ago, but we are eager to receive and review this legislation. Once we
receive the President's proposal, we are determined to review it and
act as quickly as possible. Just before coming in here, I spoke with
Secretary Paulson. He explained, in some detail, the importance of
moving this legislation very quickly.
We are committed to passing legislation that will guarantee a steady
flow of funds into the market if conditions require it so that home
ownership continues to be accessible to American families. But we have
to work to ensure that American taxpayers are not unfairly burdened if
Government action becomes necessary.
We also await President Bush's action on the Medicare doctors fix.
When a veto-proof majority of 69 Senators joined with 355 Members of
the House of Representatives to pass this legislation, we sent a clear
and unmistakable message to the President: Sign this bill. Every day
that goes by, the integrity of Medicare and TRICARE is threatened.
Every day the President delays, senior citizens, the disabled, and our
veterans are put at risk.
There is a reason that all major organizations representing doctors
and patients are desperate for this legislation to pass. Already, two
States--Alabama and South Carolina--have told Medicare patients that
they must resubmit their eligibility for assistance programs. The
President vetoing this is going to slow things down even more, and
other States will be forced to do this. If the President signs this
legislation into law today, as he has the power to do, any further
chaos or interruption of care can be avoided.
If the President chooses to veto our bill, I am confident we will
have the votes to override it. We have checked with all 9 of the
Republicans who voted to allow us to get the 69 that--in effect, voted
the first time this way. We checked with the 9 Republicans who voted
earlier, and we have heard from 1 additional Republican who said he
will vote to override the veto.
I don't know why the President is doing this. All he is doing is
creating chaos with senior citizens, with patients who are veterans or
on Active Duty, and the disabled. That is a bad choice for the
President to make--to protect HMOs and insurance companies. But the
longer we go without this bill as law, the longer millions of
Americans, including many of our country's most vulnerable, are faced
with uncertainty and risk that their health and well-being will be
jeopardized.
Finally, we will continue to address the energy crisis this week.
This past Thursday, I had a long and productive meeting with former
Senator Jim Sasser, who was the moderator, and experts from the oil
industry, the airlines, and the financial sector of this country. The
group agreed that tapping into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, as
President Bush's father did, would help lower oil prices. The group
also agreed that Congress should enact tough legislation to curb energy
speculation, with speculators driving up oil prices for their own gain
while the American people are left paying the bill. Is that the only
problem? Of course not. But is it a problem? Yes.
We continue to work toward bipartisan legislation on speculation.
Will stemming speculation solve the energy crisis? Not totally, but
it will lower prices in the near term and bring stability to the
market. That is why legislation on speculation is the first part of our
plan. I would hope the Republicans would join with us. Part of their
plan that is pending--has been rule XIV'd and is here at the desk--has
a provision that deals with speculation. I hope they would allow us to
move forward on a bipartisan speculation bill and pass it. Then we can
move to other issues relating to energy. But we can't have a free-for-
all with everyone having their own pet way of solving the energy
crisis.
I would hope that we could move toward a bipartisan bill on
speculation.
[[Page 14743]]
As I said, speculation is only the first part of our plan.
For months we have urged Republicans to join us in passing tax
extenders that will cut taxes to give American companies reliable
incentives for investing in alternative energy sources. The tax
extenders bill would speed our move away from oil and toward a cleaner,
more efficient energy future using wind, solar, geothermal, and other
renewables. It would create hundreds of thousands of good, high-paying,
permanent American jobs.
Just as Democrats are keeping an open mind about the need for
increased domestic production by insisting that oil companies start
drilling on the 68 million acres of American land they lease but are
not using, we hope Republicans will join us in finally passing the tax
extenders bill. We must stem energy speculation. We must responsibly
tap into emergency domestic oil reserves. We must increase domestic
production, and we must give American companies tax cuts to develop
clean, alternative, renewable energy right here at home.
With less market manipulation, more domestic supply, and incentives
to move away from oil toward renewable energy, we can overcome this
crisis and set our country on the path toward a cleaner, safer, more
affordable energy future. That is the Democratic plan. We hope Senate
Republicans will work with us to pass it into law.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from North Dakota.
Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. DORGAN. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum
call be rescinded.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
____________________
ENERGY CHALLENGES
Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, my colleague, the Senator from Nevada,
just described a series of challenges we face. I don't know that I have
seen a more daunting time in this country in some long while than the
time before us. The issues today of the credit crisis--the subprime
loan scandal, bank failures, the threat of bank failures--these are
serious issues. I am convinced the quick action by the Federal Reserve
Board and the Secretary of the Treasury this weekend was necessary. But
on top of that, there is a fiscal policy that is way off track. We are
engaged in a war in which none of the cost of the war is paid for. We
have a President who insists the entire cost of the war be added to the
debt, and an attempt by Congress to change that would result in a
Presidential veto. It is a fiscal policy that is way out of balance.
The President requests a budget to the Congress of roughly $420
billion in yearly deficits, but that, of course, is not the deficit.
The deficit is how much we have to borrow. This President's fiscal
policy is off track by the tune of $600 billion to $700 billion a year
because that is, in fact, what has to be borrowed. He doesn't include
in his budget request the cost of the Iraq war, which is very
expensive.
We have the subprime loan scandal, the problems in the credit market,
the fiscal policy that is off track, a trade policy that means we are
running a deficit of over $2 billion a day every single day by
importing more than we are able to export. Then, add to those issues
what is happening to energy, particularly the price of oil running up
like a Roman candle, $140 to $145 a barrel, and suggestions by some big
investment banking firms that it may reach $200 a barrel. What does all
of this mean? What do we do about it?
I have mentioned before a trip late one evening over the Pacific
Ocean in what was the previous Air Force One, that big, old airplane. I
believe it now sits at the Reagan Library in California, a 707. It was
the Air Force One that brought John F. Kennedy's body back to Andrews
Air Force Base in 1963. It was the Air Force One used by Presidents up
until George Bush, the senior, and then it was replaced.
One of the last flights of that airplane was one I was on to Asia, to
China, Japan, and Vietnam. A number of my colleagues were on that
flight--the majority leader, Senator Daschle. My colleague from Ohio,
John Glenn, was also on the flight. It was late at night flying over
the Pacific that I had a chance, for the first time, to ask Senator
Glenn a lot of questions about the time he rode around this planet in a
little space capsule called Friendship 7 by himself orbiting the Earth.
I was a very young person at the time of the flight, but I remember
vividly the reports on the radio and television about John Glenn
lifting off as the first American to orbit the Earth and how excited I
was. So that evening, as a U.S. Senator, with my colleague, John Glenn,
sitting there, I began peppering him with questions about that
spaceflight.
One of the questions I asked was, I had remembered that the city of
Perth, Australia, decided to welcome this astronaut flying alone by,
when he came to the dark side of the Earth, turning on all the lights.
Every light in Perth was on that night. They lit up this city called
Perth, Australia, and I asked John Glenn that evening: Did you see the
lights of Perth as you reached the dark side of the Earth up there in
space alone? Did you see that shining light of Perth?
He said: I did.
The only evidence of human life that existed on the planet below were
the lights shining up, a product of energy. It was perhaps not a
surprise to him to understand that product of energy affects our lives
every day in every way. Energy is critical to our lives. We get up in
the morning, virtually every one of us who is within listening
distance, and we flick a switch. That means a light goes on, the
product of energy. It means perhaps you brush your teeth with an
electric toothbrush, and thus battery energy. It means you shave with
an electric razor, perhaps, and use electric energy. You heat up some
coffee, electric energy. You take a shower and a hot water heater that
runs on either gas or electric energy produces hot water. Then you get
in the car to go to work, and you put a key in the ignition and turn
it. You use energy, in most cases from gasoline.
Energy affects almost everything we do, and we don't give it a second
thought until one day when the lights go out and electricity is gone
for 4 days and an entire neighborhood is up in arms. How on Earth can
we live without electricity? Or until at some point when gasoline is
not available and, therefore, your car is of little value. It happens
from time to time.
Now what has happened to our country and to the world with respect to
energy policy is, we have a big appetite for energy. We are seeing the
price of oil, which is a very important part of our energy appetite, go
up, up, up, like a Roman candle, $140 to $145 a barrel, and gasoline
prices follow suit. A whole lot of folks at this point aren't able to
afford to fill the tank with gas. A whole lot of trucking companies
can't afford to buy the gas or diesel for their saddle tanks on those
big trucks. A lot of airlines can't afford to put jet fuel in the wings
these days. So we have a good many airlines going into bankruptcy, and
more out of business.
The question is, Why is the price of oil where it is? What has
happened? Let me describe a couple things that have happened that lead
me to believe we have to take action now, and very aggressive action as
well. In the last 12 to 14 months, the price of oil has doubled. Has
anything happened in the last year with respect to supply and demand
that would justify the price of oil doubling? I can't think of
anything, except perhaps there is less demand for gasoline at the
moment. Our country is driving less. We have driven something close to
5 or 6 billion fewer miles in this 6-month period than the previous 6-
month period. So demand for gasoline is actually down. One would think
if that is the case, prices should abate or come down. But they didn't.
They went straight up.
Here is what is happening: Explosive growth of speculation in the oil
futures market. Speculators in the year 2000
[[Page 14744]]
were 37 percent of that market. In 2008, 71 percent of the people in
this market are speculators. That is, they are not interested in owning
oil. They are interested in contracts for oil with which they can buy
and sell and trade and make a profit.
Will Rogers described it decades ago: People buying things they will
never get from people who never had it, making money on both sides of
the trade. So what about speculators? Are they causing price increases?
Let me share some comments from some people who might know. The
senior vice president of ExxonMobil, in April of this year:
The price of oil should be about $50 or $55 per barrel.
Another comment:
Experts, including the former head of ExxonMobil, say
financial speculation in the energy markets has grown so much
over the last 30 years that it now adds up to 30 percent or
more to the price of a barrel of oil.
Energy Secretary Bodman takes a different view. He says:
There's no evidence we can find that speculators are
driving futures prices [for oil].
Let me give you a couple different views. The CEO of Marathon Oil:
$100 oil isn't justified by the physical demand in the
marketplace.
This is from Clarence Cazelot, CEO of Marathon Oil.
From a chart I have used previously, Mr. Fadel Gheit, who was for 30
or 35 years the top analyst for Oppenheimer & Co., he said:
There's no shortage of oil. I'm convinced that oil prices
should not be a dime above $55 barrel. I call it the world's
largest gambling hall. It's open 24/7. Unfortunately, it is
totally unregulated. This is like a highway with no cops and
no speed limit, and everybody is going 120 miles an hour.
I want to go back to the Energy Secretary's notion that there is
really no speculative role. Here is the Washington Post, July 7, a week
or so ago:
The wave of investment dollars has flooded commodity
markets in recent years and critics say contributed to the
runup in prices.
Here is the point:
Investors, including pension funds and Wall Street
speculators, have sharply increased their commodity
allocations since 2003, from $13 billion to $260 billion.
This has made financial actors an even larger force on these
markets than farmers, airlines, trucking firms, and companies
that buy and sell the physical goods to run their businesses.
For decades, trading commodity contracts were considered
taboo by most pension funds because the market is so volatile
and risky.
That has all changed. Now we have the California pension fund,
CalPERS, and other pension programs that are shoving money into the
commodities futures. It doesn't mean they want to own oil. They want to
speculate.
Walter Lukken is the Acting Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission. This is the Commission that is supposed to be the referee,
the Federal regulator wearing a striped shirt and blowing a whistle
when they call the fouls. Markets work, in most cases, but when markets
don't work, you have to have a referee. Walter Lukken, the referee for
us, says the price of oil is going up because demand is outstripping
supply, strong fundamentals are at play. Apparently, he misses the fact
from 2003 until now, $13 billion to $260 billion, that is an additional
$247 billion have gone into this market driving up the price of oil,
having almost nothing at all to do with supply and demand.
There is a need, it seems to me, for the Congress to address this
issue of excess speculation. Those that need a commodities market are
the airlines, trucking companies, farmers, and others so they can hedge
risks. There is a legitimate function of hedging risks, and that is
what the market was created for. A consumer and producer hedges risk
with respect to a physical product, a perfectly legitimate function.
But the fact is, those interests that are most concerned about the
Congress taking action to address a market that is broken are those who
need the markets to hedge risks--airlines, trucking companies, farmers
and others--because they know this market is broken. They know this is
a market that is supposed to work for them to hedge risk, but now it is
completely broken, taken over by speculators.
There is a columnist in the Washington Post this morning who does his
usual--he does about two pages of research and then he skips the next
five pages, so he never quite gets to the truth. He says this
speculation stuff, that is made up. He doesn't use the word
``populace.'' He says they are a bunch of ne'er-do-wells who don't have
the foggiest idea what they are talking about. It is not a surprise to
me that there are those who believe the current system is working. It
certainly works for some, doesn't it?
The OPEC countries must love walking to the bank with our money and
making a deposit in their account. The oil companies must love making
deposits of our money into their accounts. I understand why some of the
investment banks and other market players who are engaged in neck-deep
speculation and have been making a lot of money love the status quo.
They love what has happened here. It doesn't bother them a bit where
the price of oil is, as long as they make money over all this
speculation.
What I think we should do is pass legislation similar to that which I
have introduced. It is called the End Oil Speculation Act. End oil
speculation--how do you do that? You do it through a couple of
approaches. No. 1, you take the oil futures market and you require the
referee, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), to
distinguish between legitimate hedging--that is, those who want to,
between a consumer and a producer, hedge their risk with a physical
product. You must distinguish between those interests and all other
interests who are just in this market to speculate.
With respect to those who are in this market just for pure
speculation, establish significant position limits. We can wring the
speculation out of this system and should. I am talking about the
excess speculation. This oil commodity futures market was created in
1936, and when President Roosevelt signed the bill, he warned about
excess speculation. In fact, the bill itself had a provision dealing
with excess speculation. Now we find ourselves, all these decades
later, with a dramatic amount of speculation that is wrecking this
market. Should we do something? The answer is we must. We don't have a
choice. Of course, we should.
My hope is--as the majority leader indicated, we are going to be able
to address this issue later this week. My hope is we will be able to
take legislation to the floor of the Senate, and if a regulator cannot
regulate effectively--and this CFTC apparently cannot--and the head of
the regulators has already made a judgment, a judgment he has stated
four or five times since January: This market is working fine. This is
not about speculation. This is about the fundamentals of supply and
demand. What, me worry? Things are fine. Don't worry. Then, at the end
of last month, the Chairman apparently had some sort of epiphany, a
dream and woke up the next day and said: We have actually been
investigating this for 7 months.
One of those statements is not true: Supply and demand at work; don't
worry, be happy; or we have been worried for 7 months. It is not clear
what position represents the position of the Chairman of the CFTC, but
they are positions at dramatic odds with one another.
Let me say in addition, we hope this week we can address some
legislation that will bring down the price of gasoline and put downward
pressure on oil prices. Even doing that doesn't address, in the long
term, what we need to address. All of us understand that. But it does
address, in the short term, what we have to do to put some downward
pressure on these prices.
I don't think there is any question that the price of oil and gas and
the runup is hurting the economy of this country, hurting key
industries in this country, certainly hurting American families, and we
can do something about it, I believe, in the short term.
In the longer term, some of our colleagues will say: We have to
drill. I support that. I don't support drilling everywhere. But it is
interesting, the minority party put together a proposal that talks
about drilling. But they forgot to include all this area off the coast
of Florida. Isn't it interesting, I
[[Page 14745]]
know why they didn't include it. Because one of their caucus does not
want to drill off the coast of Florida, does not want to drill in these
eastern waters off the Gulf of Mexico. They also know President Bush
does not want to allow U.S. companies to drill off the coast of Cuba,
so these were included in their proposals. They are all big drilling
advocates, except they don't want to drill where most of the oil
exists.
This is a chart of the technically recoverable oil. Let me show where
it is. This is the Outer Continental Shelf of the Pacific, this is
Alaska, this is the Outer Continental Shelf of the Atlantic, and this
is the Gulf of Mexico. We can see where the bulk of the technically
recoverable oil is. I was one of four Senators--Senators Bingaman,
Domenici, and then-Senator Talent--who offered the legislation to open
lease 181. Lease 181, which is now 8.3 million acres in the gulf, was
opened in 2006. That is an additional 8.3 million additional acres
opened for oil and gas leasing.
I have also introduced legislation that opens all this additional
area in the eastern Gulf of Mexico and off Cuban waters. So do I
support drilling? I do. It is just that the minority side does not
support it quite as much as they pretend to support it.
Let me describe this chart. These are the waters off Cuba open for
leasing. There is half a million barrels of oil a day that could come
into production, and our U.S. companies cannot go in there to compete
against other nations to drill for it. Spain is there. Canada is there.
India is there. China is there. They all have a desire to drill in that
water. We cannot go there because our companies are told by President
Bush: No, we have an embargo against Cuba; you can't go after this
500,000 barrels of oil a day in these waters because of our embargo
against Cuba. That is absurd, absolutely absurd.
I have said often on the floor of the Senate, we stick little straws
in this planet as we circle the Sun and we suck out about 86 million
barrels of oil a day. We use one-fourth right here on this little place
on the planet called the United States. We have a prodigious appetite
for oil. That reflects in many ways the economy we built. We have built
a wonderful economy. This is a great place to live. There is no place
like it on Earth. But divine providence did some strange things. Most
of the oil is under the sands halfway around the world in the Persian
Gulf, and most of the demand is in the United States. There is more and
more demand ahead of us with respect to China and India. We understand
that. We knew that 12 to 14 months ago. So that is not what is causing
the runup in prices today.
But we all know, if we look ahead, we need to leapfrog to other
technologies, even as we search for additional oil. We will drill for
more oil in the right places. Obviously, the chart I showed for the
Gulf of Mexico has far more than my friends in the minority would
aspire to achieve in other regions.
In addition to drilling in an appropriate way, we need much more
conservation. Conservation is the easiest and by far the least
expensive way to produce energy because we are such unbelievable
wasters of energy. So conservation is, first and foremost, the best
place to get additional energy.
Second is efficiency. It doesn't matter what you use--a hot water
heater, a furnace, an air-conditioner--it doesn't matter what you use.
The dramatic increase in efficiency of every appliance everybody uses,
including these light bulbs, can substantially reduce our need for
energy. The incandescent light bulb is on its way out. It will not be
too many years when we will not find one in this country because we can
light America's houses and commercial facilities with about 80 percent
savings of what we have been using in the past.
Finally, and most importantly, in my judgment, as we look forward
some years, we have to, as a country, decide to get dramatically
involved in renewable energy. We are not nearly there yet. We have some
movement toward renewable, but we are not doing what we should do. The
debate in the Congress has been about whether we should increase the
production tax credits, tax incentives by 1 year. That is pathetic. We
ought to say we are going to do this for a decade. America, you can
count on where we are headed.
In the next decade, we are going to build substantial capability for
wind, solar, biomass, and more. We ought to say here is where America
is headed for 10 years. We are nibbling around the edges talking about
a 1-year extension of this and that. It is not that we have not tried.
We had a longer extension on the floor of the Senate, but
regrettably, the minority side largely blocked it. In fact, they have
blocked these extensions three times. Our hope is that we as a country
will be able to say our policy is conservation, efficiency, yes,
drilling in the right places, but our policy is especially to move
forward with substantial and dramatic amounts of new renewable energy.
I know the American people look at the Congress from time to time and
wonder if anything can get done. There certainly is an urgency with
respect to the policies I described--the fiscal policy that is way off
track, a trade policy that is producing $800 billion a year in trade
deficits, a policy that has allowed the subprime loan scam to exist and
develop right under the nose of regulators who apparently were dead
from the neck up. All these things are urgent needs for this country to
address. But none is more urgent at the moment than trying to find a
way to put some downward pressure on gas and oil prices that have risen
out of sight, in my judgment, disconnected to the supply-and-demand
fundamentals of where a market ought to be.
Every American is affected by this runup in prices, and our country
is being irreparably damaged by what it costs for us to send all this
massive money every single day overseas in search of oil that is
produced outside our country's borders.
We need a short-term urgent plan and a long-term thoughtful plan to
find our way through this situation and put America on a better course
for energy.
I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
____________________
DHL SELLOUT
Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, this summer is turning out to be one of
great anxiety and uncertainty for literally thousands of families in
southwest Ohio. At this moment, the economic future of more than 8,000
people--8,000 workers and their families--in the Wilmington and
surrounding communities hangs in the balance.
DHL, the cargo carrier service, has threatened to shut down its
Wilmington hub, a decision that, if successful, threatens both families
and surrounding communities. In May, DHL's parent company, the German
company Deutsche Post World Net, announced a proposed deal with UPS
that would close the Ohio operation.
In 2004, the State of Ohio and the city of Wilmington, a community of
13,000 people, and surrounding counties--Highland County, Greene
County, Clark County, and the area around it--proudly laid out the
welcome mat for DHL, providing more than $400 million in incentives
only 4 years ago. It was, we thought then, the beginning of a long
friendship.
The Wilmington Air Park is the largest employer in a six-county area
of Ohio. Literally, in each of the six counties in the region, DHL is
the single largest employer. Air Park employees were drawn from 45
counties, more than half of Ohio's 88 counties.
Tomorrow, Americans from across the country will gather around their
television sets to enjoy baseball's All Star game in Yankee Stadium.
The first pitch will be thrown by Cleveland's All Star pitcher Cliff
Lee. During this midsummer classic, fans may notice emblazoned on the
walls of Yankee Stadium and on game memorabilia
[[Page 14746]]
the DHL logo, because DHL is the official carrier of major league
baseball. More than 8,000 Ohio workers and their families have helped
make DHL a major league player in the North American express delivery
business. Their families in the community have supported DHL, worked
for DHL, helped build DHL, and State and local governments pitched in,
as I said, with $400 million to build this company and help it thrive
in southwest Ohio.
Thankfully, the agreement with UPS and the agreement to shut down is
not yet final, and so we fight. This morning, earlier today, Mayor
David Raizk, Clinton County Commissioner Randy Riley, and I joined
hundreds of DHL, ABX, and Air Star workers to fight for these jobs and
this community. Together, I delivered to DHL's headquarters in
Wilmington--at their headquarters just outside Wilmington, on the
outskirts of Wilmington--I delivered more than 9,000 signatures on
petitions to DHL headquarters, petitions that were denied by DHL
management 2 weeks ago when employees and community members tried to
deliver them.
DHL needs to hear from these families and they need to understand
that good corporate citizenship means more than baseball advertisements
and company sponsorships. DHL workers and their families rightfully
feel betrayed by the callous decision made by Deutsche Post.
This kind of betrayal does not just eliminate jobs. The community
loses revenue, public schools take a hit, the police force, fire
department--all take major hits. It is estimated that 10 percent of the
Wilmington City school budget is derived from DHL's operations in
Wilmington. Hospitals suffer. Clinton Memorial Hospital is a not-for-
profit, and people connected with DHL account for a huge percent of
their overall operations. They get $7 million in revenue just from DHL,
ABX, and ASTAR, and their overall budget is $100 million. They don't
know how they will be able to continue operations if DHL closes its
operations in Wilmington.
There are some 15,000 children of those DHL workers at the Wilmington
airpark--DHL, ASTAR, and ABX--who will lose their jobs.
Today I stood with the real All Stars, a couple of hundred workers
and their families from southwest Ohio at DHL and at their union hall
right across the street. In the last few months they have been sending
me their stories. I would like to share some of them.
Tara Pratz of Lebanon, a community a few miles from there in Warren
County, told me she and her husband relocated to Ohio because they
trusted DHL and the promises made to her and workers like her. Reading
from her note, she said:
Deustch-Post is nothing more than a corporate terrorist
destroying the very lives that built the company.
Kelly Morse of Blanchester also wrote me about moving to Ohio because
of the loyalty she felt for DHL. She wrote:
At first we did not want to move, but as a loyal employee I
wanted to live close to my employer. DHL needs to be held
accountable for the commitments they made to the people,
workers, and community of southwest Ohio.
New Vienna resident Beth Carpenter wrote:
My husband is one of the many employees being laid off . .
. with the economy the way it is, it is hard enough trying to
keep food on the table, let alone to try to do it without a
job.
Sherry Barrett, also of New Vienna, wrote, simply:
We are all extremely terrified of what our future holds. .
. .We need all of you in our government to fight hard for us
and Ohio.
Again, it doesn't need to be this way. DHL has been a good corporate
citizen. It can remain a good friend to the people of Ohio. Workers and
family members and the community are ready to do whatever it takes--
whatever it takes. This morning in Wilmington it was clear that this
community sticks together when times are tough.
I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. (Mr. Cardin). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
____________________
HIV/AIDS, TB, AND MALARIA REAUTHORIZATION
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I rise today to express my strong
support for the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde HIV/AIDS, TB, and Malaria
Reauthorization Act. Although we have made significant headway over the
last 5 years, the HIV/AIDS pandemic remains one of the world's worst
public health crises, with millions of people infected around the globe
and millions more who have already perished. As chairman of the Senate
Foreign Relations subcommittee on Africa, and because of the disease's
disproportionate impact on sub-Saharan Africa, I would like to focus my
remarks today on that region to illustrate just how critical--and
urgent--it is that we pass this bill.
Despite some progress, AIDS remains a severe public health concern in
Africa. Indeed, HIV continues to spread, with many countries on the
continent experiencing unprecedented drops in population, economic
decline, decimation of militaries, and the creation of an entire
generation of orphans who know no other life but that of the streets.
These societal disruptions have profound consequences for the
continent's future and security; already, they are impeding development
in the part of the world least able to contain the epidemic or treat
its victims.
In December 2007, the Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS--
UNAIDS--reported that worldwide, approximately 35 million people live
with HIV/AIDS. Similar organizations report that at the current rate,
by 2015 more than 62 million people could become newly infected.
Currently, over two-thirds of HIV cases are in Africa, which means
there are somewhere between 20 million and 24 million adults and
children in that continent who are HIV-positive. And these are just the
cases we know of--these are just the reported and documented cases. As
a point of comparison, the region with the next highest infection rate
is Southeast Asia--with some 4 million individuals living with HIV.
Since 2003 there has been a significant bipartisan effort to address
this crisis with the creation of the President's Emergency Plan for
AIDS--or PEPFAR as it is more commonly known. PEPFAR authorized some
$19 billion over 5 years for HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria and yet
in 2007 alone, 2.5 million people around the globe were infected with
HIV--or the equivalent of some 6,800 per day, 4,600 of whom live in
Africa. And while 4,600 Africans are being infected every day, some
6,000 Africans are dying from AIDS-related illness--many without ever
realizing they were HIV-positive or, if they did know, without ever
having access to any treatment for their illness. In other words,
despite a ground-breaking initiative to raise the profile of the
disease, to work with local communities and national health systems,
and to coordinate among the international community, Africa's future
remains in peril.
HIV/AIDS is spreading in African countries that are already hard hit
by a range of other problems including rampant poverty, political
instability and a lack of basic services and education. The result is
decreased state capacity and an undermining of the development of civil
society. HIV does not discriminate, and it is hitting members of
Africa's political leadership, its college-trained professionals, and
its skilled labor forces. And as it takes its toll on these groups, it
is having a devastating effect on entire generations. I saw this
firsthand just under a decade ago when I traveled to Zimbabwe, and I
have seen it since in other trips to Africa.
At that time, reports were noting that life expectancy had dropped
from 65 to 39 because of the epidemic. As I walked past the parliament
building in Harare, I asked how old one had to be to become a
legislator. The answer? Forty. And now, even as it copes with
[[Page 14747]]
a new, devastating political and humanitarian crisis, Zimbabwe is
experiencing even lower life expectancy rates--37 for men and just 34
for women--even lower than the minimum age to be elected a member of
Parliament in that country.
Despite the critical assistance of the United States, the cold hard
facts--the numbers of those infected and dying--show that even more
help is needed from the international community. Last August, on a trip
to Uganda, I met with a number of health experts--from government
health workers to civil society representatives--to discuss how the
United States can build on the good work that began with PEFPAR, and
provide a more vigorous response to the disease.
We discussed what had worked and what had not, and they told me very
clearly that in order to put a dent in the devastating impact of this
pandemic, we need to focus not only on treatment but equally, if not
more, on prevention. They shared examples of why, in order to help
those most vulnerable, HIV/AIDS efforts need to include programs that
address gender inequity, family planning, food and nutrition, and
social stigma. And they were unequivocally clear that we need to work
closely with national governments and local communities to help build
strong, sustainable health infrastructures that can provide assistance
to their own citizens.
I mention Uganda because it has been a rare example of success on the
continent. The government's early recognition of the crisis and its
initial comprehensive policies--including a well-organized public
education campaign--are credited with helping to bring adult HIV
prevalence down from around 15 percent in the early 1990s to just over
5 percent in 2001. Unfortunately by 2006, scientists were suggesting
that Uganda's HIV prevalence rates were once again rising. Indeed, I
heard that same concern from most, if not all, of the people I met
there, as well as from the President of Uganda himself.
The underlying message was that focusing on treatment is not enough.
In the case of Uganda, given the rising infection rates--as with many
other parts of the world--the emphasis on treatment fails to address
the factors driving the epidemic. Don't get me wrong--Ugandans are
grateful for U.S. HIV/AIDS funding--but they made it clear that future
support would be more effective if it were more comprehensive, and
corresponded more closely to national needs, conditions, and
initiatives.
It has become a common refrain that we cannot treat our way out of
this global pandemic and I continue to believe that is the case. As
long as infection rates are rising, treatment and care costs will
increase, as will the disease's burden on key vulnerable populations as
well as their families, communities, and countries.
Scientific evidence supports the anecdotal evidence I heard from many
in Uganda. It confirms there is much to be gained by integrating the
treatment and care of other diseases--particularly tuberculosis but
also more common, preventable ailments--with HIV programs and expanded
informational awareness campaigns that encourage health knowledge and
capacities. Part of the challenge of addressing HIV/AIDS is that the
disease does not sit easily within any particular policy area and
although there are important domestic components related to health and
human services, these are also clearly questions of foreign policy and
international assistance. All of these need to be integrated into a
harmonious whole.
And that is why today I encourage my colleagues to support The Tom
Lantos and Henry J. Hyde HIV/AIDS, TB, and Malaria Reauthorization Act
and to reject any amendments that would undermine this bipartisan
legislation. This bill is not perfect but, if passed, it will put
global AIDS programs on the road to greater sustainability and will
significantly increase our commitment to reversing the crisis.
We all know there can be no quick fix or shortcut to success, but we
have before us now legislation that maintains and expands the United
States' response to the HIV/AIDS pandemic. Passing this bill will
ensure the continuation of U.S. leadership to prevent, contain, and
combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria in a way that advances a
broader range of global health and development objectives. To do
anything less would not only be bad policy, it would be short-sighted
and counter-productive.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.
____________________
EXTENSION OF MORNING BUSINESS
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the morning
hour be extended to 4:30, with all other conditions of the previous
order remaining in effect.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from Virginia is recognized.
____________________
FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC
Mr. WEBB. Mr. President, we are going to be talking this week quite a
bit about the situation with Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. We had news
this weekend that the Federal Reserve and Treasury are intending to
intervene to shore up Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.
This situation underscores the depth and the persistence of our
Nation's housing crisis. Last week, I joined a bipartisan majority of
Senators in voting to approve a housing bill that is intended to
strengthen oversight in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, to allow the FHA to
guarantee up to $300 billion in new loans for at-risk subprime
borrowers. But I think it would be useful at this time to review a few
recent data points in other areas because they should cause all of us
some concern about where we are heading and the decisions we are making
as fiduciaries of the public trust.
In March of this year, Bear Stearns, the Nation's fifth largest
investment banking firm, was battered by what its officials termed a
sudden liquidity crisis regarding or related to its large exposure to
devalued mortgage-backed securities.
At that time, Bear Stearns, JPMorgan, and the Federal Reserve reached
a negotiated deal. JPMorgan purchased 95 million newly issued shares of
Bear's common stock, and the Fed, which in reality means the people who
pay the taxes in our country, became responsible for up to $29 billion
in losses if the collateral provided by Bear Stearns for the loan
proves to be worth less than their original claims. That is $29 billion
guaranteed by American taxpayers in the private market.
This decision was unprecedented. Never before had the Fed bailed out
a financial entity that was not a commercial bank. The Fed's
unprecedented role has generated a widespread debate on the
implications of these types of interventions. Many have had concerns
that the Government's action tells the market that the Fed is willing
to help a large and failing financial enterprise, which, in many
people's view, sets a bad precedent in terms of corporate
responsibility.
And by way of information, Bear Stearns' CEO earned $38.4 million in
2006. They did not file a proxy statement in 2008; his compensation was
not available for 2007. But I will say that again. In 2006, previous to
this crisis, the CEO made $38.4 million.
Last week, IndyMac Bank of Pasadena, CA was closed by the Federal
Office of Thrift Supervision, and the FDIC, the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation, was named conservator and therefore took over
this bank's operations. According to the FDIC, the bank's board of
directors was dissolved, the CEO was fired, and upper management may
remain, although this has not yet been determined. But the new CEO in
this situation is now an FDIC employee and is therefore compensated per
a Government payscale. As conservators, the FDIC will operate the bank
to maximize the value of the institution for further sale and to
maintain banking services.
So when we look at the situation we are now facing with Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac, I think it is important to
[[Page 14748]]
lay down three guiding principles. The first is, we do need to ensure
that the measures we are taking protect these Americans who remain at
risk of foreclosure. We have to take some proper action now so that
this crisis does not grow deeper. But we also need to be very sensitive
to the thousands of workers, many of whom live in this area, who have
built careers at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Many of those workers have
their retirement savings tied up in the plummeting stock of these
formerly robust companies. But as we focus rightly on those two
concerns, on the homeowners and on the workers, we also need to be
equally clear that any solution to this crisis has to be fair to the
American taxpayers who ultimately are going to foot the bill. When
times go bad like this, quite often the people who are paying the taxes
are people who do not even own stock, or maybe it is somebody who makes
$40,000 a year driving a truck who now is being asked to put money up
to preserve an entity where, again, we see executive compensation and
stock values over the years have increased.
Paul Krugman wrote a piece in the New York Times today addressing
elements of this issue. I want to read a portion of it.
The case against Fannie and Freddie begins with their
peculiar status: although they're private companies with
stockholders and profits, they're ``government-sponsored
enterprises'' established by Federal law, which means that
they receive special privileges. The most important of these
privileges is implicit: it's the belief of investors that if
Fannie and Freddie are threatened with failure, the Federal
Government will come to their rescue.
This implicit guarantee means that profits are privatized
but losses are socialized. If Fannie and Freddie do well,
their stockholders [and the corporate executives] reap the
benefits, but if things go badly, Washington picks up the
tab. Heads they win, tails we lose. Such one-way bets can
encourage the taking of bad risks, because the down side is
someone else's problem.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have the entire New York
Times article printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From the New York Times, July 14, 2008]
Fannie, Freddie and You
(By Paul Krugman)
And now we've reached the next stage of our seemingly
never-ending financial crisis. This time Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac are in the headlines, with dire warnings of
imminent collapse. How worried should we be?
Well, I'm going to take a contrarian position: the storm
over these particular lenders is overblown. Fannie and
Freddie probably will need a government rescue. But since
it's already clear that that rescue will take place, their
problems won't take down the economy.
Furthermore, while Fannie and Freddie are problematic
institutions, they aren't responsible for the mess we're in.
Here's the background: Fannie Mae--the Federal National
Mortgage Association--was created in the 1930s to facilitate
homeownership by buying mortgages from banks, freeing up cash
that could be used to make new loans. Fannie and Freddie Mac,
which does pretty much the same thing, now finance most of
the home loans being made in America.
The case against Fannie and Freddie begins with their
peculiar status: although they're private companies with
stockholders and profits, they're ``government-sponsored
enterprises'' established by federal law, which means that
they receive special privileges.
The most important of these privileges is implicit: it's
the belief of investors that if Fannie and Freddie are
threatened with failure, the federal government will come to
their rescue.
This implicit guarantee means that profits are privatized
but losses are socialized. If Fannie and Freddie do well,
their stockholders reap the benefits, but if things go badly,
Washington picks up the tab. Heads they win, tails we lose.
Such one-way bets can encourage the taking of bad risks,
because the downside is someone else's problem. The classic
example of how this can happen is the savings-and-loan crisis
of the 1980s: S.&L. owners offered high interest rates to
attract lots of federally insured deposits, then essentially
gambled with the money. When many of their bets went bad, the
feds ended up holding the bag. The eventual cleanup cost
taxpayers more than $100 billion.
But here's the thing: Fannie and Freddie had nothing to do
with the explosion of high-risk lending a few years ago, an
explosion that dwarfed the S.&L. fiasco. In fact, Fannie and
Freddie, after growing rapidly in the 1990s, largely faded
from the scene during the height of the housing bubble.
Partly that's because regulators, responding to accounting
scandals at the companies, placed temporary restraints on
both Fannie and Freddie that curtailed their lending just as
housing prices were really taking off. Also, they didn't do
any subprime lending, because they can't: the definition of a
subprime loan is precisely a loan that doesn't meet the
requirement, imposed by law, that Fannie and Freddie buy only
mortgages issued to borrowers who made substantial down
payments and carefully documented their income.
So whatever bad incentives the implicit federal guarantee
creates have been offset by the fact that Fannie and Freddie
were and are tightly regulated with regard to the risks they
can take. You could say that the Fannie-Freddie experience
shows that regulation works.
In that case, however, how did they end up in trouble?
Part of the answer is the sheer scale of the housing
bubble, and the size of the price declines taking place now
that the bubble has burst. In Los Angeles, Miami and other
places, anyone who borrowed to buy a house at the peak of the
market probably has negative equity at this point, even if he
or she originally put 20 percent down. The result is a rising
rate of delinquency even on loans that meet Fannie-Freddie
guidelines.
Also, Fannie and Freddie, while tightly regulated in terms
of their lending, haven't been required to put up enough
capital--that is, money raised by selling stock rather than
borrowing. This means that even a small decline in the value
of their assets can leave them underwater, owing more than
they own.
And yes, there is a real political scandal here: there have
been repeated warnings that Fannie's and Freddie's thin
capitalization posed risks to taxpayers, but the companies'
management bought off the political process, systematically
hiring influential figures from both parties. While they were
ugly, however, Fannie's and Freddie's political machinations
didn't play a significant role in causing our current
problems.
Still, isn't it shocking that taxpayers may end up having
to rescue these institutions? Not really. We're going through
a major financial crisis--and such crises almost always end
with some kind of taxpayer bailout for the banking system.
And let's be clear: Fannie and Freddie can't be allowed to
fail. With the collapse of subprime lending, they're now more
central than ever to the housing market, and the economy as a
whole.
Mr. WEBB. Looking at or thinking about Mr. Krugman's piece, we should
also recall that the chief executives of those two companies last year
earned multimillion-dollar compensation packages. We respect the
guidance and the leadership that allows corporate CEOs to make these
kinds of compensation, but at the same time, we should not be asking
the taxpayers of this country, many of whom do not even own stocks, if
we are buttressing the activities of these companies, to continue to
assist financially this type of corporate compensation.
We have seen one example with the recent IndyMac Bank failure where
the FDIC came in and the acting CEO gets a regular Federal salary. I
urge all of my colleagues to think about this this week, that, as Mr.
Krugman says, ``the profits are privatized,'' meaning the small group
of people who own stocks take advantage when things go well, and
sometimes we talk about economic Darwinism and how the fact that they
make that sort of compensation relates to their talent, ``but losses
are socialized'' meaning that everyone in the country ends up having to
pay when things go wrong in order to protect the system from falling
apart.
Well, the bottom line of that is, if our taxpayers are going to be
required to chip in to solve the problem, they should not be alone. The
executives who are involved in the operations of these institutions
should also be willing to do the same.
I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The majority leader is recognized.
____________________
CONCLUSION OF MORNING BUSINESS
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I have talked to the distinguished ranking
[[Page 14749]]
member of the Foreign Relations Committee and explained to him where we
are. I am very happy we have an agreement to move forward on PEPFAR.
That agreement is that we have 10 amendments. They are amendments we
worked on hard. We did it all day Thursday and Thursday night, and then
Friday, of course, perfecting the agreement, and we now have consent to
move to the bill.
Here is the problem that faces the majority: By our moving to PEPFAR,
it opens a spot where somebody can move to proceed to something else,
anything that is on the calendar. Anyone can come in and move to that
piece of legislation, and file a cloture motion with it, which would
force us to be on that matter. I cannot allow that to happen.
I say this with the deepest respect for all my Republican colleagues,
but we have had a little bit of mischievous legislation being thrown
about here, and so if I move to something else to fill that spot to
keep someone else from moving to something else, we on this side would
be very happy to leave that dormant, do nothing with it, and move
forward and complete PEPFAR. There would be no harm to anyone in doing
this. But it would seem to me there would be a lot of harm if--I will
not mention any names--the two or three likely suspects walked over
here and moved to proceed to something else. I think it would create a
lot of problems.
This PEPFAR legislation dealing with global AIDS is extremely
important. The President wants it. I do not know of a single Democrat
who does not want it. I think most Republicans--I think the vast
majority of Republicans--want this. So I would hope we are not going to
get off track because of some folks over here who have tended to make
me kind of look for a sucker punch to be thrown at any time. I think we
would all be ill-advised to not finish PEPFAR at this time.
Mr. President, I would ask that morning business be closed. That
being the case, I think the order is now in effect that once it is
closed, we would be on PEPFAR.
Is that right; I ask the Chair?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I would ask that morning business be closed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Morning business is closed.
____________________
TOM LANTOS AND HENRY J. HYDE UNITED STATES GLOBAL LEADERSHIP AGAINST
HIV/AIDS, TUBERCULOSIS, AND MALARIA REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2008
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the motion to
proceed to S. 2731 is agreed to, and the Senate will proceed to the
consideration of the measure, which the clerk will report by title.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 2731) to authorize appropriations for fiscal
years 2009 through 2013 to provide assistance to foreign
countries to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria, and
for other purposes.
Thereupon, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill, which had been
reported from the Committee on Foreign Relations, with an amendment to
strike all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu thereof the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Tom Lantos
and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against
HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of
2008''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Findings.
Sec. 3. Definitions.
Sec. 4. Purpose.
Sec. 5. Authority to consolidate and combine reports.
TITLE I--POLICY PLANNING AND COORDINATION
Sec. 101. Development of an updated, comprehensive, 5-year, global
strategy.
Sec. 102. Interagency working group.
Sec. 103. Sense of Congress.
TITLE II--SUPPORT FOR MULTILATERAL FUNDS, PROGRAMS, AND PUBLIC-PRIVATE
PARTNERSHIPS
Sec. 201. Voluntary contributions to international vaccine funds.
Sec. 202. Participation in the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis
and Malaria.
Sec. 203. Research on methods for women to prevent transmission of HIV
and other diseases.
Sec. 204. Combating HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria by
strengthening health policies and health systems of
partner countries.
Sec. 205. Facilitating effective operations of the Centers for Disease
Control.
Sec. 206. Facilitating vaccine development.
TITLE III--BILATERAL EFFORTS
Subtitle A--General Assistance and Programs
Sec. 301. Assistance to combat HIV/AIDS.
Sec. 302. Assistance to combat tuberculosis.
Sec. 303. Assistance to combat malaria.
Sec. 304. Malaria Response Coordinator.
Sec. 305. Amendment to Immigration and Nationality Act.
Sec. 306. Clerical amendment.
Sec. 307. Requirements.
Sec. 308. Annual report on prevention of mother-to-child transmission
of HIV.
Sec. 309. Prevention of mother-to-child transmission expert panel.
TITLE IV--FUNDING ALLOCATIONS
Sec. 401. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 402. Sense of Congress.
Sec. 403. Allocation of funds.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Section 2 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7601) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(29) On May 27, 2003, the President signed this Act into
law, launching the largest international public health
program of its kind ever created.
``(30) Between 2003 and 2008, the United States, through
the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and
in conjunction with other bilateral programs and the
multilateral Global Fund has helped to--
``(A) provide antiretroviral therapy for over 1,900,000
people;
``(B) ensure that over 150,000 infants, most of whom would
have likely been infected with HIV during pregnancy or
childbirth, were not infected; and
``(C) provide palliative care and HIV prevention assistance
to millions of other people.
``(31) While United States leadership in the battles
against HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria has had an
enormous impact, these diseases continue to take a terrible
toll on the human race.
``(32) According to the 2007 AIDS Epidemic Update of the
Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS)--
``(A) an estimated 2,100,000 people died of AIDS-related
causes in 2007; and
``(B) an estimated 2,500,000 people were newly infected
with HIV during that year.
``(33) According to the World Health Organization, malaria
kills more than 1,000,000 people per year, 70 percent of whom
are children under 5 years of age.
``(34) According to the World Health Organization, \1/3\ of
the world's population is infected with the tuberculosis
bacterium, and tuberculosis is 1 of the greatest infectious
causes of death of adults worldwide, killing 1,600,000 people
per year.
``(35) Efforts to promote abstinence, fidelity, the correct
and consistent use of condoms, the delay of sexual debut, and
the reduction of concurrent sexual partners represent
important elements of strategies to prevent the transmission
of HIV/AIDS.
``(36) According to UNAIDS--
``(A) women and girls make up nearly 60 percent of persons
in sub-Saharan Africa who are HIV positive;
``(B) women and girls are more biologically, economically,
and socially vulnerable to HIV infection; and
``(C) gender issues are critical components in the effort
to prevent HIV/AIDS and to care for those affected by the
disease.
``(37) Children who have lost a parent to HIV/AIDS, who are
otherwise directly affected by the disease, or who live in
areas of high HIV prevalence may be vulnerable to the disease
or its socioeconomic effects.
``(38) Lack of health capacity, including insufficient
personnel and inadequate infrastructure, in sub-Saharan
Africa and other regions of the world is a critical barrier
that limits the effectiveness of efforts to combat HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria, and to achieve other global health
goals.
``(39) On March 30, 2007, the Institute of Medicine of the
National Academies released a report entitled `PEPFAR
Implementation: Progress and Promise', which found that
budget allocations setting percentage levels for spending on
prevention, care, and treatment and for certain subsets of
activities within the prevention category--
``(A) have `adversely affected implementation of the U.S.
Global AIDS Initiative';
``(B) have inhibited comprehensive, integrated, evidence
based approaches;
``(C) `have been counterproductive';
``(D) `may have been helpful initially in ensuring a
balance of attention to activities within the 4 categories of
prevention, treatment, care, and orphans and vulnerable
children';
``(E) `have also limited PEPFAR's ability to tailor its
activities in each country to the local epidemic and to
coordinate with the level of activities in the countries'
national plans'; and
[[Page 14750]]
``(F) should be removed by Congress and replaced with more
appropriate mechanisms that--
``(i) `ensure accountability for results from Country Teams
to the U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator and to Congress'; and
``(ii) `ensure that spending is directly linked to and
commensurate with necessary efforts to achieve both country
and overall performance targets for prevention, treatment,
care, and orphans and vulnerable children'.
``(40) The United States Government has endorsed the
principles of harmonization in coordinating efforts to combat
HIV/AIDS commonly referred to as the `Three Ones', which
includes--
``(A) 1 agreed HIV/AIDS action framework that provides the
basis for coordination of the work of all partners;
``(B) 1 national HIV/AIDS coordinating authority, with a
broadbased multisectoral mandate; and
``(C) 1 agreed HIV/AIDS country-level monitoring and
evaluating system.
``(41) In the Abuja Declaration on HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis
and Other Related Infectious Diseases, of April 26-27, 2001
(referred to in this Act as the `Abuja Declaration'), the
Heads of State and Government of the Organization of African
Unity (OAU)--
``(A) declared that they would `place the fight against
HIV/AIDS at the forefront and as the highest priority issue
in our respective national development plans';
``(B) committed `TO TAKE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND
PROVIDE LEADERSHIP for the activities of the National AIDS
Commissions/Councils';
``(C) resolved `to lead from the front the battle against
HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Other Related Infectious Diseases
by personally ensuring that such bodies were properly
convened in mobilizing our societies as a whole and providing
focus for unified national policymaking and programme
implementation, ensuring coordination of all sectors at all
levels with a gender perspective and respect for human
rights, particularly to ensure equal rights for people living
with HIV/AIDS'; and
``(D) pledged `to set a target of allocating at least 15%
of our annual budget to the improvement of the health
sector'.''.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
Section 3 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7602) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``Committee on
International Relations'' and inserting ``Committee on
Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, the
Committee on Appropriations of the Senate, and the Committee
on Appropriations'';
(2) by redesignating paragraph (6) as paragraph (12);
(3) by redesignating paragraphs (3) through (5), as
paragraphs (4) through (6), respectively;
(4) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
``(3) Global aids coordinator.--The term `Global AIDS
Coordinator' means the Coordinator of United States
Government Activities to Combat HIV/AIDS Globally.'';
(5) by inserting after paragraph (6), as redesignated, the
following:
``(7) Impact evaluation research.--The term `impact
evaluation research' means the application of research
methods and statistical analysis to measure the extent to
which change in a population-based outcome can be attributed
to program intervention instead of other environmental
factors.
``(8) Operations research.--The term `operations research'
means the application of social science research methods and
statistical analysis to judge, compare, and improve policies
and program outcomes, from the earliest stages of defining
and designing programs through their development and
implementation, with the objective of the rapid dissemination
of conclusions and concrete impact on programming.
``(9) Paraprofessional.--The term `paraprofessional' means
an individual who is trained and employed as a health agent
for the provision of basic assistance in the identification,
prevention, or treatment of illness or disability.
``(10) Partner government.--The term `partner government'
means a government with which the United States is working to
provide assistance to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, or
malaria on behalf of people living within the jurisdiction of
such government.
``(11) Program monitoring.--The term `program monitoring'
means the collection, analysis, and use of routine program
data to determine--
``(A) how well a program is carried out; and
``(B) how much the program costs.''; and
(6) by inserting after paragraph (12), as redesignated, the
following:
``(13) Structural hiv prevention.--The term `structural HIV
prevention' means activities or programs designed to--
``(A) address environmental factors that could create
conditions conducive to the spread of HIV; and
``(B) determine the best ways to remedy such factors by
enhancing life skills and promoting changes in laws,
policies, and social norms.''.
SEC. 4. PURPOSE.
Section 4 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7603) is
amended to read as follows:
``SEC. 4. PURPOSE.
``The purpose of this Act is to strengthen and enhance
United States leadership and the effectiveness of the United
States response to the HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria
pandemics and other related and preventable infectious
diseases as part of the overall United States health and
development agenda by--
``(1) establishing comprehensive, coordinated, and
integrated 5-year, global strategies to combat HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria by--
``(A) building on progress and successes to date;
``(B) improving harmonization of United States efforts with
national strategies of partner governments and other public
and private entities; and
``(C) emphasizing capacity building initiatives in order to
promote a transition toward greater sustainability through
the support of country-driven efforts;
``(2) providing increased resources for bilateral and
multilateral efforts to fight HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and
malaria as integrated components of United States development
assistance;
``(3) intensifying efforts to--
``(A) prevent HIV infection;
``(B) ensure the continued support for, and expanded access
to, treatment and care programs;
``(C) enhance the effectiveness of prevention, treatment,
and care programs; and
``(D) address the particular vulnerabilities of girls and
women;
``(4) encouraging the expansion of private sector efforts
and expanding public-private sector partnerships to combat
HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria;
``(5) reinforcing efforts to--
``(A) develop safe and effective vaccines, microbicides,
and other prevention and treatment technologies; and
``(B) improve diagnostics capabilities for HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria; and
``(6) helping partner countries to--
``(A) strengthen health systems;
``(B) improve human health capacity; and
``(C) address infrastructural weaknesses.''.
SEC. 5. AUTHORITY TO CONSOLIDATE AND COMBINE REPORTS.
Section 5 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7604) is
amended by inserting ``, with the exception of the 5-year
strategy'' before the period at the end.
TITLE I--POLICY PLANNING AND COORDINATION
SEC. 101. DEVELOPMENT OF AN UPDATED, COMPREHENSIVE, 5-YEAR,
GLOBAL STRATEGY.
(a) Strategy.--Section 101(a) of the United States
Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of
2003 (22 U.S.C. 7611(a)) is amended to read as follows:
``(a) Strategy.--The President shall establish a
comprehensive, integrated, 5-year strategy to expand and
improve efforts to combat global HIV/AIDS. This strategy
shall--
``(1) further strengthen the capability of the United
States to be an effective leader of the international
campaign against this disease and strengthen the capacities
of nations experiencing HIV/AIDS epidemics to combat this
disease;
``(2) maintain sufficient flexibility and remain responsive
to--
``(A) changes in the epidemic;
``(B) challenges facing partner countries in developing and
implementing an effective national response; and
``(C) evidence-based improvements and innovations in the
prevention, care, and treatment of HIV/AIDS;
``(3) situate United States efforts to combat HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria within the broader United States
global health and development agenda, establishing a roadmap
to link investments in specific disease programs to the
broader goals of strengthening health systems and
infrastructure and to integrate and coordinate HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, or malaria programs with other health or
development programs, as appropriate;
``(4) provide a plan to--
``(A) prevent 12,000,000 new HIV infections worldwide;
``(B) support treatment of at least 3,000,000 individuals
with HIV/AIDS and support additional treatment through
coordinated multilateral efforts;
``(C) support care for 12,000,000 individuals with HIV/
AIDS, including 5,000,000 orphans and vulnerable children
affected by HIV/AIDS, with an emphasis on promoting a
comprehensive, coordinated system of services to be
integrated throughout the continuum of care;
``(D) help partner countries in the effort to achieve goals
of 80 percent access to counseling, testing, and treatment to
prevent the transmission of HIV from mother to child,
emphasizing a continuum of care model;
``(E) help partner countries to provide care and treatment
services to children with HIV in proportion to their
percentage within the HIV-infected population in each
country;
``(F) promote preservice training for health professionals
designed to strengthen the capacity of institutions to
develop and implement policies for training health workers to
combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria;
``(G) equip teachers with skills needed for HIV/AIDS
prevention, treatment, and care;
``(H) provide and share best practices for combating HIV/
AIDS with health professionals; and
``(I) help partner countries to train and support retention
of health care professionals and paraprofessionals, with the
target of training and retaining at least 140,000 new health
care professionals and paraprofessionals and to
[[Page 14751]]
strengthen capacities in developing countries, especially in
sub-Saharan Africa, to deliver primary health care with the
objective of helping countries achieve staffing levels of at
least 2.3 doctors, nurses, and midwives per 1,000 population,
as called for by the World Health Organization;
``(5) include multisectoral approaches and specific
strategies to treat individuals infected with HIV/AIDS and to
prevent the further transmission of HIV infections, with a
particular focus on the needs of families with children
(including the prevention of mother-to-child transmission),
women, young people, orphans, and vulnerable children;
``(6) establish a timetable with annual global treatment
targets;
``(7) expand the integration of timely and relevant
research within the prevention, care, and treatment of HIV/
AIDS;
``(8) include a plan for program monitoring, operations
research, and impact evaluation and for the dissemination of
a best practices report to highlight findings;
``(9) provide for consultation with local leaders and
officials to develop prevention strategies and programs that
are tailored to the unique needs of each country and
community and targeted particularly toward those most at risk
of acquiring HIV infection;
``(10) make the reduction of HIV/AIDS behavioral risks a
priority of all prevention efforts by--
``(A) promoting abstinence from sexual activity and
encouraging monogamy and faithfulness;
``(B) encouraging the correct and consistent use of male
and female condoms and increasing the availability of, and
access to, these commodities;
``(C) promoting the delay of sexual debut and the reduction
of multiple concurrent sexual partners;
``(D) promoting education for discordant couples (where an
individual is infected with HIV and the other individual is
uninfected or whose status is unknown) about safer sex
practices;
``(E) promoting voluntary counseling and testing, addiction
therapy, and other prevention and treatment tools for illicit
injection drug users and other substance abusers;
``(F) educating men and boys about the risks of procuring
sex commercially and about the need to end violent behavior
toward women and girls;
``(G) supporting comprehensive programs to promote
alternative livelihoods, safety, and social reintegration
strategies for commercial sex workers and their families;
``(H) promoting cooperation with law enforcement to
prosecute offenders of trafficking, rape, and sexual assault
crimes with the goal of eliminating such crimes; and
``(I) working to eliminate rape, gender-based violence,
sexual assault, and the sexual exploitation of women and
children;
``(11) include programs to reduce the transmission of HIV
through structural prevention efforts, particularly
addressing the heightened vulnerabilities of women and girls
to HIV in many countries; and
``(12) support other important means of preventing or
reducing the transmission of HIV, including--
``(A) medical male circumcision;
``(B) the maintenance of a safe blood supply; and
``(C) other mechanisms to reduce the transmission of HIV;
``(13) increase support for prevention of mother-to-child
transmission;
``(14) build capacity within the public health sector of
developing countries by improving health systems and public
health infrastructure and developing indicators to measure
changes in broader public health sector capabilities;
``(15) increase the coordination of HIV/AIDS programs with
development programs;
``(16) provide a framework for expanding or developing
existing or new country or regional programs, including--
``(A) drafting compacts or other agreements, as
appropriate;
``(B) establishing criteria and objectives for such
compacts and agreements; and
``(C) promoting sustainability;
``(17) provide a plan for national and regional priorities
for resource distribution and a global investment plan by
region;
``(18) provide a plan to address the immediate and ongoing
needs of women and girls, which--
``(A) addresses the vulnerabilities that contribute to
their elevated risk of infection;
``(B) includes specific goals and targets to address these
factors;
``(C) provides clear guidance to field missions to
integrate gender across prevention, care, and treatment
programs;
``(D) sets forth gender-specific indicators to monitor
progress on outcomes and impacts of gender programs;
``(E) supports efforts in countries in which women or
orphans lack inheritance rights and other fundamental
protections to promote the passage, implementation, and
enforcement of such laws;
``(F) supports life skills training and other structural
prevention activities, especially among women and girls, with
the goal of reducing vulnerabilities to HIV/AIDS;
``(G) addresses and prevents gender-based violence; and
``(H) addresses the posttraumatic and psychosocial
consequences and provides postexposure prophylaxis protecting
against HIV infection to victims of gender-based violence and
rape;
``(19) provide a plan to address the vulnerabilities and
needs of orphans and children who are vulnerable to, or
affected by, HIV/AIDS;
``(20) provide a framework to work with international
actors and partner countries toward universal access to HIV/
AIDS prevention, treatment, and care programs, recognizing
that prevention is of particular importance in terms of
sequencing;
``(21) enhance the coordination of United States bilateral
efforts to combat global HIV/AIDS with other major public and
private entities;
``(22) enhance the attention given to the national
strategic HIV/AIDS plans of countries receiving United States
assistance by--
``(A) reviewing the planning and programmatic decisions
associated with that assistance; and
``(B) helping to strengthen such national strategies, if
necessary;
``(23) support activities described in the Global Plan to
Stop TB, including--
``(A) expanding and enhancing the coverage of the Directly
Observed Treatment Short-course (DOTS) in order to treat
individuals infected with tuberculosis and HIV, including
multi-drug resistant or extensively drug resistant
tuberculosis; and
``(B) improving coordination and integration of HIV/AIDS
and tuberculosis programming;
``(24) ensure coordination between the Global AIDS
Coordinator and the Malaria Coordinator and address issues of
comorbidity between HIV/AIDS and malaria; and
``(25) include a longer term estimate of the projected
resource needs, progress toward greater sustainability and
country ownership of HIV/AIDS programs, and the anticipated
role of the United States in the global effort to combat HIV/
AIDS during the 10-year period beginning on October 1,
2013.''.
(b) Report.--Section 101(b) of such Act (22 U.S.C. 7611(b))
is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Report.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than October 1, 2009, the
President shall submit a report to the appropriate
congressional committees that sets forth the strategy
described in subsection (a).
``(2) Contents.--The report required under paragraph (1)
shall include a discussion of the following elements:
``(A) The purpose, scope, methodology, and general and
specific objectives of the strategy.
``(B) The problems, risks, and threats to the successful
pursuit of the strategy.
``(C) The desired goals, objectives, activities, and
outcome-related performance measures of the strategy.
``(D) A description of future costs and resources needed to
carry out the strategy.
``(E) A delineation of United States Government roles,
responsibility, and coordination mechanisms of the strategy.
``(F) A description of the strategy--
``(i) to promote harmonization of United States assistance
with that of other international, national, and private
actors as elucidated in the `Three Ones'; and
``(ii) to address existing challenges in harmonization and
alignment.
``(G) A description of the manner in which the strategy
will--
``(i) further the development and implementation of the
national multisectoral strategic HIV/AIDS frameworks of
partner governments; and
``(ii) enhance the centrality, effectiveness, and
sustainability of those national plans.
``(H) A description of how the strategy will seek to
achieve the specific targets described in subsection (a) and
other targets, as appropriate.
``(I) A description of, and rationale for, the timetable
for annual global treatment targets.
``(J) A description of how operations research is addressed
in the strategy and how such research can most effectively be
integrated into care, treatment, and prevention activities in
order to--
``(i) improve program quality and efficiency;
``(ii) ascertain cost effectiveness;
``(iii) ensure transparency and accountability;
``(iv) assess population-based impact;
``(v) disseminate findings and best practices; and
``(vi) optimize delivery of services.
``(K) An analysis of United States-assisted strategies to
prevent the transmission of HIV/AIDS, including methodologies
to promote abstinence, monogamy, faithfulness, the correct
and consistent use of male and female condoms, reductions in
concurrent sexual partners, and delay of sexual debut, and of
intended monitoring and evaluation approaches to measure the
effectiveness of prevention programs and ensure that they are
targeted to appropriate audiences.
``(L) Within the analysis required under subparagraph (J),
an examination of additional planned means of preventing the
transmission of HIV including medical male circumcision,
maintenance of a safe blood supply, and other tools.
``(M) A description of the specific targets, goals, and
strategies developed to address the needs and vulnerabilities
of women and girls to HIV/AIDS, including--
``(i) structural prevention activities;
``(ii) activities directed toward men and boys;
``(iii) activities to enhance educational, microfinance,
and livelihood opportunities for women and girls;
``(iv) activities to promote and protect the legal
empowerment of women, girls, and orphans and vulnerable
children;
``(v) programs targeted toward gender-based violence and
sexual coercion;
``(vi) strategies to meet the particular needs of
adolescents;
[[Page 14752]]
``(vii) assistance for victims of rape, sexual abuse,
assault, exploitation, and trafficking; and
``(viii) programs to prevent alcohol abuse.
``(N) A description of strategies--
``(i) to address the needs of orphans and vulnerable
children, including an analysis of--
``(I) factors contributing to children's vulnerability to
HIV/AIDS; and
``(II) vulnerabilities caused by the impact of HIV/AIDS on
children and their families; and
``(ii) in areas of higher HIV/AIDS prevalence, to promote a
community-based approach to vulnerability, maximizing
community input into determining which children participate.
``(O) A description of capacity-building efforts undertaken
by countries themselves, including adherents of the Abuja
Declaration and an assessment of the impact of International
Monetary Fund macroeconomic and fiscal policies on national
and donor investments in health.
``(P) A description of the strategy to--
``(i) strengthen capacity building within the public health
sector;
``(ii) improve health care in those countries;
``(iii) help countries to develop and implement national
health workforce strategies;
``(iv) strive to achieve goals in training, retaining, and
effectively deploying health staff;
``(v) promote ethical recruiting practices for health care
workers; and
``(vi) increase the sustainability of health programs.
``(Q) A description of the criteria for selection,
objectives, methodology, and structure of compacts or other
framework agreements with countries or regional
organizations, including--
``(i) the role of civil society;
``(ii) the degree of transparency;
``(iii) benchmarks for success of such compacts or
agreements; and
``(iv) the relationship between such compacts or agreements
and the national HIV/AIDS and public health strategies and
commitments of partner countries.
``(R) A strategy to better coordinate HIV/AIDS assistance
with nutrition and food assistance programs.
``(S) A description of transnational or regional
initiatives to combat regionalized epidemics in highly
affected areas such as the Caribbean.
``(T) A description of planned resource distribution and
global investment by region.
``(U) A description of coordination efforts in order to
better implement the Stop TB Strategy and to address the
problem of coinfection of HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis and of
projected challenges or barriers to successful
implementation.
``(V) A description of coordination efforts to address
malaria and comorbidity with malaria and HIV/AIDS.''.
(c) Study.--Section 101(c) of such Act (22 U.S.C. 7611(c))
is amended to read as follows:
``(c) Study of Progress Toward Achievement of Policy
Objectives.--
``(1) Design and budget plan for data evaluation.--The
Global AIDS Coordinator shall enter into a contract with the
Institute of Medicine of the National Academies that provides
that not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment
of the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global
Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria
Reauthorization Act of 2008, the Institute, in consultation
with the Global AIDS Coordinator and other relevant parties
representing the public and private sector, shall provide the
Global AIDS Coordinator with a design plan and budget for the
evaluation and collection of baseline and subsequent data to
address the elements set forth in paragraph (2)(B). The
Global AIDS Coordinator shall submit the budget and design
plan to the appropriate congressional committees.
``(2) Study.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 4 years after the date of
the enactment of the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United
States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008, the Institute of
Medicine of the National Academies shall publish a study that
includes--
``(i) an assessment of the performance of United States-
assisted global HIV/AIDS programs; and
``(ii) an evaluation of the impact on health of prevention,
treatment, and care efforts that are supported by United
States funding, including multilateral and bilateral programs
involving joint operations.
``(B) Content.--The study conducted under this paragraph
shall include--
``(i) an assessment of progress toward prevention,
treatment, and care targets;
``(ii) an assessment of the effects on health systems,
including on the financing and management of health systems
and the quality of service delivery and staffing;
``(iii) an assessment of efforts to address gender-specific
aspects of HIV/AIDS, including gender related constraints to
accessing services and addressing underlying social and
economic vulnerabilities of women and men;
``(iv) an evaluation of the impact of treatment and care
programs on 5-year survival rates, drug adherence, and the
emergence of drug resistance;
``(v) an evaluation of the impact of prevention programs on
HIV incidence in relevant population groups;
``(vi) an evaluation of the impact on child health and
welfare of interventions authorized under this Act on behalf
of orphans and vulnerable children;
``(vii) an evaluation of the impact of programs and
activities authorized in this Act on child mortality; and
``(viii) recommendations for improving the programs
referred to in subparagraph (A)(i).
``(C) Methodologies.--Assessments and impact evaluations
conducted under the study shall utilize sound statistical
methods and techniques for the behavioral sciences, including
random assignment methodologies as feasible. Qualitative data
on process variables should be used for assessments and
impact evaluations, wherever possible.
``(3) Contract authority.--The Institute of Medicine may
enter into contracts or cooperative agreements or award
grants to conduct the study under paragraph (2).
``(4) Authorization of appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary
to carry out the study under this subsection.''.
(d) Report.--Section 101 of such Act, as amended by this
section, is further amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(d) Comptroller General Report.--
``(1) Report required.--Not later than 3 years after the
date of the enactment of the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde
United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008, the
Comptroller General of the United States shall submit a
report on the global HIV/AIDS programs of the United States
to the appropriate congressional committees.
``(2) Contents.--The report required under paragraph (1)
shall include--
``(A) a description and assessment of the monitoring and
evaluation practices and policies in place for these
programs;
``(B) an assessment of coordination within Federal agencies
involved in these programs, examining both internal
coordination within these programs and integration with the
larger global health and development agenda of the United
States;
``(C) an assessment of procurement policies and practices
within these programs;
``(D) an assessment of harmonization with national
government HIV/AIDS and public health strategies as well as
other international efforts;
``(E) an assessment of the impact of global HIV/AIDS
funding and programs on other United States global health
programming; and
``(F) recommendations for improving the global HIV/AIDS
programs of the United States.
``(e) Best Practices Report.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
the enactment of the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United
States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008, and annually thereafter,
the Global AIDS Coordinator shall publish a best practices
report that highlights the programs receiving financial
assistance from the United States that have the potential for
replication or adaption, particularly at a low cost, across
global AIDS programs, including those that focus on both
generalized and localized epidemics.
``(2) Dissemination of findings.--
``(A) Publication on internet website.--The Global AIDS
Coordinator shall disseminate the full findings of the annual
best practices report on the Internet website of the Office
of the Global AIDS Coordinator.
``(B) Dissemination guidance.--The Global AIDS Coordinator
shall develop guidance to ensure timely submission and
dissemination of significant information regarding best
practices with respect to global AIDS programs.
``(f) Inspectors General.--
``(1) Oversight plan.--
``(A) Development.--The Inspectors General of the
Department of State and Broadcasting Board of Governors, the
Department of Health and Human Services, and the United
States Agency for International Development shall jointly
develop 5 coordinated annual plans for oversight activity in
each of the fiscal years 2009 through 2013, with regard to
the programs authorized under this Act and sections 104A,
104B, and 104C of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22
U.S.C. 2151b-2, 2151b-3, and 2151b-4).
``(B) Contents.--The plans developed under subparagraph (A)
shall include a schedule for financial audits, inspections,
and performance reviews, as appropriate.
``(C) Deadline.--
``(i) Initial plan.--The first plan developed under
subparagraph (A) shall be completed not later than the later
of--
``(I) September 1, 2008; or
``(II) 60 days after the date of the enactment of the Tom
Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership
Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization
Act of 2008.
``(ii) Subsequent plans.--Each of the last four plans
developed under subparagraph (A) shall be completed not later
than 30 days before each of the fiscal years 2010 through
2013, respectively.
``(2) Coordination.--In order to avoid duplication and
maximize efficiency, the Inspectors General described in
paragraph (1) shall coordinate their activities with--
``(A) the Government Accountability Office; and
``(B) the Inspectors General of the Department of Commerce,
the Department of Defense, the Department of Labor, and the
Peace Corps, as appropriate, pursuant to the 2004 Memorandum
of Agreement Coordinating Audit Coverage of Programs and
Activities Implementing the President's Emergency Plan for
AIDS Relief, or any successor agreement.
``(3) Funding.--The Global AIDS Coordinator and the
Coordinator of the United States Government Activities to
Combat Malaria Globally
[[Page 14753]]
shall make available necessary funds not exceeding
$10,000,000 during the 5-year period beginning on October 1,
2008 to the Inspectors General described in paragraph (1) for
the audits, inspections, and reviews described in that
paragraph.''.
SEC. 102. INTERAGENCY WORKING GROUP.
Section 1(f)(2) of the State Department Basic Authorities
Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2651a(f)(2)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ``, partner country
finance, health, and other relevant ministries,'' after
``community based organizations)'' each place it appears;
(2) in subparagraph (B)(ii)--
(A) by striking subclauses (IV) and (V);
(B) by inserting after subclause (III) the following:
``(IV) Establishing an interagency working group on HIV/
AIDS headed by the Global AIDS Coordinator and comprised of
representatives from the United States Agency for
International Development and the Department of Health and
Human Services, for the purposes of coordination of
activities relating to HIV/AIDS, including--
``(aa) meeting regularly to review progress in partner
countries toward HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, and care
objectives;
``(bb) participating in the process of identifying
countries to consider for increased assistance based on the
epidemiology of HIV/AIDS in those countries, including clear
evidence of a public health threat, as well as government
commitment to address the HIV/AIDS problem, relative need,
and coordination and joint planning with other significant
actors;
``(cc) assisting the Coordinator in the evaluation,
execution, and oversight of country operational plans;
``(dd) reviewing policies that may be obstacles to reaching
targets set forth for HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, and
care; and
``(ee) consulting with representatives from additional
relevant agencies, including the National Institutes of
Health, the Health Resources and Services Administration, the
Department of Labor, the Department of Agriculture, the
Millennium Challenge Corporation, the Peace Corps, and the
Department of Defense.
``(V) Coordinating overall United States HIV/AIDS policy
and programs, including ensuring the coordination of relevant
executive branch agency activities in the field, with efforts
led by partner countries, and with the assistance provided by
other relevant bilateral and multilateral aid agencies and
other donor institutions to promote harmonization with other
programs aimed at preventing and treating HIV/AIDS and other
health challenges, improving primary health, addressing food
security, promoting education and development, and
strengthening health care systems.'';
(C) by redesignating subclauses (VII) and VIII) as
subclauses (IX) and (XII), respectively;
(D) by inserting after subclause (VI) the following:
``(VII) Holding annual consultations with nongovernmental
organizations in partner countries that provide services to
improve health, and advocating on behalf of the individuals
with HIV/AIDS and those at particular risk of contracting
HIV/AIDS, including organizations with members who are living
with HIV/AIDS.
``(VIII) Ensuring, through interagency and international
coordination, that HIV/AIDS programs of the United States are
coordinated with, and complementary to, the delivery of
related global health, food security, development, and
education.'';
(E) in subclause (IX), as redesignated by subparagraph
(C)--
(i) by inserting ``Vietnam,'' after ``Uganda,'';
(ii) by inserting after ``of 2003'' the following: ``and
other countries in which the United States is implementing
HIV/AIDS programs as part of its foreign assistance
program''; and
(iii) by adding at the end the following: ``In designating
additional countries under this subparagraph, the President
shall give priority to those countries in which there is a
high prevalence or significantly rising incidence of HIV/
AIDS, countries with large populations and inadequate health
infrastructure, countries in which a concentrated HIV/AIDS
epidemic could become generalized to the entire population of
the country, and in countries whose governments demonstrate a
commitment to combating HIV/AIDS.'';
(F) by inserting after subclause (IX), as redesignated by
subparagraph (C), the following:
``(X) Working with partner countries in which the HIV/AIDS
epidemic is prevalent among injection drug users to
establish, as a national priority, national HIV/AIDS
prevention programs, including education and services
demonstrated to be effective in reducing the transmission of
HIV infection among injection drug users without increasing
illicit drug use.
``(XI) Working with partner countries in which the HIV/AIDS
epidemic is prevalent among individuals involved in
commercial sex acts to establish, as a national priority,
national prevention programs, including education, voluntary
testing, and counseling, and referral systems that link HIV/
AIDS programs with programs to eradicate trafficking in
persons and support alternatives to prostitution.'';
(G) in subclause (XII), as redesignated by subparagraph
(C), by striking ``funds section'' and inserting ``funds
appropriated for HIV/ AIDS assistance pursuant to the
authorization of appropriations under section 401 of the
United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7671)''; and
(H) by adding at the end the following:
``(XIII) Publicizing updated drug pricing data to inform
the purchasing decisions of pharmaceutical procurement
partners.''.
SEC. 103. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
Section 102 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7612)
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(d) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress
that--
``(1) full-time country level coordinators, preferably with
management experience, should head each HIV/AIDS country team
for United States missions overseeing significant HIV/AIDS
programs;
``(2) foreign service nationals provide critically
important services in the design and implementation of United
States country-level HIV/AIDS programs and their skills and
experience as public health professionals should be
recognized within hiring and compensation practices; and
``(3) staffing levels for United States country-level HIV/
AIDS teams should be adequately maintained to fulfill
oversight and other obligations of the positions.''.
TITLE II--SUPPORT FOR MULTILATERAL FUNDS, PROGRAMS, AND PUBLIC-PRIVATE
PARTNERSHIPS
SEC. 201. VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS TO INTERNATIONAL VACCINE
FUNDS.
Section 302 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22
U.S.C. 2222) is amended--
(1) by inserting after subsection (c) the following:
``(d) Tuberculosis Vaccine Development Programs.--In
addition to amounts otherwise available under this section,
there are authorized to be appropriated to the President such
sums as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2009
through 2013, which shall be used for United States
contributions to tuberculosis vaccine development programs,
which may include the Aeras Global TB Vaccine Foundation.'';
(2) in subsection (k), by striking ``fiscal years 2004
through 2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through
2013'';
(3) in subsection (l), by striking ``fiscal years 2004
through 2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through
2013''; and
(4) in subsection (m), by striking ``fiscal years 2004
through 2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through
2013''.
SEC. 202. PARTICIPATION IN THE GLOBAL FUND TO FIGHT AIDS,
TUBERCULOSIS AND MALARIA.
(a) Findings; Sense of Congress.--Section 202(a) of the
United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7622(a)) is amended to read as
follows:
``(a) Findings; Sense of Congress.--
``(1) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
``(A) The establishment of the Global Fund in January 2002
is consistent with the general principles for an
international AIDS trust fund first outlined by Congress in
the Global AIDS and Tuberculosis Relief Act of 2000 (Public
Law 106-264).
``(B) The Global Fund is an innovative financing mechanism
which--
``(i) has made progress in many areas in combating HIV/
AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria; and
``(ii) represents the multilateral component of this Act,
extending United States efforts to more than 130 countries
around the world.
``(C) The Global Fund and United States bilateral
assistance programs--
``(i) are demonstrating increasingly effective
coordination, with each possessing certain comparative
advantages in the fight against HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and
malaria; and
``(ii) often work most effectively in concert with each
other.
``(D) The United States Government--
``(i) is the largest supporter of the Global Fund in terms
of resources and technical support;
``(ii) made the founding contribution to the Global Fund;
and
``(iii) is fully committed to the success of the Global
Fund as a multilateral public-private partnership.
``(2) Sense of congress.--It is the sense of Congress
that--
``(A) transparency and accountability are crucial to the
long-term success and viability of the Global Fund;
``(B) the Global Fund has made significant progress toward
addressing concerns raised by the Government Accountability
Office by--
``(i) improving risk assessment and risk management
capabilities;
``(ii) providing clearer guidance for and oversight of
Local Fund Agents; and
``(iii) strengthening the Office of the Inspector General
for the Global Fund;
``(C) the provision of sufficient resources and authority
to the Office of the Inspector General for the Global Fund to
ensure that office has the staff and independence necessary
to carry out its mandate will be a measure of the commitment
of the Global Fund to transparency and accountability;
``(D) regular, publicly published financial, programmatic,
and reporting audits of the Fund, its grantees, and Local
Fund Agents are also important benchmarks of transparency;
``(E) the Global Fund should establish and maintain a
system to track--
``(i) the amount of funds disbursed to each subrecipient on
the grant's fiscal cycle; and
[[Page 14754]]
``(ii) the distribution of resources, by grant and
principal recipient, for prevention, care, treatment, drug
and commodity purchases, and other purposes;
``(F) relevant national authorities in recipient countries
should exempt from duties and taxes all products financed by
Global Fund grants and procured by any principal recipient or
subrecipient for the purpose of carrying out such grants;
``(G) the Global Fund, UNAIDS, and the Global AIDS
Coordinator should work together to standardize program
indicators wherever possible; and
``(H) for purposes of evaluating total amounts of funds
contributed to the Global Fund under subsection (d)(4)(A)(i),
the timetable for evaluations of contributions from sources
other than the United States should take into account the
fiscal calendars of other major contributors.''.
(b) United States Financial Participation.--Section 202(d)
of such Act (22 U.S.C. 7622(d)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking ``$1,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal
year 2004 beginning on January 1, 2004'' and inserting
``$2,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2009,''; and
(B) by striking ``the fiscal years 2005-2008'' and
inserting ``each of the fiscal years 2010 through 2013'';
(2) in paragraph (4)--
(A) in subparagraph (A)--
(i) in clause (i), by striking ``fiscal years 2004 through
2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through 2013'';
(ii) in clause (ii), by striking ``during any of the fiscal
years 2004 through 2008'' and inserting ``during any of the
fiscal years 2009 through 2013''; and
(iii) in clause (vi)--
(I) by striking ``for the purposes'' and inserting ``For
the purposes'';
(II) by striking ``fiscal years 2004 through 2008'' and
inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through 2013''; and
(III) by striking ``prior to fiscal year 2004'' and
inserting ``before fiscal year 2009'';
(B) in subparagraph (B)(iv), by striking ``fiscal years
2004 through 2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through
2013''; and
(C) in subparagraph (C)(ii), by striking ``Committee on
International Relations'' and inserting ``Committee on
Foreign Affairs''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(5) Withholding funds.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of this Act, 20 percent of the amounts appropriated
pursuant to this Act for a contribution to support the Global
Fund for each of the fiscal years 2010 through 2013 shall be
withheld from obligation to the Global Fund until the
Secretary of State certifies to the appropriate congressional
committees that the Global Fund--
``(A) has established an evaluation framework for the
performance of Local Fund Agents (referred to in this
paragraph as `LFAs');
``(B) is undertaking a systematic assessment of the
performance of LFAs;
``(C) is making available for public review, according to
the Fund Board's policies and practices on disclosure of
information, a regular collection and analysis of performance
data of Fund grants, which shall cover principal recipients
and subrecipients;
``(D) is maintaining an independent, well-staffed Office of
the Inspector General that--
``(i) reports directly to the Board of the Global Fund; and
``(ii) is responsible for regular, publicly published
audits of financial, programmatic, and reporting aspects of
the Global Fund, its grantees, and LFAs;
``(E) has established, and is reporting publicly on,
standard indicators for all program areas;
``(F) has established a methodology to track and is
reporting on--
``(i) all subrecipients and the amount of funds disbursed
to each subrecipient on the grant's fiscal cycle; and
``(ii) the distribution of resources, by grant and
principal recipient, for prevention, care, treatment, drugs
and commodities purchase, and other purposes;
``(G) has established a policy on tariffs imposed by
national governments on all goods and services financed by
the Global Fund;
``(H) through its Secretariat, has taken meaningful steps
to prevent national authorities in recipient countries from
imposing taxes or tariffs on goods or services provided by
the Fund;
``(I) is maintaining its status as a financing institution
focused on programs directly related to HIV/AIDS, malaria,
and tuberculosis; and
``(J) is maintaining and making progress on--
``(i) sustaining its multisectoral approach, through
country coordinating mechanisms; and
``(ii) the implementation of grants, as reflected in the
proportion of resources allocated to different sectors,
including governments, civil society, and faith- and
community-based organizations.''.
SEC. 203. RESEARCH ON METHODS FOR WOMEN TO PREVENT
TRANSMISSION OF HIV AND OTHER DISEASES.
(a) Sense of Congress.--Congress recognizes the need and
urgency to expand the range of interventions for preventing
the transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV),
including nonvaccine prevention methods that can be
controlled by women.
(b) NIH Office of AIDS Research.--Subpart 1 of part D of
title XXIII of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
300cc-40 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 2351
the following:
``SEC. 2351A. MICROBICIDE RESEARCH.
``(a) Federal Strategic Plan.--
``(1) In general.--The Director of the Office shall--
``(A) expedite the implementation of the Federal strategic
plans for the conduct and support of research on, and
development of, a microbicide for use in developing countries
to prevent the transmission of the human immunodeficiency
virus; and
``(B) annually review and, as appropriate, revise such plan
to prioritize funding and activities relative to their
scientific urgency and potential market readiness.
``(2) Coordination.--In implementing, reviewing, and
prioritizing elements of the plan described in paragraph (1),
the Director of the Office shall consult with--
``(A) representatives of other Federal agencies involved in
microbicide research, including the Coordinator of United
States Government Activities to Combat HIV/AIDS Globally, the
Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
and the Administrator of the United States Agency for
International Development;
``(B) the microbicide research and development community;
and
``(C) health advocates.
``(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary
for each of the fiscal years 2009 through 2013 to carry out
this section.''.
(c) National Institute of Allergy and Infectious
Diseases.--Subpart 6 of part C of title IV of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 285f et seq.) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 447C. MICROBICIDE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.
``The Director of the Institute, acting through the head of
the Division of AIDS, shall carry out research on, and
development of, a microbicide for use in developing countries
to prevent the transmission of the human immunodeficiency
virus. The Director shall ensure that there are a sufficient
number of employees and structure dedicated to carrying out
such activities.''.
(d) CDC.--Part B of title III of the Public Health Service
Act (42 U.S.C. 243 et seq.) is amended by inserting after
section 317S the following:
``SEC. 317T. MICROBICIDE RESEARCH.
``(a) In General.--The Director of the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention shall fully implement the Centers'
microbicide agenda to support research and development of
microbicides for use in developing countries to prevent the
transmission of the human immunodeficiency virus.
``(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary
for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2013 to carry out this
section.''.
(e) United States Agency for International Development.--
(1) In general.--The Administrator of the United States
Agency for International Development, in coordination with
the Coordinator of United States Government Activities to
Combat HIV/AIDS Globally, shall develop and implement a
program to facilitate availability and accessibility of
microbicides that prevent the transmission of HIV if such
microbicides are proven safe and effective.
(2) Authorization of appropriations.--Of the amounts
authorized to be appropriated under section 401 of the United
States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria
Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7671) for HIV/AIDS assistance, there
are authorized to be appropriated to the President such sums
as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2009 through
2013 to carry out this subsection.
SEC. 204. COMBATING HIV/AIDS, TUBERCULOSIS, AND MALARIA BY
STRENGTHENING HEALTH POLICIES AND HEALTH
SYSTEMS OF PARTNER COUNTRIES.
(a) In General.--Title II of the United States Leadership
Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22
U.S.C. 7621) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 204. COMBATING HIV/AIDS, TUBERCULOSIS, AND MALARIA BY
STRENGTHENING HEALTH POLICIES AND HEALTH
SYSTEMS OF PARTNER COUNTRIES.
``(a) Statement of Policy.--It shall be the policy of the
United States Government--
``(1) to invest appropriate resources authorized under this
Act--
``(A) to carry out activities to strengthen HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria health policies and health systems;
and
``(B) to provide workforce training and capacity-building
consistent with the goals and objectives of this Act; and
``(2) to support the development of a sound policy
environment in partner countries to increase the ability of
such countries--
``(A) to maximize utilization of health care resources from
donor countries;
``(B) to increase national investments in health and
education and maximize the effectiveness of such investments;
``(C) to improve national HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and
malaria strategies;
``(D) to deliver evidence-based services in an effective
and efficient manner; and
``(E) to reduce barriers that prevent recipients of
services from achieving maximum benefit from such services.
``(b) Assistance To Improve Public Finance Management
Systems.--
``(1) In general.--Consistent with the authority under
section 129 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C.
2152), the Secretary of the
[[Page 14755]]
Treasury, acting through the head of the Office of Technical
Assistance, is authorized to provide assistance for advisors
and partner country finance, health, and other relevant
ministries to improve the effectiveness of public finance
management systems in partner countries to enable such
countries to receive funding to carry out programs to combat
HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria and to manage such
programs.
``(2) Authorization of appropriations.--Of the amounts
authorized to be appropriated under section 401 for HIV/AIDS
assistance, there are authorized to be appropriated to the
Secretary of the Treasury such sums as may be necessary for
each of the fiscal years 2009 through 2013 to carry out this
subsection.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents for the
United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7601 note) is amended by
inserting after the item relating to section 203, as added by
section 203 of this Act, the following:
``Sec. 204. Combating HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria by
strengthening health policies and health systems of
partner countries.''.
SEC. 205. FACILITATING EFFECTIVE OPERATIONS OF THE CENTERS
FOR DISEASE CONTROL.
Section 307 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
242l) is amended--
(1) by amending subsection (a) to read as follows:
``(a) The Secretary may participate with other countries in
cooperative endeavors in--
``(1) biomedical research, health care technology, and the
health services research and statistical analysis authorized
under section 306 and title IX; and
``(2) biomedical research, health care services, health
care research, or other related activities in furtherance of
the activities, objectives or goals authorized under the Tom
Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership
Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization
Act of 2008.''; and
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (7), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon at the end;
(B) by striking ``The Secretary may not, in the exercise of
his authority under this section, provide financial
assistance for the construction of any facility in any
foreign country.''
(C) in paragraph (8), by striking ``for any purpose.'' and
inserting ``for the purpose of any law administered by the
Office of Personnel Management;''; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
``(9) provide such funds by advance or reimbursement to the
Secretary of State, as may be necessary, to pay the costs of
acquisition, lease, construction, alteration, equipping,
furnishing or management of facilities outside of the United
States; and
``(10) in consultation with the Secretary of State, through
grant or cooperative agreement, make funds available to
public or nonprofit private institutions or agencies in
foreign countries in which the Secretary is participating in
activities described under subsection (a) to acquire, lease,
construct, alter, or renovate facilities in those
countries.''.
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) by striking ``1990'' and inserting ``1980''; and
(B) by inserting or ``or section 903 of the Foreign Service
Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 4083)'' after ``Code''.
SEC. 206. FACILITATING VACCINE DEVELOPMENT.
(a) Technical Assistance for Developing Countries.--The
Administrator of the United States Agency for International
Development, utilizing public-private partners, as
appropriate, and working in coordination with other
international development agencies, is authorized to
strengthen the capacity of developing countries' governmental
institutions to--
(1) collect evidence for informed decision-making and
introduction of new vaccines, including potential HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria vaccines, if such vaccines are
determined to be safe and effective;
(2) review protocols for clinical trials and impact studies
and improve the implementation of clinical trials; and
(3) ensure adequate supply chain and delivery systems.
(b) Advanced Market Commitments.--
(1) Purpose.--The purpose of this subsection is to improve
global health by requiring the United States to participate
in negotiations for advance market commitments for the
development of future vaccines, including potential vaccines
for HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria.
(2) Negotiation requirement.--The Secretary of the Treasury
shall enter into negotiations with the appropriate officials
of the International Bank of Reconstruction and Development
(World Bank) and the GAVI Alliance, the member nations of
such entities, and other interested parties to establish
advanced market commitments to purchase vaccines to combat
HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, and other related infectious
diseases.
(3) Requirements.--In negotiating the United States
participation in programs for advanced market commitments,
the Secretary of the Treasury shall take into account whether
programs for advance market commitments include--
(A) legally binding contracts for product purchase that
include a fair market price for up to a maximum number of
treatments, creating a strong market incentive;
(B) clearly defined and transparent rules of program
participation for qualified developers and suppliers of the
product;
(C) clearly defined requirements for eligible vaccines to
ensure that they are safe and effective and can be delivered
in developing country contexts;
(D) dispute settlement mechanisms; and
(E) sufficient flexibility to enable the contracts to be
adjusted in accord with new information related to projected
market size and other factors while still maintaining the
purchase commitment at a fair price.
(4) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act--
(A) the Secretary of the Treasury shall submit a report to
the appropriate congressional committees on the status of the
United States negotiations to participate in programs for the
advanced market commitments under this subsection; and
(B) the President shall produce a comprehensive report,
written by a study group of qualified professionals from
relevant Federal agencies and initiatives, nongovernmental
organizations, and industry representatives, that sets forth
a coordinated strategy to accelerate development of vaccines
for infectious diseases, such as HIV/AIDS, malaria, and
tuberculosis, which includes--
(i) initiatives to create economic incentives for the
research, development, and manufacturing of vaccines for HIV/
AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, and other infectious diseases;
(ii) an expansion of public-private partnerships and the
leveraging of resources from other countries and the private
sector; and
(iii) efforts to maximize United States capabilities to
support clinical trials of vaccines in developing countries
and to address the challenges of delivering vaccines in
developing countries to minimize delays in access once
vaccines are available.
TITLE III--BILATERAL EFFORTS
Subtitle A--General Assistance and Programs
SEC. 301. ASSISTANCE TO COMBAT HIV/AIDS.
(a) Amendments to the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.--
(1) Finding.--Section 104A(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act
of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151b-2(a)) is amended by inserting
``Central Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America'' after
``Caribbean,''.
(2) Policy.--Section 104A(b) of such Act is amended to read
as follows:
``(b) Policy.--
``(1) Objectives.--It is a major objective of the foreign
assistance program of the United States to provide assistance
for the prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS and the care of
those affected by the disease. It is the policy objective of
the United States, by 2013, to--
``(A) assist partner countries to--
``(i) prevent 12,000,000 new HIV infections worldwide;
``(ii) support treatment of at least 3,000,000 individuals
with HIV/AIDS;
``(iii) support additional treatment through coordinated
multilateral efforts;
``(iv) support care for 12,000,000 individuals with HIV/
AIDS, including 5,000,000 orphans and vulnerable children
affected by HIV/AIDS, with an emphasis on promoting a
comprehensive, coordinated system of services to be
integrated throughout the continuum of care;
``(v) provide at least 80 percent of the target population
with access to counseling, testing, and treatment to prevent
the transmission of HIV from mother-to-child;
``(vi) provide care and treatment services to children with
HIV in proportion to their percentage within the HIV-infected
population of a given partner country; and
``(vii) train and support retention of health care
professionals, paraprofessionals, and community health
workers in HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, and care, with the
target of providing such training to at least 140,000 new
health care professionals and paraprofessionals;
``(B) strengthen the capacity to deliver primary health
care in developing countries, especially in sub-Saharan
Africa; and
``(C) help countries achieve staffing levels of at least
2.3 doctors, nurses, and midwives per 1,000 population, as
called for by the World Health Organization.
``(2) Coordinated global strategy.--The United States and
other countries with the sufficient capacity should provide
assistance to countries in sub-Saharan Africa, the Caribbean,
Central Asia, Eastern Europe, and Latin America, and other
countries and regions confronting HIV/AIDS epidemics in a
coordinated global strategy to help address generalized and
concentrated epidemics through HIV/AIDS prevention,
treatment, care, monitoring and evaluation, and related
activities.
``(3) Priorities.--The United States Government's response
to the global HIV/AIDS pandemic and the Government's efforts
to help countries assume leadership of sustainable campaigns
to combat their local epidemics should place high priority
on--
``(A) the prevention of the transmission of HIV; and
``(B) moving toward universal access to HIV/AIDS prevention
counseling and services.''.
(b) Authorization.--Section 104A(c) of such Act is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``and other countries and
areas.'' and inserting ``Central Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin
America, and other countries and areas, particularly with
respect to refugee populations or those in postconflict
settings in such countries and areas with significant or
increasing HIV incidence rates.'';
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``and other countries and
areas affected by the HIV/AIDS
[[Page 14756]]
pandemic'' and inserting ``Central Asia, Eastern Europe,
Latin America, and other countries and areas affected by the
HIV/AIDS pandemic, particularly with respect to refugee
populations or those in post-conflict settings in such
countries and areas with significant or increasing HIV
incidence rates.''; and
(3) in paragraph (3)--
(A) by striking ``foreign countries'' and inserting
``partner countries, other international actors,''; and
(B) by inserting ``within the framework of the principles
of the Three Ones'' before the period at the end.
(c) Activities Supported.--Section 104A(d) of such Act is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in subparagraph (A)--
(i) by inserting ``and multiple concurrent sexual
partnering,'' after ``casual sexual partnering''; and
(ii) by striking ``condoms'' and inserting ``male and
female condoms'';
(B) in subparagraph (B)--
(i) by striking ``programs that'' and inserting ``programs
that are designed with local input and''; and
(ii) by striking ``those organizations'' and inserting
``those locally based organizations'';
(C) in subparagraph (D), by inserting ``and promoting the
use of provider-initiated or `opt-out' voluntary testing in
accordance with World Health Organization guidelines'' before
the semicolon at the end;
(D) by redesignating subparagraphs (F), (G), and (H) as
subparagraphs (H), (I), and (J), respectively;
(E) by inserting after subparagraph (E) the following:
``(F) assistance to--
``(i) achieve the goal of reaching 80 percent of pregnant
women for prevention and treatment of mother-to-child
transmission of HIV in countries in which the United States
is implementing HIV/AIDS programs by 2013; and
``(ii) promote infant feeding options and treatment
protocols that meet the most recent criteria established by
the World Health Organization;
``(G) medical male circumcision programs as part of
national strategies to combat the transmission of HIV/
AIDS;'';
(F) in subparagraph (I), as redesignated, by striking
``and'' at the end;
(G) in subparagraph (H), as redesignated--
(i) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``,
including education and services demonstrated to be effective
in reducing the transmission of HIV infection without
increasing illicit drug use; and''; and
(H) by adding at the end the following:
``(K) assistance for counseling, testing, treatment, care,
and support programs, including--
``(i) counseling and other services for the prevention of
reinfection of individuals with HIV/AIDS;
``(ii) counseling to prevent sexual transmission of HIV,
including--
``(I) life skills development for practicing abstinence and
faithfulness;
``(II) reducing the number of sexual partners;
``(III) delaying sexual debut; and
``(IV) ensuring correct and consistent use of condoms;
``(iii) assistance to engage underlying vulnerabilities to
HIV/AIDS, especially those of women and girls, through
structural prevention programs;
``(iv) assistance for appropriate HIV/AIDS education
programs and training targeted to prevent the transmission of
HIV among men who have sex with men;
``(v) assistance to provide male and female condoms;
``(vi) diagnosis and treatment of other sexually
transmitted infections;
``(vii) strategies to address the stigma and discrimination
that impede HIV/AIDS prevention efforts; and
``(viii) assistance to facilitate widespread access to
microbicides for HIV prevention, if safe and effective
products become available, including financial and technical
support for culturally appropriate introductory programs,
procurement, distribution, logistics management, program
delivery, acceptability studies, provider training, demand
generation, and postintroduction monitoring.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in subparagraph (C)--
(i) by inserting ``pain management,'' after ``opportunistic
infections,''; and
(ii) by striking the period at the end and inserting a
semicolon; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(D) as part of care and treatment of HIV/AIDS, assistance
(including prophylaxis and treatment) for common HIV/AIDS-
related opportunistic infections for free or at a rate at
which it is easily affordable to the individuals and
populations being served;
``(E) as part of care and treatment of HIV/AIDS, assistance
or referral to available and adequately resourced service
providers for nutritional support, including counseling and
where necessary the provision of commodities, for persons
meeting malnourishment criteria and their families;'';
(3) in paragraph (4)--
(A) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in subparagraph (D), by striking the period at the end
and inserting a semicolon; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(E) carrying out and expanding program monitoring, impact
evaluation research and analysis, and operations research and
disseminating data and findings through mechanisms to be
developed by the Coordinator of United States Government
Activities to Combat HIV/AIDS Globally, in coordination with
the Director of the Centers for Disease Control, in order
to--
``(i) improve accountability, increase transparency, and
ensure the delivery of evidence-based services through the
collection, evaluation, and analysis of data regarding
gender-responsive interventions, disaggregated by age and
sex;
``(ii) identify and replicate effective models; and
``(iii) develop gender indicators to measure outcomes and
the impacts of interventions; and
``(F) establishing appropriate systems to--
``(i) gather epidemiological and social science data on
HIV; and
``(ii) evaluate the effectiveness of prevention efforts
among men who have sex with men, with due consideration to
stigma and risks associated with disclosure.'';
(4) in paragraph (5)--
(A) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (D);
and
(B) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following:
``(C) Mechanism to ensure cost-effective drug purchasing.--
Subject to subparagraph (B), mechanisms to ensure that safe
and effective pharmaceuticals, including antiretrovirals and
medicines to treat opportunistic infections, are purchased at
the lowest possible price at which such pharmaceuticals may
be obtained in sufficient quantity on the world market.'';
(5) in paragraph (6)--
(A) by amending the paragraph heading to read as follows:
``(6) Related and coordinated
activities.--'';
(B) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(C) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end
and inserting ``; and''; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
``(D) coordinated or referred activities to--
``(i) enhance the clinical impact of HIV/AIDS care and
treatment; and
``(ii) ameliorate the adverse social and economic costs
often affecting AIDS-impacted families and communities
through the direct provision, as necessary, or through the
referral, if possible, of support services, including--
``(I) nutritional and food support;
``(II) nutritional counseling;
``(III) income-generating activities and livelihood
initiatives;
``(IV) maternal and child health care;
``(V) primary health care;
``(VI) the diagnosis and treatment of other infectious or
sexually transmitted diseases;
``(VII) substance abuse and treatment services; and
``(VIII) legal services;
``(E) coordinated or referred activities to link programs
addressing HIV/AIDS with programs addressing gender-based
violence in areas of significant HIV prevalence to assist
countries in the development and enforcement of women's
health, children's health, and HIV/AIDS laws and policies
that--
``(i) prevent and respond to violence against women and
girls;
``(ii) promote the integration of screening and assessment
for gender-based violence into HIV/AIDS programming;
``(iii) promote appropriate HIV/AIDS counseling, testing,
and treatment into gender-based violence programs; and
``(iv) assist governments to develop partnerships with
civil society organizations to create networks for
psychosocial, legal, economic, or other support services;
``(F) coordinated or referred activities to--
``(i) address the frequent coinfection of HIV and
tuberculosis, in accordance with World Health Organization
guidelines;
``(ii) promote provider-initiated or `opt-out' HIV/AIDS
counseling and testing and appropriate referral for treatment
and care to individuals with tuberculosis or its symptoms,
particularly in areas with significant HIV prevalence; and
``(iii) strengthen programs to ensure that individuals
testing positive for HIV receive tuberculosis screening and
appropriate screening and to improve laboratory capacities,
infection control, and adherence; and
``(G) activities to--
``(i) improve the effectiveness of national responses to
HIV/AIDS; and
``(ii) strengthen overall health systems in high-prevalence
countries, including support for workforce training,
retention, and effective deployment, capacity building,
laboratory development, equipment maintenance and repair, and
public health and related public financial management systems
and operations.''; and
(6) by adding at the end the following:
``(8) Compacts and framework agreements.--The development
of compacts or framework agreements, tailored to local
circumstances, with national governments or regional
partnerships in countries with significant HIV/AIDS burdens
to promote host government commitment to deeper integration
of HIV/AIDS services into health systems, contribute to
health systems overall, and enhance sustainability.''.
(d) Compacts and Framework Agreements.--Section 104A of
such Act is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (e) through (g) as
subsections (f) through (h); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (d) the following:
[[Page 14757]]
``(e) Compacts and Framework Agreements.--
``(1) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
``(A) The congressionally mandated Institute of Medicine
report entitled `PEPFAR Implementation: Progress and Promise'
states: `The next strategy [of the U.S. Global AIDS
Initiative] should squarely address the needs and challenges
involved in supporting sustainable country HIV/AIDS programs,
thereby transitioning from a focus on emergency relief.'.
``(B) One mechanism to promote the transition from an
emergency to a public health and development approach to HIV/
AIDS is through compacts or framework agreements between the
United States Government and each participating nation.
``(C) Key components of a transition toward a more
sustainable approach toward fighting HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis,
and malaria and thus priorities for such compacts include--
``(i) building capacity to expand the size of the trained
health care workforce in partner countries and improve its
retention, safety, deployment, and utilization of skills and
to improve public health infrastructure and systems;
``(ii) partner governments increasing their national
investments in health and education systems, as called for in
the Abuja Declaration;
``(iii) increasing the focus of United States government
efforts to address the factors that put women and girls at
greater risk of HIV/AIDS and to strengthen the legal,
economic, educational, and social status of women, girls,
orphans, and vulnerable children and encouraging partner
governments to do the same;
``(iv) building on the New Partners Initiative and other
efforts currently underway to strengthen the capacities of
community- and faith-based organizations and civil society in
partner countries to contribute to country efforts to prevent
or manage the effects of HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria
epidemics and to improve health care delivery;
``(v) improving the coordination of efforts to combat HIV/
AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria with broader national health
and development strategies;
``(vi) promoting HIV/AIDS-related laws, regulations, and
policies that support voluntary diagnostic counseling and
rapid testing, pediatric diagnosis, rapid, tariff-free
regulatory procedures for drugs and commodities, and full
inclusion of people living with HIV/AIDS in a multisectoral
national response.
``(vii) sharing and implementing findings based on program
evaluations and operations research; and
``(viii) reducing the disease burden of HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria through improved prevention
efforts.
``(D) Such compacts should also take into account the
overall national health and development and national HIV/AIDS
and public health strategies of each country and should
contain provisions including--
``(i) the specific objectives that the country and the
United States expect to achieve during the term of a compact;
``(ii) the respective responsibilities of the country and
the United States in the achievement of such objectives;
``(iii) regular benchmarks to measure, where appropriate,
progress toward achieving such objectives;
``(iv) an identification of the intended beneficiaries,
disaggregated by gender and age, and including information on
orphans and vulnerable children, to the maximum extent
practicable;
``(v) the methods by which the compact is intended to
address the factors that put women and girls at greater risk
of HIV/AIDS and to strengthen the legal, economic,
educational, and social status of women, girls, orphans, and
vulnerable children;
``(vi) the methods by which the compact will strengthen the
health care capacity, including the training, retention,
deployment, and utilization of health care workers, improve
supply chain management, and improve the health systems and
infrastructure of the partner country, including the ability
of compact participants to maintain and operate equipment
transferred or purchased as part of the compact;
``(vii) proposed mechanisms to provide oversight;
``(viii) the role of civil society in the development of a
compact and the achievement of its objectives;
``(ix) a description of the current and potential
participation of other donors in the achievement of such
objectives, as appropriate; and
``(x) a plan to ensure appropriate fiscal accountability
for the use of assistance.
``(2) Local input.--In entering into a compact authorized
under subsection (d)(8), the Coordinator of United States
Government Activities to Combat HIV/AIDS Globally shall seek
to ensure that the government of a country--
``(A) takes into account the local perspectives of the
rural and urban poor, including women, in each country; and
``(B) consults with private and voluntary organizations,
including faith-based organizations, the business community,
and other donors in the country.
``(3) Congressional and public notification after entering
into a compact.--Not later than 10 days after entering into a
compact authorized under subsection (d)(8), the Global AIDS
Coordinator shall--
``(A) submit a report containing a detailed summary of the
compact and a copy of the text of the compact to--
``(i) the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate;
``(ii) the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate;
``(iii) the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of
Representatives; and
``(iv) the Committee on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives; and
``(B) publish such information in the Federal Register and
on the Internet website of the Office of the Global AIDS
Coordinator.''.
(e) Annual Report.--Section 104A(f) of such Act, as
redesignated, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``Committee on
International Relations'' and inserting ``Committee on
Foreign Affairs''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting the
following:
``(C) a detailed breakdown of funding allocations, by
program and by country, for prevention activities; and
``(D) a detailed assessment of the impact of programs
established pursuant to such sections, including--
``(i)(I) the effectiveness of such programs in reducing--
``(aa) the transmission of HIV, particularly in women and
girls;
``(bb) mother-to-child transmission of HIV, including
through drug treatment and therapies, either directly or by
referral; and
``(cc) mortality rates from HIV/AIDS;
``(II) the number of patients receiving treatment for AIDS
in each country that receives assistance under this Act;
``(III) an assessment of progress towards the achievement
of annual goals set forth in the timetable required under the
5-year strategy established under section 101 of the United
States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria
Act of 2003 and, if annual goals are not being met, the
reasons for such failure; and
``(IV) retention and attrition data for programs receiving
United States assistance, including mortality and loss to
follow-up rates, organized overall and by country;
``(ii) the progress made toward--
``(I) improving health care delivery systems (including the
training of health care workers, including doctors, nurses,
midwives, pharmacists, laboratory technicians, and
compensated community health workers);
``(II) advancing safe working conditions for health care
workers; and
``(III) improving infrastructure to promote progress toward
universal access to HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, and care
by 2013;
``(iii) with respect to tuberculosis--
``(I) the increase in the number of people treated and the
number of tuberculosis patients cured through each program,
project, or activity receiving United States foreign
assistance for tuberculosis control purposes through, or in
coordination with, HIV/AIDS programs;
``(II) a description of drug resistance rates among persons
treated;
``(III) the percentage of such United States foreign
assistance provided for diagnosis and treatment of
individuals with tuberculosis in countries with the highest
burden of tuberculosis, as determined by the World Health
Organization; and
``(IV) a detailed description of efforts to integrate HIV/
AIDS and tuberculosis prevention, treatment, and care
programs; and
``(iv) a description of coordination efforts with relevant
executive branch agencies to link HIV/AIDS clinical and
social services with non-HIV/AIDS services as part of the
United States health and development agenda;
``(v) a detailed description of integrated HIV/AIDS and
food and nutrition programs and services, including--
``(I) the amount spent on food and nutrition support;
``(II) the types of activities supported; and
``(III) an assessment of the effectiveness of interventions
carried out to improve the health status of persons with HIV/
AIDS receiving food or nutritional support;
``(vi) a description of efforts to improve harmonization,
in terms of relevant executive branch agencies, coordination
with other public and private entities, and coordination with
partner countries' national strategic plans as called for in
the `Three Ones';
``(vii) a description of--
``(I) the efforts of partner countries that were
signatories to the Abuja Declaration on HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis and Other Related Infectious Diseases to adhere
to the goals of such Declaration in terms of investments in
public health, including HIV/AIDS; and
``(II) a description of the HIV/AIDS investments of partner
countries that were not signatories to such Declaration;
``(viii) a detailed description of any compacts or
framework agreements reached or negotiated between the United
States and any partner countries, including a description of
the elements of compacts described in subsection (e);
``(ix) a description of programs serving women and girls,
including--
``(I) HIV/AIDS prevention programs that address the
vulnerabilities of girls and women to HIV/AIDS;
``(II) information on the number of individuals served by
programs aimed at reducing the vulnerabilities of women and
girls to HIV/AIDS and data on the types, objectives, and
duration of programs to address these issues;
``(III) information on programs to address the particular
needs of adolescent girls and young women; and
[[Page 14758]]
``(IV) programs to prevent gender-based violence or to
assist victims of gender based violence as part, of or in
coordination with, HIV/AIDS programs;
``(x) a description of strategies, goals, programs, and
interventions to--
``(I) address the needs and vulnerabilities of youth
populations;
``(II) expand access among young men and women to evidence-
based HIV/AIDS health care services and HIV prevention
programs, including abstinence education programs; and
``(III) expand community-based services to meet the needs
of orphans and of children and adolescents affected by or
vulnerable to HIV/AIDS without increasing stigmatization;
``(xi) a description of--
``(I) the specific strategies funded to ensure the
reduction of HIV infection among injection drug users;
``(II) the number of injection drug users, by country,
reached by such strategies;
``(III) medication-assisted drug treatment for individuals
with HIV or at risk of HIV; and
``(IV) HIV prevention programs demonstrated to be effective
in reducing HIV transmission without increasing drug use;
``(xii) a detailed description of program monitoring,
operations research, and impact evaluation research,
including--
``(I) the amount of funding provided for each research
type;
``(II) an analysis of cost-effectiveness models; and
``(III) conclusions regarding the efficiency,
effectiveness, and quality of services as derived from
previous or ongoing research and monitoring efforts; and
``(xiii) a description of staffing levels of United States
government HIV/AIDS teams in countries with significant HIV/
AIDS programs, including whether or not a full-time
coordinator was on staff for the year.''.
(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 301(b) of the
United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7631(b)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``fiscal years 2004
through 2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through
2013''; and
(2) in paragraph (3), by striking ``fiscal years 2004
through 2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through
2013''.
(g) Relationship To Assistance Programs To Enhance
Nutrition.--Section 301(c) of such Act is amended to read as
follows:
``(c) Food and Nutritional Support.--
``(1) In general.--As indicated in the report produced by
the Institute of Medicine, entitled `PEPFAR Implementation:
Progress and Promise', inadequate caloric intake has been
clearly identified as a principal reason for failure of
clinical response to antiretroviral therapy. In recognition
of the impact of malnutrition as a clinical health issue for
many persons living with HIV/AIDS that is often associated
with health and economic impacts on these individuals and
their families, the Global AIDS Coordinator and the
Administrator of the United States Agency for International
Development shall--
``(A) follow World Health Organization guidelines for HIV/
AIDS food and nutrition services;
``(B) integrate nutrition programs with HIV/AIDS activities
through effective linkages among the health, agricultural,
and livelihood sectors and establish additional services in
circumstances in which referrals are inadequate or
impossible;
``(C) provide, as a component of care and treatment
programs for persons with HIV/AIDS, food and nutritional
support to individuals infected with, and affected by, HIV/
AIDS who meet established criteria for nutritional support
(including clinically malnourished children and adults, and
pregnant and lactating women in programs in need of
supplemental support), including--
``(i) anthropometric and dietary assessment;
``(ii) counseling; and
``(iii) therapeutic and supplementary feeding;
``(D) provide food and nutritional support for children
affected by HIV/AIDS and to communities and households caring
for children affected by HIV/AIDS; and
``(E) in communities where HIV/AIDS and food insecurity are
highly prevalent, support programs to address these often
intersecting health problems through community-based
assistance programs, with an emphasis on sustainable
approaches.
``(2) Authorization of appropriations.--Of the amounts
authorized to be appropriated under section 401, there are
authorized to be appropriated to the President such sums as
may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2009 through
2013 to carry out this subsection.''.
(h) Eligibility for Assistance.--Section 301(d) of such Act
is amended to read as follows:
``(d) Eligibility for Assistance.--An organization,
including a faith-based organization, that is otherwise
eligible to receive assistance under section 104A of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, under this Act, or under any
amendment made by this Act or by the Tom Lantos and Henry J.
Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008, to
prevent, treat, or monitor HIV/AIDS--
``(1) shall not be required, as a condition of receiving
such assistance--
``(A) to endorse or utilize a multisectoral or
comprehensive approach to combating HIV/AIDS; or
``(B) to endorse, utilize, make a referral to, become
integrated with, or otherwise participate in any program or
activity to which the organization has a religious or moral
objection; and
``(2) shall not be discriminated against in the
solicitation or issuance of grants, contracts, or cooperative
agreements under such provisions of law for refusing to meet
any requirement described in paragraph (1).''.
SEC. 302. ASSISTANCE TO COMBAT TUBERCULOSIS.
(a) Policy.--Section 104B(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act
of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151b-3(b)) is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Policy.--It is a major objective of the foreign
assistance program of the United States to control
tuberculosis. In all countries in which the Government of the
United States has established development programs,
particularly in countries with the highest burden of
tuberculosis and other countries with high rates of
tuberculosis, the United States Government should prioritize
the achievement of the following goals by not later than
December 31, 2015:
``(1) Reduce by half the tuberculosis death and disease
burden from the 1990 baseline.
``(2) Sustain or exceed the detection of at least 70
percent of sputum smear-positive cases of tuberculosis and
the cure of at least 85 percent of those cases detected.''.
(b) Priority To Stop TB Strategy.--Section 104B(e) of such
Act is amended to read as follows:
``(e) Priority To Stop TB Strategy.--In furnishing
assistance under subsection (c), the President shall give
priority to--
``(1) activities described in the Stop TB Strategy,
including expansion and enhancement of Directly Observed
Treatment Short-course (DOTS) coverage, rapid testing,
treatment for individuals infected with both tuberculosis and
HIV, and treatment for individuals with multi-drug resistant
tuberculosis (MDR-TB), strengthening of health systems, use
of the International Standards for Tuberculosis Care by all
providers, empowering individuals with tuberculosis, and
enabling and promoting research to develop new diagnostics,
drugs, and vaccines, and program-based operational research
relating to tuberculosis; and
``(2) funding for the Global Tuberculosis Drug Facility,
the Stop Tuberculosis Partnership, and the Global Alliance
for TB Drug Development.''.
(c) Assistance for the World Health Organization and the
Stop Tuberculosis Partnership.--Section 104B of such Act is
amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (f) as subsection (g); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (e) the following:
``(f) Assistance for the World Health Organization and the
Stop Tuberculosis Partnership.--In carrying out this section,
the President, acting through the Administrator of the United
States Agency for International Development, is authorized to
provide increased resources to the World Health Organization
and the Stop Tuberculosis Partnership to improve the capacity
of countries with high rates of tuberculosis and other
affected countries to implement the Stop TB Strategy and
specific strategies related to addressing multiple drug
resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) and extensively drug
resistant tuberculosis (XDR-TB).''.
(d) Definitions.--Section 104B(g) of such Act, as
redesignated, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking the period at the end and
inserting the following: ``including--
``(A) low-cost and effective diagnosis, treatment, and
monitoring of tuberculosis;
``(B) a reliable drug supply;
``(C) a management strategy for public health systems;
``(D) health system strengthening;
``(E) promotion of the use of the International Standards
for Tuberculosis Care by all care providers;
``(F) bacteriology under an external quality assessment
framework;
``(G) short-course chemotherapy; and
``(H) sound reporting and recording systems.''; and
(2) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (6); and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (4) the following:
``(5) Stop tb strategy.--The term `Stop TB Strategy' means
the 6-point strategy to reduce tuberculosis developed by the
World Health Organization, which is described in the Global
Plan to Stop TB 2006-2015: Actions for Life, a comprehensive
plan developed by the Stop TB Partnership that sets out the
actions necessary to achieve the millennium development goal
of cutting tuberculosis deaths and disease burden in half by
2015.''.
(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 302 (b) of
the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis,
and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7632(b)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``such sums as may be
necessary for each of the fiscal years 2004 through 2008''
and inserting ``a total of $4,000,000,000 for the 5-year
period beginning on October 1, 2008.''; and
(2) in paragraph (3), by striking ``fiscal years 2004
through 2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through
2013.''.
SEC. 303. ASSISTANCE TO COMBAT MALARIA.
(a) Amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.--
Section 104C(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22
U.S.C. 2151-4(b)) is amended by inserting ``treatment,''
after ``control,''.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 303 of the
United States Leadership Against
[[Page 14759]]
HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003, and Malaria
Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7633) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``such sums as may be
necessary for fiscal years 2004 through 2008'' and inserting
``$5,000,000,000 during the 5-year period beginning on
October 1, 2008''; and
(B) in paragraph (3), by striking ``fiscal years 2004
through 2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through
2013''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(c) Statement of Policy.--Providing assistance for the
prevention, control, treatment, and the ultimate eradication
of malaria is--
``(1) a major objective of the foreign assistance program
of the United States; and
``(2) 1 component of a comprehensive United States global
health strategy to reduce disease burdens and strengthen
communities around the world.
``(d) Development of a Comprehensive 5-Year Strategy.--The
President shall establish a comprehensive, 5-year strategy to
combat global malaria that--
``(1) strengthens the capacity of the United States to be
an effective leader of international efforts to reduce
malaria burden;
``(2) maintains sufficient flexibility and remains
responsive to the ever-changing nature of the global malaria
challenge;
``(3) includes specific objectives and multisectoral
approaches and strategies to reduce the prevalence,
mortality, incidence, and spread of malaria;
``(4) describes how this strategy would contribute to the
United States' overall global health and development goals;
``(5) clearly explains how outlined activities will
interact with other United States Government global health
activities, including the 5-year global AIDS strategy
required under this Act;
``(6) expands public-private partnerships and leverage of
resources;
``(7) coordinates among relevant Federal agencies to
maximize human and financial resources and to reduce
duplication among these agencies, foreign governments, and
international organizations;
``(8) coordinates with other international entities,
including the Global Fund;
``(9) maximizes United States capabilities in the areas of
technical assistance and training and research, including
vaccine research; and
``(10) establishes priorities and selection criteria for
the distribution of resources based on factors such as--
``(A) the size and demographics of the population with
malaria;
``(B) the needs of that population;
``(C) the country's existing infrastructure; and
``(D) the ability to closely coordinate United States
Government efforts with national malaria control plans of
partner countries.''.
SEC. 304. MALARIA RESPONSE COORDINATOR.
Section 304 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7634)
is amended to read as follows:
``SEC. 304. MALARIA RESPONSE COORDINATOR.
``(a) In General.--There is established within the United
States Agency for International Development a Coordinator of
United States Government Activities to Combat Malaria
Globally (referred to in this section as the `Malaria
Coordinator'), who shall be appointed by the President.
``(b) Authorities.--The Malaria Coordinator, acting through
nongovernmental organizations (including faith-based and
community-based organizations), partner country finance,
health, and other relevant ministries, and relevant executive
branch agencies as may be necessary and appropriate to carry
out this section, is authorized to--
``(1) operate internationally to carry out prevention,
care, treatment, support, capacity development, and other
activities to reduce the prevalence, mortality, and incidence
of malaria;
``(2) provide grants to, and enter into contracts and
cooperative agreements with, nongovernmental organizations
(including faith-based organizations) to carry out this
section; and
``(3) transfer and allocate executive branch agency funds
that have been appropriated for the purposes described in
paragraphs (1) and (2).
``(c) Duties.--
``(1) In general.--The Malaria Coordinator has primary
responsibility for the oversight and coordination of all
resources and international activities of the United States
Government relating to efforts to combat malaria.
``(2) Specific duties.--The Malaria Coordinator shall--
``(A) facilitate program and policy coordination of
antimalaria efforts among relevant executive branch agencies
and nongovernmental organizations by auditing, monitoring,
and evaluating such programs;
``(B) ensure that each relevant executive branch agency
undertakes antimalarial programs primarily in those areas in
which the agency has the greatest expertise, technical
capability, and potential for success;
``(C) coordinate relevant executive branch agency
activities in the field of malaria prevention and treatment;
``(D) coordinate planning, implementation, and evaluation
with the Global AIDS Coordinator in countries in which both
programs have a significant presence;
``(E) coordinate with national governments, international
agencies, civil society, and the private sector; and
``(F) establish due diligence criteria for all recipients
of funds appropriated by the Federal Government for malaria
assistance.
``(d) Assistance for the World Health Organization.--In
carrying out this section, the President may provide
financial assistance to the Roll Back Malaria Partnership of
the World Health Organization to improve the capacity of
countries with high rates of malaria and other affected
countries to implement comprehensive malaria control
programs.
``(e) Coordination of Assistance Efforts.--In carrying out
this section and in accordance with section 104C of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151b-4), the
Malaria Coordinator shall coordinate the provision of
assistance by working with--
``(1) relevant executive branch agencies, including--
``(A) the Department of State (including the Office of the
Global AIDS Coordinator);
``(B) the Department of Health and Human Services;
``(C) the Department of Defense; and
``(D) the Office of the United States Trade Representative;
``(2) relevant multilateral institutions, including--
``(A) the World Health Organization;
``(B) the United Nations Children's Fund;
``(C) the United Nations Development Programme;
``(D) the Global Fund;
``(E) the World Bank; and
``(F) the Roll Back Malaria Partnership;
``(3) program delivery and efforts to lift barriers that
would impede effective and comprehensive malaria control
programs; and
``(4) partner or recipient country governments and national
entities including universities and civil society
organizations (including faith- and community-based
organizations).
``(f) Research.--To carry out this section and in
accordance with section 104C of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961 (22 U.S.C. 1151d-4), the Secretary of Health and Human
Services, through the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention and the National Institutes of Health, shall
conduct appropriate programmatically relevant clinical and
operational research to identify and evaluate new
diagnostics, treatment regimens, and interventions to prevent
and control malaria.
``(g) Monitoring.--To ensure that adequate malaria controls
are established and implemented, the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention shall carry out appropriate
surveillance and evaluation activities to monitor global
malaria trends and assess environmental and health impacts of
malarial control efforts. Such activities shall complement
the work of the World Health Organization, rather than
duplicate such work.
``(h) Annual Report.--
``(1) Submission.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
the enactment of the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United
States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008, and annually thereafter,
the President shall submit a report to the appropriate
congressional committees that describes United States
assistance for the prevention, treatment, control, and
elimination of malaria.
``(2) Contents.--The report required under paragraph (1)
shall describe--
``(A) the countries and activities to which malaria
resources have been allocated;
``(B) the number of people reached through malaria
assistance programs, including data on children and pregnant
women;
``(C) research efforts to develop new tools to combat
malaria, including drugs and vaccines;
``(D) the collaboration and coordination of United States
antimalarial efforts with the World Health Organization, the
Global Fund, the World Bank, other donor governments, major
private efforts, and relevant executive agencies;
``(E) the coordination of United States antimalarial
efforts with the national malarial strategies of other donor
or partner governments and major private initiatives;
``(F) the estimated impact of United States assistance on
childhood mortality and morbidity from malaria;
``(G) the coordination of antimalarial efforts with broader
health and development programs; and
``(H) the constraints on implementation of programs posed
by health workforce shortages or capacities; and
``(I) the number of personnel trained as health workers and
the training levels achieved.''.
SEC. 305. AMENDMENT TO IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT.
Section 212(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(1)(A)(i)) is amended by striking ``,
which shall include infection with the etiologic agent for
acquired immune deficiency syndrome,'' and inserting a
semicolon.
SEC. 306. CLERICAL AMENDMENT.
Title III of the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7631 et
seq.) is amended by striking the heading for subtitle B and
inserting the following:
``Subtitle B--Assistance for Women, Children, and Families''.
SEC. 307. REQUIREMENTS.
Section 312(b) of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria
[[Page 14760]]
Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7652(b)) is amended by striking
paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) and inserting the following:
``(1) establish a target for the prevention and treatment
of mother-to-child transmission of HIV that, by 2013, will
reach at least 80 percent of pregnant women in those
countries most affected by HIV/AIDS in which the United
States has HIV/AIDS programs;
``(2) establish a target that, by 2013, the proportion of
children receiving care and treatment under this Act is
proportionate to their numbers within the population of HIV
infected individuals in each country;
``(3) integrate care and treatment with prevention of
mother-to-child transmission of HIV programs to improve
outcomes for HIV-affected women and families as soon as is
feasible and support strategies that promote successful
follow-up and continuity of care of mother and child;
``(4) expand programs designed to care for children
orphaned by, affected by, or vulnerable to HIV/AIDS;
``(5) ensure that women in prevention of mother-to-child
transmission of HIV programs are provided with, or referred
to, appropriate maternal and child services; and
``(6) develop a timeline for expanding access to more
effective regimes to prevent mother-to-child transmission of
HIV, consistent with the national policies of countries in
which programs are administered under this Act and the goal
of achieving universal use of such regimes as soon as
possible.''.
SEC. 308. ANNUAL REPORT ON PREVENTION OF MOTHER-TO-CHILD
TRANSMISSION OF HIV.
Section 313(a) of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C.
7653(a)) is amended by striking ``5 years'' and inserting
``10 years''.
SEC. 309. PREVENTION OF MOTHER-TO-CHILD TRANSMISSION EXPERT
PANEL.
Section 312 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7652)
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(c) Prevention of Mother-to-Child Transmission Expert
Panel.--
``(1) Establishment.--The Global AIDS Coordinator shall
establish a panel of experts to be known as the Prevention of
Mother-to-Child Transmission Panel (referred to in this
subsection as the `Panel') to--
``(A) provide an objective review of activities to prevent
mother-to-child transmission of HIV; and
``(B) provide recommendations to the Global AIDS
Coordinator and to the appropriate committees of Congress for
scale-up of mother-to-child transmission prevention services
under this Act in order to achieve the target established in
subsection (b)(1).
``(2) Membership.--The Panel shall be convened and chaired
by the Global AIDS Coordinator, who shall serve as a
nonvoting member. The Panel shall consist of not more than 15
members (excluding the Global AIDS Coordinator), to be
appointed by the Global AIDS Coordinator not later than 1
year after the date of the enactment of this Act, including--
``(A) 2 members from the Department of Health and Human
Services with expertise relating to the prevention of mother-
to-child transmission activities;
``(B) 2 members from the United States Agency for
International Development with expertise relating to the
prevention of mother-to-child transmission activities;
``(C) 2 representatives from among health ministers of
national governments of foreign countries in which programs
under this Act are administered;
``(D) 3 members representing organizations implementing
prevention of mother-to-child transmission activities under
this Act;
``(E) 2 health care researchers with expertise relating to
global HIV/AIDS activities; and
``(F) representatives from among patient advocate groups,
health care professionals, persons living with HIV/AIDS, and
non-governmental organizations with expertise relating to the
prevention of mother-to-child transmission activities, giving
priority to individuals in foreign countries in which
programs under this Act are administered.
``(3) Duties of panel.--The Panel shall--
``(A) assess the effectiveness of current activities in
reaching the target described in subsection (b)(1);
``(B) review scientific evidence related to the provision
of mother-to-child transmission prevention services,
including programmatic data and data from clinical trials;
``(C) review and assess ways in which the Office of the
United States Global AIDS Coordinator collaborates with
international and multilateral entities on efforts to prevent
mother-to-child transmission of HIV in affected countries;
``(D) identify barriers and challenges to increasing access
to mother-to-child transmission prevention services and
evaluate potential mechanisms to alleviate those barriers and
challenges;
``(E) identify the extent to which stigma has hindered
pregnant women from obtaining HIV counseling and testing or
returning for results, and provide recommendations to address
such stigma and its effects;
``(F) identify opportunities to improve linkages between
mother-to-child transmission prevention services and care and
treatment programs; and
``(G) recommend specific activities to facilitate reaching
the target described in subsection (b)(1).
``(4) Report.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date on
which the Panel is first convened, the Panel shall submit a
report containing a detailed statement of the
recommendations, findings, and conclusions of the Panel to
the appropriate congressional committees.
``(B) Availability.--The report submitted under
subparagraph (A) shall be made available to the public.
``(C) Consideration by coordinator.--The Coordinator
shall--
``(i) consider any recommendations contained in the report
submitted under subparagraph (A); and
``(ii) include in the annual report required under section
104A(f) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 a description
of the activities conducted in response to the
recommendations made by the Panel and an explanation of any
recommendations not implemented at the time of the report.
``(5) Authorization of appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to the Panel such sums as may
be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2009 through 2011
to carry out this section.
``(6) Termination.--The Panel shall terminate on the date
that is 60 days after the date on which the Panel submits the
report to the appropriate congressional committees under
paragraph (4).''.
TITLE IV--FUNDING ALLOCATIONS
SEC. 401. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) In General.--Section 401(a) of the United States
Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of
2003 (22 U.S.C. 7671(a)) is amended by striking
``$3,000,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2004 through
2008'' and inserting ``$50,000,000,000 for the 5-year period
beginning on October 1, 2008''.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress
that the appropriations authorized under section 401(a) of
the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis,
and Malaria Act of 2003, as amended by subsection (a), should
be allocated among fiscal years 2009 through 2013 in a manner
that allows for the appropriations to be gradually increased
in a manner that is consistent with program requirements,
absorptive capacity, and priorities set forth in such Act, as
amended by this Act.
SEC. 402. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
Section 402(b) of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C.
7672(b)) is amended by striking ``an effective distribution
of such amounts would be'' and all that follows through ``10
percent of such amounts'' and inserting ``10 percent should
be used''.
SEC. 403. ALLOCATION OF FUNDS.
Section 403 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7673)
is amended--
(1) by amending subsection (a) to read as follows:
``(a) Balanced Funding Requirement.--
``(1) In general.--The Global AIDS Coordinator shall--
``(A) provide balanced funding for prevention activities
for sexual transmission of HIV/AIDS; and
``(B) ensure that behavioral change programs, including
abstinence, delay of sexual debut, monogamy, fidelity, and
partner reduction, are implemented and funded in a meaningful
and equitable way in the strategy for each host country based
on objective epidemiological evidence as to the source of
infections and in consultation with the government of each
host county involved in HIV/AIDS prevention activities.
``(2) Prevention strategy.--
``(A) Establishment.--In carrying out paragraph (1), the
Global AIDS Coordinator shall establish a HIV sexual
transmission prevention strategy governing the expenditure of
funds authorized under this Act to prevent the sexual
transmission of HIV in any host country with a generalized
epidemic.
``(B) Report.--In each host country described in
subparagraph (A), if the strategy established under
subparagraph (A) provides less than 50 percent of the funds
described in subparagraph (A) for behavioral change programs,
including abstinence, delay of sexual debut, monogamy,
fidelity, and partner reduction, the Global AIDS Coordinator
shall, not later than 30 days after the issuance of this
strategy, report to the appropriate congressional committees
on the justification for this decision.
``(3) Exclusion.--Programs and activities that implement or
purchase new prevention technologies or modalities, such as
medical male circumcision, pre-exposure pharmaceutical
prophylaxis to prevent transmission of HIV, or microbicides
and programs and activities that provide counseling and
testing for HIV or prevent mother-to-child prevention of HIV,
shall not be included in determining compliance with
paragraph (2).
``(4) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States
Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria
Reauthorization Act of 2008, and annually thereafter as part
of the annual report required under section 104A(e) of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151b-2(e)), the
President shall--
``(A) submit a report on the implementation of paragraph
(2) for the most recently concluded fiscal year to the
appropriate congressional committees; and
``(B) make the report described in subparagraph (A)
available to the public.''; and
[[Page 14761]]
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking ``fiscal years 2006 through 2008'' and
inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through 2013''; and
(B) by striking ``vulnerable children affected by'' and
inserting ``other children affected by, or vulnerable to,''.
Unanimous-Consent request--S. 3186
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent that upon
disposition of S. 2731/H.R. 5501, the global AIDS legislation, the
Senate then proceed to Calendar No. 835, S. 3186, which is a bill to
provide for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, reserving the right to object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indiana.
Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I have asked the leader for clarification
of the situation. My understanding is that, as things stood, we would
be automatically moving on to discussion of PEPFAR. I appreciate the
anxiety of the leader with regard to the situation, but, at the same
time, from our standpoint on this side of the aisle, I have been
advised we would need to object to that simply because the agreement
our Members feel they have realized would be that we would move to
PEPFAR today and have the debates on PEPFAR, as opposed to additional
material.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I would say to my friend that is absolutely
what we are going to do. The only way we would not do that is if you
object to it. I have explained in more detail than probably everyone
wants to hear, but we have a situation now, procedurally in the Senate,
where there is a spot open. It has nothing to do with PEPFAR. It is
separate and apart from PEPFAR. There is an empty spot there that
anyone can walk in here--any Senator can walk in here--and move to
anything we have on the calendar. By doing that, of course, they could
also accompany that with a cloture motion, and that is what we would be
on. That would take away from what the President wants and, I would
say, 90 Senators want. So I am not trying to take advantage of anyone.
No one loses anything, nothing, other than the ability to sucker punch
the entire Senate.
So I would say to my friend, the distinguished Senator from Indiana,
if we are on this matter here, I would be happy to--and no harm can be
done. If people do not want us to move to that, I could not do it. I
could not do it anyway. I would have to have 60 Senators to agree to
that. This is simply an effort to allow us to complete PEPFAR--without
using the term too many times; this is the third time I have used it--
without the entire Senate being sucker punched.
Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
MORNING BUSINESS
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that we now proceed
to a period of morning business, that Senator Lugar be recognized to
speak for up to one-half hour, and that following his speech, I be
recognized.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the majority leader's
previous request?
Mr. LUGAR. I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
Is there objection to the majority leader's pending request?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I further ask unanimous consent that if and
when we get on the PEPFAR legislation, the distinguished Senator from
Indiana be recognized for an opening statement on the bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from Indiana is recognized.
____________________
PEPFAR
Mr. LUGAR. I thank the leader.
I rise today in support of S. 2731, the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde
United States Global Leadership Act Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria. I thank Chairman Joe Biden for working with me and other
Republicans to achieve a bipartisan approach for the reauthorization of
our Nation's program to combat these diseases. I believe we will have
an excellent bill before us that will preserve the best aspects of the
President's Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief--PEPFAR--and expand the
efforts of the United States to stem the tide of AIDS, tuberculosis,
and malaria worldwide.
The HIV/AIDS pandemic, coupled with the impact of tuberculosis and
malaria, is rending the socioeconomic fabric of communities, nations,
and an entire continent. The U.S. National Intelligence Council and
innumerable top officials, including President Bush, have stated the
HIV/AIDS pandemic is a threat to national and international security.
Communities are being hobbled by the disability and the loss of
consumers and workers at the peak of their productive, reproductive,
and care-giving years. In the most heavily affected areas, communities
are losing a whole generation of parents, teachers, laborers, health
care workers, peacekeepers, and police.
United Nations projections indicate that by 2020, HIV/AIDS will have
depressed GDP by more than 20 percent in the hardest hit countries. The
World Bank recently warned that while the global economy is expected to
more than double over the next 25 years, Africa is at risk of being
left behind.
Many children who have lost parents to HIV/AIDS are left entirely on
their own, leading to an epidemic of orphan-headed households. When
they drop out of school to fend for themselves and their siblings, they
lose the potential for economic empowerment that an education can
provide. Alone and desperate, they sometimes resort to transactional
sex or prostitution to survive and risk becoming infected with HIV
themselves.
I believe that in addition to our own national security concerns, we
have a humanitarian duty to take action. Five years ago, HIV was a
death sentence for most individuals in the developing world who
contracted that disease. Now there is hope. We should never forget that
behind each number is a person--a human being--a life the United States
can touch or even save.
PEPFAR has provided treatment to an estimated 1.4 million men, women,
and children infected with HIV/AIDS in Africa and elsewhere. Before the
program began, only 50,000 people in all of sub-Saharan Africa were
receiving lifesaving antiretroviral drugs. Today, three times that many
are being treated in Kenya alone. PEPFAR also has focused on prevention
programs, with the target of preventing 7 million new HIV infections.
As Americans, we should take pride in our Nation's efforts to combat
these diseases overseas.
We should understand that our investments in disease prevention
programs have yielded enormous foreign policy benefits during the last
5 years. PEPFAR has helped to prevent instability and societal collapse
in a number of at-risk countries; it has stimulated contributions from
other wealthy nations to fight AIDS; it has facilitated deep
partnerships with a generation of African leaders; and it has improved
attitudes toward the United States and Africa and other regions of the
world. In my judgment, the dollars spent on this program can be
justified purely on the basis of the humanitarian results we have
achieved, but the value of this investment clearly extends to our
national security and to our national reputation.
I wish to emphasize three points that should guide our deliberations.
First, it is important that Congress move now to reauthorize the
program. The authorization expires in 2\1/2\ months. Partner
governments and implementing organizations in the field have indicated
that without certainty of reauthorization of this bill, they may delay
expanding their programs to meet PEPFAR goals. Certainty of U.S. action
is an important matter of perception, delivering something similar to
[[Page 14762]]
consumer confidence to these nations. It may be intangible, but it will
profoundly affect the behavior of individuals, groups, and governments
engaged in the fight against HIV/AIDS. The continuity of our efforts to
combat aids, malaria, and tuberculosis, and the impact of our resources
on the commitments of the rest of the world will be maximized if we act
now.
Underscoring this point, last fall the Ministers of Health of the 12
African focus countries receiving PEPFAR assistance wrote to us saying:
Without an early and clear signal of the continuity of
PEPFAR's support, we are concerned that partners might not
move as quickly as possible to fill the resource gap that
might be created. Therefore, services will not reach all who
need them. . . . The momentum will be much greater in 2008 if
we know what to expect after 2008.
Secondly, our bill expands the flexibility of current law so that
U.S. efforts in each country can be tailored to its unique situation. I
have consulted extensively with American officials who are implementing
PEPFAR. Most believe that adding new restrictions to the law can limit
the flexibility of those charged with implementation in 2009 and
beyond. We don't know who that will be and, more importantly, we don't
know what the challenges of 2013 will be, although we can probably say
with confidence the landscape will be very different than it is today.
As the Institute of Medicine said, the Global Leadership Act is a
``learning organization.'' We should pass a bill that allows PEPFAR to
expand and evolve its program implementation, utilizing the experience
it has gained in its initial years of operation.
I understand some Members identify concerns or areas that they
believe deserve specific emphasis. As Senators study the record of
PEPFAR to date, I believe they will find that the vast majority of the
authorities needed for the next phase of our efforts already are in
existing legislation. This flexibility is preserved in the House bill
and in the bill before us today.
The one directive in the Leadership Act that I believe must be
maintained holds that 10 percent of funding be devoted to programs for
orphans and vulnerable children. There were few programs focused on the
needs of these children before the Leadership Act, and we remain in the
early stages of the effort to serve them. Before the advent of PEPFAR,
neither the United States nor anyone else had much experience in
programs that support children infected with or affected by HIV/AIDS.
After several years of effort, we have made some progress, but our
programs are not yet as firmly established as they can be.
The AIDS orphans crisis in sub-Saharan Africa has implications for
political stability, development, and human welfare that extend far
beyond that region. The American people strongly back this effort, and
the maintenance of this directive will help to ensure that we remain
attentive to those who need our support the most. The directive will
also help ensure the success of the Assistance for Orphans and Other
Vulnerable Children in Developing Countries Act of 2005, a bill I
drafted and which was cosponsored by 11 Senators. That bill was signed
into law on November 8, 2005.
The third point I would underscore is this is an authorization bill
subject to the annual budget and appropriations process. It is meant to
establish policy and the overall parameters of spending on the PEPFAR
program. The $50 billion figure is based on what we believe can be
spent efficiently and effectively in the years ahead. It presumes that
funding will gradually increase over the coming 5-year period. Of the
$50 billion authorized, $5 billion has been reserved for malaria and $4
billion has been reserved for tuberculosis.
I understand some Members would spend less than $50 billion, while
others would choose to spend more.
But this is a reasonable target that has emerged from good-faith
negotiations between Congress and the White House. I believe it will
maximize the humanitarian and foreign policy benefits of the PEPFAR
Program.
We have an opportunity this week to establish policy on a bipartisan
basis that will be a triumph for the United States of America. We have
the opportunity to save lives on a massive scale and preserve the
fabric of numerous fragile societies. I ask my colleagues to continue
to work together for this very important result.
I look forward to the passage of this important legislation.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida is recognized.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I
be allowed to speak for the remainder of the time on this side in
morning business.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from
Indiana for his and Senator Biden's leadership in getting this
legislation to the floor.
This Senator has just returned from Africa over the July 4th recess.
Four countries in southeastern Africa--Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, and
Rwanda--is where PEPFAR has been concentrated. Out of the $3 billion
that is being spent per year in Africa, for example, $500 million of
that goes just to the country of Kenya.
As the distinguished Senator from Indiana has said, it is very true
that the attitudes about the United States--as a result of us being out
there with this very effective program that is turning people's lives
around, which, in fact, is taking people who were nothing but skin and
bones and now being able to live a somewhat normal life, it has
increased the favorability toward the United States enormously all over
the continent. It has had a tremendous effect. For example, in Kampala,
Uganda, I visited a PEPFAR program. It was not only giving the
antiviral drugs--and these were to a lot of the children of the
refugees who live in this squalor you could not believe, but, in
addition, if their bodies won't take the drugs because they are
malnourished, there is a food program that goes along with it through
USAID. The combination of the two--a year ago in Ethiopia, the same
thing--by getting their little bodies up to where, nutritionally, they
can accept the HIV antiviral drugs, it has had a tremendous effect.
On this particular PEPFAR Program, there was much more--a school for
the children. The children wore uniforms. The children were learning
science, math, English, and all the studies that will give them some
opportunity for a fruitful and productive life. So now, as the
leadership of our Senate Foreign Relations Committee has come forth
with an extension and expansion of this program, it is absolutely
necessary that we pass it.
You cannot do any better than the good will--just think about the
globe and about where America may not be held in the highest of esteem.
But it is held in the highest esteem in Africa. It is in large part as
a result--
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask my friend to yield for a unanimous
consent request.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. I yield to the majority leader for that
purpose.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, it is my understanding that we had a half
hour under morning business. I told Senator Nelson he could use the
remaining approximately 10 minutes of that time and I would be
recognized thereafter. Is there any concern about that? Is that still
in effect?
Mr. President, it is no big deal. It might make it easier for
everybody. I will ask unanimous consent that I be recognized when
Senator Nelson finishes his statement.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is
so ordered.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I say to the majority leader, I
would have asked that, but this Senator thought that was locked in with
the previous unanimous consent. I thank the majority leader for the
opportunity.
Mr. President, the United States has benefited enormously because of
the good will. That is one thing. But when you see these folks who have
been bedeviled with this terrible, terrible infliction suddenly have a
chance for a normal life as a result of these lifegiving drugs, when
properly administered, along with the food programs
[[Page 14763]]
as well, indeed it is one of the least things we can do.
Is it not in the capacity of the United States to help the rest of
the world? Of course it is. Is it not within our ethos to want to help
the rest of the world? It certainly is. Just as a byproduct of that,
the people of Africa are recognizing the leadership that the United
States has taken. They are appreciative.
I must say that there was a part of this African trip that was very
disturbing to me, and that was the grave situation in Zimbabwe. That is
as a result of the disastrous regime of Robert Mugabe.
Last Friday, a bunch of us Senators had joined Senators Feingold and
Isakson, who are leaders on the African Affairs Subcommittee of the
Foreign Relations Committee, in introducing a resolution to rebuke
Robert Mugabe and support U.S. efforts at the United Nations to impose
tougher sanctions on the Mugabe regime. Although the U.S.-sponsored
resolution failed to overcome the vetoes of China and Russia--listen to
that: the vetoes of China and Russia--in the Security Council on
Friday--we kind of get an indication of where their attitude is about a
democratically elected government in Zimbabwe--it is critical for us to
continue to work with the U.N. and our African Union partners to help
bring about a political solution for the desperate people in Zimbabwe.
On this most recent trip, I didn't go to Zimbabwe. I wasn't welcome.
It was a striking survey of the governments that I saw in those four
countries, a new African leadership, strong economic growth, the rule
of law, political stability--what a contrast with the old ways of
dealing with people such as Mugabe, in a government that is marked with
autocracy, corruption, and the rule of law through the barrel of a gun.
Well, what is clearly in the interest of the people of Zimbabwe and the
rest of the world is stability in Zimbabwe. And it is important that we
continue to press forward.
In east Africa, the rule of law does have some new applications--for
example, the Government of Kenya. There, the whole place was being torn
apart because of a dispute in the December election. Finally, after
much violence and with as many as 5,000 deaths--if you can believe it--
because of the violence following the election, the business community,
the government community, and the two opposition parties came together
and said: We have to have a better way. They formed this unity
government. Thus far, it has worked. Let's see how it continues.
But in the aftermath of September 11, we know all too well how
instability and weak governance and corruption can sow the seeds of
radicalization and terrorism. Now, however destitute and downtrodden
the heroic people of Zimbabwe, however, those heroic people have risen
up against Mugabe's machine at the ballot box on March 29 and they cast
their votes overwhelmingly for Morgan Tsvangirai and his Movement for
Democratic Change. That opposition party won 48 percent of the vote
against 43 percent for Mugabe.
But then, of course, Mugabe initiated a reign of terror and
intimidation in the lead-up to this farce of a runoff election. His
state-sponsored violence against opposition members, against
supporters, against civilians, in an attempt to consolidate his power,
ultimately caused the opposition candidates to withdraw from the
election. He had to take refuge in the Dutch Embassy. This recent
runoff was declared neither credible nor fair by independent election
monitors. Mugabe was the only candidate left. He was declared the
winner.
Since the initial election back in March, the opposition party said
that 86 of its supporters have been killed and 200,000 of its
supporters forced from their homes by militias loyal to Mugabe's party.
If you will go back decades, Mugabe took over in a new country of
Zimbabwe when he had thrown off the colonial rule under the old
Rhodesia. Mugabe was looked upon as a freedom fighter and someone who
was going to bring a fresh break, a fresh government that was going to
be a democratic government. He has long been celebrated by his fellow
African leaders for his role as a liberation leader for Zimbabwe. In
recent years, Mugabe has too often been coddled as his failings have
come to light. Two weeks ago, unfortunately, the African Union allowed
him to take his seat as the head of state among the leaders in their
annual meeting that was in Sharm el-Sheikh.
Those African Union leaders were split over how to deal with Mugabe,
but they allowed him to be seated. Many leaders, including South
African President Mbeki, who serves as the South African Development
Community's designated mediator, have stood by as Mugabe has trampled
human rights, as he has silenced the press, as he has undermined the
rule of law, and he has run the once-thriving Zimbabwean economy into
the ground.
South Africa worked behind the scenes to sink the U.S.-sponsored
resolution on Zimbabwe at the U.N. last week. This is quite
distressing, given that South Africa is where it is today because of
the international sanctions to end apartheid.
So now because of these ruinous economic policies, Zimbabwe is the
world's fastest shrinking economy. It has a negative GDP of minus 6
percent. It has skyrocketing inflation. Zimbabwe's central bank stopped
posting inflation figures in January when inflation stood at,
unbelievably, over 100,000 percent. A loaf of bread cost 30 billion
Zimbabwean dollars--a loaf of bread.
The sinking economy and the government-orchestrated political
intimidation and murder has caused a massive refugee flight into the
neighboring countries. According to a recent report by Human Rights
Watch, there is now estimated to be 1.5 million Zimbabweans who have
fled across the border into South Africa.
The international community must honor the courage of the Zimbabwean
people and help them take back their country from the brink of ruin.
Recent reports show that a Chinese ship loaded with more than 1
million pounds of arms bound for Zimbabwe was eventually turned away by
the dock workers in Durban, South Africa, a reminder of the support
Mugabe continues to receive from around the world.
The United States is going to have to continue to work in the U.N.
and with the African Union to immediately call for Robert Mugabe to
step down and to push for a number of practical solutions for the
crisis in Zimbabwe.
First is an international arms embargo and stricter sanctions.
Although our backed resolution in the United Nations last Friday
failed, we must continue to work on an international framework to
impose sanctions on international arms, travel, and an asset embargo.
We have to get Mugabe to understand that his totalitarian, dictatorial
ways have to change.
Then we need to press for any new power sharing arrangement. Any new
mediation must secure agreement with the opposition, with Tsvangirai in
the lead, and provide support in setting up new institutions. We can
assist the transitional government by helping to provide a framework
for future elections and reforms.
We need to help them economically. The African Union, led by
Zimbabwe's largest trading partners, including South Africa, Zambia,
Congo, and Botswana, should put together a package of aid and
reconstruction funding to help the ravaged people of Zimbabwe stand on
their feet. The United States and Europe can play a leading role in
backing that effort with the support that we are so generously quick to
offer.
The situation in Zimbabwe is dire, and the United States must take
the lead in rebuking Robert Mugabe in calling for a new dawn for
Zimbabwe.
It is a time in which when you see the success, the beginnings of
political stability, the beginnings of economic blossoming in countries
such as Kenya and Tanzania and Uganda and Rwanda, we know the same
thing can be done in a place such as Zimbabwe.
Just think, in those last two countries I mentioned, Uganda and
Rwanda, look from where they have come. It was not too many years ago
that there was a brutal dictator named Idi Amin. A lot of people have
seen the movie
[[Page 14764]]
``The Last King of Scotland,'' which tells about the brutality of that
regime. But as soon as Idi Amin was gone, the former President came in
again and became almost as bad, Obote. It wasn't until another strong
man, a general named Museveni, came on that he has brought stability
for the last couple of decades.
Look at the country immediately to the south of Uganda. Look at
Rwanda. Look at what has happened to Rwanda, a country, just 14 years
ago, in 1994, because there was the hatred between the two tribes, the
Hutus and the Tutsis--the Hutus were in charge of the government. They
allowed the militias, the gangs, the thugs to reign and use as an
excuse the downing of the President's airplane, and they unleashed a
reign of terror that was nothing short of mass slaughter, genocide, of
which, unbelievably, within 100 days, 1 million people were slaughtered
and hacked to death by machetes. That was 14 years ago.
The general who took over and is now the President of Rwanda, the
opposite tribe, a Tutsi, said: We are not going the same way. We are
not going to take revenge.
You can imagine when his army came in and invaded the capital city of
Rwanda and they saw bodies strewn all over the streets rotting, corpses
that dogs were eating the flesh, and when his soldiers found out that
their entire families had been wiped out, hacked to death with
machetes, you can imagine the problem of discipline that general, now
the new President of Rwanda, had in trying to exert discipline.
The President told me in our meeting that was a very difficult time
because a soldier would go to his home and find his entire family
slaughtered, and he felt that he would have to take the revenge into
his own hands, despite the order that the general had given him. The
general, the new President, then would have that soldier arrested, even
though you can understand the feeling of outrage of seeing 50 members
of his family slaughtered.
The President told me also the story about the notes that he would
get from members of his army that said: Mr. President, it is not going
to please you because you have given orders to the contrary, but I
could not stand by and see these people who have slaughtered my family
get away with it. And then that soldier would take the revenge and that
soldier would then turn the gun on his own self and commit suicide.
But the general's orders took hold. He established a government. It
was a government where they would go through under Rwandan law and try
those people. They would try to bring about reconciliation. And 14
years later, after 1 million people were slaughtered in a 100-day
period, Rwanda is on its way back with some stability, some economic
promise, and some economic progress.
This is what can happen in Africa, and this is what needs to happen
in Zimbabwe. Soon there are going to be elections in South Africa
bringing in a new President. If present President Mbeki will not move,
since they are the biggest influence on Zimbabwe because of their trade
relationship, if he will not move, then there is another election in
South Africa that will elect a new leader, and maybe that new leader
will move to bring sanctions on Zimbabwe so that, once again, the
promise of Africa will become realized, as so many countries in Africa
today are realizing.
Madam President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a
quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Stabenow). The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the
quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Whitehouse). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Mr. KYL. I ask I be allowed to speak in morning business for 30
minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I want to speak about the bill which we had
hoped to have taken up by now, the PEPFAR Reauthorization Act. Because
of some procedural questions, we are not on the bill right now, but I
thought I would utilize this time to make some remarks about the bill
which I hope we will be able to begin dealing with in the not too
distant future.
This bill is called PEPFAR, as I said, but that stands for the
President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief. It is a program that
President Bush brought to the Congress in 2003 and was enacted. It
authorized $15 billion over a 5-year period for the purpose primarily
of supporting the treatment of AIDS in Africa and elsewhere.
Between 2004 and 2008, according to the Bush administration, PEPFAR
has supported a cure for about 10 million people infected by HIV/AIDS,
including children orphaned by AIDS. It prevented 7 million new HIV
infections. It supported efforts to provide support to another 2
million HIV-infected people.
As a result, I think when the President indicated in his State of the
Union speech that he wanted to reauthorize the program, most of us in
the Congress, in the House and in the Senate, were supportive of that.
I supported the initial legislation and fully intended to support the
reauthorization.
There is one little catch. When the President made his announcement,
he offered to double the amount of the authorization from $15 billion
to $30 billion. I swallowed rather hard because doubling the amount is
a big change in the amount of money available, but I assumed I would be
able to support the reauthorization of the bill. However, when the bill
was written in the House of Representatives and then sent over to the
Senate, two things happened. First, one of the things that made the
legislation effective in the first place was that we had several
conditions attached to it as to how the money would be spent. We were
very careful to ensure that the money was spent appropriately. That is
one of the reasons it has been effective.
And, secondly, when the bill was written in the House of
Representatives, lo and behold, it was not doubled from $15 to $30
billion, it was more than tripled to $50 billion.
Now, there was not anything magical about $50 billion; it seemed like
a nice, round, symbolic number. As a result, several of us at that
point said: Wait a minute. That is a lot of money. In Washington when a
program doubles, that is something. When it more than triples, it bears
some looking into.
Because of many of the problems with the substance of the bill, as
well as this tripling of the amount from $15 to $50 billion, several of
us began to take a harder look at it. Then, as the gas crisis hit, the
housing crisis hit, and we find that more and more Americans are
feeling the real pinch of a downturn in our economy, the question began
to solidify: Should America be committing to spend $50 billion on this
program, which at $15 billion was quite successful, without at least
considering whether we can reduce the amount and certainly taking a
look at the substantive provisions of it to see if it can get back to
the original purpose rather than some of the expanded purposes under
the House bill.
That is why several of us said, when the bill came through the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee: We object to simply passing the bill out
of the Senate without any opportunity to amend it, certainly without
any opportunity to reduce the amount of it and without an opportunity
to fix it. I know some of us were criticized. But I would hope that
when we talk about some of the changes that have already been agreed
to, those who were critical of us who said: No, we are not going to
automatically pass it, would at least acknowledge there have been
numerous improvements in the bill because of the negotiation process
which ensued.
I wish to particularly thank Senators Coburn, Burr, and Enzi for
working on several provisions of the bill and, frankly, restoring the
original purpose of PEPFAR in the process. They did a good job. Let me
note two or three of the areas with which I think they did a good job.
One key to PEPFAR working in the first place was that at least 55
percent of the funding had to go directly to the treatment of AIDS
patients. That was a good thing. Once the House said: No, we can spend
this
[[Page 14765]]
money on other things, too, you could see the same kind of problems
with some other foreign aid bills, where money is going to governments
or NGOs and you never see it again.
As a result, what Senators Coburn, Burr, and Enzi did was say: Look,
we need to get back to the proposition that at least half the bilateral
AIDS funding is spent on treatment, for treatment for HIV/AIDS. That,
in fact, was agreed to. But I would note, again, that the original
House and Senate bills proposed simply eliminating that treatment
floor.
Another thing they negotiated was to strengthen the protection of
funding for abstinence and fidelity programs, clarifying that 50
percent of any funding had to go to those kinds of programs. I would
note, again, that the original House and Senate bills eliminated the
requirement in the previous law that a third of the prevention funds
would go to abstinence education.
Another thing that they did to make the bill better was to protect
faith-based groups and others from discrimination in all funding.
Again, the House and Senate bills had very weak conscience clauses, so-
called conscience clause provisions. This was, again, an improvement of
the bill which would not have occurred if we had simply agreed to the
unanimous consent that we pass the bill that had been posed earlier and
that some of us had objected to.
To some extent, it strengthens the Global Fund transparency and
accountability. This is an area that needs additional strengthening.
But there is a part of this bill that is not the bilateral U.S. money,
it goes into this big Global Fund. And the Global Fund is not well
monitored. It is very possible for our funding to be wasted as a part
of that.
Again, there was nothing in the original House and Senate bills on
this and they at least got some strengthening of the Global Fund
transparency and accountability provisions.
Another provision was to protect AIDS patients from substandard
medicine, which again was not in the original language. There were
other things. My point is that when those of us objected originally to
passing the bill as it came out of the House, we were criticized: Well,
this is a perfect bill, we were told. It turns out it was not so
perfect after all.
That is point No. 1. Point No. 2, there are some additional things
which should be done to the substance of the bill. Point No. 3 deals
with the amount of money that is being spent.
Here are some of the remaining areas that are problematic: The bill
would not prohibit funding for countries such as China, Russia, and
India, countries that are quite wealthy, that have their own nuclear
weapons and space exploration programs. Russia is awash in
petrodollars. China has hundreds of billions of dollars in its foreign
currency reserve, has an exploding military budget, and so on. So,
certainly, we ought to limit the funding of the bill to countries that
actually need the money.
Secondly, it adds a variety of lower priority programs to spend the
extra money above the $15 billion, including--well, I am not going to
mention all of these, but educating males about the dangers of visiting
prostitutes. That is a fine thing, but is that a priority that we need
to spend this money on? Addressing the inheritance rights of women and
orphans. There is money in here for legal aid and the like, legal aid
services.
There is mission creep in the new legislation. It calls for PEPFAR
dollars to support nutrition programs, drinking water and sanitation
and income-generation activities and livelihood activities--legal
services, as I said.
All of these might be fine, but this is not the PEPFAR program, this
is foreign aid. There are not any kind of constraints on this mission
creep that ought to be in existence if we are going to authorize this
kind of money for it.
The bill diverts funding from AIDS treatment for other purposes. I
mentioned legal services and substance abuse and so on. It doubles the
funding for the U.N.-affiliated Global Fund, which disregards U.S.
policies on positions such as abortion and needle exchange and has been
linked to funding for corrupt and criminal regimes.
It strikes current law regarding the inadmissibility into the United
States of HIV-positive aliens. It calls for a strategy and objective
over the next 5 years with these funds to train and hire 140,000 new
nurses and other health care professionals in these countries.
This at a time when the United States is drastically in need of
health care professionals and nurses. We are wealthy and can afford to
be a very generous country, but we also have needs in this country. I
mentioned the water development projects and so on. I happen to be
familiar, and Senator Thune has offered an amendment on this, with the
needs in the United States of America for water development in our
Native American communities, on Indian reservations.
There is a study out right now that demonstrates the need that many,
thousands of our Native Americans have to rely on water being hauled to
their communities, which they then take to their individual hogans or
residences. We need water development right here in the United States
for American citizens, and I might add to whom we have a trust
responsibility, at least as a priority before we send money abroad for
folks who do not fall into that same category.
The final point I wished to make is that this legislation, at $50
billion of authorization, is more than we can afford. The Congressional
Budget Office, in fact, says that if it is authorized at $50 billion,
we cannot efficaciously spend more than about $34 billion. In other
words, it is very hard to spend that much money, at least to do so
without a lot of waste, fraud, and abuse.
As a result, even the Congressional Budget Office, the nonpartisan
entity that we ask for advice on such things, said we could not spend
more than $34 billion in that event. As I said, $50 billion is the
amount of the authorization here.
To put it in perspective, what is $50 billion? What could we spend
$50 billion on? We passed a new GI bill. It could pay for the GI bill
twice. It could pay for the Apollo Program to land a man on the Moon
twice. It could pay for about half the entire interstate defense
highway system. It could pay the pensions of our military veterans for
over a year. Now, $50 billion is a lot of money. As I said, I do not
know of anybody who would not be willing, especially if we are able to
clean up some of the other language in the bill, to authorize it at $15
billion, maybe to even double it to $30 billion, but $50 billion?
I note President Bush has, at least in more recent months, begun to
focus on the wasteful Washington spending, the programs he believes
spend too much money, and to put some fiscal discipline on the
Congress. In fact, since the Democratic Party takeover of the Congress,
the President has threatened to veto more than 25 authorization and
appropriations bills. This amounts to about $188 billion in spending
because of his view that this is excessive beyond what the American
taxpayer can be burdened with.
I will note a couple of those. But it illustrates where the President
has been willing to say: I am going to veto a bill. That is his
ultimate authority here. In the case of the Labor-HHS 2008
Appropriations Act, the President would have vetoed the bill by
exceeding his request by $9 billion. Now, this is $35 billion more than
the previous funding, $20 billion more than the President announced in
his State of the Union speech that he would be willing to reauthorize
the bill at.
He would have vetoed $2.3 billion beyond the budget in the Commerce
State and Justice Appropriations Act in 2008; $2.2 billion in the
Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act.
Then, for some authorizations--because this is an authorization, not
an appropriation--the Water Quality Financing Act, H.R. 720, which
authorizes Federal spending for State clean water revolving funds, that
bill would have been vetoed for providing $14 billion in excess above
the current $5.6 billion authorization.
I know many of my colleagues have said a $50 billion authorization
for
[[Page 14766]]
PEPFAR is not a big deal because it is only an authorization, not an
appropriation. But that certainly was not the position of the
administration when it threatened to veto this bill that was over $14
billion more than what the President wanted, or H.R. 1495, the Water
Resources Development Act, which authorized water infrastructure
projects. That bill was vetoed for going about $7 billion over what the
President had authorized or had budgeted.
So it is kind of difficult to understand how the administration or my
colleagues can support more than tripling a foreign aid program by
spending $50 billion on PEPFAR when the administration was so keen, and
I believe correctly so, to finally put the stake down in the ground and
say: I am going to veto legislation that is $2 billion or $3 billion or
$7 billion over what it should be, including authorizations.
As I said before, we are very wealthy and therefore should be and can
be a very generous country. But we also have to establish our
priorities. Changing this legislation and tripling the money is not
necessarily going to make it triply effective. In fact, if anything, as
I said, I think it is going to make it less effective.
I make this point: We have now an American economy which is
struggling and American families who are struggling with their budgets.
They do not need additional liabilities, either in terms of taxes or
more debt, which they and their children and grandchildren are going to
have to pay. Someone has to pay for the $50 billion. I do not know
where the money is going to come from. Are we going to take it from
other spending? Not likely. Are we going to increase taxes to pay for
it? Quite conceivably. Or are we going to add it to the deficit? That
is the only other choice.
So $50 billion does not grow on trees. It is very easy to be generous
with other people's money. But we are talking about the taxpayers'
money. I think, when we are taking about taxpayer money, we need to be
good stewards of it. More than tripling a program to get it up to $50
billion in foreign aid is more than I think most Americans--if you put
the question to them and said: Is this what you want to do with $50
billion of your money, I would bet you the vast majority of Americans
would say: Look, we are willing to be generous, provide something for
that program but not $50 billion.
That brings me to my final point. In prioritizing, and that is what
Congress needs to do, prioritizing what we spend our money on, we have
to look at our domestic needs as well. I have supported some increases
in funding for years on programs that I think are very important. The
answer has always been: Well, there is not enough money. We would love
to help you out, Senator Kyl, but there is not enough money. OK. Now we
have gone from $15 billion to $50 billion that we are ready to spend on
PEPFAR.
So, clearly, the majority around here has decided, along with the
administration, that we can afford to spend $50 billion on something.
My approach would be to say: OK, if we have decided we can afford to
spend $50 billion, why don't we only spend part of that on PEPFAR, and
why don't we spend part of it on America for what we know are top
priorities?
We have already decided we can afford to spend $50 billion. How about
some priority for American spending as well? I can think of a lot of
things that almost all of us would agree upon as good projects for
spending some of this money.
I mentioned before the fact that the U.S. Government has a trust
responsibility to Native Americans in this country. We have an
obligation to help them pay for what is important to them. Health care.
We passed an Indian health care bill. So I asked: Are there additional
health care needs? Well, mostly they were taken care of thanks to
Senators Murkowski and Dorgan in the Indian health bill, which I was
happy to support.
There are two other needs on Indian reservations that are drastic,
emergencies, and an embarrassment in that we in the Congress are not
able to meet these requirements for the Native American population. Yet
we are willing to spend $50 billion on this foreign aid program. This
trust responsibility includes public safety and drinking water. There
are Federal Government reports that identify needs in both of these
areas. As a result, Senator Thune and I have an amendment which would
designate $2 billion--$1 billion for public safety, $1 billion for
drinking water--for Indians on reservations. Is that too much to ask,
out of $50 billion, that we take $2 billion and authorize programs for
public safety and water development on Indian reservations? To me, this
would be a better prioritization of funding.
I mentioned reports. There is a 2004 report by the Department of
Interior inspector general. Here is what it says in part: That some
Indian detention facilities were egregiously unsafe, unsanitary, and a
hazard to both inmates and staff. BIA's detention program is riddled
with problems and is a national disgrace. A recent 2008 Department of
Interior study, called the Shubnum report, confirms that tribal jails
are still grossly inefficient and says:
[O]nly half of the offenders are being incarcerated who
should be incarcerated, the remaining are released through a
variety of informal practices due to severe overcrowding in
existing detention facilities.
Life and safety of officers and inmates are at risk for
lack of adequate Justice Facilities and programs in Indian
Country.
It goes on to recommend that we construct or rehabilitate 263
detention facilities at a cost of about $8.4 billion over the next 10
years. So there is a need identified for American citizens.
What the Thune-Kyl amendment asks is that we take a billion out of
PEPFAR and apply it to this $8.4 billion need. I have personally
visited detention facilities in Arizona. I have witnessed firsthand
their deplorable conditions. The Navajo Nation, to mention one, in New
Mexico, Utah, and Arizona is about the size of the State of West
Virginia. It has a population of more than 180,000 people. In fact, it
is over 200,000, if you count all of them. Yet a number of its
detention facilities have been closed for health and safety reasons. It
has bed space--this place, the size of West Virginia--for 59 inmates.
That is to serve a total of over 50,000 inmates booked in its
facilities in 2007. I think everyone would agree this is a deplorable
state of affairs. This represents only a fraction of its needs.
There is much more we can discuss. When people are released, it is
impossible to protect the people of the community.
Let me briefly turn to water. The managers' amendment to S. 2731
includes assistance to foreign countries for safe drinking water and
adequate sanitation. This is supposed to be an AIDS bill. Why are we
providing drinking water facilities abroad? I concede that they are a
good thing to do, and there is a need for them, but when there is a
very big crisis in our country, primarily involving people to whom we
have a trust responsibility, why aren't we prioritizing funding for
those projects?
According to the Indian Health Service, safe and adequate water
supplies and waste disposal facilities are lacking in approximately 11
percent of American Indian and Alaska Native homes compared to 1
percent for the U.S. general population. In some areas of Indian
country the figure is as high as 35 percent. In Arizona, the Navajo
Nation estimates that approximately 30 percent of the households on the
reservation do not have direct access to a public water system and are
forced to haul water long distances to provide drinking water. I have
seen it. They have water trucks, and they fill them at some central
location. They come to another central location. People drive up in
their pickup trucks and fill their gallon jugs and barrels, take them
back to their hogans, and so on. That is in the United States today. If
we have decided that we can afford to spend $50 billion on something,
starting with a $15 billion AIDS program, then why not double that to
$30 billion, as the President originally proposed, and spend some of
the rest of the money on American requirements?
This lack of a reliable potable water supply in Indian country
results in a
[[Page 14767]]
high incidence of disease and infection as a result of waterborne
contaminants. IHS estimates that for every dollar it spends on safe
drinking water and sewage systems, it achieves a twentyfold return in
terms of health benefits. The cost to provide American Indians and
Alaska Natives with safe drinking water and adequate sewage is
estimated to be over $2.3 billion. Delivering water to the people
within the tribe would be several billion on top of that.
These are priorities in the United States. I wouldn't be raising it
except for the fact that there seems to be an assumption that we can
afford to spend $50 billion. My point is, if we can afford to spend $50
billion, let's at least take a little bit of that money and spend it on
Americans.
In conclusion, I supported PEPFAR when it was authorized 5 years ago.
Because of its success, I would vote to extend the original funding
policy for another 5 years. I would even consider the doubling which
the President had asked for in his State of the Union speech. For the
United States to have the resources to continue funding U.S. Government
responsibilities both to our citizens and to be generous with others
around the globe, we need a strong economy that creates wealth. I can
think of a lot of things we could do with part of this $50 billion to
improve our economy so that we will be better able to help others in
the future. I have discussed some of them. I will continue to work to
improve this bill. It will take some time in this body, but I think it
is worth moving forward.
I hope we will be able to move forward on the 10 amendments we have
agreed to. I won't describe all of the amendments. They have been
described. One of them I have mentioned Senator Thune and I will offer.
I hope we will have a process by which we consider these things; that
my colleagues will be open to their adoption, and at the end of the
day, when we do pass a PEPFAR bill, it will be a bill we can all be
proud of that will meet the purposes of the original legislation, that
will not waste American taxpayer dollars, and that will prioritize
American needs as well as those with respect to foreign aid programs.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The assistant majority leader.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I would like to respond to the Senator
from Arizona. I don't quarrel with his premise that we need to spend a
lot more money when it comes to Native Americans. Senator Byron Dorgan
tried valiantly for months to bring Indian health care to the floor. He
ran into a lot of obstacles. I think all of us believe when it comes to
Native Americans, there is a lot more we need to do. But it strikes me
as fundamentally unfair to argue that money should be taken from
fighting a global epidemic of HIV/AIDS, the problem of tuberculosis and
malaria, and divert that money and put it into help for Native
Americans.
Has America reached that point? Is that what the choices have come
to, that we cannot join the world in trying to stop this global AIDS
epidemic to the extent we know is necessary?
If there is anyone who believes that the $50 billion over 5 years
suggested in this bill is adequate to the challenge, they haven't sat
down to take an honest look. This is indeed a global epidemic. There
are parts of this bill that have been criticized by some. I would like
to address one of them. It is the argument that somehow we have gone
adrift. We are no longer talking about prevention and medication, but
we are talking about unrelated elements. One criticism is that this
bill addresses the global AIDS epidemic in terms of food and water. I
can tell you point blank that the best medicine in the world is no help
to a person who is suffering from malnutrition or a person whose water
supply is contaminated, making them sick when they take the expensive
drugs.
I have seen it in Africa, where people receiving the antiretroviral
medications are wasting away because of malnutrition. We can't save
their lives from starvation simply by stopping the onset of HIV
infection. So we need, if we are going to do this honestly, to take a
serious and comprehensive look at the challenge.
This is a rarity in a way, that the Members on the Democratic side
and the overwhelming majority on the Republican side are of one mind.
We support the President. The President was right when he initiated the
PEPFAR Program to deal with global AIDS and the global fight to address
those countries that are not part of PEPFAR. But we need to come
together now and try to pass this bill for the President and, more
importantly, for those who are the victims of this global epidemic.
I will be the first in line when Senator Kyl offers his amendment to
help those Native Americans who are being shortchanged and deprived
because of our inadequate funding. But at the risk of being slightly
political for a moment, were we not fighting a war in Iraq that costs
$10 billion to $15 billion a month, there would be a lot more to spend
in America. That war, which is now in its sixth year, with no end in
sight, has drained our Treasury of over $700 billion that could have
been spent for curing diseases, dealing with Native Americans in the
United States, expanding education, expanding health care and clinics
in our own country, more medical research. Instead, we have been
shoveling this money as fast as we can out of our Treasury into Iraq
and making it part of our permanent national deficit. That is the
reality of what we face.
It is hard to imagine that Iraq, an oil-rich country, one of the
richest in the world with oil, is still waiting on U.S. taxpayers to
spend more money to help them out of the current problems they face. It
is time for the Iraqis to step up and defend their own country, govern
their own country, and spend their own money on their own problems.
After almost 6 years, it is overdue. If they do that, there would be
a lot more money in the United States for our priorities. A strong
America begins at home. It begins by bringing this war to an end,
bringing our combat troops home.
When we have suggestions from the Iraqis that it is time for America
to leave, I think we ought to take them. We ought to start bringing our
brave men and women, who have risked their lives, home to the hero's
welcome they deserve. Waiting for another 10, 20, 50, or 100 years, as
some have suggested, is ludicrous. The United States cannot afford it,
and it is no favor to Iraq to create that kind of long-term dependency.
I sincerely hope we can resolve this. I hope we can pass the
President's bill. I support it. I hope there is adequate bipartisan
support. Then when Senator Kyl and others come forward and ask us to
find money to help Native Americans, they can count on many of us on
the Democratic side.
Mr. KYL. Will the assistant minority leader yield for one quick
point?
Mr. DURBIN. Of course.
Mr. KYL. Having mentioned my name and alluded to the fact that we had
a hard time getting the Indian health bill to the floor, I hope my
colleague would acknowledge the fact that one of the people central in
getting that bill to the floor and getting it passed was the Senator
from Arizona. It was because of my strong commitment to get that done.
I will work with anybody, not only to deal with the Indian health
matter but also local law enforcement and the water development
problems that we talked about with Native Americans. I know my
colleague understands that is my position.
Mr. DURBIN. There is no question of the Senator's sincerity. Senator
Dorgan tried to lead the fight on this side, and Senator Kyl was a
great help in that regard. Let the record be clear. If there is to be
future help for Indian Health Services and other Native American needs,
I am certain the Senator from Arizona will be part of that effort.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. COBURN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
[[Page 14768]]
Mr. COBURN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed
to speak in morning business for approximately 10 to 12 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. COBURN. Mr. President, I have supporting material related to
PEPFAR that I will ask to be printed in the Record, which I will
deliver to the desk.
PEPFAR's unique contribution has been treatment. By any measure,
PEPFAR has been a success. We have helped almost 2 million people with
AIDS live longer. We have prevented millions of new infections. We have
cared for millions of people more. And we have prevented hundreds of
thousands of babies--newborn children--who were born to infected moms
from being infected with the HIV virus.
PEPFAR was different from all our previous efforts precisely because
we treated it like a disease rather than a development problem. We ran
it like a medical program and not a foreign aid poverty program. Rather
than funding the usual beltway contractors who like to write reports,
give advice, and convene meetings, we put pills in the hands of
doctors, nurses, and a legion of community-based health care workers
riding out to the bush on mopeds with medicine in their backpacks. We
treated people with HIV like patients we can save instead of victims.
And we told them the truth about where HIV comes from.
If you go to Nairobi or Soweto or Kampala and ask people what PEPFAR
is about, they will tell you it is about treatment. Have we spent
billions on prevention? Yes. But ask anyone in Africa what PEPFAR is,
and they will say: It is about HIV and AIDS treatment. It was AIDS
treatment that was the innovation of PEPFAR. We had been funding
prevention messages long before we had PEPFAR, although certainly not
to the extent as we did after PEPFAR started. But what was new, what
was miraculous, what rocked Africa, was the medical treatment.
And it has worked. It was not easy. With a tiny staff, the AIDS
coordinator achieved the impossible--what many had said could not be
done--bringing high-tech medical innovation to the lowest tech settings
on Earth. It is still just as hard today as it was then, especially as
we start in new countries.
The path of least resistance is always the status quo: contractors
and ``social marketing'' and reports and ``technical assistance'' and
``capacity building'' and meetings. Without statutory mandates, that
path will always look more appealing to people who have been asked to
do the impossible. That is why PEPFAR reauthorization could not retreat
on its mandated treatment priority.
Take it out of the law, and despite all the rhetoric and good
intentions, it will always be easier to fund something else. Maybe
treatment would not have been eliminated, but it would have taken a
back street, maybe by small cuts, by not building new clinics in the
harder places, by letting the shortage of doctors become an excuse to
not get creative. The commitment to treatment would have eroded over
time, and before we knew it, PEPFAR would have become just another
failing foreign aid program like so many others.
It does not matter what people say their intentions are, because
people come and go and promises are hard to keep. What matters is what
the law requires, and so it is encouraging to be able to assure the
American people today that PEPFAR's unique innovation--cutting-edge
HIV/AIDS medical care--has been preserved in this bill.
For that, there are a lot of people to thank, starting first with the
President and his staff, who first reached out to try to broker this
critical compromise. Of course, the bill managers, Chairman Biden and
Senator Lugar, and their staff were patient, constructive, and deserve
all the thanks in the world. They were quick, thorough, honest, and at
all times operated in good faith. Senators Enzi and Burr and their
staff were incredible to work with, and their commitment to this cause
is commendable.
The compromise language has a number of critical features that make
it worthy of passage.
First and most important, the compromise restores the critical focus
of PEPFAR on medical treatment. The House bill eliminated the provision
in current law that required that 55 percent of all funding go to
``therapeutic medical care'' of people with HIV. The managers'
substitute preserves this focus by requiring that ``more than half'' of
the money goes to that medical care. This time, the law will also
clarify what was meant by ``therapeutic medical care,'' so that there
is no longer any confusion that this treatment money can be spent on
ARV--antiretroviral--treatment, care for opportunistic infections, and
medical monitoring of folks who do not yet need antiretroviral therapy.
Prioritizing treatment is not a radical policy. It is the same policy
we have right here in the United States. In this country, this year, we
are spending 63 percent of all domestic AIDS funding on treatment and
14 percent on prevention. Prevention is cheap, so you can still make
prevention a big priority without spending nearly the money necessary
for treatment.
The substitute also restores an ambitious target linked to funding.
The original law had the 55-percent allocation, but it also had an
ambitious target of treating 2 million people with antiretroviral
drugs. The House-passed reauthorization only targeted 3 million people
on treatment--a pretty underwhelming figure that meant adding only 1
million people on PEPFAR treatment rolls. That 1 million would have
been a 50-percent increase in results, while funding was more than
tripling in the bill.
Some have argued that this funding includes a lot of other things
besides AIDS and so you cannot make that comparison. That is just not
true. The original bill included malaria, it included TB, and it
included the Global Fund. So it is an apples-to-apples comparison to
say that the funding for AIDS, TB, malaria, and the Global Fund was $15
billion the first time this bill was authorized and that then, in this
bill, $50 billion is authorized for those same things at this time.
That is a tremendous amount of money, and the targets for what we
expect to achieve with that money must go up at the same rate the
funding goes up. The compromise language appropriately links the target
number to appropriations. As the funding goes up from the current
funding level, the treatment target has to go up by the same percentage
above the current goal of 2 million people. That means that if all the
money authorized in this bill is appropriated, the number of people
treated will exceed more than 5 million. Those extra millions of lives
saved are a major accomplishment of the Senate bill. Those are lives.
Those are individuals who would otherwise succumb to HIV.
However, the formula does not end there. Treatment costs per patient
right now are fairly high--anywhere from $800 to $1,000 per patient.
Some drugs are as low as $80 or at most around $200 per person, so we
are talking 80 percent of the treatment costs that are not being spent
on direct medical care now. That 80 percent represents overhead and
infrastructure which should be reduced over time as the efficiencies
are built in and clinics are expanded.
To account for that, the compromise language also requires that the
target number for treatment increases by the same percent that cost-
per-patient decreases over time. This ensures that the cost savings are
reinvested right back into treatment rather than diverted to other
activities.
Another key element of the compromise is the protection of PEPFAR
patients from substandard medicines. From the earliest days of PEPFAR,
there were some calling for the United States to buy cheap, copycat
drugs for PEPFAR patients, including drugs that were not approved by
the FDA or any other rigorous regulatory body of any country. These are
drugs we would never treat our domestic patients with here in the
United States. This is no abstract threat. Today, under the Orwellian
named ``quality assurance'' process at the Global Fund, American
dollars may be used to purchase drugs
[[Page 14769]]
that have met no standard except that they have been put on an
application for a WHO prequalification.
When this conflict arose shortly after PEPFAR was first authorized,
the President rightly insisted that we would not treat the African AIDS
patients like lab rats or guinea pigs. We would treat them with the
same standards we treat American patients: They would only receive
drugs with FDA approval or equivalent. To help expedite the approval of
some international products that were likely safe and effective but had
not been through the FDA process, the President established an
emergency review process to speed up approval while still ensuring that
PEPFAR patients get the same standard of care we expect for our
domestic patients. Since then, others have generally agreed that all
appropriate safe and effective drugs make it through this new process
with proper and direct speed.
In direct contradiction of this more moral approach, the House bill
took bilateral PEPFAR programs down the same scary path that the Global
Fund has gone. It required that PEPFAR purchase the cheapest drugs
available on the world market, without requiring any standard of safety
and efficacy. Under such a provision, African patients would have been
treated worse than lab rats--receiving drugs that the United States
would never use for its patients, never purchase through Medicaid,
Medicare, or the Ryan White Care Act.
The bill managers are to be commended for modifying this provision in
their substitute to require that drugs purchased by PEPFAR have FDA
approval or its equivalent in other developed countries. We can all
breathe a little easier as we seek to put 5 million people on ARVs. We
want those 5 million people to thrive as long as possible on first-line
drugs before they experience a treatment failure. You should not be
relegated to unsafe drugs just because you are poor and living in
Africa.
There are quite a few other improvements in this substitute bill that
the managers and the President helped to broker, but I will not take
any more time. Suffice it to say that most of my outstanding concerns
have been met through our negotiations, and I am confident that
PEPFAR's success in the future is no longer in jeopardy.
PEPFAR was not broken. It did not need fixing. It just needed
reauthorization. The managers' substitute does that. I am confident
that lives are going to be saved because of the good faith in the bill
and of the bill managers and the President and my other colleagues who
are associated with it.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have the supplementary
material I referred to printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
From Good Intentions to Bad AIDS Policy: The Moral Hazards of
Redesigning PEPFAR
(By Daniel Patrick Moloney)
The President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) has
received praise from across the political spectrum, both for
its principles and for its successes in fighting HIV/AIDS in
some of the world's poorest countries. Announced by President
George W. Bush in the 2003 State of the Union Address, PEPFAR
fights HIV/AIDS primarily in countries with generalized
epidemics. These countries are mostly, though not
exclusively, in Africa.
PEPFAR's successful track record is a result of its focus
on three points:
Treating those infected with HIV,
Preventing new HIV infections, and
Ensuring, through bilateral programs, that assistance is in
accord with U.S. policy.
Bills under consideration in the U.S. House and Senate
(H.R. 5501 and S. 2731) represent significant departures from
the current law. These bills are hugely expensive, and would
take existing U.S. policy off its present, successful course.
Rather than simply reauthorizing PEPFAR, Congress seeks to
rewrite it, vastly expanding funding while removing
structural guidance that stipulates how it is apportioned.
The structure of the original PEPFAR law was essential for
keeping it focused on its prevention and treatment
objectives. The congressional bills fail to do this. Both
more than triple the $15 billion cost of the original
program, yet neither adjusts the targets of the program to
reflect this increase. Instead, both propose to spend tens of
billions of dollars on projects not directly related to the
fight against HIV/AIDS. This proposed spending duplicates
existing programs, and diverts resources into social
engineering projects at odds with the values of many
Americans.
To achieve PEPFAR's goal, policy must continue to be guided
by strong requirements that will direct funding toward
effective prevention and treatment strategies, rather than a
diffuse set of general development goals.
From Good Intentions to Good Policy: The Original Design of
PEPFAR. As proposed by President Bush in 2003, PEPFAR was
built around three priorities:
Providing medicine to treat those who have HIV/AIDS in
those countries where the disease affects the general
population,
Funding local programs that aim to prevent new HIV
infections, and
Providing palliative care to those suffering from HIV/AIDS,
including children orphaned as a result of HIV-infected
parents.
To justify its ambitious agenda and $15 billion price tag,
the original law used three structural features to keep the
program focused on its priorities: ambitious targets,
spending requirements, and an emphasis on bilateral
agreements.
The law set ambitious targets for the number of people in
its treatment, prevention, and care programs. These goals
were so ambitious that they could not be met were the money
lost to waste or corruption, or simply diverted to other
development activities not directly providing treatment,
care, or prevention of HIV/AIDS.
The law also provided strong guidance so that the money
would be spent in proportion to the law's priorities. It did
this in two distinct but related sections of the law. The
first, a ``Sense of Congress'' resolution, declared that 55
percent of the funds should be spent on medicine and
treatment, 10 percent on orphans and children affected by
HIV, 20 percent on prevention programs, and 15 percent on
palliative care. This gave the Global AIDS Coordinator some
idea how to balance the competing ends of the bill. The next
section, which actually allocated the funds, made the first
two elements of this nonbinding resolution into binding
spending requirements. Though it did not make binding that 20
percent be spent on prevention, it did require that one-third
of funds spent on prevention be spent on programs that
promote abstinence outside of marriage and fidelity within
it. By requiring that the money be spent according to these
specific percentages, rather than authorizing particular
dollar amounts, the law ensured that its priorities would
always be implemented in the same proportions, even were
Congress later to appropriate funds at amounts different than
the law had authorized.
The law required that PEPFAR deliver aid through bilateral
arrangements with each of the partner countries, rather than
through multilateral organizations. This procedural safeguard
gave the U.S. its best opportunity to make sure the funds
were spent on its priorities. It was consistent with the
President's belief that welfare and aid programs work best
when they support civil society, rather than supplant it with
an international bureaucracy.
The bills in the House and the Senate undermine these
principles. They set goals too low for their budgets, remove
most of the spending mandates under the guise of
``flexibility,'' and add radical new agendas on which the
unstructured and abundant funds are to be spent.
Funding Should Fit Program Goals. In asking Congress to
reauthorize PEPFAR for the next five years, the Bush
Administration sought to increase the budget by 100 percent
to $30 billion over five years. However, the President sought
to increase its goals by a mere 20 percent to 70 percent
(depending on the criterion) over that period. Some Members
of Congress have complained that the Administration's goals
are too low to justify doubling the funding. They note that
the program is on track to meet its original goals of 2
million treated, 7 million infections prevented, and 10
million people in care, while staying close to its original
budget of $15 billion-$18 billion. Given such a history, the
Administration's moderately increased goals should require
only moderately increased funding, particularly now that so
much early infrastructure has been laid in the focus
countries and some efficiencies of scale may be expected.
The Administration defends its lower goals on the grounds
that they are realistic given local infrastructure. It also
notes that its proposed goals represent a U.S. commitment to
treat a number of people equal to the commitment of all other
aid-donor nations combined. For the U.S. to treat more would
not demand enough of the world community. It also expresses
doubts that in 2013 there will be as many people to be
treated in the focus countries as some of its critics
predict.
If the Administration's request is disproportionate to its
goals, the bills in the House and the Senate are even more
so. Both bills add an additional $20 billion to the
President's request--more than the entire first five years of
the program--while barely changing the Administration's
underwhelming new goals. The bills authorize up to $9 billion
to fight other diseases
[[Page 14770]]
common in Africa (i.e., tuberculosis and malaria), and they
authorize billions more in contributions to the Global Fund
to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria. After taking all
these into account and after assuming full funding of the
bills' priorities, the Congressional Budget Office concluded
that the bills would still have at least $15 billion left
over. To date, no one in either chamber has adequately
explained what will be done with the ``extra'' billions.
Congress could improve the fit between PEPFAR's funding and
its goals by making the latter more ambitious. For example,
Senators Tom Coburn (R-OK), Jon Kyl (R-AZ), Saxby Chambliss
(R-GA), and Richard Burr (R-NC) have introduced S. 2749, the
Save Lives First Act of 2008. This bill would set PEPFAR's
treatment goal at providing HIV/AIDS treatment and pre-
treatment medical monitoring to 7 million people, about one-
half of them in sub-Saharan Africa--an increase from 3
million in the House and Senate bills. It would also
reinstitute the provision in current law allocating at least
55 percent of all PEPFAR funds to treatment. To treat that
many people is estimated to cost between $8.4 billion and
$11.5 billion.
Higher goals require more money, but the draft bills'
proposed goals for treatment, prevention, and care are not by
themselves high enough to justify even the Administration's
$30 billion price tag. Activities extraneous to the original
program are likely to make up the difference. Whether
Congress decides to increase PEPFAR's treatment goals along
the lines of the Save Lives First Act, or whether it sticks
with its current goals, a $50 billion budget would still
include extra billions likely to be spent on purposes
irrelevant to PEPFAR.
``Flexibility'' Means Blank Check Worth Billions. The
original PEPFAR law contained binding requirements that 55
percent of all funds be spent on medical treatment, and 10
percent on orphans and vulnerable children. It further
required that 33 percent of the prevention funds be spent on
abstinence and fidelity programs. The spending restrictions
(except for that regarding orphans) have been criticized,
both by NGOs that disagree with U.S. priorities, and by
bureaucrats who implement the program.
Both the House and the Senate strip out these funding
requirements for prevention and treatment. (The Senate bill
even strips out most of the nonbinding ``Sense of Congress''
resolutions of the original law.) The House bill gives the
Global AIDS Coordinator complete control over 55 percent of
the funding, and the Senate bill writes a blank check for 90
percent of the funds. Beyond this, the bills provide some
vague guidance, but not hard requirements, on how money will
be spent. The Global AIDS Coordinator is left to prioritize
the multiple goals and agendas of the bills.
New Funds and Radical New Agendas. The proposed legislation
expands the activities eligible for PEPFAR funding well
beyond the scope of the original program, offering some clues
about how its ``extra billions'' could be spent. Some of
these new agendas are duplicative of other foreign aid
programs and are irrelevant to fighting HIV/AIDS. For
example, the legislation promotes micro-finance, education,
general health care, and food security, among other new
programs.
The bills also add a number of radical new agendas that
change the focus of PEPFAR, are at odds with the values of
many Americans, and trample on the cultural values of the
partner countries. For example, the bills before Congress
make it U.S. policy to teach safer drug-use techniques to
injection drug users, and safer sex techniques to
prostitutes, injection drug users, and men who have sex with
men (MSM). The original law made no special provisions for
outreach to these populations, reflecting the fact that
infections among these risk groups are marginal to the
generalized epidemic in subSaharan Africa, as opposed to the
epidemics concentrated among these groups in countries such
as Russia and Thailand. Where it did mention them, the
original law sought to eradicate prostitution and to
encourage injection drug users to stop, recognizing that
public health policy should not enable such high-risk
behavior but seek to end it. In a clear policy reversal, the
proposed legislation strips out the original commitment to
eradicate prostitution, and makes PEPFAR dollars available to
activities intended to make illicit drug use ``safer.'' Not
coincidentally, it also allows PEPFAR to expand to include
more focus countries in Europe and Asia where the epidemics
are concentrated among prostitutes and drug users.
The bills would also commit the U.S. to altering the
relations between men and women in developing countries to
reflect the values of Western gender activists. The bills
encourage U.S. intervention on sensitive cultural topics that
are not scientifically demonstrated to have direct impacts on
rates of HIV/AIDS morbidity or mortality, but very well might
offend those whom U.S. policy is designed to help. Whatever
merits these provisions might have as aspirations, they were
not in the original bill, they would do nothing to stop the
AIDS emergency in sub-Saharan Africa, and they would commit
the U.S. to agendas that are likely to be unpopular in
partner countries.
Conclusion: Compassionate Aid Is Effective Aid. The three
structural features of the original law--ambitious targets,
spending restraints, and an emphasis on bilateral
agreements--have helped PEPFAR stay on target. In the
process, the U.S. has created a strong precedent for
combating HIV/AIDS in poor countries with generalized
epidemics. PEPFAR's commitment to abstinence and fidelity
programs, which was and is still ridiculed by many activists
and others, is now recognized to have a measurable impact on
HIV infection rates.
Rather than write a blank check to an unelected
bureaucracy, Congress should retain firm control over PEPFAR,
which touches on such delicate issues as sex, marriage, and
the relations between men and women. Congress should insist
that PEP-FAR retain its focus on preventing new HIV
infections and treating those infected with HIV/AIDS. PEPFAR
should not duplicate the efforts of America's other aid
programs. Lawmakers should insist that the funds authorized
and appropriated for PEPFAR will not support activities
irrelevant to fighting HIV/AIDS in countries with generalized
epidemics. Congress should authorize funds for PEPFAR at a
level appropriate to its central goals. If Congress wishes to
fund other activities, it should do so by increasing the
budget for other assistance programs rather than diffusing
PEPFAR's focus.
America's PEPFAR partners are waiting on congressional
reauthorization before setting their own budgets, putting
pressure on Congress to move quickly. Hasty passage of the
existing House and Senate bills, however, would not allow
them to make their plans either, since so many funding
decisions would still be left to the discretion of the Global
AIDS Coordinator in the next administration, and subject to
the annual appropriations process and the lobbying of NGOs.
With lives at stake, strategic efficiency and effectiveness
are paramount. Ambitious goals, clear spending directives,
and a reassertion of successful U.S. policies will maintain
the structure and proportion that have leveraged Americas
generous intentions into a highly effective policy.
____
Myths v. Facts--Re: Global AIDS Legislation (PEPFAR)
Myth: ``We Can't Treat Our Way Out of This Epidemic.''
Fact:
We have to walk and chew gum--we must prevent future
infections but we must respond to the desperate and dying
TODAY.
Prevention efforts may prevent new infections, and
therefore prevent FUTURE treatment need, but prevention
efforts do nothing to abate the treatment need in the next 5
years, which is the time period the reauthorization bills
address.
Treatment need is determined by numbers infected 5-10 years
ago.
This argument is like going into a post-Katrina New Orleans
and spending most of the relief funds on building better
levies to prevent a future disaster rather than rescuing the
people waving frantically on rooftops for help.
Obviously both need to be done, but no one would claim that
it was somehow more humane to focus more effort and funding
on the future prevention than the immediate humanitarian
disaster.
Treatment, is prevention. Treatment prevents new infections
several ways:
It requires dramatic scale-up of diagnostic screening--
meaning we will identify most infected people.
It will give us the opportunity to do education and
prevention messaging with the people who are transmitting HIV
rather than wasting money on mass media campaigns targeting
mostly uninfected people. Nobody ever got HIV from someone
who wasn't infected with HIV.
It identifies pregnant women with HIV so that their babies
can be saved from infection.
It lowers viral load. There are quite a few studies out now
showing that reduced viral load dramatically reduces the
transmission of the virus.
Myth: Flexibility--``Earmarks'' or ``Allocations''
dictating how much money has to be spent on a certain
activity are too inflexible and don't allow countries to
respond to their needs appropriately.
Fact:
The allocations are not country-specific, they apply to the
whole pot of money. If one country needs to spend less money
on treatment, there are other countries where treatment is
particularly expensive and can use the extra.
Other donors such as the Global Fund can come in and fund
other priorities for the country--the American people are
committed to treatment being the priority for PEPFAR.
Public health has taught us how to control infectious
disease and it doesn't require flexibility. It requires a
formula--find every case, treat every case, work with every
case to find other cases and prevent transmission to new
cases. This doesn't change no matter what the circumstances
on the ground are.
This argument is disingenuous--the other side only wants to
eliminate the allocations that take money away from beltway
contractors--those for treatment and abstinence, because
those contractors don't do
[[Page 14771]]
treatment or abstinence. The other allocations have been left
in the bill, and in fact, new ones added in the House
version. You can't simultaneously criticize allocations but
add in new ones.
Myth: Drug prices have gone down so we don't need to
reserve as much for treatment costs anymore to meet our
treatment targets.
Fact:
If it's now cheaper than expected to meet targets, then we
should raise our targets to save and treat more people. We
only are treating a small fraction of people in need of
treatment in the developing world.
Myth: Eliminating baby AIDS is unrealistic.
Fact:
Dramatic gains are seen when universal testing of pregnant
women and newborns is provided and appropriate prophylaxis of
infections that are identified through that testing.
In states in the U.S. that have adopted this standard of
care, new cases have been virtually eliminated.
In Botswana, a country that used to have HIV infection
rates as high as 50% of child-bearing-aged women, they
instituted these policies. Now 92% of pregnant women are
being tested, and the drop in HIV+ mothers delivering
infected babies dropped from 35% to 4% from 2004-2007, with
13,000 HIV-infected moms being identified annually.
A recent study, the largest to date, just came out with
findings that 99 percent of babies were born uninfected if an
infected mother was diagnosed and proper treatment was
administered.
However, a World Health Organization report found that
access to AIDS drugs is severely limited in developing
countries, with fewer than 10 percent of pregnant women with
HIV in those countries having access to medication.
As a result, about 1,800 babies become infected with HIV
each day. Prevention of mother-to-chi1d-transmission (PMTCT)
is cheap per life saved: Estimated cost of PMTCT drugs to
support treatment of (1) mother/child pair is US$167
(generics) and US$318 (branded).
We haven't even come close to meeting the need in PEPFAR
focus countries.
Estimated 1.15 million pregnant women with HIV/AIDS living
in PEPFAR countries.
In 2006 PEPFAR proved ARV Prophylaxis to only 294,000
(25.5%).
And now PEPFAR is expanding beyond the focus countries to
other countries--the need just will keep growing:
Estimated 2.1 million pregnant women estimated to be living
with HIV/AIDS in developing countries (1.7 million in sub-
Saharan Africa -85%).
Of the estimated 2.3 million (1.7-3.5 million) children
under the age of 15 years living with HIV, well over 90% are
thought to have become infected through mother-to-child
transmission.
Mr. COBURN. Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.
____________________
ORDER OF PROCEDURE
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that during the
pendency of the PEPFAR matter, there be no motions to proceed in order.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
ORDER OF BUSINESS
Mr. REID. Mr. President, in this body, both sides need to exercise
good faith. I appreciate very much what the distinguished Republican
leader has been able to work out in the last couple hours. We are going
to do our very best. This is a very difficult time we find ourselves in
in our country. We have housing matters for which I have had three
calls today from the Secretary of the Treasury, and he does not call me
very often. It is a very serious situation we have with housing. We are
trying to get the House to do what we think is right for this country.
We know the energy issue is right for our trying to do something.
So, Mr. President, I am going to do my very best. I have expressed to
the distinguished Republican leader, unless there is something I do not
understand that comes up untoward, we are going to have all those 10
amendments debated and voted upon. And I indicated to the Republican
leader that there will be no cloture filed unless he thinks it is
appropriate. And if he does not want his fingerprints on it, I will do
it on my own, but he will be closely advised of anything we do in that
regard.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republican leader is recognized.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, let me just say to the majority leader,
this is a good way to go forward. This consent agreement was rather
painfully achieved last week, and I am glad to hear his representation
that we will vote on the 10 amendments. I think all of our Members are
more than happy to have short time agreements, process the amendments,
and move on.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, on behalf of Senators Biden and Lugar, I
call up the managers' amendment, which Senator Lugar was on the floor
wanting to do earlier today, but because of issues he was unable to do
that. So this is the substitute amendment.
____________________
CONCLUSION OF MORNING BUSINESS
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Morning business is closed.
____________________
TOM LANTOS AND HENRY J. HYDE UNITED STATES GLOBAL LEADERSHIP AGAINST
HIV/AIDS, TUBERCULOSIS, AND MALARIA REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2008--
Continued
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The reported committee amendment is withdrawn.
Amendment No. 5075
(Purpose: In the nature of a substitute)
The clerk will report the amendment.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Nevada [Mr. Reid], for Mr. Biden, for
himself and Mr. Lugar, proposes an amendment numbered 5075.
(The amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Text of
Amendments.'')
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the substitute is
agreed to and the bill will be treated as original text for the purpose
of further amendment.
The amendment (No. 5075) was agreed to.
Mr. REID. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Amendment No. 5077
Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending
amendment be set aside, and I call up amendment No. 5077 for its
immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is no pending amendment.
The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. DeMint] proposes an
amendment numbered 5077.
Mr. DeMINT. 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 reduce to $35,000,000,000 the amount authorized to be
appropriated to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria in
developing countries during the next 5 years)
On page 130, line 1, strike ``$50,000,000,000'' and insert
``$35,000,000,000''.
Amendment No. 5078
Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 5078 and ask for
its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. DeMint] proposes an
amendment numbered 5078.
Mr. DeMINT. 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 limit the countries to which Federal financial assistance
may be targeted under this Act)
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. FUNDING LIMITATION.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, amounts
authorized to be appropriated under this Act may only be
targeted
[[Page 14772]]
toward those countries authorized for funding under the
United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and
Malaria Act of 2003 (Public Law 108-25).
Amendment No. 5079 to Amendment No. 5078
Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I send a second-degree amendment to the
desk and ask for its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. DeMint] proposes an
amendment numbered 5079 to amendment No. 5078:
At the end of the amendment, strike the period and add a
comma and the following:
``and shall not be made available to such countries, or other
countries through the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis
and Malaria, for any organization or program which supports
or participates in the management of a program of coercive
abortion or involuntary sterilizations.''
Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I rise today to speak against this foreign
aid bill and in favor of a couple of amendments that will restore some
integrity to it.
I wish to make it clear that I believe this legislation aims to do
something very important. A lot of people are suffering in Africa with
AIDS, and the President's Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief--or PEPFAR, as
we call it--is designed to provide treatment and prevention assistance
to those in need. This is a program I voted for in 2003, and it is
something I think every American would consider a worthy cause. But the
simple fact is, we cannot afford every worthy cause around the world.
Our budget is broken and our Nation is headed toward financial
collapse. Yet this bill spends $50 billion, which is more than a 300-
percent increase over the original $15 billion authorization. None of
this money is paid for. Instead, it is all borrowed money. It passes
the bill on to our children and grandchildren. This is not generosity;
I am afraid it is thievery.
So we have conflicting goals. On one hand, we want to help people
suffering in Africa. On the other hand, we want to balance our budget
and prevent people from suffering in America. As Ronald Reagan said,
``America is a great Nation because America is a good Nation.''
Americans have always prided themselves on reaching out to people in
need, and we should do so. However, if we bankrupt our own country, we
will no longer be able to extend a helping hand to others. That is why
I am offering an amendment--this first amendment, No. 5077--to reduce
the spending in this bill from $50 billion to $35 billion. This would
still provide a more than 100 percent increase over the original
program while maintaining some integrity to our budget process.
The Senator from Kentucky, Mr. Bunning, has an amendment that would
reauthorize the program at current levels with no increase in spending.
That is something I support because at a time when we need to be
dramatically reducing the size and scope of government, just keeping
the program at its current spending levels is generous.
My amendment would allow for the program to actually grow from $15
billion to $35 billion. This is still way too much money, in my
opinion, but it would save American taxpayers $15 billion over the next
5 years, which is no small amount of money. Besides saving Americans
money, this amendment would not actually take a thing away from people
in Africa who benefit from this program.
The fact is, this foreign aid program cannot spend $50 billion on its
intended purposes. According to the Congressional Budget Office, PEPFAR
can only spend $35 billion over the next 5 years to meet the needs of
those who are suffering. Our aid workers in many African nations have
said as much, and their statements are backed up by the Congressional
Budget Office's own estimate of this budget.
In reality, the money that cannot be spent to directly treat and
prevent the spread of AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria will be siphoned
off for other things authorized in this bill, none of which are
directly related to the prevention or treatment of these three
diseases. For example, the bill authorizes the expenditure of funds to
provide legal services, empower women, ensure safe drinking water and
sanitation, provide treatment for alcohol abuse, and address the
inheritance rights of women and girls, and study transportation
patterns, just to name a few. In addition, some of this $35 billion
would be siphoned off to build an even larger bureaucracy here in the
United States.
One U.S. aid worker in Africa said:
We spend 4 months writing our Country Operation Plan only
to send it to Washington and have it rewritten without our
input.
Four months of effort for no reason certainly sounds like a waste of
effort, and it diminishes our success.
Unfortunately, as we have all seen around here, the bigger the pot of
money gets, the more waste and fraud we have, and accountability
completely disappears. If we really care about those suffering from
AIDS, we need to ensure that as many dollars as possible reach the
people who are truly in need. The measure of America's greatness is not
found in the amount of money we provide but in the effectiveness of our
efforts.
I encourage my colleagues to support my amendment. It saves $15
billion without taking anything away from people who are hurting in
Africa. Most importantly, it restores some honesty and integrity to
this bill.
Another problem with this bill is that it expands the scope of this
program to new countries that were not part of the original program.
The bill explicitly adds central Asia, Eastern Europe, and Latin
America to the list of PEPFAR's focused countries. The bill also
contains vague language expanding the program to other nations.
This is yet another example of the dishonesty of Congress. We say
this bill is about addressing AIDS in Africa, but really it is about
foreign aid all over the globe. The original program focused on
countries that had widespread, generalized epidemics, but this bill
allows the program to expand to a number of new countries that have
problems only in limited areas. We can fix this problem with the bill
by limiting the list of focused countries to those included in the
original 2003 authorization.
That is what my amendment does, amendment No. 5078, and this is what
it says:
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, funds
authorized under this Act shall be targeted only toward those
countries authorized for funding under the United States
Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of
2003.
So we keep the program focused on its original intent.
Last week, the majority leader pointed out that the purpose of this
bill is to specifically help people in Africa. According to the
Washington Times, he told reporters:
While we're fiddling around here on this in Washington,
people are dying. This is big-time stuff, this is very
important to one whole continent.
I agree with him, but the bill he has brought up spreads money to
more than three continents beyond Africa. If we are going to spend this
kind of money, we need to be honest about what we are spending it on.
This bill is supposed to be about the treatment of AIDS, tuberculosis,
and malaria in Africa. The cost of this program will only continue to
increase dramatically if we continue to allow funds to go to other
countries.
I have also offered a second-degree amendment to prevent American
taxpayers from having to support forced abortions around the world. My
amendment simply says that none of the funds in this bill may be
awarded to any organization or program which supports or participates
in the management of a program of coerced abortion or involuntary
sterilization.
In addition to the things I described before that fall outside the
stated purpose of the bill, the provision of funds to organizations
that perform and/or support coercive abortion in China is perhaps the
worst. This not only kills innocent unborn children, it violates the
human rights of women in China.
This bill authorizes $2 billion to the United Nations Global Fund in
2009 and designates such funds in the following 4 years. This means
that over the 5-year
[[Page 14773]]
life of the bill, the United States will likely provide at least $10
billion to the United Nations Global Fund.
Restrictions against funding forced abortions are in the current
PEPFAR bill, but they do not apply to the Global Fund. We know that the
Global Fund has provided at least two large grants in 2004 and 2006 to
the various agencies within the Chinese Government, including the
National Population and Family Planning Commission, which runs China's
one-child-per-family program. In fact, we have here--and I wish to
submit them for the record--the grants themselves which explicitly
state that they were made to the various agencies within the Chinese
Government, including the National Population and Family Planning
Commission. I have the number, which I would like to have printed in
the Record. One of these grants spent almost $59 million in 2004 and
the second was over $11 million in 2006.
It is quite clear that my concerns about how funds can be used in the
Global Fund are real and serious. It is very obvious that unless we
pass this amendment to clearly prohibit funds, they can and likely will
be used by the Chinese agency that carries out coercive abortions.
Instead of working to ensure that the United Nations Global Fund does
not provide grants to Chinese Government agencies that force women to
have abortions, the sponsors of the bill doubled the U.S. contributions
to the Global Fund to $2 billion.
The Bush administration has fought to prohibit funding to
organizations that perform or support coercive abortions. In testimony
before Congress on February 17, 2005, Secretary of State Condoleezza
Rice said:
We have been outspoken with the Chinese about this terrible
practice, and of course, as Secretary of State, I will
enforce Kemp-Kasten to make certain that we are not funding
anything that remotely as related to these policies.
I just do not believe that either the administration or any Member of
the Congress could ever argue that we should not do everything we can
to ensure that American taxpayers' money does not go to the Chinese
National Population and Family Planning Commission.
Now, many of my colleagues may not believe this because it is so
outrageous, but it is true. Many outside groups supporting this bill
don't want anyone to know about it because they don't believe we should
do anything that restricts abortions--even those performed against the
will of the mother. Even some people who oppose spending money on
coercive abortions have been convinced to look the other way because
they want this bill to pass. We cannot turn a blind eye to this problem
with the bill.
My amendment is germane, it is allowable under the unanimous consent
agreement, and I encourage all of my colleagues to support it. We need
to make absolutely certain that American families are not giving their
hard-earned tax dollars to organizations that force women in China and
around the world to have abortions.
I encourage my colleagues to support these amendments.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee is recognized.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I saw the majority leader. I wonder if
he needs time to speak or wrap up. I will be glad to forego if he wants
to do that. I will speak for 10 or 15 minutes as in morning business,
but I will be glad to wait for the majority leader to see if he wishes
to speak.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is recognized for 10 minutes.
JOHN WHITEHEAD
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, sometimes American lives are lived so
eloquently that nothing needs to be written about them. Sometimes even
eloquent lives can be eloquently written about. Such was the case over
the Fourth of July weekend. When I had a little extra time, I came
across Peggy Noonan's article in the Wall Street Journal on July 5
about John Whitehead of New York.
John Whitehead was on Normandy Beach. He chaired Goldman Sachs. He
was President Reagan's Deputy Secretary of State. He headed the
International Rescue Commission. He has been in the middle of New
York's efforts after 9/11. As Peggy Noonan wrote, he is a model public
citizen.
For the eloquence of his life and the eloquence of her article, I ask
unanimous consent that it be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
A Day at the Beach
(By Peggy Noonan)
It was May 1944, and 22-year-old John Whitehead of
Montclair, N.J., an ensign on the USS Thomas Jefferson, was
placed in charge of five of the landing craft for the
invasion of Europe. Each would ferry 25 soldiers from the TJ,
as they called it, onto the shore of France. John's landing
site was to be a 50-yard stretch of shoreline dubbed Dog Red
Beach. It fell near the middle of the sector called Omaha
Beach which in turn fell in the middle of the entire assault.
The TJ sailed to Portsmouth Harbor, which was jam-packed
with ships. On June 1 the Army troops arrived, coming up the
gangway one by one. ``They were very quiet,'' John said this
week. Word came on June 4 that they'd leave that night, but
they were ordered back in a storm. The next morning June 5,
the rain was still coming down, but the seas were calmer.
Around 8 that night, they cast off to cross the channel. The
skies were dark, rain lashed the deck, and the TJ rolled in
the sea. At midnight they dropped anchor nine miles off the
French coast. They ate a big breakfast of eggs and bacon. At
2 a.m. the crew began lowering the Higgins boats--``a kind of
floating boxcar, rectangular, with high walls''--over the
side by crane. The soldiers had to climb down big nets to get
aboard. ``They had practiced, but as Eisenhower always said,
`In wartime, plans are only good until the moment you try to
execute them.' ''
The Higgins boats pitched in the choppy water. The
soldiers, loaded down ``like mountaineers'' with rifles,
flamethrowers, radio equipment, artillery parts, tarps, food,
water, ``70 pounds in all''--had trouble getting from the
nets to the boats. ``I saw a poor soul slip from the net into
the water. He sank like a stone. He just disappeared in the
depths of the sea. There was nothing we could do.'' So they
boarded the boats on the deck and hoisted them into the sea.
It took John's five little boats four hours to cover the
nine miles to the beach. ``They were the worst hours of our
lives. It was pitch black, cold, and the rain was coming down
in sheets, drenching us. The boats were being tossed in the
waves, making all of us violently sick. We'd all been given
the big breakfast. Hardly anyone could hold it down. Packed
in like that, with the boat's high walls. a cry went up: `For
Christ's sake, do it in your helmet!' ''
``Around 4 a.m. the dawn broke and a pale light spread
across the sea, and now we could see that we were in the
middle of an armada--every kind of boat, destroyers, probably
the greatest array of sea power ever gathered.''
Now they heard the sound, the deep boom of the shells from
the battleships farther out at sea, shelling the beach to
clear a path. Above, barely visible through clouds, they saw
the transport planes pushing through to drop paratroopers
from the 82nd and 101st Airborne Divisions. ``Those were
brave men.''
At 5 a.m. they were close enough to shore to see
landmarks--a spit of land, a slight rise of a bluff. In front
of them they saw some faster, sleeker British boats trying
desperately to stay afloat in the choppy water. As the
Americans watched, three of the boats flipped over and sank,
drowning all the men. A British navigator went by in a
different kind of boat. ``He was standing up and he called
out to my friend in a very jaunty British accent, `I say,
fellows, which way is it to Pointe du Hoc?' That was one of
the landmarks, and the toughest beach of all. My friend
yelled out that it was up to our right. `Very good!' he cried
out, and then went on by with a little wave of his hand.''
Closer to shore, a furious din--``It was like a Fourth of
July celebration multiplied by a thousand.'' By 6 a.m. they
were 800 yards from shore. All five boats of the squadron had
stayed together. The light had brightened enough that John
could see his wristwatch. ``At 6:20 I waved them in with a
hard chop of my arm: Go!''
They faced a barrier, made a sharp left, ran parallel to
the shore looking for an opening, got one, turned again
toward the beach. They hit it, were in a foot or two of
water. The impact jarred loose the landing ramps to release
the soldiers as planned. But on John's boat, it didn't work.
He scrambled to the bow, got a hammer, pounded the stuck
bolt. The ramp crashed down and the soldiers lunged forth.
Some were hit with shrapnel as they struggled through to the
beach. Others made it to land only to be hit as they crossed
it. The stuck ramp probably saved John's life. After he'd
rushed forward to grab the hammer, he turned and saw the
coxswain he'd been standing next to had been hit and killed
by an incoming shell.
The troops of Omaha Beach took terrible fire. Half the
soldiers from John's five boats
[[Page 14774]]
were killed or wounded. ``It was a horrible sight. But I had
to concentrate on doing my job.'' To make room for the next
wave of landings, they raised the ramp, backed out, turned
around and sped back to the TJ. ``I remember, waving hello to
the soldiers in the in-coming boats, as if we were all on
launches for a pleasure cruise. I remember thinking how odd
that such, gestures of civility would persist amid such
horror.''
Back at the TJ, he was told to take a second breakfast in
the wardroom--white tablecloths, steward's mates asking if
he'd like more. He thought it unreal: ``from Dog Red Beach to
the Ritz.'' He heard in the background the quiet boom of the
liberation of Europe. Then back to a Higgins boat for another
run at the beach. This time the ramp lowered, and he got off.
Dog Red Beach was secure. The bodies of the dead and wounded
had been carried up onto a rise below a bluff. He felt
thankful he had survived. ``Then I took a few breaths and
felt elated, proud to have played a part in maybe the biggest
battle in history.''
John went on to landings in Marseilles, Iwo Jima and
Okinawa. After he came home, he went on to chair Goldman
Sachs, work in Ronald Reagan's State Department, and head
great organizations such as the International Rescue
Committee. He is, in that beautiful old phrase, a public
citizen.
But if you asked him today his greatest moment, he'd say
that day on the beach, when he was alive and grateful for it.
``At that moment, dead tired, soaked to the skin, I would not
have wanted to be anywhere else in the world.''
It is silly to think one generation is ``better'' than
another. No one born in 1920 is, by virtue of that fact,
better than someone born in 1960. But it is true that each
era has a certain mood, certain assumptions--in John's era,
sacrifice--and each generation distinguishes itself in time,
or doesn't. John's did. He himself did. And what better day
than today to say: Thanks, John.
energy
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, the majority leader, Senator Reid, has
spoken about an energy roadmap. He talked about it on Friday. He talked
about it again today. I am glad he is talking about it. I want to make
a suggestion to him, which I hope he can accept. I am sure that in his
home State, Nevada, as well as in my home State, Tennessee, the first
thing out of anybody's mouth has to do with gasoline prices.
I try to read on the floor of the Senate regularly letters that have
been e-mailed to me from Tennesseans whose lives are changed by the $4
and $4.25 gasoline. What Senator Reid said in his remarks was that he
has an energy roadmap. I say, with great respect, that I am afraid his
roadmap is only half a roadmap because he is willing to use less energy
but not willing--as far as I can tell--to find more energy.
In 1961, President Kennedy said: Let's go to the Moon in 10 years.
But if the astronauts had a roadmap that took them only halfway there,
they would be floating in space. That is where I am afraid we would be
as a country if we only do half our job as we address $4 gasoline.
The problem that we have is a very simple one, even though a
difficult one. It has to do with economics 101, the law of supply and
demand. We have low supplies and more demand because around the world,
the Chinese, the Indians, and others are growing wealthier and using
more oil, from which gasoline is made.
Mr. President, the only real solution to the $4, $4.25 gasoline
prices is to find more and use less--find more, as well as use less.
Now, the majority leader's suggestions that he mentioned--and I don't
think they are part of the bill yet--include some very promising ideas.
Curb speculation. We on the Republican side have introduced legislation
that would put 100 more cops on the beat to curb speculation. Say that
oil produced in America should be used here. That is what is happening
today.
Increase our focus on renewable energy; renewable energy is
important. It is only 3 percent of the total amount of electricity that
we use in the United States today. We have a long way to go before
solar, wind, and other energy of that kind can be a major part of what
we need to do. Most of that is devoted to electricity. Of course, that
is important. On the Republican side, we have supported that.
But what we have done on our side is introduce legislation that would
do both: find more and use less. We don't do that with the hope that we
will have a Republican bill because we don't want to see a Democratic
bill either. We want an American bill. We believe our legislation
deserves--and will earn--Democratic support. In fact, Democratic
Senators have voted for some of the provisions in our legislation
before.
In terms of finding more oil, we propose allowing deep sea
exploration--give a State the option to drill for oil, if the State
wishes to do that, and then take 37 percent of that money and put it
into the State treasury for universities, beach nourishment, lowering
taxes, or whatever. Put 12\1/2\ percent into the Land and Water
Conservation Fund and half to the Federal Treasury. We could unlock,
conservatively, 1 million barrels of oil a day if we were to allow deep
sea exploration.
Today the President has taken off the Presidential moratorium on deep
sea exploration. So it is up to us in the Congress to say: Will we or
will we not find more oil by exploring in the deep seas off our coast?
Two, we have suggested in our legislation that we take the moratorium
off oil shale development in four Western States. That could produce,
over time, 2 million barrels a day. Just those two ideas--drilling
offshore and oil shale--would increase by one-third the American
production of oil, almost all of which we use here. So that is the
supply part.
We are also interested in using less. The most promising way to do
that, I believe--and 44 of us have agreed, and I will bet many do on
the other side--has to do with plug-in electric cars and trucks. When I
first started talking about that, people thought I had been out in the
sun too long. In fact, Nissan, General Motors, Toyota, and Ford are all
going to be selling us cars that we can plug in at night--hybrid cars.
Three quarters of us drive less than 40 miles a day, and I am one of
those. I can drive back and forth to the Senate using very little
gasoline, if any. We could electrify half of our fleet of cars and
trucks in the United States. That would take time, but it would be a
clear direction toward using less oil.
With just those provisions I have talked about--finding more and
using less--we could cut our oil imports in half. That would reduce
your gas prices.
If you are driving a plug-in electric vehicle, by the way, there is
plenty of electricity. At night, while we are asleep, most utilities
have plenty of cheap electricity they would sell us. You plug your car
or truck in at night for just about the same amount of charge that your
water heater would use, and you could fill up with 60 cents of
electricity instead of $100 worth of gasoline.
Just these three ideas--deep sea exploration, oil shale, and plug-in
vehicles--would cut oil imports in half. We are ready to do that.
We would like for the majority leader to bring to the floor of the
Senate an energy bill that is directed toward reducing the price of
gasoline. Let each Democratic Senator put up their best idea, and let
the Republicans put up our best ideas. Let's have a debate and votes,
and they would probably take 60 votes.
We cannot get everything done before we leave in August, or even
before October, but we can begin. From the day the United States of
America--the third largest producer of oil and the user of a quarter of
all of the oil in the world--finds more and uses less, the future
expected price of oil will go down, and today's price of oil will
stabilize and begin to go down.
I say to my friend, the majority leader, as one Senator, I welcome
his interest and attention to energy, and specifically to gasoline
prices. We Republicans have offered--44 of us--a slimmed-down bill, a
modest bill. We don't say drill everywhere offshore. We don't say drill
in Alaska in this piece of legislation. We say give States the option,
and lift the moratorium on oil shale. Make electric plug-in cars and
trucks commonplace and cut our oil imports in half over time. That is
the way to reduce gasoline prices.
We hope if we are able in this Senate to act like a Senate and spend
a week or two on this legislation and consider a number of amendments,
we can come up with a result and we can go home to
[[Page 14775]]
our constituents in August and say: Yes, we got a result. And when we
come back in September, if we can do more, we will. When we come back
in January, if we can do more, we will.
Everybody in Tennessee is saying to me: Senator Alexander, why don't
you get together and work something out? I would like to do that, Mr.
President. I didn't come here to play politics, talk trash, or stick my
fingers in the eyes of the other side.
In my first speech on, for example, U.S. history, the majority
leader, who was then the whip, was on the Senate floor, and he stood up
and cosponsored my bill. Senator Kennedy got 20 cosponsors for it. It
is now law today. Surely, if we can do that with U.S. history summer
academies, we can do it with gasoline prices when it is the No. 1
issue.
Last Tuesday we had a bipartisan breakfast that was attended by 14
Senators. We heard from Senators Conrad, Chambliss, Domenici, and
Bingaman. We talked about what we could agree on that had to do with
both finding more and using less.
We cannot repeal the law of supply and demand. We know that mostly on
the Republican side we talk about supply. Over on the Democratic side,
they talk about demand. We have to put it together if we want to bring
gasoline prices down. That is what we should be doing. I think that
opportunity exists today.
In that closed room last Tuesday--and there is another bipartisan
breakfast in the morning--I heard some Senators say things such as:
If we cannot deal with this across party lines, we don't
deserve to be here.
I think that is right, and most Americans feel that way.
The majority leader has many issues that have to be dealt with in the
next 2 or 3 weeks. I hope he can find a way to bring his best ideas to
the floor and allow us to do the same. Let's bring up the debates and
let's talk and let's vote and come to a result, and let's begin to
lower gasoline prices. From the day the United States of America says
to the world that we are going to find more American oil and we are
going to use less oil, the expected price of oil and gas will begin to
go down, and so will today's price of gas and oil go down.
I yield the floor.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
MORNING BUSINESS
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there now be a
period for the transaction of morning business, with Senators allowed
to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
FORECLOSURE PREVENTION ACT OF 2008
Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I am very pleased that the Senate has passed
legislation which will help our troubled housing market. This bill will
reform the oversight of the government-sponsored enterprises--Fannie
Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Home Loan Banks--and also provided
much needed relief for communities and homeowners combating
foreclosures.
The first piece of this large housing bill is the Federal Housing
Finance Regulatory Reform Act. This legislation will modernize the
regulation of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banks
and expands their housing mission. By creating one regulator for the
GSEs, it will make it easier for them to respond to the housing market
and continue to create affordable housing opportunities for Americans
across the country.
The bill also includes key provisions which will help homeowners and
communities combat foreclosures. Foreclosed properties drive down the
property value of surrounding homes, and communities are losing tax
revenue, which will impact public services. Communities need the
ability to take excess homes and make them livable again in order to
recover lost revenue. The $4 billion in CDBG funding included in this
bill will allow for States and local municipalities to rehabilitate
foreclosed properties and then get them back onto the market for
homeowners to purchase or to be made into affordable rental housing.
This money is vital to the economic recovery of communities that have
been devastated by foreclosure.
Additionally, the bill has funding for housing counselors to help
homeowners avoid foreclosure. Housing counselors will be able to reach
troubled homeowners and find viable and affordable solutions in order
to keep them in their homes. One of the most creative provisions to
help at risk homeowners is the Hope for Homeownership Program in FHA.
This program will allow homeowners who are behind on their mortgage
payments to refinance into a fixed-rate FHA insured mortgage and
ultimately stay in their homes. The quicker these provisions are signed
into law, the quicker families and communities can respond to their
housing needs.
I am very pleased that the amendment which myself, Senators Collins,
Lincoln, and Mikulski offered was agreed to and incorporated into the
bill. There are many problems that are a result of the collapsing
housing market, and the emergence of financial scam artists is one of
them. The amendment will better protect homeowners from scam artists
trying to steal the equity out of their homes.
The passage of this housing bill is the first step to help our
country from the collapse of the housing market. I hope that the House
will act quickly and Congress can produce a comprehensive piece of
legislation which the President will sign.
____________________
FISA ADMENDMENTS ACT
Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, the Congressional Record for
July 9, 2008, inadvertently omitted my written statement for the
Record. The text is as follows:
Mr. President, I believe that we must pass a new FISA bill that
enables our intelligence community to get the information it needs to
stop terrorist plots while also protecting our civil liberties, by
requiring a court order before any American is targeted for
eavesdropping.
But I don't believe in blanket immunity for the phone companies.
That's why, in the Intelligence Committee, I offered language to deny
immunity to the telecommunications companies for their alleged
participation in the President's warrantless wiretapping program. But
that amendment failed--and failed miserably.
During floor consideration of the FISA bill, Senator Feinstein and I
offered a compromise amendment that would have required the FISA court
to review the actions of telecommunication companies who participated
in the President's warrantless wiretapping program. But it failed too.
Now I am backing an amendment by Senator Bingaman that would at least
delay immunity until the inspectors general of the U.S. Government
complete their investigation of the President's warrantless wiretapping
program. Upon completion of the report, the Senate will have ninety
days to act before immunity is granted to the telecommunications
companies. This will allow us time to change some minds if real
wrongdoing is found.
Overall, I believe this legislation significantly improves civil
liberties protections for Americans while enabling our intelligence
community to listen in on terrorists. This is an important step forward
and I will support this legislation.
____________________
HONORING OUR ARMED FORCES
specialist estelle ``lee'' turner
Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to SPC
Estelle ``Lee'' Turner and his heroic service to our country. As a
member of the Army's Echo Company, 1st Battalion, 506th Infantry
Regiment, 4th Brigade
[[Page 14776]]
Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division based in Fort Campbell, KY, SPC
Turner was serving in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. On July 2,
2008, he died in a hospital in Bethesda, MD after being mortally
wounded by an IED in Afghanistan.
Lee had already served his country for 6 years in the Army two
decades earlier, having finished his military service in 1989. Yet this
wasn't enough. Even though he had gone above and beyond, Lee still had
the drive to be a hero. After moving to Sioux Falls in 2004, he
reenlisted in the Army at the age of 39, after the Army had raised its
age limit. He looked forward to being deployed to Afghanistan, his
first tour in the war on terror. His wife recalls, ``He never seemed
worried about it, this is something he believed in. He thought it was
right.''
Raised in a military family, patriotism was instilled in his heart
from a young age. Lee's father served in the Navy for 18 years, and his
grandfather was an Army soldier who served in World War II. His younger
brother John is in the Army, and his wife is an Army reservist. Lee's
awards and decorations include the Army Good Conduct Medal, the
National Defense Service Medal, the Army Combat Action Badge, and the
Purple Heart. Lee enjoyed racing and fixing cars, and playing guitar.
He had a fierce devotion to his family, and he will be deeply missed by
those who survive him: his wife Leah, his daughter Lyda, his siblings,
John and ``Gucci'', and his mother Gloria.
Specialist Turner gave his all for his soldiers and his country. Our
Nation owes him a debt of gratitude, and the best way to honor his life
is to emulate his commitment to our country. Mr. President, I join with
all South Dakotans in expressing my deepest sympathy to the family and
friends of Specialist Turner. He will be missed, but his service to our
Nation will never be forgotten.
____________________
IDAHOANS SPEAK OUT ON HIGH ENERGY PRICES
Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, in mid-June, I asked Idahoans to share with
me how high energy prices are affecting their lives, and they responded
by the hundreds. The stories, numbering over 1,000, are heartbreaking
and touching. To respect their efforts, I am submitting every e-mail
sent to me through [email protected] .gov to the Congressional
Record. This is not an issue that will be easily resolved, but it is
one that deserves immediate and serious attention, and Idahoans deserve
to be heard. Their stories not only detail their struggles to meet
everyday expenses but also have suggestions and recommendations as to
what Congress can do now to tackle this problem and find solutions that
last beyond today. I ask unanimous consent to have today's letters
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Like many other single parents out there, we have to
commute to work for better-paying jobs and cannot take public
transportation because they won't stop at daycare and the
store on the way home from work. So, yes, like every family,
whether single or not, you have to drive and cannot ride your
bike, but give me a break. And tell me why the airlines are
now charging a $75 escort fee for your child under 12 flying
alone (it was $30 last year), and this is to walk them from
the counter to the plane. Tell me how much gas does that use?
And their reason for increased cost is the fuel prices. So
that is $150 round trip to walk from the counter to the plane
on top of the airline charge. What is going to be the next
excuse--charging to use the restroom during the flight?
I seriously believe this is going to extremely out of hand
before it gets any better. And is anyone going to do anything
about all of this? I do not think so!!!
Thank you,
Tracy, Star.
____
Dear Senator Crapo, When gas hit $2 a gallon, my husband
and I agreed that neither of us expected the price to ever go
below $2 and that the price would continue to increase
because of increased demand from China and India and the Iraq
war. In 2006, we traded in a mid-80s Saturn and bought a
Toyota Prius because of its gas mileage. As the price of gas
continued to increase, my husband bought a scooter to commute
to work whenever the weather is dry. The scooter gets 90+
miles to the gallon. Being a stay-at-home mom for a while
with our daughter, I consolidate errands into a single trip
whenever I can and handle as many things as I can over the
telephone. Gas is now over $4 a gallon (. . . diesel is
almost $5!), but everyday I still see huge shiny pickup
trucks and SUVs driven by solo drivers commuting to work.
Would I like gas to be cheaper? Sure, but it is not
reasonable to expect that it is going to happen any time
soon. Domestic oil reserves cannot be developed quickly
enough for us to seriously depend on that strategy. We must
reduce demand and become more efficient.
Our grandparents and parents supported the war effort by
reducing their personal consumption of oil, metal, clothing
and food (among other items). Why do our leaders (you!)
insist that citizens are unable to rise to the occasion and
change our consumption?
Do I support destroying the Alaskan wilderness so my fellow
Idahoans can commute in SUV's? No!
Do I support fighting wars over oil so we can go water
skiing and speed boating at Lucky Peak? No!
Do I support subsidizing and coddling the American car
industry which has stubbornly refused to offer fuel efficient
cars? No!
If Boise had a light rail system, would we use it to visit
family and run errands in Meridian, Nampa and Caldwell? You
bet!
Senator Crapo, please be a leader who does not ask citizens
to wallow in anger and pity. Establish your leadership and
vision around responsible use and investment in the future!
Best regards,
Kimberly, Boise.
____
Dear Mr. Crapo: Thank you so much for trying to fight this
battle for us. I do not think there is a family in the U.S.
that is not being affected by our high fuel costs. For many
of us, we have long considered our fuel as a necessity but
with the prices we now are paying, it is becoming a luxury!
My husband and I are getting close to retirement, so we
have been trying to plan and save for that time. With these
fuel charges, I will have to reduce my 401K payments because
I drive 25 miles to work each day. Sure, I could try and buy
a smaller car to reduce my fuel bill, but my car is fairly
new and paid for and it does not seem economically feasible
to trade it in and start making payments on a smaller car.
No, we won't go without food or shelter, but we will be
tightening our belts on other aspects of our lives. Our
Saturday drives, date nights, and trips to visit our
grandkids will be greatly reduced. These are the things that
we have worked hard to achieve and enjoy and now will not be
able to do so.
I greatly encourage our country to begin using our own
resources. Domestic drilling and refining is the answer.
Sure, I care about the environment and harming wildlife, but
I care more about the human aspect of this crisis. Our human
way life has become harmed. Why aren't the environmentalists
worrying about that? With technology what it is today, there
are fewer chances of oil spills or environmental issues. I
also know that, with our technology, it will not take eight
to ten years to get this oil into production. I think we need
to begin drilling in ANWR and off the coast of California
immediately.
As a citizen I will do my part to help with energy
conservation but I also expect our legislatures to step up
and do their part and stop being controlled by special
interest environmentalists.
Thank you once again for your efforts.
Jeannette, Idaho Falls.
____
As seniors on a pension and Social Security, I think we are
among the hardest hit. I think it is criminal that neither
energy nor food is included in the COLA. It is going to be a
long time before these prices come down and I think it is
time the COLA is based on something a little more realistic.
We cannot live without either one of these items. Also living
in rural Idaho, we do not have any public transportation. I
truly think the government would just as soon that we would
all die off so they do not have to deal with us.
Donna.
____
Dear Senator Mike Crapo: If you really care about one of
the most crippling economic problems facing our nation, it is
the impact of the greed of the oil industry infrastructure.
The racketeering (oh, well, what else should I call it?) of
the oil industry is having massive inflationary impact on
this nation, severely damaging this nations transportation
system. The ripple effects will be far-reaching and crippling
over the long term. Damage to the transportation
infrastructure with loss of service through airline cutbacks,
will have long term impact on the entire travel industry, in
turn impacting the entire economy. Fewer flights and fewer
airline routes (and bankrupt carriers) require less
airplanes, impacting aircraft production (loss of airplane
orders and jobs at Boeing), resulting in fewer jobs, and
fewer hours worked. Resultant higher ticket prices make
discretionary travel (vacations) less affordable impacting
hotels, motels, theme parks, rental cars, etc. Look further
still and it not hard to visualize the massive ripple: less
[[Page 14777]]
hotel and motel supplies purchased, restaurant food, new
automobiles for the rental car industry, etc.
The airline industry, trucking, farming, plastics (and
other products reliant on petrochemicals) and food production
are all suffering from the unchecked corporate oil industry
greed. Greed that only promises to worsen, as the oil
industry blackmails us with obvious threat of higher prices
without access to protected areas for drilling. Yet they
actually do nothing too relieve the bottlenecks nor improve
their existing production infrastructure. Nor is it a short
term solution. They claim investment, in what, additional
tracts of land to grow their holdings, and exploration, to
lock in future production, but provide no meaningful major
expenditure that has improved current production that is of
benefit to the American consumer. When was the last new
refinery opened, or the old existing infrastructure
modernized, unless required by regulation, or replacement due
to industrial accident or breakdown? The number of
competitors has shrunk thru buyouts and mergers over the
years, serving to destroy the competitive market, and pricing
at the pump, is nothing short of collusion, thinly veiled as
competitive free market pricing. And the oil industry gets
wiser on how to game the congress and the people. And you sit
still for it!
We need very badly the long term solutions you speak of,
however, we need action now with a high priority placed on
bringing a cessation to the greed based damage to this
nations economy and the severe economic burden being endured
by the voters you elected officials collectively represent.
If it is bad now, think of the winter heating bill citizens
in the nation's cold climate will shortly face when winter is
once again upon us.
So vital is this industry to our nation's economy, it is
past time to regulate it! I repeat, it is past time to
regulate the oil industry!
Our government regulates electricity, natural gas, and
telephone infrastructure, and the FCC TV & radio. How is the
oil industry any different? How is the oil dependency/
infrastructure of this nation less vital? They are no longer
serving this nation's interest in a responsible manner, have
made a complete mockery of congressional investigations (with
the aid of some members of congress), and basically have the
United States of America over a barrel!
A good place to start would be to make speculation illegal
(dealing through third party brokers & traders illegal. If a
person/company does not actually physically handle the actual
product, it should be made illegal to profit from it by
brokering or speculation.).
How many airlines have to fold, how many truckers go under,
and how much unnecessary inflation must this nation endure
before our elected (for now) officials really do something
meaningful? It is said oil is higher due to the shrinking
dollar. Oil has driven the dollar down and is a major player
in our current inflation. It impacts the United States, it
ripples thru the world.
Have you asked yourselves why the voters think less of our
elected officials (per polls) than our President? Are you
really happy with that?
Your email implies you care. Then prove it to the voters
you represent. Start the Congress on a path to put control
and regulation on [the oil] industry so very vital to the
nation's economy and infrastructure.
How long must we wait for Congress to stop the ongoing
damage to our dollar, cost of living (including food), and
our transportation infrastructure? What could be more
important to both the short-term and long-term wellbeing of
this country and its citizens in your list of priorities?
On another but still related issue, where is this nation's
long range planning? If I might cite an example; Japan after
WWII as a nation set its sights on consumer electronics and
the automobile. Look where they are today with those
technologies and look at our once proud auto industry, now a
cripple. Kennedy pointed this nation toward the moon--within
ten years. It was a national plan and a priority. What are
this nation's long-term goals? Do you know? Why do not we the
people know?
These items should rise above petty politics. They should
be without party ownership and bickering. And a declaration
of persona non grata made toward the oil lobby and their
bought and paid for elected officials.
Thank you for asking for my story, but it is really a much
larger story than my story; it is our story.
John.
____
Dear Senator Crapo: It is good to hear from you and know
that at least one politician in Washington has their head on
straight. Thank you for representing those of us who do not
buy the ``man-caused global warming'' hoax. I believe it is a
natural cycle the earth has gone thru many times before and
will continue to undergo.
I believe all Americans want clean air, water and a healthy
environment which can all be accomplished while
simultaneously drilling in ANWAR, off coast regions and
exploring other natural resources available domestically.
Sincerely,
Mike, Emmett.
____
Dear Senator Crapo: Thank you for the opportunity to
provide input on what I think is the most important issue we
should have faced at least twenty years ago. Yet, I know that
mustering the political will to make the changes we needed to
make would have been very difficult then. Nonetheless, here
we are in 2008 and, being Americans, we will face this crisis
with intelligence and determination.
Frankly, I put the rising prices into this perspective. I
drive a Hyundai Accent and average about 34 mpg and drive
about 11,000 miles per year. So, I buy about 325 gallons
annually. Gasoline has increased $1.75 over the last short
while. So, on average I'm paying an additional $47 per month.
Sure, I'd rather spend that on something else, but that
really is not that bad. My wife drives our Toyota 4 Runner.
Her commute is short and other than that, we only use that
vehicle for recreation . . . about 4,000 to 5,000 miles per
year. Again, I can live with it.
To my way of thinking, the increased gas prices have been a
blessing. It has finally brought the discussion of energy
management to forefront where it has needed to be for some
time. Not only is our economic well being at stake, but the
security of America as well. Were it not for oil, would we
have ever even heard of Saddam Hussein? And, too, we are
finally coming to agreement that climate change is real and
are showing signs that we may actually address it. If higher
gas prices are the cost of getting to have this discussion,
so be it.
What should we do about gas prices, you ask? Nothing.
Market forces will bring down gas consumption which should
have a moderating effect on prices. People are opting for
more fuel efficient cars which may stimulate the auto
industry. And finally, I think the federal government should
take a more active role with our currency issues to keep the
dollar from falling much further. I know there is reluctance
to that idea, but the circumstances seem to warrant it.
Regards,
Pete, Boise.
____
Dear Senator Crapo: I do not agree with your assessment
regarding the high price of gas. We are being gouged by the
oil companies, and I will prove my point.
Oil is at about $130 a barrel. There are 42 gallons in a US
barrel, which equates to $3.09 a gallon for crude. Add to
this the price for refining say $0.40 distribution $0.25.
State and federal Taxes and about $0.25 a gallon a gas
station makes and you will see that we are already over $4 a
gallon.
How do the oil companies make these massive profits every
quarter? In the United States, we have to import 40% of our
oil the other 60% comes from Alaska, Texas, California, the
Gulf, etc. Are we paying $130 a barrel to the oil companies
for oil coming out of our own back yard? You people blame
China and India for the cost of fuel today. For your
information, I have been to both countries. They do not have
the amount of cars we Americans have. In fact, they are a
bicycle society.
I am fed up with Congress and the Senate for not taking any
action on this issue; in fact, President Bush is quiet on the
subject.
I have always been [conservative], but I fear that this
coming election [conservatives will not fare well], mainly
due oil prices which has a ripple effect and cause
unemployment, rise in food prices etc. The hardest hit people
in out society are the old people of which I am one.
Sincerely,
George.
____
Our current monthly gas budget has almost tripled with the
increase during the past year. With my husband working out of
town (300+ miles weekly commute) and I'm working for a non-
profit that reimburses me @$.40/mile, we are going in the
hole. As our state representative, you and your family should
be feeling the same affects of the energy prices that we are,
and helping correct this problem. Are you?
Respectfully,
Marcia.
____
Dear Senator: I am a hard-working Idahoan who has to change
my behavior because of high energy costs, but I also
understand that sometimes you have to pay the piper. Nobody
likes to go on a diet or take medicine. Yet in order to get
well, we have to do things we do not like. This is one of
those times. The answer to our energy problem is not to find
some way to ignore or go around what made us fat and sick.
And, I mean that quite literally. Furthermore, you know as
well as I do that local oil will be the same price as global
oil. The market price is the price regardless of where it
comes from. You do no favor to the public with this tactic.
Feel free to quote me.
Jim.
____
We are unable to see our children who live 500 to 1000
miles away due to gas prices. We are getting older and live
on retirement income, thus we are unable to help them out
with gas for making a trip to Idaho. I expect we will never
get to see them again.
Robert and Peggy, Emmett.
[[Page 14778]]
____
Senator Crapo for the last three years, I have been
traveling to Missoula, Montana, for medical treatments for
cancer and I had a stint placed. I was traveling every three
weeks for treatments and I am happy to say that the cancer is
in remission as of now but Non Hodgkin's Lymphoma cannot be
cured, it can be treated usually but not cured, and it keeps
coming back. I am not only faced with expenses at the Cancer
Center and doctor, but I have a diseased liver and they have
no idea why the tests are showing such high levels in the
tests. It seems all of this has hit more or less all at once
in traveling and taking the tests. I have to stay overnight
at times, and this, of course, creates more expenses which
the government or the insurance and Medicare does not cover.
My nest egg for retirement is getting eaten up each month,
and it will run out. I worry about my wife if something
happens to me.
I hope that someone reads this that can help me and others
in the same boat. Thank you for giving me this chance to air
my concerns about my health and what all it is taking to
handle the situation so far.
Sincerely
George, Salmon.
____________________
OBJECTION TO THE NOMINATION OF HUSEIN CUMBER
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I stand today to object to any unanimous
consent agreement in connection with the nomination of Mr. Husein
Cumber to be a member of the Surface Transportation Board, or STB. I
don't take this action lightly, and I would like to take a few moments
to briefly describe why I am placing a hold on his nomination.
Railroads and transportation infrastructure are the lifeblood of our
economy. My home State of Oregon has recently been the victim of a
short line railroad that has subverted consumer protections established
by Congress in an attempt to reduce service and raise rates. The STB is
the last line of defense against companies that are more interested in
maximizing profits than they are in their legal obligations as a common
carrier.
To be an effective safeguard against this activity, the STB needs
board members with in-depth experience and knowledge of a broad range
of rate, service and railroad merger issues. The law says that members
of the STB should possess professional standing and demonstrated
knowledge in the fields of transportation or transportation regulation.
I am very concerned that Mr. Cumber doesn't possess any of these
qualities.
Mr. Cumber's nomination requires this body to seriously review his
record of accomplishment in light of these requirements and
demonstrated abilities. I have compared Mr. Cumber's record with those
of other current and former members of the STB, and I would like to
share some of my findings with you today.
First, Chairman Charles Nottingham, a licensed attorney. Chairman
Nottingham has 4 years of experience in the Federal Highway
Administration working on everything from funding analysis to policy
development. He has an additional 4 years at the state level as the
Transportation Commissioner and CEO of Virginia DOT. He was the counsel
to the Committee on Government Reform in the U.S. House of
Representatives. Chairman Nottingham is unquestionably qualified for
the duties required of a board member and a good example of what the
STB needs in a nominee.
Vice Chairman Francis Mulvey, with a Ph.D. in Economics, is likewise
qualified. He has legislative experience as the Staff Director for the
Railroad Subcommittee in the House of Representatives. He was the
Deputy Assistant Inspector General for Rail, Transit, and Special
Programs in the Department of Transportation. He was the Assistant
Director charged with analyzing transportation issues at the GAO. His
experiences outside government are equally valuable: He was the
Programs Manager for the National Academy of Sciences, Transportation
Research Board. He was also the Vice President for Research with the
American Bus Association. Again, Vice Chairman Mulvey is an exemplary
member and a model for future nominees.
Former Chairman Linda Morgan, an attorney with a Georgetown law
degree, was supremely qualified to work on the STB. For 15 years she
held various positions with the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation. While there, she was responsible for much of the
legislation that established the framework for today's surface
transportation system. She also served as the general counsel of the
committee.
Former Chairman Roger Nober was the counselor to the Deputy Secretary
of Transportation for a year before joining the STB. Before that he
spent 4 years as the chief counsel for the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives. For the 4 years
before that, he held a variety of positions on that committee's staff.
And for the 4 years before that, he put his Harvard law degree to use
in New York City. His breadth of experience, most of it relating to
transportation issues, made him very well qualified to serve as a board
member and chairman.
Former Vice Chairman Wayne Burkes served in the Mississippi
legislature for 14 years; 4 years in the House of Representatives, and
10 years in the Senate. He served on the Highways and Transportation
Committee all 14 years. After his time in the legislature, he then
spent 10 years as the Mississippi Transportation Commissioner for the
Central District. His understanding of transportation issues was
certainly unquestioned.
Even a cursory review of current and former board member
qualifications makes it clear what kind of nominee this important
regulatory body requires. I would like to bring the Senate's attention
now to our current nominee, Mr. Husein Cumber. There are stark
differences between what you have just heard and what I will present to
you now.
Mr. Cumber's regulatory experience in transportation is limited to
his short tenure as a political appointee at the Department of
Transportation--1 year as the Deputy Chief of Staff, and some time as
the Assistant to the Secretary for Policy. For his private sector
expertise, he can point to his year as the spokesman for Florida East
Coast Industries. And before that, he was a political fundraiser for
President George W. Bush and Governor Jeb Bush. He was what some
referred to as a fundraising wunderkind. One story noted that he
``devours business cards like most mortals do potato chips.''
Developing these political relationships, he said, allowed him to
``meet some great people and there's going to be a payoff in the end.''
The President has nominated Mr. Cumber to work on a vital regulatory
board with the capacity to impact our economy, our infrastructure, and
the wages of hard-working Americans across the Nation. Reviewing the
qualifications of other members, be they PH.D.s, attorneys, or career
legislators, I see that broad experience in regulatory, policy, and
economic matters surrounding rail transportation is essential.
Understanding the common carrier obligation of the rail industry is
essential. Advocacy for consumers in the face of enormous pressure from
powerful industry representatives is essential.
Mr. Husein Cumber is, by all accounts, a hard-working man. But hard
work alone is not sufficient qualification for nomination to the board
of an important consumer protection agency. It is also essential that a
nominee have demonstrated experience and expertise in the issues that
come before the agency.
I recently met with Mr. Cumber to discuss his nomination. I found him
to be polite, personable, and eager. I did not, however, find him to be
knowledgeable of the critical issues that have come before the STB. His
experiences in lobbying and fundraising stand out and will no doubt
help him in his future endeavors outside of government. But what is
important here is what he has been nominated to do while serving in a
government position.
Members of the Surface Transportation Board have to make important
decisions affecting our Nation's transportation policy from the moment
they are sworn in. They do not have time for on-the-job training.
Mr. Cumber's nomination to the STB may in fact be ``the payoff in the
end'' he has been working toward. But a seat
[[Page 14779]]
on the Surface Transportation Board shouldn't be a payoff. It's not a
prize to be won--it is a job to be done. And it is a job to be done by
someone armed with credentials and credibility, not by someone armed
with only cash and connections.
I am compelled to object to this nomination for the reasons I have
provided. My hope is that the administration will acknowledge the
importance of the STB in their search for a qualified nominee and keep
looking for one.
____________________
ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS
______
RECOGNIZING MONFORTON SCHOOL
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I wish today to recognize the
achievements of an outstanding teacher and her seventh grade students.
This is a story of community and folks coming together to make their
town a better place to live. The students at Monforton School in
Bozeman, MT, with their teacher, Sally Broughton, saw a playground at
the school that was outdated and unsafe. These ambitious young people
then sprung into action and set out to inform the principal, school
board, other students, and community members of the subpar condition of
the playground and gathered input and support for building a new
playground.
In the Montana spirit of folks working together to make their
community a better place to live, local businesses pitched in by
donating nearly $40,000 worth of supplies and labor toward completion
of the playground. Monforton parent and carpenter, Alan Ripley, worked
with students to design the octagonal climbing structure for the
playground. The students spent countless hours with volunteers in
building the playground.
Thanks to the work of these students, their teacher, and the
community all Monforton students now have a safe playground at their
school. The efforts of these fine young people have not gone unnoticed.
The Corporation for National and Community Service honored the students
and their teacher, Sally Broughton, with the 2008 Spirit of Service
Award, and We the People: Project Citizen presented them with the
Montana Project Citizen Award for their contributions to the community.
This spirit of service is prevalent at Monforton School as all
students participate in service-learning projects. Classroom lessons
are combined with meaningful service to their community. Through these
efforts students have been responsible for improving the food service
at the school, constructing a walking path, and informing the larger
community about the need for a new jail and a warning system for
Hyalite Dam among other projects.
I would like to join the chorus recognizing the seventh grade
students of Monforton and their teacher, Sally Broughton. They are a
perfect example of how Montana's world-class education system is
preparing children across Big Sky country to meet the challenges they
will face. These outstanding young people are the future of our Nation,
and I am sure that they will continue to serve and make many
contributions to their communities.
____________________
TRIBUTE TO MARIAN ORFEO
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I would like to take this
opportunity to congratulate Ms. Marian Orfeo, director of Planning and
Coordination with the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority, MWRA, on
being named the new president of the National Association of Clean
Water Agencies, NACWA.
Ms. Orfeo has been an environmental champion for the city of Boston,
State of Massachusetts, and the Nation. She is an exceptional leader
and public steward dedicated to the improvement of Boston's water
quality and public health.
Ms. Orfeo has worked for with MWRA, a founding member of NACWA, for
nearly 20 years. The Authority provides wholesale water and sewer
services to 2.5 million people in 61 communities across eastern and
central Massachusetts 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
As the director of Planning and Coordination, her responsibilities
include long-range planning to construct and renew MWRA's water and
wastewater facilities, as well as infrastructure and short-term
strategic business planning for all agency functions. She also manages
the Authority's performance reporting system and is a member of the
steering committee for the MetroFuture initiative of the Boston
Metropolitan Area Planning Council.
Before joining the Authority, Ms. Orfeo previously worked in Boston
city government for 16 years. She held a range of positions including
operations, administration and finance, and planning.
She has been an active member of NACWA since 1994, was elected to its
board of directors in 2000, and has chaired the Association's
Legislative Policy, Strategic Planning, Finance, and Awards Committees.
Ms. Orfeo is also a consistent champion for the need to develop a new,
holistic approach to the nation's complex 21st century water
challenges.
Being elected NACWA president is not onlyan impressive personal
accomplishment but will help secure NACWA's role as the leading
advocate for responsible national policies that advance clean water and
a healthy environment.
Mr. President, I congratulate Marian Orfeo on becoming president of
NACWA. I am certain the association will greatly benefit from her able
leadership.
____________________
CONGRATULATING THE OLDENBURG GROUP
Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I would like to congratulate
Oldenburg Group on the 150th anniversary of the Oldenburg Lake Shore
product line. The Oldenburg Group has a major presence in Milwaukee and
Rhinelander, WI. What began on the shores of Lake Superior as a line of
outboard motors has grown into a significant contributor to our
Nation's defense.
As a qualified small business with both military and commercial
product lines, Oldenburg Group has shown that they are a leader within
the Nation's defense industry. Their products support the U.S. Navy
with refueling systems to allow our ships to remain at sea and ready.
They support the U.S. Army with systems for offloading war-fighting
equipment when no port facility is available, as well as supporting the
U.S. Department of Defense in many other ways as well. Oldenburg
Group's history of customer satisfaction and excellence is immensely
important as it contributes daily to the security of our Nation.
It is because of quality products and exceptional support service
that the U.S. Department of Defense trusts Oldenburg Group to provide
vital equipment and services used by the military. Oldenburg's
dedication to continually looking toward the future and considering how
products can practically be applied to homeland security is one reason
for their considerable success, and I congratulate that spirit.
____________________
MESSAGES FROM THE PRESIDENT
Messages from the President of the United States were communicated to
the Senate by Mrs. Neiman, one of his secretaries.
____________________
EXECUTIVE MESSAGES REFERRED
As in executive session the Presiding Officer laid before the Senate
messages from the President of the United States submitting sundry
nominations and a withdrawal which were referred to the Committee on
Armed Services.
(The nominations received today are printed at the end of the Senate
proceedings.)
____________________
MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE
______
ENROLLED BILL SIGNED
At 6:43 p.m., a message from the House of Representatives, delivered
by Ms. Niland, one of its reading clerks,
[[Page 14780]]
announced that the Speaker has signed the following enrolled bill:
S. 2967. An act to provide for certain Federal employee
benefits to be continued for certain employees of the Senate
Restaurants after operation of the Senate Restaurants are
contracted to be performed by a private business concern, and
for other purposes.
____________________
MEASURES PLACED ON THE CALENDAR
The following bill was read the second time, and placed on the
calendar:
S. 3257. A bill to extend immigration programs to promote
legal immigration and for other purposes.
____________________
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES
The following reports of committees were submitted:
By Mr. DORGAN, from the Committee on Appropriations,
without amendment:
S. 3258. An original bill making appropriations for energy
and water development and related agencies for the fiscal
year ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes (Rept.
No. 110-416).
By Mr. DURBIN, from the Committee on Appropriations,
without amendment:
S. 3260. An original bill making appropriations for
financial services and general government for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes (Rept. No.
110-417).
By Mrs. MURRAY, from the Committee on Appropriations,
without amendment:
S. 3261. An original bill making appropriations for the
Departments of Transportation and Housing and Urban
Development, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 2009, and for other purposes (Rept. No. 110-
418).
____________________
INTRODUCTION OF BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
The following bills and joint resolutions were introduced, read the
first and second times by unanimous consent, and referred as indicated:
By Mr. DORGAN:
S. 3258. An original bill making appropriations for energy
and water development and related agencies for the fiscal
year ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes; from
the Committee on Appropriations; placed on the calendar.
By Mr. WHITEHOUSE (for himself and Mr. Durbin):
S. 3259. A bill to amend title 11, United States Code, with
respect to the priority of certain high cost credit debts; to
the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. DURBIN:
S. 3260. An original bill making appropriations for
financial services and general government for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes; from the
Committee on Appropriations; placed on the calendar.
By Mrs. MURRAY:
S. 3261. An original bill making appropriations for the
Departments of Transportation and Housing and Urban
Development, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 2009, and for other purposes; from the
Committee on Appropriations; placed on the calendar.
By Mrs. HUTCHISON:
S. 3262. A bill to reauthorize the women's entrepreneurial
development programs of the Small Business Administration,
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Small Business
and Entrepreneurship.
____________________
SUBMISSION OF CONCURRENT AND SENATE RESOLUTIONS
The following concurrent resolutions and Senate resolutions were
read, and referred (or acted upon), as indicated:
By Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Cardin,
Mr. Harkin, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Nelson of
Florida, Mr. Durbin, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Leahy, Mrs.
Clinton, Mr. Sununu, Mr. Chambliss, Ms. Snowe, Mrs.
Dole, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Specter, Mr. Stevens, Mr.
Martinez, and Mr. Smith):
S. Res. 611. A resolution expressing the sense of the
Senate on the crisis in Zimbabwe, and for other purposes;
considered and agreed to.
By Mr. BIDEN (for himself, Mr. Kerry, and Mr. Casey):
S. Res. 612. A resolution expressing the sense of the
Senate that President George W. Bush, President Dmitry
Medvedev of the Russian Federation, and other participants in
the 2008 Group of Eight (G8) Summit in Toyako, Hokkaido,
Japan should work together to foster a more constructive
relationship, and that the Government of the Russian
Federation should eschew behaviors that are inconsistent with
the Group's objectives of protecting global security,
economic stability, and democracy; considered and agreed to.
By Mr. NELSON of Nebraska (for himself, Ms. Collins,
Mr. Baucus, Mr. Smith, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Roberts, Mr.
Dodd, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Brown, Mr. Bunning, and Mr.
Bingaman):
S. Res. 613. A resolution designating the week beginning
September 8, 2008, as ``National Direct Support Professionals
Recognition Week''; considered and agreed to.
____________________
ADDITIONAL COSPONSORS
S. 617
At the request of Mr. Smith, the name of the Senator from Maine (Ms.
Snowe) was added as a cosponsor of S. 617, a bill to make the National
Parks and Federal Recreational Lands Pass available at a discount to
certain veterans.
S. 999
At the request of Mr. Cochran, the name of the Senator from Montana
(Mr. Tester) was added as a cosponsor of S. 999, a bill to amend the
Public Health Service Act to improve stroke prevention, diagnosis,
treatment, and rehabilitation.
S. 1738
At the request of Mr. Biden, the names of the Senator from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Casey) and the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. Coleman)
were added as cosponsors of S. 1738, a bill to establish a Special
Counsel for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction within the
Office of the Deputy Attorney General, to improve the Internet Crimes
Against Children Task Force, to increase resources for regional
computer forensic labs, and to make other improvements to increase the
ability of law enforcement agencies to investigate and prosecute
predators.
S. 2035
At the request of Mr. Specter, the name of the Senator from
Connecticut (Mr. Lieberman) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2035, a bill
to maintain the free flow of information to the public by providing
conditions for the federally compelled disclosure of information by
certain persons connected with the news media.
S. 2042
At the request of Ms. Stabenow, the name of the Senator from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Casey) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2042, a bill to
authorize the Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct
activities to rapidly advance treatments for spinal muscular atrophy,
neuromuscular disease, and other pediatric diseases, and for other
purposes.
S. 2204
At the request of Mr. Whitehouse, the name of the Senator from New
York (Mr. Schumer) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2204, a bill to
assist wildlife populations and wildlife habitats in adapting to and
surviving the effects of global warming, and for other purposes.
S. 2422
At the request of Mr. Whitehouse, the name of the Senator from New
York (Mr. Schumer) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2422, a bill to amend
title 18, United States Code, to prohibit certain computer-assisted
remote hunting, and for other purposes.
S. 2549
At the request of Mrs. Clinton, the name of the Senator from New York
(Mr. Schumer) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2549, a bill to require
the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to establish
an Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice to provide
guidance to Federal agencies on the development of criteria for
identifying disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on minority populations and low-income
populations, and for other purposes.
S. 2579
At the request of Mr. Inouye, the names of the Senator from Maryland
(Mr. Cardin), the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez), the Senator
from Iowa (Mr. Grassley) and the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Alexander)
were added as cosponsors of S. 2579, a bill to require the Secretary of
the Treasury to mint coins in recognition and celebration of the
establishment of the United States Army in 1775, to honor the American
soldier of both today and yesterday, in wartime and in peace, and to
commemorate the traditions, history, and heritage of the
[[Page 14781]]
United States Army and its role in American society, from the colonial
period to today.
S. 2618
At the request of Ms. Klobuchar, the name of the Senator from South
Dakota (Mr. Johnson) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2618, a bill to
amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for research with
respect to various forms of muscular dystrophy, including Becker,
congenital, distal, Duchenne, Emery-Dreifuss Facioscapulohumeral, limb-
girdle, myotonic, and oculopha- ryngeal muscular dystrophies.
S. 2668
At the request of Mr. Kerry, the name of the Senator from South
Dakota (Mr. Thune) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2668, a bill to amend
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to remove cell phones from listed
property under section 280F.
S. 2844
At the request of Mr. Lautenberg, the name of the Senator from New
York (Mr. Schumer) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2844, a bill to amend
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to modify provisions relating
to beach monitoring, and for other purposes.
S. 3038
At the request of Mr. Grassley, the name of the Senator from
Minnesota (Mr. Coleman) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3038, a bill to
amend part E of title IV of the Social Security Act to extend the
adoption incentives program, to authorize States to establish a
relative guardianship program, to promote the adoption of children with
special needs, and for other purposes.
S. 3122
At the request of Ms. Klobuchar, her name was added as a cosponsor of
S. 3122, a bill to amend the Commodity Exchange Act to provide for the
regulation of oil commodities markets, and for other purposes.
S. 3134
At the request of Ms. Klobuchar, her name was added as a cosponsor of
S. 3134, a bill to amend the Commodity Exchange Act to require energy
commodities to be traded only on regulated markets, and for other
purposes.
S. 3185
At the request of Ms. Klobuchar, her name was added as a cosponsor of
S. 3185, a bill to provide for regulation of certain transactions
involving energy commodities, to strengthen the enforcement authorities
of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission under the Natural Gas Act
and the Federal Power Act, and for other purposes.
S. 3186
At the request of Mr. Sanders, the names of the Senator from New
Jersey (Mr. Lautenberg), the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Reid), the
Senator from Florida (Mr. Nelson), the Senator from Connecticut (Mr.
Lieberman), the Senator from Montana (Mr. Baucus), the Senator from
Michigan (Mr. Levin) and the Senator from Oregon (Mr. Wyden) were added
as cosponsors of S. 3186, a bill to provide funding for the Low-Income
Home Energy Assistance Program.
S. 3223
At the request of Mr. Kerry, the name of the Senator from New Jersey
(Mr. Lautenberg) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3223, a bill to
establish a small business energy emergency disaster loan program.
S. 3233
At the request of Mr. Bingaman, the name of the Senator from North
Dakota (Mr. Dorgan) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3233, a bill to
promote development of a 21st century energy system to increase United
States competitiveness in the world energy technology marketplace, and
for other purposes.
S. 3237
At the request of Mr. Casey, the name of the Senator from New Jersey
(Mr. Menendez) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3237, a bill to assist
volunteer fire companies in coping with the precipitous rise in fuel
prices.
S. 3240
At the request of Mr. Sessions, the name of the Senator from North
Carolina (Mr. Burr) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3240, a bill to
promote energy production and security in the United States, and for
other purposes.
____________________
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. WHITEHOUSE (for himself and Mr. Durbin):
S. 3259. A bill to amend title 11, United States Code, with respect
to the priority of certain high cost credit debts; to the Committee on
the Judiciary.
Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text
of the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 3259
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Consumer Credit Fairness
Act''.
SEC. 2. EFFECTS OF HIGH COST CREDIT ON BANKRUPTCY
PROCEEDINGS.
(a) Definitions.--Section 101 of title 11, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraph (27B) as paragraph (27C);
and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (27A) the following:
``(27B) The term `high cost consumer credit transaction'
means an extension of credit by a `creditor' (as defined in
section 103 of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 1602(f)),
resulting in a consumer debt that has an applicable annual
percentage rate (as determined in accordance with section
107(a) of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 1606(a)), and
including costs and fees incurred in connection with the
extension of such credit) that exceeds the lesser of--
``(A) the sum of 15 percent and the yield on United States
Treasury securities having a 30-year period of maturity; or
``(B) 36 percent.''.
(b) Subordination.--Section 510 of title 11, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(d)(1) For the purpose of distribution under this title,
an allowed claim arising from a high cost consumer credit
transaction shall be subordinated to all other claims.
``(2) Any lien securing a claim subordinated under
paragraph (1) shall be transferred to the estate.''.
SEC. 3. EXCLUSION.
Section 707(b) of title 11, United States Code, is amended
by adding at the end the following:
``(8) Paragraph (2) shall not apply if the debtor's
petition resulted from a high cost consumer credit
transaction.''.
____________________
SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS
______
SENATE RESOLUTION 611--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE SENATE ON THE CRISIS
IN ZIMBABWE, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Cardin, Mr. Harkin, Mr.
Whitehouse, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Nelson of Florida, Mr. Durbin, Mrs. Boxer,
Mr. Leahy, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Sununu, Mr. Chambliss, Ms. Snowe, Mrs.
Dole, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Specter, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Martinez, and Mr.
Smith) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and
agreed to:
S. Res. 611
Whereas, over the last eight years, the Zimbabwean African
National Union-Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF), led by Robert
Mugabe, has increasingly turned to violence and intimidation
to maintain power amidst a deteriorating crisis;
Whereas the gross domestic product of Zimbabwe has
decreased over 40 percent in the last decade, inflation is
estimated by United Nations Deputy Secretary-General Asha-
Rose Migiro at over 10,500,000 percent, unemployment is now
over 80 percent, and more than 4,000,000 people have fled the
country;
Whereas presidential and parliamentary elections were held
on March 29, 2008, in Zimbabwe amidst widespread reports of
voting irregularities and intimidation in favor of the ruling
ZANU-PF party and Robert Mugabe;
Whereas the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission refused to
release results, despite calls to do so by the African Union
(AU), the European Union (EU), the Republic of South Africa,
the Southern African Development Community (SADC), United
Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, and the United States;
Whereas the official results of the election, announced
five weeks later, showed that Robert Mugabe won 43.2 percent
of the vote, while Morgan Tsvangirai, leader of the
opposition party Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), won
47.9 percent of the vote;
[[Page 14782]]
Whereas, in the wake of the elections, Robert Mugabe
launched a brutal campaign of state-sponsored violence
against opposition members, supporters, and other civilians
in an attempt to consolidate his power;
Whereas United States Ambassador to the United Nations
Zalmay Khalilzad stated on April 16, 2008, that he was
``gravely concerned about the escalating politically
motivated violence perpetrated by security forces and ruling
party militias'';
Whereas Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice stated on April
17, 2008, that Robert Mugabe has ``done more harm to his
country than would have been imaginable'' and that ``the last
years have been really an abomination'' and called for the AU
and SADC to strengthen efforts to achieve a political
resolution to the crisis;
Whereas Human Rights Watch reported on April 19, 2008, that
the Mugabe regime had developed a network of informal
detention centers to intimidate, torture, and detain
political opponents;
Whereas the Mugabe regime has, in violation of the Vienna
Convention on Diplomatic Relations, done at Vienna April 18,
1961 (23 U.S.T. 3229), harassed United States and other
diplomats in retaliation for their repeated protest of recent
violence, including by detaining the United States
ambassador's vehicle for several hours on May 13, 2008, and
detaining five United States embassy staff and two local
embassy workers on June 5, 1998, one of whom was physically
assaulted;
Whereas reports of killings, abductions, beatings, torture,
and sexual violence against civilians in Zimbabwe have
continued, resulting in some 10,000 people being assaulted
and at least 30,000 displaced;
Whereas the MDC and Presidential candidate Tsvangirai
withdrew from the June 27, 2008, runoff presidential
election, citing intensified political repression and
killings of their supporters;
Whereas the Mugabe regime persisted with the runoff
election, despite the protest of many leaders in Africa, the
EU, SADC, the United Nations Security Council, and the United
States Government;
Whereas results from the runoff election unsurprisingly
declared Robert Mugabe, the only standing candidate, as the
winner with 85 percent of the vote, and he was sworn into
office;
Whereas SADC, the Pan-African Parliament, and AU Observer
missions to Zimbabwe made statements on June 29 and 30, 2008,
finding that the elections fell short of accepted African
Union standards, did not give rise to free, fair, or credible
elections, and did not reflect the will of the people of
Zimbabwe;
Whereas, on June 4, 2008, the Mugabe regime banned the
operations of non-governmental organizations in Zimbabwe,
including those who provide food and aid to millions of
Zimbabweans suffering at the result of a ZANU-PF's policies,
exacerbating the humanitarian crisis and leaving newly
displaced victims of political violence without assistance;
Whereas Nelson Mandela has described the situation in
Zimbabwe as a ``tragic failure of leadership,'' while the
Government of Botswana has refused to recognize the election
outcome as legitimate and has said that representatives of
the administration should be excluded from SADC and African
Union meetings;
Whereas the African Union passed a resolution on July 1,
2008, expressing concern for the loss of life in Zimbabwe and
the need to initiate political dialogue to promote peace,
democracy, and reconciliation;
Whereas the MDC reported on July 9, 2008, that 129 of its
supporters have been killed since the first round of
elections, including 20 since the runoff election, 1,500 of
its activists and officials are in detention, and 5,000 are
missing or unaccounted for; and
Whereas the Group of Eight (G8) industrialized nations, at
their annual summit, issued a joint statement on July 8,
2008, rejecting the June 27, 2008, election and legitimacy of
the Mugabe regime, as well as committing to further measures
against those responsible for the violence: Now, therefore,
be it
Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate--
(1) to support the people of Zimbabwe, who continue to face
widespread violence, political repression, a humanitarian
emergency, and economic adversity;
(2) to condemn the Mugabe regime for its manipulation of
the country's electoral process, including the March 29,
2008, election and the June 27, 2008, runoff election and the
regime's continued attacks against, and intimidation of,
opposition members and supporters and civil society;
(3) to reject the results of the June 27, 2008,
presidential runoff election in Zimbabwe as illegitimate
because of widespread irregularities, systematic violence by
the Mugabe regime, and the boycott of the MDC;
(4) to encourage the President's continued efforts to
tighten and expand sanctions on those individuals responsible
for violations of human and political rights in Zimbabwe;
(5) to applaud the Governments of Benin, Botswana, Liberia,
Kenya, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, and Zambia for
condemning the violent derailment of the runoff election at
the African Union summit in Sharm El-Sheikh;
(6) to encourage all members of the United Nations Security
Council to vote in favor of the proposed resolution that
would authorize a United Nations Special Representative to
support the negotiations process, impose an international
arms embargo, and strengthen financial penalties on those
individuals most responsible for undermining democratic
processes;
(7) to encourage the African Union to initiate an inclusive
political dialogue between both parties and deploy a
protection force to prevent attacks, assist victims, and
prevent the security situation from further deteriorating;
(8) to urge leaders in Africa to engage directly in the
effort to achieve an expeditious political resolution to the
crisis;
(9) to urge the United States Government and the
international community to assemble a comprehensive economic
and political recovery package for Zimbabwe in the event that
a political resolution is reached and a truly democratic
government is formed; and
(10) to support a lasting democratic political solution
that reflects the will and respects the rights of the people
of Zimbabwe, including mechanisms to ensure that future
elections are free and fair, in accordance with regional and
international standards.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 612--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT
PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT DMITRY MEDVEDEV OF THE RUSSIAN
FEDERATION, AND OTHER PARTICIPANTS IN THE 2008 GROUP OF EIGHT (G8)
SUMMIT IN TOYAKO, HOKKAIDO, JAPAN SHOULD WORK TOGETHER TO FOSTER A MORE
CONSTRUCTIVE RELATIONSHIP, AND THAT THE GOVERNMENT OF THE RUSSIAN
FEDERATION SHOULD ESCHEW BEHAVIORS THAT ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE
GROUP'S OBJECTIVES OF PROTECTING GLOBAL SECURITY, ECONOMIC STABILITY,
AND DEMOCRACY
Mr. BIDEN (for himself, Mr. Kerry, and Mr. Casey) submitted the
following resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
S. Res. 612
Whereas the leaders of 6 major industrialized democracies,
including France, West Germany, Italy, Japan, the United
Kingdom, and the United States, gathered in 1975 for a summit
meeting in Rambouillet, France, and for annual meetings
thereafter under a rotating presidency known as the Group of
Six (G6);
Whereas the G6 was established based on the mutual interest
of its members in promoting economic stability, global
security, and democracy;
Whereas, in 1976, membership of the G6 was expanded to
include Canada;
Whereas the members of the G7 share a commitment to promote
security, economic stability, and democracy in their
respective nations and around the world;
Whereas Russia was integrated into the G7 in 1998 at the
behest of President William Jefferson Clinton following
Russian President Boris Yeltsin's decision to pursue reforms
and assume a neutral position on the acceptance of additional
members into the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO);
Whereas the members of the G8 face common challenges,
including climate change, violent extremism, global economic
volatility, pandemic disease, nuclear proliferation, and
trafficking in narcotics, persons, and weapons of mass
destruction;
Whereas President Dmitry Medvedev, Prime Minister Vladimir
Putin, and other leaders of the Russian Federation have
regularly expressed a desire for the Russian Federation to
play a leading role in international affairs;
Whereas the Russian Federation and other members of the
international community all stand to benefit if the Russian
Federation is an active, constructive partner in addressing
the broad range of challenges confronting the global
community;
Whereas the Russian Federation has evidenced the capacity
and willingness to cooperate with the United States and other
nations in the interest of global security in certain areas
pertaining to arms control and weapons proliferation, notably
through its participation in the Six-Party Talks regarding
North Korea and its support of the incentives package offered
by leading countries to Iran if that country would suspend
its uranium enrichment program;
Whereas the United States and Russia have safely
deactivated and destroyed thousands
[[Page 14783]]
of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and provided
upgraded storage and transportation of nuclear materials
through the Nunn-Lugar program;
Whereas the United States and other countries participating
in the June 2002 G8 Summit in Kananaskis, Canada agreed to
raise up to $20,000,000,000 over 10 years to support
nonproliferation projects in Russia and other nations through
the Global Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and
Materials of Mass Destruction;
Whereas participants in the July 2006 G8 Summit in St.
Petersburg, Russia launched the Global Initiative to Combat
Nuclear Terrorism to improve the physical protection of
nuclear materials, suppress illicit trafficking of such
materials, and bolster the capacity of willing partner
nations to respond to acts of nuclear terrorism;
Whereas the United States and the Government of the Russian
Federation pledged in the April 2008 Sochi Strategic
Framework Declaration to negotiate a ``legally binding post-
START arrangement'' for the purposes of extending provisions
of the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty;
Whereas, notwithstanding these successes, the potential for
collaboration between the United States and the Government of
Russian Federation has been seriously undermined by the
manner in which the leaders of the Russian Federation have
conducted aspects of Russia's foreign policy;
Whereas the Government of the Russian Federation has
unilaterally suspended implementation of the 1991 Treaty on
Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE Treaty) and has yet
to fulfill its commitment to withdraw Russian forces from
Georgia and Moldova pursuant to the 1999 Istanbul Summit
Declaration of the Organization for Security and Cooperation
in Europe;
Whereas the CFE Treaty has played a key role in enhancing
the stability of the Euro-Atlantic region;
Whereas the Adapted CFE Treaty, which will not enter into
force until the Russian Federation fulfills commitments made
at the Istanbul Summit, will provide greater flexibility for
the Russian Federation in return for improved transparency
and verification;
Whereas the Government of the Russian Federation has
attempted to undermine the territorial integrity of the
Republic of Georgia through its support of the breakaway
provinces of South Ossetia and Abkhazia;
Whereas the United Nations Observer Mission in Georgia has
concluded that a military aircraft belonging to the Russian
Federation shot down an unarmed Georgian drone on April 20,
2008, while flying over Abkhazia;
Whereas the conduct of Russian trade and energy policy has
created a widespread perception that the Government of the
Russian Federation is using oil and gas exports and economic
policy as a means of political pressure on countries that
seek closer ties with the United States and Euro-Atlantic
partners;
Whereas the behavior of the Russian Federation as it
relates to several neighboring countries has contributed to
the erosion of regional peace and security;
Whereas such actions are inconsistent with the G8's
objectives of protecting global security, economic stability,
and democracy, hinder cooperation with the Government of the
Russian Federation, and undermine the standing of the Russian
Federation as a respected member of the international
community;
Whereas there has been considerable disagreement between
the Government of the United States and the Government of the
Russian Federation regarding proposals to place ballistic
missile defense interceptor and radar sites in Poland and the
Czech Republic, respectively;
Whereas certain developments inside the Russian Federation
and the Russian Government's conduct of domestic policy have
undermined confidence in the Russian Federation's ability and
capability to serve as a full partner in the work of the
international community;
Whereas the Department of State's Country Report on Human
Rights Practices for 2007 stated that, in Russia,
``continuing centralization of power in the executive branch,
a compliant State Duma, corruption and selectivity in
enforcement of the law, media restrictions, and harassment of
some NGOs eroded the government's accountability to its
citizens.'';
Whereas, in June 2008, a report released by Human Rights
Watch concluded that Russian ``law enforcement and security
forces involved in counterinsurgency [in the North Caucasus]
have committed dozens of extrajudicial executions, summary
and arbitrary detentions, and acts of torture and cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment'';
Whereas the Government of the Russian Federation has failed
to successfully prosecute individuals responsible for the
murder of critics of the Kremlin, including journalist Anna
Politkovskaya and Alexander Litvinenko;
Whereas the 2008 Annual Report of Reporters without Borders
noted a sharp increase in government pressure on the
independent media in Russia, reporting that at least 2
journalists were forcibly sent to psychiatric hospitals in
2007 and others were badly beaten or kidnapped prior to the
local and parliamentary elections in 2007;
Whereas Transparency International ranked Russia 143 out of
179 countries for perceived corruption in 2007;
Whereas there is increasing concern about violent
nationalism and xenophobia in the Russian Federation and the
2008 Annual Report of the United States Commission on
International Religious Freedom reports that there has been a
``sharp rise in violent crimes against persons [in Russia] on
account of their religion or ethnicity'';
Whereas, in the handling of the Yukos Oil Company case and
numerous other judicial actions, the Government of the
Russian Federation has permitted the politicization of
Russia's legal system;
Whereas these developments have seriously damaged
international confidence in the institutions and laws of the
Russian Federation and hindered the ability of the United
States and other partners to work with the Russian Federation
in addressing a broad range of pressing global, regional, and
domestic challenges;
Whereas the people of the Russian Federation and the people
of the United States have been disadvantaged by the resulting
damage to relations between the countries;
Whereas President Dmitry Medvedev, in an interview with the
Reuters News Service on June 25, 2008, stated that ``freedom,
democracy and the right to private property'' should define
Russia's behavior;
Whereas the United States believes that adherence on the
part of the Government of the Russian Federation to the
values articulated by President Medvedev would provide a
foundation for improved cooperation with the Russian
Federation;
Whereas adherence to the values articulated by President
Medvedev would also help repair damage to the international
reputation of the Russian Federation and advance the goals of
security, prosperity, and representative governance that
should be the common ambition of all members of the G8;
Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that--
(1) in order to build a more constructive relationship with
the Government of the Russian Federation and its people, the
President of the United States and other leaders of the G8
nations should--
(A) pursue a broad agenda of cooperation with the leaders
of the Russian Federation; and
(B) encourage Russia's transformation into a more liberal
and democratic polity;
(2) the Government of the United States and the Government
of the Russian Federation should work to ensure the continued
success of Nunn-Lugar initiatives and nonproliferation and
counterterrorism programs through--
(A) additional funding;
(B) access to sensitive facilities;
(C) effective safety and security measures to prevent
proliferation of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons
and weapons-related materials and technology; and
(D) cooperation between the United States and Russia to
enhance these objectives on a worldwide basis;
(3) the Government of the United States and the Government
of the Russian Federation, working within the International
Atomic Energy Agency and United Nations Security Council,
should renew demands for Iran to cease its nuclear enrichment
activities and fully disclose any prior weapons-related work;
(4) the Government of the United States and the Government
of the Russian Federation should negotiate a legally-binding
successor agreement to the 1991 Strategic Arms Reductions
Treaty and address all outstanding concerns regarding the
1991 Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe;
(5) the leaders of the Russian Federation should adopt
foreign and domestic policies that are consistent with
``freedom, democracy and the right to private property'', as
articulated by President Dmitry Medvedev;
(6) the Government of the Russian Federation should take
immediate steps to restore the freedom and independence of
the country's media in accordance with its obligations under
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;
(7) the Government and officials of the Russian Federation
should refrain from portraying the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO) as a threat to the Russian Federation and
fully utilize the consultative mechanisms that exist through
the NATO-Russia Council to facilitate cooperation between the
countries of NATO and the Russian Federation;
(8) the United States, in coordination with other members
of the G8, should--
(A) encourage the Government of the Russian Federation to
address the challenges facing its society, including
widespread corruption, a deteriorating health care system,
growing instability in the North Caucasus, and an
increasingly serious demographic crisis; and
(B) stand ready to assist the people and Government of the
Russian Federation in those efforts;
(9) just as the United States welcomed the increasing
prosperity and political development of Germany, Japan, and
the nations Eastern Europe in the aftermath of former
[[Page 14784]]
conflicts, the United States should welcome the emergence of
the Russian Federation as a strong, successful, democratic
partner in addressing global challenges; and
(10) the leaders of the Russian Federation should respect
the rights of sovereign, democratic governments in
neighboring countries and their prerogative to seek
membership in Euro-Atlantic institutions.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 613--DESIGNATING THE WEEK BEGINNING SEPTEMBER 8,
2008, AS ``NATIONAL DIRECT SUPPORT PROFESSIONALS RECOGNITION WEEK''
Mr. NELSON of Nebraska (for himself, Ms. Collins, Mr. Baucus, Mr.
Smith, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Brown, Mr.
Bunning, and Mr. Bingaman) submitted the following resolution; which
was considered and agreed to:
S. Res. 613
Whereas direct support workers, direct care workers,
personal assistants, personal attendants, in-home support
workers, and paraprofessionals (referred to in this preamble
as ``direct support professionals'') are the primary
providers of publicly funded long term support and services
for millions of individuals;
Whereas a direct support professional must build a close,
trusted relationship with an individual with disabilities;
Whereas a direct support professional assists an individual
with disabilities with the most intimate needs, on a daily
basis;
Whereas direct support professionals provide a broad range
of support, including--
(1) preparation of meals;
(2) helping with medications;
(3) bathing;
(4) dressing;
(5) mobility;
(6) getting to school, work, religious, and recreational
activities; and
(7) general daily affairs;
Whereas a direct support professional provides essential
support to help keep an individual with disabilities
connected to the family and community of the individual;
Whereas direct support professionals enable individuals
with disabilities to live meaningful, productive lives;
Whereas direct support professionals are the key to
allowing an individual with disabilities to live successfully
in the community of the individual, and to avoid more costly
institutional care;
Whereas the majority of direct support professionals are
female, and many are the sole breadwinners of their families;
Whereas direct support professionals work and pay taxes,
but many remain impoverished and are eligible for the same
Federal and State public assistance programs on which the
individuals with disabilities served by the direct support
professionals must depend;
Whereas Federal and State policies, as well as the Supreme
Court, in Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 581 (1999), assert the
right of an individual to live in the home and community of
the individual;
Whereas, in 2008, the majority of direct support
professionals are employed in home and community-based
settings and this trend is projected to increase over the
next decade;
Whereas there is a documented critical and growing shortage
of direct support professionals in every community throughout
the United States; and
Whereas many direct support professionals are forced to
leave jobs due to inadequate wages and benefits, creating
high turnover and vacancy rates that research demonstrates
adversely affects the quality of support to individuals with
disabilities: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) designates the week beginning September 8, 2008, as
``National Direct Support Professionals Recognition Week'';
(2) recognizes the dedication and vital role of direct
support professionals in enhancing the lives of individuals
with disabilities of all ages;
(3) appreciates the contribution of direct support
professionals in supporting the needs that reach beyond the
capacities of millions of families in the United States;
(4) commends direct support professionals as integral in
supporting the long-term support and services system of the
United States; and
(5) finds that the successful implementation of the public
policies of the United States depends on the dedication of
direct support professionals.
____________________
AMENDMENTS SUBMITTED AND PROPOSED
SA 5073. Mr. BUNNING submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 2731, to authorize
appropriations for fiscal years 2009 through 2013 to provide
assistance to foreign countries to combat HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria, and for other purposes; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5074. Mrs. DOLE submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by her to the bill S. 2731, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 5075. Mr. LUGAR (for Mr. Biden (for himself and Mr.
Lugar)) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by Mr.
Lugar to the bill S. 2731, supra.
SA 5076. Mr. THUNE (for himself, Mr. Kyl, Mr. Johnson, Mr.
Tester, and Mr. Domenici) submitted an amendment intended to
be proposed by him to the bill S. 2731, supra; which was
ordered to lie on the table.
SA 5077. Mr. DeMINT proposed an amendment to the bill S.
2731, supra.
SA 5078. Mr. DeMINT proposed an amendment to the bill S.
2731, supra.
SA 5079. Mr. DeMINT proposed an amendment to amendment SA
5078 proposed by Mr. DeMint to the bill S. 2731, supra.
____________________
TEXT OF AMENDMENTS
SA 5073. Mr. BUNNING submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
by him to the bill S. 2731, to authorize appropriations for fiscal
years 2009 through 2013 to provide assistance to foreign countries to
combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, and for other purposes; which
was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) In General.--Section 401(a) of the United States
Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of
2003 is amended by striking ``2004 through 2008'' and
inserting ``2009 through 2013''.
(b) Malaria Vaccine Development Programs.--Section 302(m)
of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2222(m)) is
amended by striking ``2004 through 2008'' and inserting
``2009 through 2013''.
______
SA 5074. Mrs. DOLE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
her to the bill S. 2731, to authorize appropriations for fiscal years
2009 through 2013 to provide assistance to foreign countries to combat
HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, and for other purposes; which was
ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
On page 1, line 5, strike ``and Henry J. Hyde'' and insert
``, Henry J. Hyde, and Jesse Helms''.
______
SA 5075. Mr. LUGAR (for Mr. Biden (for himself and Mr. Lugar))
submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by Mr. Lugar to the bill
S. 2731, to authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2009 through 2013
to provide assistance to foreign countries to combat HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria, and for other purposes; as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Tom Lantos
and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against
HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of
2008''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Findings.
Sec. 3. Definitions.
Sec. 4. Purpose.
Sec. 5. Authority to consolidate and combine reports.
TITLE I--POLICY PLANNING AND COORDINATION
Sec. 101. Development of an updated, comprehensive, 5-year, global
strategy.
Sec. 102. Interagency working group.
Sec. 103. Sense of Congress.
TITLE II--SUPPORT FOR MULTILATERAL FUNDS, PROGRAMS, AND PUBLIC-PRIVATE
PARTNERSHIPS
Sec. 201. Voluntary contributions to international vaccine funds.
Sec. 202. Participation in the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis
and Malaria.
Sec. 203. Research on methods for women to prevent transmission of HIV
and other diseases.
Sec. 204. Combating HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria by
strengthening health policies and health systems of
partner countries.
Sec. 205. Facilitating effective operations of the Centers for Disease
Control.
Sec. 206. Facilitating vaccine development.
TITLE III--BILATERAL EFFORTS
Subtitle A--General Assistance and Programs
Sec. 301. Assistance to combat HIV/AIDS.
Sec. 302. Assistance to combat tuberculosis.
Sec. 303. Assistance to combat malaria.
Sec. 304. Malaria Response Coordinator.
Sec. 305. Amendment to Immigration and Nationality Act.
Sec. 306. Clerical amendment.
Sec. 307. Requirements.
[[Page 14785]]
Sec. 308. Annual report on prevention of mother-to-child transmission
of HIV.
Sec. 309. Prevention of mother-to-child transmission expert panel.
TITLE IV--FUNDING ALLOCATIONS
Sec. 401. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 402. Sense of Congress.
Sec. 403. Allocation of funds.
TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS
Sec. 501. Machine readable visa fees.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Section 2 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7601) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(29) On May 27, 2003, the President signed this Act into
law, launching the largest international public health
program of its kind ever created.
``(30) Between 2003 and 2008, the United States, through
the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and
in conjunction with other bilateral programs and the
multilateral Global Fund has helped to--
``(A) provide antiretroviral therapy for over 1,900,000
people;
``(B) ensure that over 150,000 infants, most of whom would
have likely been infected with HIV during pregnancy or
childbirth, were not infected; and
``(C) provide palliative care and HIV prevention assistance
to millions of other people.
``(31) While United States leadership in the battles
against HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria has had an
enormous impact, these diseases continue to take a terrible
toll on the human race.
``(32) According to the 2007 AIDS Epidemic Update of the
Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS)--
``(A) an estimated 2,100,000 people died of AIDS-related
causes in 2007; and
``(B) an estimated 2,500,000 people were newly infected
with HIV during that year.
``(33) According to the World Health Organization, malaria
kills more than 1,000,000 people per year, 70 percent of whom
are children under 5 years of age.
``(34) According to the World Health Organization, \1/3\ of
the world's population is infected with the tuberculosis
bacterium, and tuberculosis is 1 of the greatest infectious
causes of death of adults worldwide, killing 1,600,000 people
per year.
``(35) Efforts to promote abstinence, fidelity, the correct
and consistent use of condoms, the delay of sexual debut, and
the reduction of concurrent sexual partners represent
important elements of strategies to prevent the transmission
of HIV/AIDS.
``(36) According to UNAIDS--
``(A) women and girls make up nearly 60 percent of persons
in sub-Saharan Africa who are HIV positive;
``(B) women and girls are more biologically, economically,
and socially vulnerable to HIV infection; and
``(C) gender issues are critical components in the effort
to prevent HIV/AIDS and to care for those affected by the
disease.
``(37) Children who have lost a parent to HIV/AIDS, who are
otherwise directly affected by the disease, or who live in
areas of high HIV prevalence may be vulnerable to the disease
or its socioeconomic effects.
``(38) Lack of health capacity, including insufficient
personnel and inadequate infrastructure, in sub-Saharan
Africa and other regions of the world is a critical barrier
that limits the effectiveness of efforts to combat HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria, and to achieve other global health
goals.
``(39) On March 30, 2007, the Institute of Medicine of the
National Academies released a report entitled `PEPFAR
Implementation: Progress and Promise', which found that
budget allocations setting percentage levels for spending on
prevention, care, and treatment and for certain subsets of
activities within the prevention category--
``(A) have `adversely affected implementation of the U.S.
Global AIDS Initiative';
``(B) have inhibited comprehensive, integrated, evidence
based approaches;
``(C) `have been counterproductive';
``(D) `may have been helpful initially in ensuring a
balance of attention to activities within the 4 categories of
prevention, treatment, care, and orphans and vulnerable
children';
``(E) `have also limited PEPFAR's ability to tailor its
activities in each country to the local epidemic and to
coordinate with the level of activities in the countries'
national plans'; and
``(F) should be removed by Congress and replaced with more
appropriate mechanisms that--
``(i) `ensure accountability for results from Country Teams
to the U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator and to Congress'; and
``(ii) `ensure that spending is directly linked to and
commensurate with necessary efforts to achieve both country
and overall performance targets for prevention, treatment,
care, and orphans and vulnerable children'.
``(40) The United States Government has endorsed the
principles of harmonization in coordinating efforts to combat
HIV/AIDS commonly referred to as the `Three Ones', which
includes--
``(A) 1 agreed HIV/AIDS action framework that provides the
basis for coordination of the work of all partners;
``(B) 1 national HIV/AIDS coordinating authority, with a
broadbased multisectoral mandate; and
``(C) 1 agreed HIV/AIDS country-level monitoring and
evaluating system.
``(41) In the Abuja Declaration on HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis
and Other Related Infectious Diseases, of April 26-27, 2001
(referred to in this Act as the `Abuja Declaration'), the
Heads of State and Government of the Organization of African
Unity (OAU)--
``(A) declared that they would `place the fight against
HIV/AIDS at the forefront and as the highest priority issue
in our respective national development plans';
``(B) committed `TO TAKE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND
PROVIDE LEADERSHIP for the activities of the National AIDS
Commissions/Councils';
``(C) resolved `to lead from the front the battle against
HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Other Related Infectious Diseases
by personally ensuring that such bodies were properly
convened in mobilizing our societies as a whole and providing
focus for unified national policymaking and programme
implementation, ensuring coordination of all sectors at all
levels with a gender perspective and respect for human
rights, particularly to ensure equal rights for people living
with HIV/AIDS'; and
``(D) pledged `to set a target of allocating at least 15%
of our annual budget to the improvement of the health
sector'.''.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
Section 3 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7602) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``Committee on
International Relations'' and inserting ``Committee on
Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, the
Committee on Appropriations of the Senate, and the Committee
on Appropriations'';
(2) by redesignating paragraph (6) as paragraph (12);
(3) by redesignating paragraphs (3) through (5), as
paragraphs (4) through (6), respectively;
(4) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
``(3) Global aids coordinator.--The term `Global AIDS
Coordinator' means the Coordinator of United States
Government Activities to Combat HIV/AIDS Globally.''; and
(5) by inserting after paragraph (6), as redesignated, the
following:
``(7) Impact evaluation research.--The term `impact
evaluation research' means the application of research
methods and statistical analysis to measure the extent to
which change in a population-based outcome can be attributed
to program intervention instead of other environmental
factors.
``(8) Operations research.--The term `operations research'
means the application of social science research methods,
statistical analysis, and other appropriate scientific
methods to judge, compare, and improve policies and program
outcomes, from the earliest stages of defining and designing
programs through their development and implementation, with
the objective of the rapid dissemination of conclusions and
concrete impact on programming.
``(9) Paraprofessional.--The term `paraprofessional' means
an individual who is trained and employed as a health agent
for the provision of basic assistance in the identification,
prevention, or treatment of illness or disability.
``(10) Partner government.--The term `partner government'
means a government with which the United States is working to
provide assistance to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, or
malaria on behalf of people living within the jurisdiction of
such government.
``(11) Program monitoring.--The term `program monitoring'
means the collection, analysis, and use of routine program
data to determine--
``(A) how well a program is carried out; and
``(B) how much the program costs.''.
SEC. 4. PURPOSE.
Section 4 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7603) is
amended to read as follows:
``SEC. 4. PURPOSE.
``The purpose of this Act is to strengthen and enhance
United States leadership and the effectiveness of the United
States response to the HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria
pandemics and other related and preventable infectious
diseases as part of the overall United States health and
development agenda by--
``(1) establishing comprehensive, coordinated, and
integrated 5-year, global strategies to combat HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria by--
``(A) building on progress and successes to date;
``(B) improving harmonization of United States efforts with
national strategies of partner governments and other public
and private entities; and
``(C) emphasizing capacity building initiatives in order to
promote a transition toward greater sustainability through
the support of country-driven efforts;
``(2) providing increased resources for bilateral and
multilateral efforts to fight HIV/
[[Page 14786]]
AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria as integrated components of
United States development assistance;
``(3) intensifying efforts to--
``(A) prevent HIV infection;
``(B) ensure the continued support for, and expanded access
to, treatment and care programs;
``(C) enhance the effectiveness of prevention, treatment,
and care programs; and
``(D) address the particular vulnerabilities of girls and
women;
``(4) encouraging the expansion of private sector efforts
and expanding public-private sector partnerships to combat
HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria;
``(5) reinforcing efforts to--
``(A) develop safe and effective vaccines, microbicides,
and other prevention and treatment technologies; and
``(B) improve diagnostics capabilities for HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria; and
``(6) helping partner countries to--
``(A) strengthen health systems;
``(B) expand health workforce; and
``(C) address infrastructural weaknesses.''.
SEC. 5. AUTHORITY TO CONSOLIDATE AND COMBINE REPORTS.
Section 5 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7604) is
amended by inserting ``, with the exception of the 5-year
strategy'' before the period at the end.
TITLE I--POLICY PLANNING AND COORDINATION
SEC. 101. DEVELOPMENT OF AN UPDATED, COMPREHENSIVE, 5-YEAR,
GLOBAL STRATEGY.
(a) Strategy.--Section 101(a) of the United States
Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of
2003 (22 U.S.C. 7611(a)) is amended to read as follows:
``(a) Strategy.--The President shall establish a
comprehensive, integrated, 5-year strategy to expand and
improve efforts to combat global HIV/AIDS. This strategy
shall--
``(1) further strengthen the capability of the United
States to be an effective leader of the international
campaign against this disease and strengthen the capacities
of nations experiencing HIV/AIDS epidemics to combat this
disease;
``(2) maintain sufficient flexibility and remain responsive
to--
``(A) changes in the epidemic;
``(B) challenges facing partner countries in developing and
implementing an effective national response; and
``(C) evidence-based improvements and innovations in the
prevention, care, and treatment of HIV/AIDS;
``(3) situate United States efforts to combat HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria within the broader United States
global health and development agenda, establishing a roadmap
to link investments in specific disease programs to the
broader goals of strengthening health systems and
infrastructure and to integrate and coordinate HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, or malaria programs with other health or
development programs, as appropriate;
``(4) provide a plan to--
``(A) prevent 12,000,000 new HIV infections worldwide;
``(B) support--
``(i) the increase in the number of individuals with HIV/
AIDS receiving antiretroviral treatment above the goal
established under section 402(a)(3) and increased pursuant to
paragraphs (1) through (3) of section 403(d); and
``(ii) additional treatment through coordinated
multilateral efforts;
``(C) support care for 12,000,000 individuals infected with
or affected by HIV/AIDS, including 5,000,000 orphans and
vulnerable children affected by HIV/AIDS, with an emphasis on
promoting a comprehensive, coordinated system of services to
be integrated throughout the continuum of care;
``(D) help partner countries in the effort to achieve goals
of 80 percent access to counseling, testing, and treatment to
prevent the transmission of HIV from mother to child,
emphasizing a continuum of care model;
``(E) help partner countries to provide care and treatment
services to children with HIV in proportion to their
percentage within the HIV-infected population in each
country;
``(F) promote preservice training for health professionals
designed to strengthen the capacity of institutions to
develop and implement policies for training health workers to
combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria;
``(G) equip teachers with skills needed for HIV/AIDS
prevention and support for persons with, or affected by, HIV/
AIDS;
``(H) provide and share best practices for combating HIV/
AIDS with health professionals;
``(I) promote pediatric HIV/AIDS training for physicians,
nurses, and other health care workers, through public-private
partnerships if possible, including through the designation,
if appropriate, of centers of excellence for training in
pediatric HIV/AIDS prevention, care, and treatment in partner
countries; and
``(J) help partner countries to train and support retention
of health care professionals and paraprofessionals, with the
target of training and retaining at least 140,000 new health
care professionals and paraprofessionals with an emphasis on
training and in country deployment of critically needed
doctors and nurses and to strengthen capacities in developing
countries, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, to deliver
primary health care with the objective of helping countries
achieve staffing levels of at least 2.3 doctors, nurses, and
midwives per 1,000 population, as called for by the World
Health Organization;
``(5) include multisectoral approaches and specific
strategies to treat individuals infected with HIV/AIDS and to
prevent the further transmission of HIV infections, with a
particular focus on the needs of families with children
(including the prevention of mother-to-child transmission),
women, young people, orphans, and vulnerable children;
``(6) establish a timetable with annual global treatment
targets with country-level benchmarks for antiretroviral
treatment;
``(7) expand the integration of timely and relevant
research within the prevention, care, and treatment of HIV/
AIDS;
``(8) include a plan for program monitoring, operations
research, and impact evaluation and for the dissemination of
a best practices report to highlight findings;
``(9) support the in-country or intra-regional training,
preferably through public-private partnerships, of scientific
investigators, managers, and other staff who are capable of
promoting the systematic uptake of clinical research findings
and other evidence-based interventions into routine practice,
with the goal of improving the quality, effectiveness, and
local leadership of HIV/AIDS health care;
``(10) expand and accelerate research on and development of
HIV/AIDS prevention methods for women, including enhancing
inter-agency collaboration, staffing, and organizational
infrastructure dedicated to microbicide research;
``(11) provide for consultation with local leaders and
officials to develop prevention strategies and programs that
are tailored to the unique needs of each country and
community and targeted particularly toward those most at risk
of acquiring HIV infection;
``(12) make the reduction of HIV/AIDS behavioral risks a
priority of all prevention efforts by--
``(A) promoting abstinence from sexual activity and
encouraging monogamy and faithfulness;
``(B) encouraging the correct and consistent use of male
and female condoms and increasing the availability of, and
access to, these commodities;
``(C) promoting the delay of sexual debut and the reduction
of multiple concurrent sexual partners;
``(D) promoting education for discordant couples (where an
individual is infected with HIV and the other individual is
uninfected or whose status is unknown) about safer sex
practices;
``(E) promoting voluntary counseling and testing, addiction
therapy, and other prevention and treatment tools for illicit
injection drug users and other substance abusers;
``(F) educating men and boys about the risks of procuring
sex commercially and about the need to end violent behavior
toward women and girls;
``(G) supporting partner country and community efforts to
identify and address social, economic, or cultural factors,
such as migration, urbanization, conflict, gender-based
violence, lack of empowerment for women, and transportation
patterns, which directly contribute to the transmission of
HIV;
``(H) supporting comprehensive programs to promote
alternative livelihoods, safety, and social reintegration
strategies for commercial sex workers and their families;
``(I) promoting cooperation with law enforcement to
prosecute offenders of trafficking, rape, and sexual assault
crimes with the goal of eliminating such crimes; and
``(J) working to eliminate rape, gender-based violence,
sexual assault, and the sexual exploitation of women and
children;
``(13) include programs to reduce the transmission of HIV,
particularly addressing the heightened vulnerabilities of
women and girls to HIV in many countries; and
``(14) support other important means of preventing or
reducing the transmission of HIV, including--
``(A) medical male circumcision;
``(B) the maintenance of a safe blood supply; and
``(C) other mechanisms to reduce the transmission of HIV;
``(15) increase support for prevention of mother-to-child
transmission;
``(16) build capacity within the public health sector of
developing countries by improving health systems and public
health infrastructure and developing indicators to measure
changes in broader public health sector capabilities;
``(17) increase the coordination of HIV/AIDS programs with
development programs;
``(18) provide a framework for expanding or developing
existing or new country or regional programs, including--
``(A) drafting compacts or other agreements, as
appropriate;
``(B) establishing criteria and objectives for such
compacts and agreements; and
``(C) promoting sustainability;
``(19) provide a plan for national and regional priorities
for resource distribution and a global investment plan by
region;
[[Page 14787]]
``(20) provide a plan to address the immediate and ongoing
needs of women and girls, which--
``(A) addresses the vulnerabilities that contribute to
their elevated risk of infection;
``(B) includes specific goals and targets to address these
factors;
``(C) provides clear guidance to field missions to
integrate gender across prevention, care, and treatment
programs;
``(D) sets forth gender-specific indicators to monitor
progress on outcomes and impacts of gender programs;
``(E) supports efforts in countries in which women or
orphans lack inheritance rights and other fundamental
protections to promote the passage, implementation, and
enforcement of such laws;
``(F) supports life skills training, especially among women
and girls, with the goal of reducing vulnerabilities to HIV/
AIDS;
``(G) addresses and prevents gender-based violence; and
``(H) addresses the posttraumatic and psychosocial
consequences and provides postexposure prophylaxis protecting
against HIV infection to victims of gender-based violence and
rape;
``(21) provide a plan to--
``(A) determine the local factors that may put men and boys
at elevated risk of contracting or transmitting HIV;
``(B) address male norms and behaviors to reduce these
risks, including by reducing alcohol abuse;
``(C) promote responsible male behavior; and
``(D) promote male participation and leadership at the
community level in efforts to promote HIV prevention, reduce
stigma, promote participation in voluntary counseling and
testing, and provide care, treatment, and support for persons
with HIV/AIDS;
``(22) provide a plan to address the vulnerabilities and
needs of orphans and children who are vulnerable to, or
affected by, HIV/AIDS;
``(23) encourage partner countries to develop health care
curricula and promote access to training tailored to
individuals receiving services through, or exiting from,
existing programs geared to orphans and vulnerable children;
``(24) provide a framework to work with international
actors and partner countries toward universal access to HIV/
AIDS prevention, treatment, and care programs, recognizing
that prevention is of particular importance;
``(25) enhance the coordination of United States bilateral
efforts to combat global HIV/AIDS with other major public and
private entities;
``(26) enhance the attention given to the national
strategic HIV/AIDS plans of countries receiving United States
assistance by--
``(A) reviewing the planning and programmatic decisions
associated with that assistance; and
``(B) helping to strengthen such national strategies, if
necessary;
``(27) support activities described in the Global Plan to
Stop TB, including--
``(A) expanding and enhancing the coverage of the Directly
Observed Treatment Short-course (DOTS) in order to treat
individuals infected with tuberculosis and HIV, including
multi-drug resistant or extensively drug resistant
tuberculosis; and
``(B) improving coordination and integration of HIV/AIDS
and tuberculosis programming;
``(28) ensure coordination between the Global AIDS
Coordinator and the Malaria Coordinator and address issues of
comorbidity between HIV/AIDS and malaria; and
``(29) include a longer term estimate of the projected
resource needs, progress toward greater sustainability and
country ownership of HIV/AIDS programs, and the anticipated
role of the United States in the global effort to combat HIV/
AIDS during the 10-year period beginning on October 1,
2013.''.
(b) Report.--Section 101(b) of such Act (22 U.S.C. 7611(b))
is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Report.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than October 1, 2009, the
President shall submit a report to the appropriate
congressional committees that sets forth the strategy
described in subsection (a).
``(2) Contents.--The report required under paragraph (1)
shall include a discussion of the following elements:
``(A) The purpose, scope, methodology, and general and
specific objectives of the strategy.
``(B) The problems, risks, and threats to the successful
pursuit of the strategy.
``(C) The desired goals, objectives, activities, and
outcome-related performance measures of the strategy.
``(D) A description of future costs and resources needed to
carry out the strategy.
``(E) A delineation of United States Government roles,
responsibility, and coordination mechanisms of the strategy.
``(F) A description of the strategy--
``(i) to promote harmonization of United States assistance
with that of other international, national, and private
actors as elucidated in the `Three Ones'; and
``(ii) to address existing challenges in harmonization and
alignment.
``(G) A description of the manner in which the strategy
will--
``(i) further the development and implementation of the
national multisectoral strategic HIV/AIDS frameworks of
partner governments; and
``(ii) enhance the centrality, effectiveness, and
sustainability of those national plans.
``(H) A description of how the strategy will seek to
achieve the specific targets described in subsection (a) and
other targets, as appropriate.
``(I) A description of, and rationale for, the timetable
for annual global treatment targets with country-level
estimates of numbers of persons in need of antiretroviral
treatment, country-level benchmarks for United States support
for assistance for antiretroviral treatment, and numbers of
persons enrolled in antiretroviral treatment programs
receiving United States support. If global benchmarks are not
achieved within the reporting period, the report shall
include a description of steps being taken to ensure that
global benchmarks will be achieved and a detailed breakdown
and justification of spending priorities in countries in
which benchmarks are not being met, including a description
of other donor or national support for antiretroviral
treatment in the country, if appropriate.
``(J) A description of how operations research is addressed
in the strategy and how such research can most effectively be
integrated into care, treatment, and prevention activities in
order to--
``(i) improve program quality and efficiency;
``(ii) ascertain cost effectiveness;
``(iii) ensure transparency and accountability;
``(iv) assess population-based impact;
``(v) disseminate findings and best practices; and
``(vi) optimize delivery of services.
``(K) An analysis of United States-assisted strategies to
prevent the transmission of HIV/AIDS, including methodologies
to promote abstinence, monogamy, faithfulness, the correct
and consistent use of male and female condoms, reductions in
concurrent sexual partners, and delay of sexual debut, and of
intended monitoring and evaluation approaches to measure the
effectiveness of prevention programs and ensure that they are
targeted to appropriate audiences.
``(L) Within the analysis required under subparagraph (K),
an examination of additional planned means of preventing the
transmission of HIV including medical male circumcision,
maintenance of a safe blood supply, and other tools.
``(M) A description of efforts to assist partner country
and community to identify and address social, economic, or
cultural factors, such as migration, urbanization, conflict,
gender-based violence, lack of empowerment for women, and
transportation patterns, which directly contribute to the
transmission of HIV.
``(N) A description of the specific targets, goals, and
strategies developed to address the needs and vulnerabilities
of women and girls to HIV/AIDS, including--
``(i) activities directed toward men and boys;
``(ii) activities to enhance educational, microfinance, and
livelihood opportunities for women and girls;
``(iii) activities to promote and protect the legal
empowerment of women, girls, and orphans and vulnerable
children;
``(iv) programs targeted toward gender-based violence and
sexual coercion;
``(v) strategies to meet the particular needs of
adolescents;
``(vi) assistance for victims of rape, sexual abuse,
assault, exploitation, and trafficking; and
``(vii) programs to prevent alcohol abuse.
``(O) A description of strategies to address male norms and
behaviors that contribute to the transmission of HIV, to
promote responsible male behavior, and to promote male
participation and leadership in HIV/AIDS prevention, care,
treatment, and voluntary counseling and testing.
``(P) A description of strategies--
``(i) to address the needs of orphans and vulnerable
children, including an analysis of--
``(I) factors contributing to children's vulnerability to
HIV/AIDS; and
``(II) vulnerabilities caused by the impact of HIV/AIDS on
children and their families; and
``(ii) in areas of higher HIV/AIDS prevalence, to promote a
community-based approach to vulnerability, maximizing
community input into determining which children participate.
``(Q) A description of capacity-building efforts undertaken
by countries themselves, including adherents of the Abuja
Declaration and an assessment of the impact of International
Monetary Fund macroeconomic and fiscal policies on national
and donor investments in health.
``(R) A description of the strategy to--
``(i) strengthen capacity building within the public health
sector;
``(ii) improve health care in those countries;
``(iii) help countries to develop and implement national
health workforce strategies;
``(iv) strive to achieve goals in training, retaining, and
effectively deploying health staff;
[[Page 14788]]
``(v) promote the use of codes of conduct for ethical
recruiting practices for health care workers; and
``(vi) increase the sustainability of health programs.
``(S) A description of the criteria for selection,
objectives, methodology, and structure of compacts or other
framework agreements with countries or regional
organizations, including--
``(i) the role of civil society;
``(ii) the degree of transparency;
``(iii) benchmarks for success of such compacts or
agreements; and
``(iv) the relationship between such compacts or agreements
and the national HIV/AIDS and public health strategies and
commitments of partner countries.
``(T) A strategy to better coordinate HIV/AIDS assistance
with nutrition and food assistance programs.
``(U) A description of transnational or regional
initiatives to combat regionalized epidemics in highly
affected areas such as the Caribbean.
``(V) A description of planned resource distribution and
global investment by region.
``(W) A description of coordination efforts in order to
better implement the Stop TB Strategy and to address the
problem of coinfection of HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis and of
projected challenges or barriers to successful
implementation.
``(X) A description of coordination efforts to address
malaria and comorbidity with malaria and HIV/AIDS.''.
(c) Study.--Section 101(c) of such Act (22 U.S.C. 7611(c))
is amended to read as follows:
``(c) Study of Progress Toward Achievement of Policy
Objectives.--
``(1) Design and budget plan for data evaluation.--The
Global AIDS Coordinator shall enter into a contract with the
Institute of Medicine of the National Academies that provides
that not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment
of the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global
Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria
Reauthorization Act of 2008, the Institute, in consultation
with the Global AIDS Coordinator and other relevant parties
representing the public and private sector, shall provide the
Global AIDS Coordinator with a design plan and budget for the
evaluation and collection of baseline and subsequent data to
address the elements set forth in paragraph (2)(B). The
Global AIDS Coordinator shall submit the budget and design
plan to the appropriate congressional committees.
``(2) Study.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 4 years after the date of
the enactment of the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United
States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008, the Institute of
Medicine of the National Academies shall publish a study that
includes--
``(i) an assessment of the performance of United States-
assisted global HIV/AIDS programs; and
``(ii) an evaluation of the impact on health of prevention,
treatment, and care efforts that are supported by United
States funding, including multilateral and bilateral programs
involving joint operations.
``(B) Content.--The study conducted under this paragraph
shall include--
``(i) an assessment of progress toward prevention,
treatment, and care targets;
``(ii) an assessment of the effects on health systems,
including on the financing and management of health systems
and the quality of service delivery and staffing;
``(iii) an assessment of efforts to address gender-specific
aspects of HIV/AIDS, including gender related constraints to
accessing services and addressing underlying social and
economic vulnerabilities of women and men;
``(iv) an evaluation of the impact of treatment and care
programs on 5-year survival rates, drug adherence, and the
emergence of drug resistance;
``(v) an evaluation of the impact of prevention programs on
HIV incidence in relevant population groups;
``(vi) an evaluation of the impact on child health and
welfare of interventions authorized under this Act on behalf
of orphans and vulnerable children;
``(vii) an evaluation of the impact of programs and
activities authorized in this Act on child mortality; and
``(viii) recommendations for improving the programs
referred to in subparagraph (A)(i).
``(C) Methodologies.--Assessments and impact evaluations
conducted under the study shall utilize sound statistical
methods and techniques for the behavioral sciences, including
random assignment methodologies as feasible. Qualitative data
on process variables should be used for assessments and
impact evaluations, wherever possible.
``(3) Contract authority.--The Institute of Medicine may
enter into contracts or cooperative agreements or award
grants to conduct the study under paragraph (2).
``(4) Authorization of appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary
to carry out the study under this subsection.''.
(d) Report.--Section 101 of such Act, as amended by this
section, is further amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(d) Comptroller General Report.--
``(1) Report required.--Not later than 3 years after the
date of the enactment of the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde
United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008, the
Comptroller General of the United States shall submit a
report on the global HIV/AIDS programs of the United States
to the appropriate congressional committees.
``(2) Contents.--The report required under paragraph (1)
shall include--
``(A) a description and assessment of the monitoring and
evaluation practices and policies in place for these
programs;
``(B) an assessment of coordination within Federal agencies
involved in these programs, examining both internal
coordination within these programs and integration with the
larger global health and development agenda of the United
States;
``(C) an assessment of procurement policies and practices
within these programs;
``(D) an assessment of harmonization with national
government HIV/AIDS and public health strategies as well as
other international efforts;
``(E) an assessment of the impact of global HIV/AIDS
funding and programs on other United States global health
programming; and
``(F) recommendations for improving the global HIV/AIDS
programs of the United States.
``(e) Best Practices Report.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
the enactment of the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United
States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008, and annually thereafter,
the Global AIDS Coordinator shall publish a best practices
report that highlights the programs receiving financial
assistance from the United States that have the potential for
replication or adaption, particularly at a low cost, across
global AIDS programs, including those that focus on both
generalized and localized epidemics.
``(2) Dissemination of findings.--
``(A) Publication on internet website.--The Global AIDS
Coordinator shall disseminate the full findings of the annual
best practices report on the Internet website of the Office
of the Global AIDS Coordinator.
``(B) Dissemination guidance.--The Global AIDS Coordinator
shall develop guidance to ensure timely submission and
dissemination of significant information regarding best
practices with respect to global AIDS programs.
``(f) Inspectors General.--
``(1) Oversight plan.--
``(A) Development.--The Inspectors General of the
Department of State and Broadcasting Board of Governors, the
Department of Health and Human Services, and the United
States Agency for International Development shall jointly
develop 5 coordinated annual plans for oversight activity in
each of the fiscal years 2009 through 2013, with regard to
the programs authorized under this Act and sections 104A,
104B, and 104C of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22
U.S.C. 2151b-2, 2151b-3, and 2151b-4).
``(B) Contents.--The plans developed under subparagraph (A)
shall include a schedule for financial audits, inspections,
and performance reviews, as appropriate.
``(C) Deadline.--
``(i) Initial plan.--The first plan developed under
subparagraph (A) shall be completed not later than the later
of--
``(I) September 1, 2008; or
``(II) 60 days after the date of the enactment of the Tom
Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership
Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization
Act of 2008.
``(ii) Subsequent plans.--Each of the last four plans
developed under subparagraph (A) shall be completed not later
than 30 days before each of the fiscal years 2010 through
2013, respectively.
``(2) Coordination.--In order to avoid duplication and
maximize efficiency, the Inspectors General described in
paragraph (1) shall coordinate their activities with--
``(A) the Government Accountability Office; and
``(B) the Inspectors General of the Department of Commerce,
the Department of Defense, the Department of Labor, and the
Peace Corps, as appropriate, pursuant to the 2004 Memorandum
of Agreement Coordinating Audit Coverage of Programs and
Activities Implementing the President's Emergency Plan for
AIDS Relief, or any successor agreement.
``(3) Funding.--The Global AIDS Coordinator and the
Coordinator of the United States Government Activities to
Combat Malaria Globally shall make available necessary funds
not exceeding $15,000,000 during the 5-year period beginning
on October 1, 2008 to the Inspectors General described in
paragraph (1) for the audits, inspections, and reviews
described in that paragraph.''.
(e) Annual Study; Message.--Section 101 of such Act, as
amended by this section, is further amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(g) Annual Study.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than September 30, 2009, and
annually thereafter through September 30, 2013, the Global
AIDS
[[Page 14789]]
Coordinator shall complete a study of treatment providers
that--
``(A) represents a range of countries and service
environments;
``(B) estimates the per-patient cost of antiretroviral HIV/
AIDS treatment and the care of people with HIV/AIDS not
receiving antiretroviral treatment, including a comparison of
the costs for equivalent services provided by programs not
receiving assistance under this Act;
``(C) estimates per-patient costs across the program and in
specific categories of service providers, including--
``(i) urban and rural providers;
``(ii) country-specific providers; and
``(iii) other subcategories, as appropriate.
``(2) Publication.--Not later than 90 days after the
completion of each study under paragraph (1), the Global AIDS
Coordinator shall make the results of such study available on
a publicly accessible Web site.
``(h) Message.--The Global AIDS Coordinator shall develop a
message, to be prominently displayed by each program
receiving funds under this Act, that--
``(1) demonstrates that the program is a commitment by
citizens of the United States to the global fight against
HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria; and
``(2) enhances awareness by program recipients that the
program is an effort on behalf of the citizens of the United
States.''.
SEC. 102. INTERAGENCY WORKING GROUP.
Section 1(f)(2) of the State Department Basic Authorities
Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2651a(f)(2)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ``, partner country
finance, health, and other relevant ministries,'' after
``community based organizations)'' each place it appears;
(2) in subparagraph (B)(ii)--
(A) by striking subclauses (IV) and (V);
(B) by inserting after subclause (III) the following:
``(IV) Establishing an interagency working group on HIV/
AIDS headed by the Global AIDS Coordinator and comprised of
representatives from the United States Agency for
International Development and the Department of Health and
Human Services, for the purposes of coordination of
activities relating to HIV/AIDS, including--
``(aa) meeting regularly to review progress in partner
countries toward HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, and care
objectives;
``(bb) participating in the process of identifying
countries to consider for increased assistance based on the
epidemiology of HIV/AIDS in those countries, including clear
evidence of a public health threat, as well as government
commitment to address the HIV/AIDS problem, relative need,
and coordination and joint planning with other significant
actors;
``(cc) assisting the Coordinator in the evaluation,
execution, and oversight of country operational plans;
``(dd) reviewing policies that may be obstacles to reaching
targets set forth for HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, and
care; and
``(ee) consulting with representatives from additional
relevant agencies, including the National Institutes of
Health, the Health Resources and Services Administration, the
Department of Labor, the Department of Agriculture, the
Millennium Challenge Corporation, the Peace Corps, and the
Department of Defense.
``(V) Coordinating overall United States HIV/AIDS policy
and programs, including ensuring the coordination of relevant
executive branch agency activities in the field, with efforts
led by partner countries, and with the assistance provided by
other relevant bilateral and multilateral aid agencies and
other donor institutions to promote harmonization with other
programs aimed at preventing and treating HIV/AIDS and other
health challenges, improving primary health, addressing food
security, promoting education and development, and
strengthening health care systems.'';
(C) by redesignating subclauses (VII) and VIII) as
subclauses (IX) and (XII), respectively;
(D) by inserting after subclause (VI) the following:
``(VII) Holding annual consultations with nongovernmental
organizations in partner countries that provide services to
improve health, and advocating on behalf of the individuals
with HIV/AIDS and those at particular risk of contracting
HIV/AIDS, including organizations with members who are living
with HIV/AIDS.
``(VIII) Ensuring, through interagency and international
coordination, that HIV/AIDS programs of the United States are
coordinated with, and complementary to, the delivery of
related global health, food security, development, and
education.'';
(E) in subclause (IX), as redesignated by subparagraph
(C)--
(i) by inserting ``Vietnam,'' after ``Uganda,'';
(ii) by inserting after ``of 2003'' the following: ``and
other countries in which the United States is implementing
HIV/AIDS programs as part of its foreign assistance
program''; and
(iii) by adding at the end the following: ``In designating
additional countries under this subparagraph, the President
shall give priority to those countries in which there is a
high prevalence of HIV or risk of significantly increasing
incidence of HIV within the general population and inadequate
financial means within the country.'';
(F) by inserting after subclause (IX), as redesignated by
subparagraph (C), the following:
``(X) Working with partner countries in which the HIV/AIDS
epidemic is prevalent among injection drug users to
establish, as a national priority, national HIV/AIDS
prevention programs.
``(XI) Working with partner countries in which the HIV/AIDS
epidemic is prevalent among individuals involved in
commercial sex acts to establish, as a national priority,
national prevention programs, including education, voluntary
testing, and counseling, and referral systems that link HIV/
AIDS programs with programs to eradicate trafficking in
persons and support alternatives to prostitution.'';
(G) in subclause (XII), as redesignated by subparagraph
(C), by striking ``funds section'' and inserting ``funds
appropriated for HIV/ AIDS assistance pursuant to the
authorization of appropriations under section 401 of the
United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7671)''; and
(H) by adding at the end the following:
``(XIII) Publicizing updated drug pricing data to inform
the purchasing decisions of pharmaceutical procurement
partners.''.
SEC. 103. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
Section 102 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7612)
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(d) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress
that--
``(1) full-time country level coordinators, preferably with
management experience, should head each HIV/AIDS country team
for United States missions overseeing significant HIV/AIDS
programs;
``(2) foreign service nationals provide critically
important services in the design and implementation of United
States country-level HIV/AIDS programs and their skills and
experience as public health professionals should be
recognized within hiring and compensation practices; and
``(3) staffing levels for United States country-level HIV/
AIDS teams should be adequately maintained to fulfill
oversight and other obligations of the positions.''.
TITLE II--SUPPORT FOR MULTILATERAL FUNDS, PROGRAMS, AND PUBLIC-PRIVATE
PARTNERSHIPS
SEC. 201. VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS TO INTERNATIONAL VACCINE
FUNDS.
Section 302 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22
U.S.C. 2222) is amended--
(1) by inserting after subsection (c) the following:
``(d) Tuberculosis Vaccine Development Programs.--In
addition to amounts otherwise available under this section,
there are authorized to be appropriated to the President such
sums as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2009
through 2013, which shall be used for United States
contributions to tuberculosis vaccine development programs,
which may include the Aeras Global TB Vaccine Foundation.'';
(2) in subsection (k)--
(A) by striking ``fiscal years 2004 through 2008'' and
inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through 2013''; and
(B) by striking ``Vaccine Fund'' and inserting ``GAVI
Fund''.
(3) in subsection (l), by striking ``fiscal years 2004
through 2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through
2013''; and
(4) in subsection (m), by striking ``fiscal years 2004
through 2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through
2013''.
SEC. 202. PARTICIPATION IN THE GLOBAL FUND TO FIGHT AIDS,
TUBERCULOSIS AND MALARIA.
(a) Findings; Sense of Congress.--Section 202(a) of the
United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7622(a)) is amended to read as
follows:
``(a) Findings; Sense of Congress.--
``(1) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
``(A) The establishment of the Global Fund in January 2002
is consistent with the general principles for an
international AIDS trust fund first outlined by Congress in
the Global AIDS and Tuberculosis Relief Act of 2000 (Public
Law 106-264).
``(B) The Global Fund is an innovative financing mechanism
which--
``(i) has made progress in many areas in combating HIV/
AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria; and
``(ii) represents the multilateral component of this Act,
extending United States efforts to more than 130 countries
around the world.
``(C) The Global Fund and United States bilateral
assistance programs--
``(i) are demonstrating increasingly effective
coordination, with each possessing certain comparative
advantages in the fight against HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and
malaria; and
``(ii) often work most effectively in concert with each
other.
``(D) The United States Government--
``(i) is the largest supporter of the Global Fund in terms
of resources and technical support;
[[Page 14790]]
``(ii) made the founding contribution to the Global Fund;
and
``(iii) is fully committed to the success of the Global
Fund as a multilateral public-private partnership.
``(2) Sense of congress.--It is the sense of Congress
that--
``(A) transparency and accountability are crucial to the
long-term success and viability of the Global Fund;
``(B) the Global Fund has made significant progress toward
addressing concerns raised by the Government Accountability
Office by--
``(i) improving risk assessment and risk management
capabilities;
``(ii) providing clearer guidance for and oversight of
Local Fund Agents; and
``(iii) strengthening the Office of the Inspector General
for the Global Fund;
``(C) the provision of sufficient resources and authority
to the Office of the Inspector General for the Global Fund to
ensure that office has the staff and independence necessary
to carry out its mandate will be a measure of the commitment
of the Global Fund to transparency and accountability;
``(D) regular, publicly published financial, programmatic,
and reporting audits of the Fund, its grantees, and Local
Fund Agents are also important benchmarks of transparency;
``(E) the Global Fund should establish and maintain a
system to track--
``(i) the amount of funds disbursed to each subrecipient on
the grant's fiscal cycle; and
``(ii) the distribution of resources, by grant and
principal recipient, for prevention, care, treatment, drug
and commodity purchases, and other purposes;
``(F) relevant national authorities in recipient countries
should exempt from duties and taxes all products financed by
Global Fund grants and procured by any principal recipient or
subrecipient for the purpose of carrying out such grants;
``(G) the Global Fund, UNAIDS, and the Global AIDS
Coordinator should work together to standardize program
indicators wherever possible;
``(H) for purposes of evaluating total amounts of funds
contributed to the Global Fund under subsection (d)(4)(A)(i),
the timetable for evaluations of contributions from sources
other than the United States should take into account the
fiscal calendars of other major contributors; and
``(I) the Global Fund should not support activities
involving the `Affordable Medicines Facility-Malaria' or
similar entities pending compelling evidence of success from
pilot programs as evaluated by the Coordinator of United
States Government Activities to Combat Malaria Globally.''.
(b) Statement of Policy.--Section 202(b) of such Act is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(3) Statement of policy.--The United States Government
regards the imposition by recipient countries of taxes or
tariffs on goods or services provided by the Global Fund,
which are supported through public and private donations,
including the substantial contribution of the American
people, as inappropriate and inconsistent with standards of
good governance. The Global AIDS Coordinator or other
representatives of the United States Government shall work
with the Global Fund to dissuade governments from imposing
such duties, tariffs, or taxes.''.
(c) United States Financial Participation.--Section 202(d)
of such Act (22 U.S.C. 7622(d)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking ``$1,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal
year 2004 beginning on January 1, 2004'' and inserting
``$2,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2009,''; and
(B) by striking ``the fiscal years 2005-2008'' and
inserting ``each of the fiscal years 2010 through 2013'';
(2) in paragraph (4)--
(A) in subparagraph (A)--
(i) in clause (i), by striking ``fiscal years 2004 through
2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through 2013'';
(ii) in clause (ii)--
(I) by striking ``during any of the fiscal years 2004
through 2008'' and inserting ``during any of the fiscal years
2009 through 2013''; and
(II) by adding at the end the following: ``The President
may waive the application of this clause with respect to
assistance for Sudan that is overseen by the Southern Country
Coordinating Mechanism, including Southern Sudan, Southern
Kordofan, Blue Nile State, and Abyei, if the President
determines that the national interest or humanitarian reasons
justify such a waiver. The President shall publish each
waiver of this clause in the Federal Register and, not later
than 15 days before the waiver takes effect, shall consult
with the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the
Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives
regarding the proposed waiver.''; and
(iii) in clause (vi)--
(I) by striking ``for the purposes'' and inserting ``For
the purposes'';
(II) by striking ``fiscal years 2004 through 2008'' and
inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through 2013''; and
(III) by striking ``prior to fiscal year 2004'' and
inserting ``before fiscal year 2009'';
(B) in subparagraph (B)(iv), by striking ``fiscal years
2004 through 2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through
2013''; and
(C) in subparagraph (C)(ii), by striking ``Committee on
International Relations'' and inserting ``Committee on
Foreign Affairs''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(5) Withholding funds.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of this Act, 20 percent of the amounts appropriated
pursuant to this Act for a contribution to support the Global
Fund for each of the fiscal years 2010 through 2013 shall be
withheld from obligation to the Global Fund until the
Secretary of State certifies to the appropriate congressional
committees that the Global Fund--
``(A) has established an evaluation framework for the
performance of Local Fund Agents (referred to in this
paragraph as `LFAs');
``(B) is undertaking a systematic assessment of the
performance of LFAs;
``(C) has adopted, and is implementing, a policy to publish
on a publicly available Web site--
``(i) grant performance reviews;
``(ii) all reports of the Inspector General of the Global
Fund, in a manner that is consistent with the Policy for
Disclosure of Reports of the Inspector General, approved at
the 16th Meeting of the Board of the Global Fund;
``(iii) decision points of the Board of the Global Fund;
``(iv) reports from Board committees to the Board; and
``(v) a regular collection and analysis of performance data
and funding of grants of the Global Fund, which shall cover
all principal recipients and all subrecipients;
``(D) is maintaining an independent, well-staffed Office of
the Inspector General that--
``(i) reports directly to the Board of the Global Fund; and
``(ii) compiles regular, publicly published audits of
financial, programmatic, and reporting aspects of the Global
Fund, its grantees, and LFAs;
``(E) has established, and is reporting publicly on,
standard indicators for all program areas;
``(F) has established a methodology to track and is
publicly reporting on--
``(i) all subrecipients and the amount of funds disbursed
to each subrecipient on the grant's fiscal cycle; and
``(ii) the distribution of resources, by grant and
principal recipient, for prevention, care, treatment, drugs
and commodities purchase, and other purposes;
``(G) has established a policy on tariffs imposed by
national governments on all goods and services financed by
the Global Fund;
``(H) through its Secretariat, has taken meaningful steps
to prevent national authorities in recipient countries from
imposing taxes or tariffs on goods or services provided by
the Fund;
``(I) is maintaining its status as a financing institution
focused on programs directly related to HIV/AIDS, malaria,
and tuberculosis; and
``(J) is maintaining and making progress on--
``(i) sustaining its multisectoral approach, through
country coordinating mechanisms; and
``(ii) the implementation of grants, as reflected in the
proportion of resources allocated to different sectors,
including governments, civil society, and faith- and
community-based organizations.
``(6) Summaries of board decisions and united states
positions.--Following each meeting of the Board of the Global
Fund, the Coordinator of United States Government Activities
to Combat HIV/AIDS Globally shall report on the public
website of the Coordinator a summary of Board decisions and
how the United States Government voted and its positions on
such decisions.''.
SEC. 203. RESEARCH ON METHODS FOR WOMEN TO PREVENT
TRANSMISSION OF HIV AND OTHER DISEASES.
(a) Sense of Congress.--Congress recognizes the need and
urgency to expand the range of interventions for preventing
the transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV),
including nonvaccine prevention methods that can be
controlled by women.
(b) NIH Office of AIDS Research.--Subpart 1 of part D of
title XXIII of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
300cc-40 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 2351
the following:
``SEC. 2351A. MICROBICIDE RESEARCH.
``(a) Federal Strategic Plan.--The Director of the Office
shall--
``(1) expedite the implementation of the Federal strategic
plans required by section 403(a) of the Public Health Service
Act (42 U.S.C. 283(a)(5)) regarding the conduct and support
of research on, and development of, a microbicide to prevent
the transmission of the human immunodeficiency virus; and
``(2) review and, as appropriate, revise such plan to
prioritize funding and activities relative to their
scientific urgency and potential market readiness.
``(b) Coordination.--In implementing, reviewing, and
prioritizing elements of the plan described in subsection
(a), the Director of the Office shall consult, as
appropriate, with--
[[Page 14791]]
``(1) representatives of other Federal agencies involved in
microbicide research, including the Coordinator of United
States Government Activities to Combat HIV/AIDS Globally, the
Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
and the Administrator of the United States Agency for
International Development;
``(2) the microbicide research and development community;
and
``(3) health advocates.''.
(c) National Institute of Allergy and Infectious
Diseases.--Subpart 6 of part C of title IV of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 285f et seq.) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 447C. MICROBICIDE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.
``The Director of the Institute, acting through the head of
the Division of AIDS, shall, consistent with the peer-review
process of the National Institutes of Health, carry out
research on, and development of, safe and effective methods
for use by women to prevent the transmission of the human
immunodeficiency virus, which may include microbicides.''.
(d) CDC.--Part B of title III of the Public Health Service
Act (42 U.S.C. 243 et seq.) is amended by inserting after
section 317S the following:
``SEC. 317T. MICROBICIDE RESEARCH.
``(a) In General.--The Director of the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention is strongly encouraged to fully
implement the Centers' microbicide agenda to support research
and development of microbicides for use to prevent the
transmission of the human immunodeficiency virus.
``(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary
for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2013 to carry out this
section.''.
(e) United States Agency for International Development.--
(1) In general.--The Administrator of the United States
Agency for International Development, in coordination with
the Coordinator of United States Government Activities to
Combat HIV/AIDS Globally, may facilitate availability and
accessibility of microbicides, provided that such
pharmaceuticals are approved, tentatively approved, or
otherwise authorized for use by--
(A) the Food and Drug Administration;
(B) a stringent regulatory agency acceptable to the
Secretary of Health and Human Services; or
(C) a quality assurance mechanism acceptable to the
Secretary of Health and Human Services.
(2) Authorization of appropriations.--Of the amounts
authorized to be appropriated under section 401 of the United
States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria
Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7671) for HIV/AIDS assistance, there
are authorized to be appropriated to the President such sums
as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2009 through
2013 to carry out this subsection.
SEC. 204. COMBATING HIV/AIDS, TUBERCULOSIS, AND MALARIA BY
STRENGTHENING HEALTH POLICIES AND HEALTH
SYSTEMS OF PARTNER COUNTRIES.
(a) In General.--Title II of the United States Leadership
Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22
U.S.C. 7621) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 204. COMBATING HIV/AIDS, TUBERCULOSIS, AND MALARIA BY
STRENGTHENING HEALTH POLICIES AND HEALTH
SYSTEMS OF PARTNER COUNTRIES.
``(a) Statement of Policy.--It shall be the policy of the
United States Government--
``(1) to invest appropriate resources authorized under this
Act--
``(A) to carry out activities to strengthen HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria health policies and health systems;
and
``(B) to provide workforce training and capacity-building
consistent with the goals and objectives of this Act; and
``(2) to support the development of a sound policy
environment in partner countries to increase the ability of
such countries--
``(A) to maximize utilization of health care resources from
donor countries;
``(B) to increase national investments in health and
education and maximize the effectiveness of such investments;
``(C) to improve national HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and
malaria strategies;
``(D) to deliver evidence-based services in an effective
and efficient manner; and
``(E) to reduce barriers that prevent recipients of
services from achieving maximum benefit from such services.
``(b) Assistance To Improve Public Finance Management
Systems.--
``(1) In general.--Consistent with the authority under
section 129 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C.
2152), the Secretary of the Treasury, acting through the head
of the Office of Technical Assistance, is authorized to
provide assistance for advisors and partner country finance,
health, and other relevant ministries to improve the
effectiveness of public finance management systems in partner
countries to enable such countries to receive funding to
carry out programs to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and
malaria and to manage such programs.
``(2) Authorization of appropriations.--Of the amounts
authorized to be appropriated under section 401 for HIV/AIDS
assistance, there are authorized to be appropriated to the
Secretary of the Treasury such sums as may be necessary for
each of the fiscal years 2009 through 2013 to carry out this
subsection.
``(c) Plan Required.--The Global AIDS Coordinator, in
collaboration with the Administrator of the United States
Agency for International Development (USAID), shall develop
and implement a plan to combat HIV/AIDS by strengthening
health policies and health systems of partner countries as
part of USAID's `Health Systems 2020' project. Recognizing
that human and institutional capacity form the core of any
health care system that can sustain the fight against HIV/
AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria, the plan shall include a
strategy to encourage postsecondary educational institutions
in partner countries, particularly in Africa, in
collaboration with United States postsecondary educational
institutions, including historically black colleges and
universities, to develop such human and institutional
capacity and in the process further build their capacity to
sustain the fight against these diseases.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents for the
United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7601 note) is amended by
inserting after the item relating to section 203, as added by
section 203 of this Act, the following:
``Sec. 204. Combating HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria by
strengthening health policies and health systems of
partner countries.''.
SEC. 205. FACILITATING EFFECTIVE OPERATIONS OF THE CENTERS
FOR DISEASE CONTROL.
Section 307 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
242l) is amended--
(1) by amending subsection (a) to read as follows:
``(a) The Secretary may participate with other countries in
cooperative endeavors in--
``(1) biomedical research, health care technology, and the
health services research and statistical analysis authorized
under section 306 and title IX; and
``(2) biomedical research, health care services, health
care research, or other related activities in furtherance of
the activities, objectives or goals authorized under the Tom
Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership
Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization
Act of 2008.''; and
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (7), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon at the end;
(B) by striking ``The Secretary may not, in the exercise of
his authority under this section, provide financial
assistance for the construction of any facility in any
foreign country.''
(C) in paragraph (8), by striking ``for any purpose.'' and
inserting ``for the purpose of any law administered by the
Office of Personnel Management;''; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
``(9) provide such funds by advance or reimbursement to the
Secretary of State, as may be necessary, to pay the costs of
acquisition, lease, construction, alteration, equipping,
furnishing or management of facilities outside of the United
States; and
``(10) in consultation with the Secretary of State, through
grant or cooperative agreement, make funds available to
public or nonprofit private institutions or agencies in
foreign countries in which the Secretary is participating in
activities described under subsection (a) to acquire, lease,
construct, alter, or renovate facilities in those
countries.''.
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) by striking ``1990'' and inserting ``1980''; and
(B) by inserting or ``or section 903 of the Foreign Service
Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 4083)'' after ``Code''.
SEC. 206. FACILITATING VACCINE DEVELOPMENT.
(a) Technical Assistance for Developing Countries.--The
Administrator of the United States Agency for International
Development, utilizing public-private partners, as
appropriate, and working in coordination with other
international development agencies, is authorized to
strengthen the capacity of developing countries' governmental
institutions to--
(1) collect evidence for informed decision-making and
introduction of new vaccines, including potential HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, and malaria vaccines, if such vaccines are
determined to be safe and effective;
(2) review protocols for clinical trials and impact studies
and improve the implementation of clinical trials; and
(3) ensure adequate supply chain and delivery systems.
(b) Advanced Market Commitments.--
(1) Purpose.--The purpose of this subsection is to improve
global health by requiring the United States to participate
in negotiations for advance market commitments
[[Page 14792]]
for the development of future vaccines, including potential
vaccines for HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria.
(2) Negotiation requirement.--The Secretary of the Treasury
shall enter into negotiations with the appropriate officials
of the International Bank of Reconstruction and Development
(World Bank) and the GAVI Alliance, the member nations of
such entities, and other interested parties to establish
advanced market commitments to purchase vaccines to combat
HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, and other related infectious
diseases.
(3) Requirements.--In negotiating the United States
participation in programs for advanced market commitments,
the Secretary of the Treasury shall take into account whether
programs for advance market commitments include--
(A) legally binding contracts for product purchase that
include a fair market price for up to a maximum number of
treatments, creating a strong market incentive;
(B) clearly defined and transparent rules of program
participation for qualified developers and suppliers of the
product;
(C) clearly defined requirements for eligible vaccines to
ensure that they are safe and effective and can be delivered
in developing country contexts;
(D) dispute settlement mechanisms; and
(E) sufficient flexibility to enable the contracts to be
adjusted in accord with new information related to projected
market size and other factors while still maintaining the
purchase commitment at a fair price.
(4) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act--
(A) the Secretary of the Treasury shall submit a report to
the appropriate congressional committees on the status of the
United States negotiations to participate in programs for the
advanced market commitments under this subsection; and
(B) the President shall produce a comprehensive report,
written by a study group of qualified professionals from
relevant Federal agencies and initiatives, nongovernmental
organizations, and industry representatives, that sets forth
a coordinated strategy to accelerate development of vaccines
for infectious diseases, such as HIV/AIDS, malaria, and
tuberculosis, which includes--
(i) initiatives to create economic incentives for the
research, development, and manufacturing of vaccines for HIV/
AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, and other infectious diseases;
(ii) an expansion of public-private partnerships and the
leveraging of resources from other countries and the private
sector; and
(iii) efforts to maximize United States capabilities to
support clinical trials of vaccines in developing countries
and to address the challenges of delivering vaccines in
developing countries to minimize delays in access once
vaccines are available.
TITLE III--BILATERAL EFFORTS
Subtitle A--General Assistance and Programs
SEC. 301. ASSISTANCE TO COMBAT HIV/AIDS.
(a) Amendments to the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.--
(1) Finding.--Section 104A(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act
of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151b-2(a)) is amended by inserting
``Central Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America'' after
``Caribbean,''.
(2) Policy.--Section 104A(b) of such Act is amended to read
as follows:
``(b) Policy.--
``(1) Objectives.--It is a major objective of the foreign
assistance program of the United States to provide assistance
for the prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS and the care of
those affected by the disease. It is the policy objective of
the United States, by 2013, to--
``(A) assist partner countries to--
``(i) prevent 12,000,000 new HIV infections worldwide;
``(ii) support--
``(I) the increase in the number of individuals with HIV/
AIDS receiving antiretroviral treatment above the goal
established under section 402(a)(3) and increased pursuant to
paragraphs (1) through (3) of section 403(d); and
``(II) additional treatment through coordinated
multilateral efforts;
``(iii) support care for 12,000,000 individuals infected
with or affected by HIV/AIDS, including 5,000,000 orphans and
vulnerable children affected by HIV/AIDS, with an emphasis on
promoting a comprehensive, coordinated system of services to
be integrated throughout the continuum of care;
``(iv) provide at least 80 percent of the target population
with access to counseling, testing, and treatment to prevent
the transmission of HIV from mother-to-child;
``(v) provide care and treatment services to children with
HIV in proportion to their percentage within the HIV-infected
population of a given partner country; and
``(vi) train and support retention of health care
professionals, paraprofessionals, and community health
workers in HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, and care, with the
target of providing such training to at least 140,000 new
health care professionals and paraprofessionals with an
emphasis on training and in country deployment of critically
needed doctors and nurses;
``(B) strengthen the capacity to deliver primary health
care in developing countries, especially in sub-Saharan
Africa;
``(C) support and help countries in their efforts to
achieve staffing levels of at least 2.3 doctors, nurses, and
midwives per 1,000 population, as called for by the World
Health Organization; and
``(D) help partner countries to develop independent,
sustainable HIV/AIDS programs.
``(2) Coordinated global strategy.--The United States and
other countries with the sufficient capacity should provide
assistance to countries in sub-Saharan Africa, the Caribbean,
Central Asia, Eastern Europe, and Latin America, and other
countries and regions confronting HIV/AIDS epidemics in a
coordinated global strategy to help address generalized and
concentrated epidemics through HIV/AIDS prevention,
treatment, care, monitoring and evaluation, and related
activities.
``(3) Priorities.--The United States Government's response
to the global HIV/AIDS pandemic and the Government's efforts
to help countries assume leadership of sustainable campaigns
to combat their local epidemics should place high priority
on--
``(A) the prevention of the transmission of HIV; and
``(B) moving toward universal access to HIV/AIDS prevention
counseling and services.''.
(b) Authorization.--Section 104A(c) of such Act is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``and other countries and
areas.'' and inserting ``Central Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin
America, and other countries and areas, particularly with
respect to refugee populations or those in postconflict
settings in such countries and areas with significant or
increasing HIV incidence rates.'';
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``and other countries and
areas affected by the HIV/AIDS pandemic'' and inserting
``Central Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America, and other
countries and areas affected by the HIV/AIDS pandemic,
particularly with respect to refugee populations or those in
post-conflict settings in such countries and areas with
significant or increasing HIV incidence rates.''; and
(3) in paragraph (3)--
(A) by striking ``foreign countries'' and inserting
``partner countries, other international actors,''; and
(B) by inserting ``within the framework of the principles
of the Three Ones'' before the period at the end.
(c) Activities Supported.--Section 104A(d) of such Act is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in subparagraph (A)--
(i) by inserting ``and multiple concurrent sexual
partnering,'' after ``casual sexual partnering''; and
(ii) by striking ``condoms'' and inserting ``male and
female condoms'';
(B) in subparagraph (B)--
(i) by striking ``programs that'' and inserting ``programs
that are designed with local input and''; and
(ii) by striking ``those organizations'' and inserting
``those locally based organizations'';
(C) in subparagraph (D), by inserting ``and promoting the
use of provider-initiated or `opt-out' voluntary testing in
accordance with World Health Organization guidelines'' before
the semicolon at the end;
(D) by redesignating subparagraphs (F), (G), and (H) as
subparagraphs (H), (I), and (J), respectively;
(E) by inserting after subparagraph (E) the following:
``(F) assistance to--
``(i) achieve the goal of reaching 80 percent of pregnant
women for prevention and treatment of mother-to-child
transmission of HIV in countries in which the United States
is implementing HIV/AIDS programs by 2013; and
``(ii) promote infant feeding options and treatment
protocols that meet the most recent criteria established by
the World Health Organization;
``(G) medical male circumcision programs as part of
national strategies to combat the transmission of HIV/
AIDS;'';
(F) in subparagraph (I), as redesignated, by striking
``and'' at the end; and
(G) by adding at the end the following:
``(K) assistance for counseling, testing, treatment, care,
and support programs, including--
``(i) counseling and other services for the prevention of
reinfection of individuals with HIV/AIDS;
``(ii) counseling to prevent sexual transmission of HIV,
including--
``(I) life skills development for practicing abstinence and
faithfulness;
``(II) reducing the number of sexual partners;
``(III) delaying sexual debut; and
``(IV) ensuring correct and consistent use of condoms;
``(iii) assistance to engage underlying vulnerabilities to
HIV/AIDS, especially those of women and girls;
``(iv) assistance for appropriate HIV/AIDS education
programs and training targeted to prevent the transmission of
HIV among men who have sex with men;
``(v) assistance to provide male and female condoms;
[[Page 14793]]
``(vi) diagnosis and treatment of other sexually
transmitted infections;
``(vii) strategies to address the stigma and discrimination
that impede HIV/AIDS prevention efforts; and
``(viii) assistance to facilitate widespread access to
microbicides for HIV prevention, if safe and effective
products become available, including financial and technical
support for culturally appropriate introductory programs,
procurement, distribution, logistics management, program
delivery, acceptability studies, provider training, demand
generation, and postintroduction monitoring.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in subparagraph (C)--
(i) by inserting ``pain management,'' after ``opportunistic
infections,''; and
(ii) by striking the period at the end and inserting a
semicolon; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(D) as part of care and treatment of HIV/AIDS, assistance
(including prophylaxis and treatment) for common HIV/AIDS-
related opportunistic infections for free or at a rate at
which it is easily affordable to the individuals and
populations being served;
``(E) as part of care and treatment of HIV/AIDS, assistance
or referral to available and adequately resourced service
providers for nutritional support, including counseling and
where necessary the provision of commodities, for persons
meeting malnourishment criteria and their families;'';
(3) in paragraph (4)--
(A) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in subparagraph (D), by striking the period at the end
and inserting a semicolon; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(E) carrying out and expanding program monitoring, impact
evaluation research and analysis, and operations research and
disseminating data and findings through mechanisms to be
developed by the Coordinator of United States Government
Activities to Combat HIV/AIDS Globally, in coordination with
the Director of the Centers for Disease Control, in order
to--
``(i) improve accountability, increase transparency, and
ensure the delivery of evidence-based services through the
collection, evaluation, and analysis of data regarding
gender-responsive interventions, disaggregated by age and
sex;
``(ii) identify and replicate effective models; and
``(iii) develop gender indicators to measure outcomes and
the impacts of interventions; and
``(F) establishing appropriate systems to--
``(i) gather epidemiological and social science data on
HIV; and
``(ii) evaluate the effectiveness of prevention efforts
among men who have sex with men, with due consideration to
stigma and risks associated with disclosure.'';
(4) in paragraph (5)--
(A) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (D);
and
(B) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following:
``(C) Mechanism to ensure cost-effective drug purchasing.--
Subject to subparagraph (B), mechanisms to ensure that safe
and effective pharmaceuticals, including antiretrovirals and
medicines to treat opportunistic infections, are purchased at
the lowest possible price at which such pharmaceuticals may
be obtained in sufficient quantity on the world market,
provided that such pharmaceuticals are approved, tentatively
approved, or otherwise authorized for use by--
``(i) the Food and Drug Administration;
``(ii) a stringent regulatory agency acceptable to the
Secretary of Health and Human Services; or
``(iii) a quality assurance mechanism acceptable to the
Secretary of Health and Human Services.'';
(5) in paragraph (6)--
(A) by amending the paragraph heading to read as follows:
``(6) Related and coordinated activities.--'';
(B) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(C) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end
and inserting ``; and''; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
``(D) coordinated or referred activities to--
``(i) enhance the clinical impact of HIV/AIDS care and
treatment; and
``(ii) ameliorate the adverse social and economic costs
often affecting AIDS-impacted families and communities
through the direct provision, as necessary, or through the
referral, if possible, of support services, including--
``(I) nutritional and food support;
``(II) safe drinking water and adequate sanitation;
``(III) nutritional counseling;
``(IV) income-generating activities and livelihood
initiatives;
``(V) maternal and child health care;
``(VI) primary health care;
``(VII) the diagnosis and treatment of other infectious or
sexually transmitted diseases;
``(VIII) substance abuse and treatment services; and
``(IX) legal services;
``(E) coordinated or referred activities to link programs
addressing HIV/AIDS with programs addressing gender-based
violence in areas of significant HIV prevalence to assist
countries in the development and enforcement of women's
health, children's health, and HIV/AIDS laws and policies
that--
``(i) prevent and respond to violence against women and
girls;
``(ii) promote the integration of screening and assessment
for gender-based violence into HIV/AIDS programming;
``(iii) promote appropriate HIV/AIDS counseling, testing,
and treatment into gender-based violence programs; and
``(iv) assist governments to develop partnerships with
civil society organizations to create networks for
psychosocial, legal, economic, or other support services;
``(F) coordinated or referred activities to--
``(i) address the frequent coinfection of HIV and
tuberculosis, in accordance with World Health Organization
guidelines;
``(ii) promote provider-initiated or `opt-out' HIV/AIDS
counseling and testing and appropriate referral for treatment
and care to individuals with tuberculosis or its symptoms,
particularly in areas with significant HIV prevalence; and
``(iii) strengthen programs to ensure that individuals
testing positive for HIV receive tuberculosis screening and
to improve laboratory capacities, infection control, and
adherence; and
``(G) activities to--
``(i) improve the effectiveness of national responses to
HIV/AIDS;
``(ii) strengthen overall health systems in high-prevalence
countries, including support for workforce training,
retention, and effective deployment, capacity building,
laboratory development, equipment maintenance and repair, and
public health and related public financial management systems
and operations; and
``(iii) encourage fair and transparent procurement
practices among partner countries; and
``(iv) promote in-country or intra-regional pediatric
training for physicians and other health professionals,
preferably through public-private partnerships involving
colleges and universities, with the goal of increasing
pediatric HIV workforce capacity. .''; and
(6) by adding at the end the following:
``(8) Compacts and framework agreements.--The development
of compacts or framework agreements, tailored to local
circumstances, with national governments or regional
partnerships in countries with significant HIV/AIDS burdens
to promote host government commitment to deeper integration
of HIV/AIDS services into health systems, contribute to
health systems overall, and enhance sustainability.''.
(d) Compacts and Framework Agreements.--Section 104A of
such Act is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (e) through (g) as
subsections (f) through (h); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (d) the following:
``(e) Compacts and Framework Agreements.--
``(1) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
``(A) The congressionally mandated Institute of Medicine
report entitled `PEPFAR Implementation: Progress and Promise'
states: `The next strategy [of the U.S. Global AIDS
Initiative] should squarely address the needs and challenges
involved in supporting sustainable country HIV/AIDS programs,
thereby transitioning from a focus on emergency relief.'.
``(B) One mechanism to promote the transition from an
emergency to a public health and development approach to HIV/
AIDS is through compacts or framework agreements between the
United States Government and each participating nation.
``(2) Elements.--Compacts on HIV/AIDS authorized under
subsection (d)(8) shall include the following elements:
``(A) Compacts whose primary purpose is to provide direct
services to combat HIV/AIDS are to be made between--
``(i) the United States Government; and
``(ii)(I) national or regional entities representing low-
income countries served by an existing United States Agency
for International Development or Department of Health and
Human Services presence or regional platform; or
``(II) countries or regions--
``(aa) experiencing significantly high HIV prevalence or
risk of significantly increasing incidence within the general
population;
``(bb) served by an existing United States Agency for
International Development or Department of Health and Human
Services presence or regional platform; and
``(cc) that have inadequate financial means within such
country or region.
``(B) Compacts whose primary purpose is to provide limited
technical assistance to a country or region connected to
services provided within the country or region--
``(i) may be made with other countries or regional entities
served by an existing United States Agency for International
Development or Department of Health and
[[Page 14794]]
Human Services presence or regional platform;
``(ii) shall require significant investments in HIV
prevention, care, and treatment services by the host country;
``(iii) shall be time-limited in terms of United States
contributions; and
``(iv) shall be made only upon prior notification to
Congress--
``(I) justifying the need for such compacts;
``(II) describing the expected investment by the country or
regional entity; and
``(III) describing the scope, nature, expected total United
States investment, and time frame of the limited technical
assistance under the compact and its intended impact.
``(C) Compacts shall include provisions to--
``(i) promote local and national efforts to reduce stigma
associated with HIV/AIDS; and
``(ii) work with and promote the role of civil society in
combating HIV/AIDS.
``(D) Compacts shall take into account the overall national
health and development and national HIV/AIDS and public
health strategies of each country.
``(E) Compacts shall contain--
``(i) consideration of the specific objectives that the
country and the United States expect to achieve during the
term of a compact;
``(ii) consideration of the respective responsibilities of
the country and the United States in the achievement of such
objectives;
``(iii) consideration of regular benchmarks to measure
progress toward achieving such objectives;
``(iv) an identification of the intended beneficiaries,
disaggregated by gender and age, and including information on
orphans and vulnerable children, to the maximum extent
practicable;
``(v) consideration of the methods by which the compact is
intended to--
``(I) address the factors that put women and girls at
greater risk of HIV/AIDS; and
``(II) strengthen elements such as the economic,
educational, and social status of women, girls, orphans, and
vulnerable children and the inheritance rights and safety of
such individuals;
``(vi) consideration of the methods by which the compact
will--
``(I) strengthen the health care capacity, including
factors such as the training, retention, deployment,
recruitment, and utilization of health care workers;
``(II) improve supply chain management; and
``(III) improve the health systems and infrastructure of
the partner country, including the ability of compact
participants to maintain and operate equipment transferred or
purchased as part of the compact;
``(vii) consideration of proposed mechanisms to provide
oversight;
``(viii) consideration of the role of civil society in the
development of a compact and the achievement of its
objectives;
``(ix) a description of the current and potential
participation of other donors in the achievement of such
objectives, as appropriate; and
``(x) consideration of a plan to ensure appropriate fiscal
accountability for the use of assistance.
``(F) For regional compacts, priority shall be given to
countries that are included in regional funds and programs in
existence as of the date of the enactment of the Tom Lantos
and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against
HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of
2008.
``(3) Local input.--In entering into a compact on HIV/AIDS
authorized under subsection (d)(8), the Coordinator of United
States Government Activities to Combat HIV/AIDS Globally
shall seek to ensure that the government of a country--
``(A) takes into account the local perspectives of the
rural and urban poor, including women, in each country; and
``(B) consults with private and voluntary organizations,
including faith-based organizations, the business community,
and other donors in the country.
``(4) Congressional and public notification after entering
into a compact.--Not later than 10 days after entering into a
compact authorized under subsection (d)(8), the Global AIDS
Coordinator shall--
``(A) submit a report containing a detailed summary of the
compact and a copy of the text of the compact to--
``(i) the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate;
``(ii) the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate;
``(iii) the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of
Representatives; and
``(iv) the Committee on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives; and
``(B) publish such information in the Federal Register and
on the Internet website of the Office of the Global AIDS
Coordinator.''.
(e) Annual Report.--Section 104A(f) of such Act, as
redesignated, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``Committee on
International Relations'' and inserting ``Committee on
Foreign Affairs''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting the
following:
``(C) a detailed breakdown of funding allocations, by
program and by country, for prevention activities; and
``(D) a detailed assessment of the impact of programs
established pursuant to such sections, including--
``(i)(I) the effectiveness of such programs in reducing--
``(aa) the transmission of HIV, particularly in women and
girls;
``(bb) mother-to-child transmission of HIV, including
through drug treatment and therapies, either directly or by
referral; and
``(cc) mortality rates from HIV/AIDS;
``(II) the number of patients receiving treatment for AIDS
in each country that receives assistance under this Act;
``(III) an assessment of progress towards the achievement
of annual goals set forth in the timetable required under the
5-year strategy established under section 101 of the United
States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria
Act of 2003 and, if annual goals are not being met, the
reasons for such failure; and
``(IV) retention and attrition data for programs receiving
United States assistance, including mortality and loss to
follow-up rates, organized overall and by country;
``(ii) the progress made toward--
``(I) improving health care delivery systems (including the
training of health care workers, including doctors, nurses,
midwives, pharmacists, laboratory technicians, and
compensated community health workers, and the use of codes of
conduct for ethical recruiting practices for health care
workers);
``(II) advancing safe working conditions for health care
workers; and
``(III) improving infrastructure to promote progress toward
universal access to HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, and care
by 2013;
``(iii) a description of coordination efforts with relevant
executive branch agencies to link HIV/AIDS clinical and
social services with non-HIV/AIDS services as part of the
United States health and development agenda;
``(iv) a detailed description of integrated HIV/AIDS and
food and nutrition programs and services, including--
``(I) the amount spent on food and nutrition support;
``(II) the types of activities supported; and
``(III) an assessment of the effectiveness of interventions
carried out to improve the health status of persons with HIV/
AIDS receiving food or nutritional support;
``(v) a description of efforts to improve harmonization, in
terms of relevant executive branch agencies, coordination
with other public and private entities, and coordination with
partner countries' national strategic plans as called for in
the `Three Ones';
``(vi) a description of--
``(I) the efforts of partner countries that were
signatories to the Abuja Declaration on HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis and Other Related Infectious Diseases to adhere
to the goals of such Declaration in terms of investments in
public health, including HIV/AIDS; and
``(II) a description of the HIV/AIDS investments of partner
countries that were not signatories to such Declaration;
``(vii) a detailed description of any compacts or framework
agreements reached or negotiated between the United States
and any partner countries, including a description of the
elements of compacts described in subsection (e);
``(viii) a description of programs serving women and girls,
including--
``(I) HIV/AIDS prevention programs that address the
vulnerabilities of girls and women to HIV/AIDS;
``(II) information on the number of individuals served by
programs aimed at reducing the vulnerabilities of women and
girls to HIV/AIDS and data on the types, objectives, and
duration of programs to address these issues;
``(III) information on programs to address the particular
needs of adolescent girls and young women; and
``(IV) programs to prevent gender-based violence or to
assist victims of gender based violence as part of, or in
coordination with, HIV/AIDS programs;
``(ix) a description of strategies, goals, programs, and
interventions to--
``(I) address the needs and vulnerabilities of youth
populations;
``(II) expand access among young men and women to evidence-
based HIV/AIDS health care services and HIV prevention
programs, including abstinence education programs; and
``(III) expand community-based services to meet the needs
of orphans and of children and adolescents affected by or
vulnerable to HIV/AIDS without increasing stigmatization;
``(x) a description of--
``(I) the specific strategies funded to ensure the
reduction of HIV infection among injection drug users;
``(II) the number of injection drug users, by country,
reached by such strategies; and
``(III) medication-assisted drug treatment for individuals
with HIV or at risk of HIV;
``(xi) a detailed description of program monitoring,
operations research, and impact evaluation research,
including--
``(I) the amount of funding provided for each research
type;
[[Page 14795]]
``(II) an analysis of cost-effectiveness models; and
``(III) conclusions regarding the efficiency,
effectiveness, and quality of services as derived from
previous or ongoing research and monitoring efforts; and
``(xii) a description of staffing levels of United States
government HIV/AIDS teams in countries with significant HIV/
AIDS programs, including whether or not a full-time
coordinator was on staff for the year.''.
(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 301(b) of the
United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7631(b)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``fiscal years 2004
through 2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through
2013''; and
(2) in paragraph (3), by striking ``fiscal years 2004
through 2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through
2013''.
(g) Relationship To Assistance Programs To Enhance
Nutrition.--Section 301(c) of such Act is amended to read as
follows:
``(c) Food and Nutritional Support.--
``(1) In general.--As indicated in the report produced by
the Institute of Medicine, entitled `PEPFAR Implementation:
Progress and Promise', inadequate caloric intake has been
clearly identified as a principal reason for failure of
clinical response to antiretroviral therapy. In recognition
of the impact of malnutrition as a clinical health issue for
many persons living with HIV/AIDS that is often associated
with health and economic impacts on these individuals and
their families, the Global AIDS Coordinator and the
Administrator of the United States Agency for International
Development shall--
``(A) follow World Health Organization guidelines for HIV/
AIDS food and nutrition services;
``(B) integrate nutrition programs with HIV/AIDS activities
through effective linkages among the health, agricultural,
and livelihood sectors and establish additional services in
circumstances in which referrals are inadequate or
impossible;
``(C) provide, as a component of care and treatment
programs for persons with HIV/AIDS, food and nutritional
support to individuals infected with, and affected by, HIV/
AIDS who meet established criteria for nutritional support
(including clinically malnourished children and adults, and
pregnant and lactating women in programs in need of
supplemental support), including--
``(i) anthropometric and dietary assessment;
``(ii) counseling; and
``(iii) therapeutic and supplementary feeding;
``(D) provide food and nutritional support for children
affected by HIV/AIDS and to communities and households caring
for children affected by HIV/AIDS; and
``(E) in communities where HIV/AIDS and food insecurity are
highly prevalent, support programs to address these often
intersecting health problems through community-based
assistance programs, with an emphasis on sustainable
approaches.
``(2) Authorization of appropriations.--Of the amounts
authorized to be appropriated under section 401, there are
authorized to be appropriated to the President such sums as
may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2009 through
2013 to carry out this subsection.''.
(h) Eligibility for Assistance.--Section 301(d) of such Act
is amended to read as follows:
``(d) Eligibility for Assistance.--An organization,
including a faith-based organization, that is otherwise
eligible to receive assistance under section 104A of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, under this Act, or under any
amendment made by this Act or by the Tom Lantos and Henry J.
Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008, for
HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, or care--
``(1) shall not be required, as a condition of receiving
such assistance--
``(A) to endorse or utilize a multisectoral or
comprehensive approach to combating HIV/AIDS; or
``(B) to endorse, utilize, make a referral to, become
integrated with, or otherwise participate in any program or
activity to which the organization has a religious or moral
objection; and
``(2) shall not be discriminated against in the
solicitation or issuance of grants, contracts, or cooperative
agreements under such provisions of law for refusing to meet
any requirement described in paragraph (1).''.
SEC. 302. ASSISTANCE TO COMBAT TUBERCULOSIS.
(a) Policy.--Section 104B(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act
of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151b-3(b)) is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Policy.--It is a major objective of the foreign
assistance program of the United States to control
tuberculosis. In all countries in which the Government of the
United States has established development programs,
particularly in countries with the highest burden of
tuberculosis and other countries with high rates of
tuberculosis, the United States should support the objectives
of the Global Plan to Stop TB, including through achievement
of the following goals:
``(1) Reduce by half the tuberculosis death and disease
burden from the 1990 baseline.
``(2) Sustain or exceed the detection of at least 70
percent of sputum smear-positive cases of tuberculosis and
the successful treatment of at least 85 percent of the cases
detected in countries with established United States Agency
for International Development tuberculosis programs.
``(3) In support of the Global Plan to Stop TB, the
President shall establish a comprehensive, 5-year United
States strategy to expand and improve United States efforts
to combat tuberculosis globally, including a plan to
support--
``(A) the successful treatment of 4,500,000 new sputum
smear tuberculosis patients under DOTS programs by 2013,
primarily through direct support for needed services,
commodities, health workers, and training, and additional
treatment through coordinated multilateral efforts; and
``(B) the diagnosis and treatment of 90,000 new multiple
drug resistant tuberculosis cases by 2013, and additional
treatment through coordinated multilateral efforts.''.
(b) Priority To Stop TB Strategy.--Section 104B(e) of such
Act is amended to read as follows:
``(e) Priority To Stop TB Strategy.--In furnishing
assistance under subsection (c), the President shall give
priority to--
``(1) direct services described in the Stop TB Strategy,
including expansion and enhancement of Directly Observed
Treatment Short-course (DOTS) coverage, rapid testing,
treatment for individuals infected with both tuberculosis and
HIV, and treatment for individuals with multi-drug resistant
tuberculosis (MDR-TB), strengthening of health systems, use
of the International Standards for Tuberculosis Care by all
providers, empowering individuals with tuberculosis, and
enabling and promoting research to develop new diagnostics,
drugs, and vaccines, and program-based operational research
relating to tuberculosis; and
``(2) funding for the Global Tuberculosis Drug Facility,
the Stop Tuberculosis Partnership, and the Global Alliance
for TB Drug Development.''.
(c) Assistance for the World Health Organization and the
Stop Tuberculosis Partnership.--Section 104B of such Act is
amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (f) as subsection (h); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (e) the following:
``(f) Assistance for the World Health Organization and the
Stop Tuberculosis Partnership.--In carrying out this section,
the President, acting through the Administrator of the United
States Agency for International Development, is authorized to
provide increased resources to the World Health Organization
and the Stop Tuberculosis Partnership to improve the capacity
of countries with high rates of tuberculosis and other
affected countries to implement the Stop TB Strategy and
specific strategies related to addressing multiple drug
resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) and extensively drug
resistant tuberculosis (XDR-TB).''.
(d) Annual Report.--Section 104B of such Act is amended by
inserting after subsection (f), as added by subsection (c) of
this section, the following:
``(g) Annual Report.--The President shall submit an annual
report to Congress that describes the impact of United States
foreign assistance on efforts to control tuberculosis,
including--
``(1) the number of tuberculosis cases diagnosed and the
number of cases cured in countries receiving United States
bilateral foreign assistance for tuberculosis control
purposes;
``(2) a description of activities supported with United
States tuberculosis resources in each country, including a
description of how those activities specifically contribute
to increasing the number of people diagnosed and treated for
tuberculosis;
``(3) in each country receiving bilateral United States
foreign assistance for tuberculosis control purposes, the
percentage provided for direct tuberculosis services in
countries receiving United States bilateral foreign
assistance for tuberculosis control purposes;
``(4) a description of research efforts and clinical trials
to develop new tools to combat tuberculosis, including
diagnostics, drugs, and vaccines supported by United States
bilateral assistance;
``(5) the number of persons who have been diagnosed and
started treatment for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis in
countries receiving United States bilateral foreign
assistance for tuberculosis control programs;
``(6) a description of the collaboration and coordination
of United States anti-tuberculosis efforts with the World
Health Organization, the Global Fund, and other major public
and private entities within the Stop TB Strategy;
``(7) the constraints on implementation of programs posed
by health workforce shortages and capacities;
``(8) the number of people trained in tuberculosis control;
and
``(9) a breakdown of expenditures for direct patient
tuberculosis services, drugs and
[[Page 14796]]
other commodities, drug management, training in diagnosis and
treatment, health systems strengthening, research, and
support costs.''.
(e) Definitions.--Section 104B(h) of such Act, as
redesignated by subsection (c), is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking the period at the end and
inserting the following: ``including--
``(A) low-cost and effective diagnosis, treatment, and
monitoring of tuberculosis;
``(B) a reliable drug supply;
``(C) a management strategy for public health systems;
``(D) health system strengthening;
``(E) promotion of the use of the International Standards
for Tuberculosis Care by all care providers;
``(F) bacteriology under an external quality assessment
framework;
``(G) short-course chemotherapy; and
``(H) sound reporting and recording systems.''; and
(2) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (6); and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (4) the following:
``(5) Stop tb strategy.--The term `Stop TB Strategy' means
the 6-point strategy to reduce tuberculosis developed by the
World Health Organization, which is described in the Global
Plan to Stop TB 2006-2015: Actions for Life, a comprehensive
plan developed by the Stop TB Partnership that sets out the
actions necessary to achieve the millennium development goal
of cutting tuberculosis deaths and disease burden in half by
2015.''.
(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 302 (b) of
the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis,
and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7632(b)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``such sums as may be
necessary for each of the fiscal years 2004 through 2008''
and inserting ``a total of $4,000,000,000 for the 5-year
period beginning on October 1, 2008.''; and
(2) in paragraph (3), by striking ``fiscal years 2004
through 2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through
2013.''.
SEC. 303. ASSISTANCE TO COMBAT MALARIA.
(a) Amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.--
Section 104C(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22
U.S.C. 2151-4(b)) is amended by inserting ``treatment,''
after ``control,''.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 303 of the
United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Act of 2003, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7633)
is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``such sums as may be
necessary for fiscal years 2004 through 2008'' and inserting
``$5,000,000,000 during the 5-year period beginning on
October 1, 2008''; and
(B) in paragraph (3), by striking ``fiscal years 2004
through 2008'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through
2013''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(c) Statement of Policy.--Providing assistance for the
prevention, control, treatment, and the ultimate eradication
of malaria is--
``(1) a major objective of the foreign assistance program
of the United States; and
``(2) 1 component of a comprehensive United States global
health strategy to reduce disease burdens and strengthen
communities around the world.
``(d) Development of a Comprehensive 5-Year Strategy.--The
President shall establish a comprehensive, 5-year strategy to
combat global malaria that--
``(1) strengthens the capacity of the United States to be
an effective leader of international efforts to reduce
malaria burden;
``(2) maintains sufficient flexibility and remains
responsive to the ever-changing nature of the global malaria
challenge;
``(3) includes specific objectives and multisectoral
approaches and strategies to reduce the prevalence,
mortality, incidence, and spread of malaria;
``(4) describes how this strategy would contribute to the
United States' overall global health and development goals;
``(5) clearly explains how outlined activities will
interact with other United States Government global health
activities, including the 5-year global AIDS strategy
required under this Act;
``(6) expands public-private partnerships and leverage of
resources;
``(7) coordinates among relevant Federal agencies to
maximize human and financial resources and to reduce
duplication among these agencies, foreign governments, and
international organizations;
``(8) coordinates with other international entities,
including the Global Fund;
``(9) maximizes United States capabilities in the areas of
technical assistance and training and research, including
vaccine research; and
``(10) establishes priorities and selection criteria for
the distribution of resources based on factors such as--
``(A) the size and demographics of the population with
malaria;
``(B) the needs of that population;
``(C) the country's existing infrastructure; and
``(D) the ability to closely coordinate United States
Government efforts with national malaria control plans of
partner countries.''.
SEC. 304. MALARIA RESPONSE COORDINATOR.
Section 304 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7634)
is amended to read as follows:
``SEC. 304. MALARIA RESPONSE COORDINATOR.
``(a) In General.--There is established within the United
States Agency for International Development a Coordinator of
United States Government Activities to Combat Malaria
Globally (referred to in this section as the `Malaria
Coordinator'), who shall be appointed by the President.
``(b) Authorities.--The Malaria Coordinator, acting through
nongovernmental organizations (including faith-based and
community-based organizations), partner country finance,
health, and other relevant ministries, and relevant executive
branch agencies as may be necessary and appropriate to carry
out this section, is authorized to--
``(1) operate internationally to carry out prevention,
care, treatment, support, capacity development, and other
activities to reduce the prevalence, mortality, and incidence
of malaria;
``(2) provide grants to, and enter into contracts and
cooperative agreements with, nongovernmental organizations
(including faith-based organizations) to carry out this
section; and
``(3) transfer and allocate executive branch agency funds
that have been appropriated for the purposes described in
paragraphs (1) and (2).
``(c) Duties.--
``(1) In general.--The Malaria Coordinator has primary
responsibility for the oversight and coordination of all
resources and international activities of the United States
Government relating to efforts to combat malaria.
``(2) Specific duties.--The Malaria Coordinator shall--
``(A) facilitate program and policy coordination of
antimalarial efforts among relevant executive branch agencies
and nongovernmental organizations by auditing, monitoring,
and evaluating such programs;
``(B) ensure that each relevant executive branch agency
undertakes antimalarial programs primarily in those areas in
which the agency has the greatest expertise, technical
capability, and potential for success;
``(C) coordinate relevant executive branch agency
activities in the field of malaria prevention and treatment;
``(D) coordinate planning, implementation, and evaluation
with the Global AIDS Coordinator in countries in which both
programs have a significant presence;
``(E) coordinate with national governments, international
agencies, civil society, and the private sector; and
``(F) establish due diligence criteria for all recipients
of funds appropriated by the Federal Government for malaria
assistance.
``(d) Assistance for the World Health Organization.--In
carrying out this section, the President may provide
financial assistance to the Roll Back Malaria Partnership of
the World Health Organization to improve the capacity of
countries with high rates of malaria and other affected
countries to implement comprehensive malaria control
programs.
``(e) Coordination of Assistance Efforts.--In carrying out
this section and in accordance with section 104C of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151b-4), the
Malaria Coordinator shall coordinate the provision of
assistance by working with--
``(1) relevant executive branch agencies, including--
``(A) the Department of State (including the Office of the
Global AIDS Coordinator);
``(B) the Department of Health and Human Services;
``(C) the Department of Defense; and
``(D) the Office of the United States Trade Representative;
``(2) relevant multilateral institutions, including--
``(A) the World Health Organization;
``(B) the United Nations Children's Fund;
``(C) the United Nations Development Programme;
``(D) the Global Fund;
``(E) the World Bank; and
``(F) the Roll Back Malaria Partnership;
``(3) program delivery and efforts to lift barriers that
would impede effective and comprehensive malaria control
programs; and
``(4) partner or recipient country governments and national
entities including universities and civil society
organizations (including faith- and community-based
organizations).
``(f) Research.--To carry out this section, the Malaria
Coordinator, in accordance with section 104C of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 1151d-4), shall ensure that
operations and implementation research conducted under this
Act will closely complement the clinical and program research
being undertaken by the National Institutes of Health. The
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention should advise the
Malaria Coordinator on priorities for operations and
implementation research and should be a key implementer of
this research.
[[Page 14797]]
``(g) Monitoring.--To ensure that adequate malaria controls
are established and implemented, the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention should advise the Malaria Coordinator
on monitoring, surveillance, and evaluation activities and be
a key implementer of such activities under this Act. Such
activities shall complement, rather than duplicate, the work
of the World Health Organization.
``(h) Annual Report.--
``(1) Submission.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
the enactment of the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United
States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and
Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008, and annually thereafter,
the President shall submit a report to the appropriate
congressional committees that describes United States
assistance for the prevention, treatment, control, and
elimination of malaria.
``(2) Contents.--The report required under paragraph (1)
shall describe--
``(A) the countries and activities to which malaria
resources have been allocated;
``(B) the number of people reached through malaria
assistance programs, including data on children and pregnant
women;
``(C) research efforts to develop new tools to combat
malaria, including drugs and vaccines;
``(D) the collaboration and coordination of United States
antimalarial efforts with the World Health Organization, the
Global Fund, the World Bank, other donor governments, major
private efforts, and relevant executive agencies;
``(E) the coordination of United States antimalarial
efforts with the national malarial strategies of other donor
or partner governments and major private initiatives;
``(F) the estimated impact of United States assistance on
childhood mortality and morbidity from malaria;
``(G) the coordination of antimalarial efforts with broader
health and development programs; and
``(H) the constraints on implementation of programs posed
by health workforce shortages or capacities; and
``(I) the number of personnel trained as health workers and
the training levels achieved.''.
SEC. 305. AMENDMENT TO IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT.
Section 212(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(1)(A)(i)) is amended by striking ``,
which shall include infection with the etiologic agent for
acquired immune deficiency syndrome,'' and inserting a
semicolon.
SEC. 306. CLERICAL AMENDMENT.
Title III of the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7631 et
seq.) is amended by striking the heading for subtitle B and
inserting the following:
``Subtitle B--Assistance for Women, Children, and Families''.
SEC. 307. REQUIREMENTS.
Section 312(b) of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C.
7652(b)) is amended by striking paragraphs (1), (2), and (3)
and inserting the following:
``(1) establish a target for the prevention and treatment
of mother-to-child transmission of HIV that, by 2013, will
reach at least 80 percent of pregnant women in those
countries most affected by HIV/AIDS in which the United
States has HIV/AIDS programs;
``(2) establish a target that, by 2013, the proportion of
children receiving care and treatment under this Act is
proportionate to their numbers within the population of HIV
infected individuals in each country;
``(3) integrate care and treatment with prevention of
mother-to-child transmission of HIV programs to improve
outcomes for HIV-affected women and families as soon as is
feasible and support strategies that promote successful
follow-up and continuity of care of mother and child;
``(4) expand programs designed to care for children
orphaned by, affected by, or vulnerable to HIV/AIDS;
``(5) ensure that women in prevention of mother-to-child
transmission of HIV programs are provided with, or referred
to, appropriate maternal and child services; and
``(6) develop a timeline for expanding access to more
effective regimes to prevent mother-to-child transmission of
HIV, consistent with the national policies of countries in
which programs are administered under this Act and the goal
of achieving universal use of such regimes as soon as
possible.''.
SEC. 308. ANNUAL REPORT ON PREVENTION OF MOTHER-TO-CHILD
TRANSMISSION OF HIV.
Section 313(a) of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C.
7653(a)) is amended by striking ``5 years'' and inserting
``10 years''.
SEC. 309. PREVENTION OF MOTHER-TO-CHILD TRANSMISSION EXPERT
PANEL.
Section 312 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7652)
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(c) Prevention of Mother-to-Child Transmission Expert
Panel.--
``(1) Establishment.--The Global AIDS Coordinator shall
establish a panel of experts to be known as the Prevention of
Mother-to-Child Transmission Panel (referred to in this
subsection as the `Panel') to--
``(A) provide an objective review of activities to prevent
mother-to-child transmission of HIV; and
``(B) provide recommendations to the Global AIDS
Coordinator and to the appropriate congressional committees
for scale-up of mother-to-child transmission prevention
services under this Act in order to achieve the target
established in subsection (b)(1).
``(2) Membership.--The Panel shall be convened and chaired
by the Global AIDS Coordinator, who shall serve as a
nonvoting member. The Panel shall consist of not more than 15
members (excluding the Global AIDS Coordinator), to be
appointed by the Global AIDS Coordinator not later than 1
year after the date of the enactment of this Act, including--
``(A) 2 members from the Department of Health and Human
Services with expertise relating to the prevention of mother-
to-child transmission activities;
``(B) 2 members from the United States Agency for
International Development with expertise relating to the
prevention of mother-to-child transmission activities;
``(C) 2 representatives from among health ministers of
national governments of foreign countries in which programs
under this Act are administered;
``(D) 3 members representing organizations implementing
prevention of mother-to-child transmission activities under
this Act;
``(E) 2 health care researchers with expertise relating to
global HIV/AIDS activities; and
``(F) representatives from among patient advocate groups,
health care professionals, persons living with HIV/AIDS, and
non-governmental organizations with expertise relating to the
prevention of mother-to-child transmission activities, giving
priority to individuals in foreign countries in which
programs under this Act are administered.
``(3) Duties of panel.--The Panel shall--
``(A) assess the effectiveness of current activities in
reaching the target described in subsection (b)(1);
``(B) review scientific evidence related to the provision
of mother-to-child transmission prevention services,
including programmatic data and data from clinical trials;
``(C) review and assess ways in which the Office of the
United States Global AIDS Coordinator collaborates with
international and multilateral entities on efforts to prevent
mother-to-child transmission of HIV in affected countries;
``(D) identify barriers and challenges to increasing access
to mother-to-child transmission prevention services and
evaluate potential mechanisms to alleviate those barriers and
challenges;
``(E) identify the extent to which stigma has hindered
pregnant women from obtaining HIV counseling and testing or
returning for results, and provide recommendations to address
such stigma and its effects;
``(F) identify opportunities to improve linkages between
mother-to-child transmission prevention services and care and
treatment programs; and
``(G) recommend specific activities to facilitate reaching
the target described in subsection (b)(1).
``(4) Report.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date on
which the Panel is first convened, the Panel shall submit a
report containing a detailed statement of the
recommendations, findings, and conclusions of the Panel to
the appropriate congressional committees.
``(B) Availability.--The report submitted under
subparagraph (A) shall be made available to the public.
``(C) Consideration by coordinator.--The Coordinator
shall--
``(i) consider any recommendations contained in the report
submitted under subparagraph (A); and
``(ii) include in the annual report required under section
104A(f) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 a description
of the activities conducted in response to the
recommendations made by the Panel and an explanation of any
recommendations not implemented at the time of the report.
``(5) Authorization of appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to the Panel such sums as may
be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2009 through 2011
to carry out this section.
``(6) Termination.--The Panel shall terminate on the date
that is 60 days after the date on which the Panel submits the
report to the appropriate congressional committees under
paragraph (4).''.
TITLE IV--FUNDING ALLOCATIONS
SEC. 401. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) In General.--Section 401(a) of the United States
Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of
2003 (22 U.S.C. 7671(a)) is amended by striking
``$3,000,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2004 through
2008'' and inserting ``$50,000,000,000 for the 5-year period
beginning on October 1, 2008''.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress
that the appropriations authorized under section 401(a) of
the United States
[[Page 14798]]
Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of
2003, as amended by subsection (a), should be allocated among
fiscal years 2009 through 2013 in a manner that allows for
the appropriations to be gradually increased in a manner that
is consistent with program requirements, absorptive capacity,
and priorities set forth in such Act, as amended by this Act.
SEC. 402. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
Section 402(b) of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C.
7672(b)) is amended by striking ``an effective distribution
of such amounts would be'' and all that follows through ``10
percent of such amounts'' and inserting ``10 percent should
be used''.
SEC. 403. ALLOCATION OF FUNDS.
Section 403 of the United States Leadership Against HIV/
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (22 U.S.C. 7673)
is amended--
(1) by amending subsection (a) to read as follows:
``(a) Balanced Funding Requirement.--
``(1) In general.--The Global AIDS Coordinator shall--
``(A) provide balanced funding for prevention activities
for sexual transmission of HIV/AIDS; and
``(B) ensure that activities promoting abstinence, delay of
sexual debut, monogamy, fidelity, and partner reduction are
implemented and funded in a meaningful and equitable way in
the strategy for each host country based on objective
epidemiological evidence as to the source of infections and
in consultation with the government of each host county
involved in HIV/AIDS prevention activities.
``(2) Prevention strategy.--
``(A) Establishment.--In carrying out paragraph (1), the
Global AIDS Coordinator shall establish an HIV sexual
transmission prevention strategy governing the expenditure of
funds authorized under this Act to prevent the sexual
transmission of HIV in any host country with a generalized
epidemic.
``(B) Report.--In each host country described in
subparagraph (A), if the strategy established under
subparagraph (A) provides less than 50 percent of the funds
described in subparagraph (A) for activities promoting
abstinence, delay of sexual debut, monogamy, fidelity, and
partner reduction, the Global AIDS Coordinator shall, not
later than 30 days after the issuance of this strategy,
report to the appropriate congressional committees on the
justification for this decision.
``(3) Exclusion.--Programs and activities that implement or
purchase new prevention technologies or modalities, such as
medical male circumcision, pre-exposure pharmaceutical
prophylaxis to prevent transmission of HIV, or microbicides
and programs and activities that provide counseling and
testing for HIV or prevent mother-to-child prevention of HIV,
shall not be included in determining compliance with
paragraph (2).
``(4) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States
Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria
Reauthorization Act of 2008, and annually thereafter as part
of the annual report required under section 104A(e) of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151b-2(e)), the
President shall--
``(A) submit a report on the implementation of paragraph
(2) for the most recently concluded fiscal year to the
appropriate congressional committees; and
``(B) make the report described in subparagraph (A)
available to the public.'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking ``fiscal years 2006 through 2008'' and
inserting ``fiscal years 2009 through 2013''; and
(B) by striking ``vulnerable children affected by'' and
inserting ``other children affected by, or vulnerable to,'';
and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(c) Funding Allocation.--For each of the fiscal years
2009 through 2013, more than half of the amounts appropriated
for bilateral global HIV/AIDS assistance pursuant to section
401 shall be expended for--
``(1) antiretroviral treatment for HIV/AIDS;
``(2) clinical monitoring of HIV-seropositive people not in
need of antiretroviral treatment;
``(3) care for associated opportunistic infections;
``(4) nutrition and food support for people living with
HIV/AIDS; and
``(5) other essential HIV/AIDS-related medical care for
people living with HIV/AIDS.
``(d) Treatment, Prevention, and Care Goals.--For each of
the fiscal years 2009 through 2013--
``(1) the treatment goal under section 402(a)(3) shall be
increased above 2,000,000 by at least the percentage increase
in the amount appropriated for bilateral global HIV/AIDS
assistance for such fiscal year compared with fiscal year
2008;
``(2) any increase in the treatment goal under section
402(a)(3) above the percentage increase in the amount
appropriated for bilateral global HIV/AIDS assistance for
such fiscal year compared with fiscal year 2008 shall be
based on long-term requirements, epidemiological evidence,
the share of treatment needs being met by partner governments
and other sources of treatment funding, and other appropriate
factors;
``(3) the treatment goal under section 402(a)(3) shall be
increased above the number calculated under paragraph (1) by
the same percentage that the average United States Government
cost per patient of providing treatment in countries
receiving bilateral HIV/AIDS assistance has decreased
compared with fiscal year 2008; and
``(4) the prevention and care goals established in clauses
(i) and (iv) of section 104A(b)(1)(A) of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151b-2(b)(1)(A)) shall be
increased consistent with epidemiological evidence and
available resources.''.
TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS
SEC. 501. MACHINE READABLE VISA FEES.
(a) Fee Increase.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law--
(1) not later than October 1, 2010, the Secretary of State
shall increase by $1 the fee or surcharge authorized under
section 140(a) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act,
Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995 (Public Law 103-236; 8 U.S.C. 1351
note) for processing machine readable nonimmigrant visas and
machine readable combined border crossing identification
cards and nonimmigrant visas; and
(2) not later than October 1, 2013, the Secretary shall
increase the fee or surcharge described in paragraph (1) by
an additional $1.
(b) Deposit of Amounts.--Notwithstanding section 140(a)(2)
of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994
and 1995 (Public Law 103-236; 8 U.S.C. 1351 note), fees
collected under the authority of subsection (a) shall be
deposited in the Treasury.
______
SA 5076. Mr. THUNE (for himself, Mr. Kyl, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Tester,
and Mr. Domenici) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him
to the bill S. 2731, to authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2009
through 2013 to provide assistance to foreign countries to combat HIV/
AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria, and for other purposes; which was
ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
In section 401(a), strike ``$50,000,000,000'' and insert
``$48,000,000,000''.
At the end, add the following:
TITLE VI--EMERGENCY PLAN FOR INDIAN SAFETY AND HEALTH
SEC. 601. EMERGENCY PLAN FOR INDIAN SAFETY AND HEALTH.
(a) Establishment of Fund.--There is established in the
Treasury of the United States a fund, to be known as the
``Emergency Fund for Indian Safety and Health'' (referred to
in this section as the ``Fund''), consisting of such amounts
as are appropriated to the Fund under subsection (b).
(b) Transfers to Fund.--
(1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated to
the Fund, out of funds of the Treasury not otherwise
appropriated, $2,000,000,000 for the 5-year period beginning
on October 1, 2008.
(2) Availability of amounts.--Amounts deposited in the Fund
under this section shall--
(A) be made available without further appropriation;
(B) be in addition to amounts made available under any
other provision of law; and
(C) remain available until expended.
(c) Expenditures From Fund.--On request by the Attorney
General, the Secretary of the Interior, or the Secretary of
Health and Human Services, the Secretary of the Treasury
shall transfer from the Fund to the Attorney General, the
Secretary of the Interior, or the Secretary of Health and
Human Services, as appropriate, such amounts as the Attorney
General, the Secretary of the Interior, or the Secretary of
Health and Human Services determines to be necessary to carry
out the emergency plan under subsection (f).
(d) Transfers of Amounts.--
(1) In general.--The amounts required to be transferred to
the Fund under this section shall be transferred at least
monthly from the general fund of the Treasury to the Fund on
the basis of estimates made by the Secretary of the Treasury.
(2) Adjustments.--Proper adjustment shall be made in
amounts subsequently transferred to the extent prior
estimates were in excess of or less than the amounts required
to be transferred.
(e) Remaining Amounts.--Any amounts remaining in the Fund
on September 30 of an applicable fiscal year may be used by
the Attorney General, the Secretary of the Interior, or the
Secretary of Health and Human Services to carry out the
emergency plan under subsection (f) for any subsequent fiscal
year.
(f) Emergency Plan.--Not later than 1 year after the date
of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General, the Secretary
of the Interior, and the Secretary of Health and Human
Services, in consultation with Indian tribes (as defined in
section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education
Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b)), shall jointly establish an
emergency plan that addresses law enforcement and water needs
of Indian tribes under which, for each of fiscal years 2010
through 2019, of amounts in the Fund--
(1) the Attorney General shall use--
[[Page 14799]]
(A) 25 percent for the construction, rehabilitation, and
replacement of Federal Indian detention facilities;
(B) 2.5 percent to investigate and prosecute crimes in
Indian country (as defined in section 1151 of title 18,
United States Code);
(C) 1.5 percent for use by the Office of Justice Programs
for Indian and Alaska Native programs; and
(D) 1 percent to provide assistance to--
(i) parties to cross-deputization or other cooperative
agreements between State or local governments and Indian
tribes (as defined in section 102 of the Federally Recognized
Indian Tribe List Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 479a)) carrying out
law enforcement activities in Indian country; and
(ii) the State of Alaska (including political subdivisions
of that State) for carrying out the Village Public Safety
Officer Program and law enforcement activities on Alaska
Native land (as defined in section 3 of Public Law 103-399
(25 U.S.C. 3902));
(2) the Secretary of the Interior shall--
(A) deposit 20 percent in the public safety and justice
account of the Bureau of Indian Affairs for use by the Office
of Justice Services of the Bureau in providing law
enforcement or detention services, directly or through
contracts or compacts with Indian tribes under the Indian
Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C.
450 et seq.); and
(B) use 45 percent to implement requirements of Indian
water settlement agreements that are approved by Congress (or
the legislation to implement such an agreement) under which
the United States shall plan, design, rehabilitate, or
construct, or provide financial assistance for the planning,
design, rehabilitation, or construction of, water supply or
delivery infrastructure that will serve an Indian tribe (as
defined in section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and
Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b)); and
(3) the Secretary of Health and Human Services, acting
through the Director of the Indian Health Service, shall use
5 percent to provide domestic and community sanitation
facilities serving members of Indian tribes (as defined in
section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education
Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b)) pursuant to section 7 of the
Act of August 5, 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2004a), directly or through
contracts or compacts with Indian tribes under the Indian
Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C.
450 et seq.).
______
SA 5077. Mr. DeMINT proposed an amendment to the bill S. 2731, to
authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2009 through 2013 to provide
assistance to foreign countries to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and
malaria, and for other purposes; as follows:
On page 130, line 1, strike ``$50,000,000,000'' and insert
``$35,000,000,000''.
______
SA 5078. Mr. DeMINT proposed an amendment to the bill S. 2731, to
authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2009 through 2013 to provide
assistance to foreign countries to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and
malaria, and for other purposes; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. FUNDING LIMITATION.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, amounts
authorized to be appropriated under this Act may only be
targeted toward those countries authorized for funding under
the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis
and Malaria Act of 2003 (Public Law 108-25).
______
SA 5079. Mr. DeMINT proposed an amendment to amendment SA 5078
proposed by Mr. DeMint to the bill S. 2731, to authorize appropriations
for fiscal years 2009 through 2013 to provide assistance to foreign
countries to combat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria, and for other
purposes; as follows:
At the end of the amendment, strike the period and add a
comma and the following:
``and shall not be made available to such countries, or
other countries through the Global Fund to Fight AIDS,
Tuberculosis and Malaria, for any organization or program
which supports or participates in the management of a program
of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilizations.''
____________________
NOTICE: REGISTRATION OF MASS MAILINGS
The filing date for 2008 second quarter mass mailings is Friday, July
25, 2008. If your office did no mass mailings during this period,
please submit a form that states ``none.''
Mass mailing registrations, or negative reports, should be submitted
to the Senate Office of Public Records, 232 Hart Building, Washington,
DC 20510-7116.
The Public Records office will be open from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on the
filing date to accept these filings. For further information, please
contact the Public Records office at (202) 224-0322.
____________________
OVER-THE-ROAD BUS TRANSPORTATION ACCESSIBILITY ACT OF 2007
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 829, H.R. 3985.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 3985) to amend title 49, United States Code,
to direct the Secretary of Transportation to register a
person providing transportation by an over-the-road bus as a
motor carrier of passengers only if the person is willing and
able to comply with certain accessibility requirements in
addition to the other existing requirements, and for other
purposes.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be
read a third time, passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the
table, with no intervening action or debate, and that any statements
relating to the bill be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (H.R. 3985) was ordered to a third reading, was read the
third time, and passed.
____________________
CRISIS IN ZIMBABWE
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 611.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 611) expressing the sense of the
Senate on the crisis in Zimbabwe, and for other purposes.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the
resolution.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution
be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be
laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and that all
statements relating to this resolution be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The resolution (S. Res. 611) was agreed to.
The preamble was agreed to.
The resolution, with its preamble, reads as follows:
S. Res. 611
Whereas, over the last eight years, the Zimbabwean African
National Union-Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF), led by Robert
Mugabe, has increasingly turned to violence and intimidation
to maintain power amidst a deteriorating crisis;
Whereas the gross domestic product of Zimbabwe has
decreased over 40 percent in the last decade, inflation is
estimated by United Nations Deputy Secretary-General Asha-
Rose Migiro at over 10,500,000 percent, unemployment is now
over 80 percent, and more than 4,000,000 people have fled the
country;
Whereas presidential and parliamentary elections were held
on March 29, 2008, in Zimbabwe amidst widespread reports of
voting irregularities and intimidation in favor of the ruling
ZANU-PF party and Robert Mugabe;
Whereas the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission refused to
release results, despite calls to do so by the African Union
(AU), the European Union (EU), the Republic of South Africa,
the Southern African Development Community (SADC), United
Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, and the United States;
Whereas the official results of the election, announced
five weeks later, showed that Robert Mugabe won 43.2 percent
of the vote, while Morgan Tsvangirai, leader of the
opposition party Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), won
47.9 percent of the vote;
Whereas, in the wake of the elections, Robert Mugabe
launched a brutal campaign of state-sponsored violence
against opposition members, supporters, and other civilians
in an attempt to consolidate his power;
Whereas United States Ambassador to the United Nations
Zalmay Khalilzad stated on April 16, 2008, that he was
``gravely concerned about the escalating politically
motivated violence perpetrated by security forces and ruling
party militias'';
Whereas Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice stated on April
17, 2008, that Robert Mugabe has ``done more harm to his
country than would have been imaginable'' and that ``the last
years have been really an abomination'' and called for the AU
and SADC to
[[Page 14800]]
strengthen efforts to achieve a political resolution to the
crisis;
Whereas Human Rights Watch reported on April 19, 2008, that
the Mugabe regime had developed a network of informal
detention centers to intimidate, torture, and detain
political opponents;
Whereas the Mugabe regime has, in violation of the Vienna
Convention on Diplomatic Relations, done at Vienna April 18,
1961 (23 U.S.T. 3229), harassed United States and other
diplomats in retaliation for their repeated protest of recent
violence, including by detaining the United States
ambassador's vehicle for several hours on May 13, 2008, and
detaining five United States embassy staff and two local
embassy workers on June 5, 1998, one of whom was physically
assaulted;
Whereas reports of killings, abductions, beatings, torture,
and sexual violence against civilians in Zimbabwe have
continued, resulting in some 10,000 people being assaulted
and at least 30,000 displaced;
Whereas the MDC and Presidential candidate Tsvangirai
withdrew from the June 27, 2008, runoff presidential
election, citing intensified political repression and
killings of their supporters;
Whereas the Mugabe regime persisted with the runoff
election, despite the protest of many leaders in Africa, the
EU, SADC, the United Nations Security Council, and the United
States Government;
Whereas results from the runoff election unsurprisingly
declared Robert Mugabe, the only standing candidate, as the
winner with 85 percent of the vote, and he was sworn into
office;
Whereas SADC, the Pan-African Parliament, and AU Observer
missions to Zimbabwe made statements on June 29 and 30, 2008,
finding that the elections fell short of accepted African
Union standards, did not give rise to free, fair, or credible
elections, and did not reflect the will of the people of
Zimbabwe;
Whereas, on June 4, 2008, the Mugabe regime banned the
operations of non-governmental organizations in Zimbabwe,
including those who provide food and aid to millions of
Zimbabweans suffering at the result of a ZANU-PF's policies,
exacerbating the humanitarian crisis and leaving newly
displaced victims of political violence without assistance;
Whereas Nelson Mandela has described the situation in
Zimbabwe as a ``tragic failure of leadership,'' while the
Government of Botswana has refused to recognize the election
outcome as legitimate and has said that representatives of
the administration should be excluded from SADC and African
Union meetings;
Whereas the African Union passed a resolution on July 1,
2008, expressing concern for the loss of life in Zimbabwe and
the need to initiate political dialogue to promote peace,
democracy, and reconciliation;
Whereas the MDC reported on July 9, 2008, that 129 of its
supporters have been killed since the first round of
elections, including 20 since the runoff election, 1,500 of
its activists and officials are in detention, and 5,000 are
missing or unaccounted for; and
Whereas the Group of Eight (G8) industrialized nations, at
their annual summit, issued a joint statement on July 8,
2008, rejecting the June 27, 2008, election and legitimacy of
the Mugabe regime, as well as committing to further measures
against those responsible for the violence: Now, therefore,
be it
Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate--
(1) to support the people of Zimbabwe, who continue to face
widespread violence, political repression, a humanitarian
emergency, and economic adversity;
(2) to condemn the Mugabe regime for its manipulation of
the country's electoral process, including the March 29,
2008, election and the June 27, 2008, runoff election and the
regime's continued attacks against, and intimidation of,
opposition members and supporters and civil society;
(3) to reject the results of the June 27, 2008,
presidential runoff election in Zimbabwe as illegitimate
because of widespread irregularities, systematic violence by
the Mugabe regime, and the boycott of the MDC;
(4) to encourage the President's continued efforts to
tighten and expand sanctions on those individuals responsible
for violations of human and political rights in Zimbabwe;
(5) to applaud the Governments of Benin, Botswana, Liberia,
Kenya, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, and Zambia for
condemning the violent derailment of the runoff election at
the African Union summit in Sharm El-Sheikh;
(6) to encourage all members of the United Nations Security
Council to vote in favor of the proposed resolution that
would authorize a United Nations Special Representative to
support the negotiations process, impose an international
arms embargo, and strengthen financial penalties on those
individuals most responsible for undermining democratic
processes;
(7) to encourage the African Union to initiate an inclusive
political dialogue between both parties and deploy a
protection force to prevent attacks, assist victims, and
prevent the security situation from further deteriorating;
(8) to urge leaders in Africa to engage directly in the
effort to achieve an expeditious political resolution to the
crisis;
(9) to urge the United States Government and the
international community to assemble a comprehensive economic
and political recovery package for Zimbabwe in the event that
a political resolution is reached and a truly democratic
government is formed; and
(10) to support a lasting democratic political solution
that reflects the will and respects the rights of the people
of Zimbabwe, including mechanisms to ensure that future
elections are free and fair, in accordance with regional and
international standards.
____________________
REGARDING G8 SUMMIT IN JAPAN
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now
proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 612.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. 612) expressing the sense of the Senate
that President George W. Bush, President Dmitry Medvedev of
the Russian Federation, and other participants in the 2008
Group of Eight (G8) Summit in Toyako, Hokkaido, Japan should
work together to foster a more constructive relationship, and
that the Government of the Russian Federation should eschew
behaviors that are inconsistent with the Group's objectives
of protecting global security, economic stability, and
democracy.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the
resolution.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution
be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be
laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and that any
statements relating to this measure be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The resolution (S. Res. 612) was agreed to.
The preamble was agreed to.
The resolution, with its preamble, reads as follows:
S. Res. 612
Expressing the sense of the Senate that President George W.
Bush, President Dmitry Medvedev of the Russian Federation,
and other participants in the 2008 Group of Eight (G8) Summit
in Toyako, Hokkaido, Japan should work together to foster a
more constructive relationship, and that the Government of
the Russian Federation should eschew behaviors that are
inconsistent with the Group's objectives of protecting global
security, economic stability, and democracy.
Whereas the leaders of 6 major industrialized democracies,
including France, West Germany, Italy, Japan, the United
Kingdom, and the United States, gathered in 1975 for a summit
meeting in Rambouillet, France, and for annual meetings
thereafter under a rotating presidency known as the Group of
Six (G6);
Whereas the G6 was established based on the mutual interest
of its members in promoting economic stability, global
security, and democracy;
Whereas, in 1976, membership of the G6 was expanded to
include Canada;
Whereas the members of the G7 share a commitment to promote
security, economic stability, and democracy in their
respective nations and around the world;
Whereas Russia was integrated into the G7 in 1998 at the
behest of President William Jefferson Clinton following
Russian President Boris Yeltsin's decision to pursue reforms
and assume a neutral position on the acceptance of additional
members into the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO);
Whereas the members of the G8 face common challenges,
including climate change, violent extremism, global economic
volatility, pandemic disease, nuclear proliferation, and
trafficking in narcotics, persons, and weapons of mass
destruction;
Whereas President Dmitry Medvedev, Prime Minister Vladimir
Putin, and other leaders of the Russian Federation have
regularly expressed a desire for the Russian Federation to
play a leading role in international affairs;
Whereas the Russian Federation and other members of the
international community all stand to benefit if the Russian
Federation is an active, constructive partner in addressing
the broad range of challenges confronting the global
community;
Whereas the Russian Federation has evidenced the capacity
and willingness to cooperate with the United States and other
nations in the interest of global security in certain areas
pertaining to arms control and weapons proliferation, notably
through its participation in the Six-Party Talks regarding
North Korea and its support of the incentives package offered
by leading countries to Iran if that country would suspend
its uranium enrichment program;
Whereas the United States and Russia have safely
deactivated and destroyed thousands of nuclear, chemical, and
biological weapons
[[Page 14801]]
and provided upgraded storage and transportation of nuclear
materials through the Nunn-Lugar program;
Whereas the United States and other countries participating
in the June 2002 G8 Summit in Kananaskis, Canada agreed to
raise up to $20,000,000,000 over 10 years to support
nonproliferation projects in Russia and other nations through
the Global Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and
Materials of Mass Destruction;
Whereas participants in the July 2006 G8 Summit in St.
Petersburg, Russia launched the Global Initiative to Combat
Nuclear Terrorism to improve the physical protection of
nuclear materials, suppress illicit trafficking of such
materials, and bolster the capacity of willing partner
nations to respond to acts of nuclear terrorism;
Whereas the United States and the Government of the Russian
Federation pledged in the April 2008 Sochi Strategic
Framework Declaration to negotiate a ``legally binding post-
START arrangement'' for the purposes of extending provisions
of the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty;
Whereas, notwithstanding these successes, the potential for
collaboration between the United States and the Government of
the Russian Federation has been seriously undermined by the
manner in which the leaders of the Russian Federation have
conducted aspects of Russia's foreign policy;
Whereas the Government of the Russian Federation has
unilaterally suspended implementation of the 1991 Treaty on
Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE Treaty) and has yet
to fulfill its commitment to withdraw Russian forces from
Georgia and Moldova pursuant to the 1999 Istanbul Summit
Declaration of the Organization for Security and Cooperation
in Europe;
Whereas the CFE Treaty has played a key role in enhancing
the stability of the Euro-Atlantic region;
Whereas the Adapted CFE Treaty, which will not enter into
force until the Russian Federation fulfills commitments made
at the Istanbul Summit, will provide greater flexibility for
the Russian Federation in return for improved transparency
and verification;
Whereas the Government of the Russian Federation has
attempted to undermine the territorial integrity of the
Republic of Georgia through its support of the breakaway
provinces of South Ossetia and Abkhazia;
Whereas the United Nations Observer Mission in Georgia has
concluded that a military aircraft belonging to the Russian
Federation shot down an unarmed Georgian drone on April 20,
2008, while flying over Abkhazia;
Whereas the conduct of Russian trade and energy policy has
created a widespread perception that the Government of the
Russian Federation is using oil and gas exports and economic
policy as a means of political pressure on countries that
seek closer ties with the United States and Euro-Atlantic
partners;
Whereas the behavior of the Russian Federation as it
relates to several neighboring countries has contributed to
the erosion of regional peace and security;
Whereas such actions are inconsistent with the G8's
objectives of protecting global security, economic stability,
and democracy, hinder cooperation with the Government of the
Russian Federation, and undermine the standing of the Russian
Federation as a respected member of the international
community;
Whereas there has been considerable disagreement between
the Government of the United States and the Government of the
Russian Federation regarding proposals to place ballistic
missile defense interceptor and radar sites in Poland and the
Czech Republic, respectively;
Whereas certain developments inside the Russian Federation
and the Russian Government's conduct of domestic policy have
undermined confidence in the Russian Federation's ability and
capability to serve as a full partner in the work of the
international community;
Whereas the Department of State's Country Report on Human
Rights Practices for 2007 stated that, in Russia,
``continuing centralization of power in the executive branch,
a compliant State Duma, corruption and selectivity in
enforcement of the law, media restrictions, and harassment of
some NGOs eroded the government's accountability to its
citizens.'';
Whereas, in June 2008, a report released by Human Rights
Watch concluded that Russian ``law enforcement and security
forces involved in counterinsurgency [in the North Caucasus]
have committed dozens of extrajudicial executions, summary
and arbitrary detentions, and acts of torture and cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment'';
Whereas the Government of the Russian Federation has failed
to successfully prosecute individuals responsible for the
murder of critics of the Kremlin, including journalist Anna
Politkovskaya and Alexander Litvinenko;
Whereas the 2008 Annual Report of Reporters without Borders
noted a sharp increase in government pressure on the
independent media in Russia, reporting that at least 2
journalists were forcibly sent to psychiatric hospitals in
2007 and others were badly beaten or kidnapped prior to the
local and parliamentary elections in 2007;
Whereas Transparency International ranked Russia 143 out of
179 countries for perceived corruption in 2007;
Whereas there is increasing concern about violent
nationalism and xenophobia in the Russian Federation and the
2008 Annual Report of the United States Commission on
International Religious Freedom reports that there has been a
``sharp rise in violent crimes against persons [in Russia] on
account of their religion or ethnicity'';
Whereas, in the handling of the Yukos Oil Company case and
numerous other judicial actions, the Government of the
Russian Federation has permitted the politicization of
Russia's legal system;
Whereas these developments have seriously damaged
international confidence in the institutions and laws of the
Russian Federation and hindered the ability of the United
States and other partners to work with the Russian Federation
in addressing a broad range of pressing global, regional, and
domestic challenges;
Whereas the people of the Russian Federation and the people
of the United States have been disadvantaged by the resulting
damage to relations between the countries;
Whereas President Dmitry Medvedev, in an interview with the
Reuters News Service on June 25, 2008, stated that ``freedom,
democracy and the right to private property'' should define
Russia's behavior;
Whereas the United States believes that adherence on the
part of the Government of the Russian Federation to the
values articulated by President Medvedev would provide a
foundation for improved cooperation with the Russian
Federation;
Whereas adherence to the values articulated by President
Medvedev would also help repair damage to the international
reputation of the Russian Federation and advance the goals of
security, prosperity, and representative governance that
should be the common ambition of all members of the G8;
Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that--
(1) in order to build a more constructive relationship with
the Government of the Russian Federation and its people, the
President of the United States and other leaders of the G8
nations should--
(A) pursue a broad agenda of cooperation with the leaders
of the Russian Federation; and
(B) encourage Russia's transformation into a more liberal
and democratic polity;
(2) the Government of the United States and the Government
of the Russian Federation should work to ensure the continued
success of Nunn-Lugar initiatives and nonproliferation and
counterterrorism programs through--
(A) additional funding;
(B) access to sensitive facilities;
(C) effective safety and security measures to prevent
proliferation of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons
and weapons-related materials and technology; and
(D) cooperation between the United States and Russia to
enhance these objectives on a worldwide basis;
(3) the Government of the United States and the Government
of the Russian Federation, working within the International
Atomic Energy Agency and United Nations Security Council,
should renew demands for Iran to cease its nuclear enrichment
activities and fully disclose any prior weapons-related work;
(4) the Government of the United States and the Government
of the Russian Federation should negotiate a legally-binding
successor agreement to the 1991 Strategic Arms Reductions
Treaty and address all outstanding concerns regarding the
1991 Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe;
(5) the leaders of the Russian Federation should adopt
foreign and domestic policies that are consistent with
``freedom, democracy and the right to private property'', as
articulated by President Dmitry Medvedev;
(6) the Government of the Russian Federation should take
immediate steps to restore the freedom and independence of
the country's media in accordance with its obligations under
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;
(7) the Government and officials of the Russian Federation
should refrain from portraying the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO) as a threat to the Russian Federation and
fully utilize the consultative mechanisms that exist through
the NATO-Russia Council to facilitate cooperation between the
countries of NATO and the Russian Federation;
(8) the United States, in coordination with other members
of the G8, should--
(A) encourage the Government of the Russian Federation to
address the challenges facing its society, including
widespread corruption, a deteriorating health care system,
growing instability in the North Caucasus, and an
increasingly serious demographic crisis; and
(B) stand ready to assist the people and Government of the
Russian Federation in those efforts;
(9) just as the United States welcomed the increasing
prosperity and political development of Germany, Japan, and
the nations Eastern Europe in the aftermath of former
[[Page 14802]]
conflicts, the United States should welcome the emergence of
the Russian Federation as a strong, successful, democratic
partner in addressing global challenges; and
(10) the leaders of the Russian Federation should respect
the rights of sovereign, democratic governments in
neighboring countries and their prerogative to seek
membership in Euro-Atlantic institutions.
____________________
NATIONAL DIRECT SUPPORT PROFESSIONALS RECOGNITION WEEK
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now
proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 613.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 613) designating the week beginning
September 8, 2008, as ``National Direct Support Professionals
Recognition Week.''
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the
resolution.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution
be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be
laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and that any
statements relating to this matter be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The resolution (S. Res. 613) was agreed to.
The preamble was agreed to.
The resolution, with its preamble, reads as follows:
S. Res. 613
Whereas direct support workers, direct care workers,
personal assistants, personal attendants, in-home support
workers, and paraprofessionals (referred to in this preamble
as ``direct support professionals'') are the primary
providers of publicly funded long term support and services
for millions of individuals;
Whereas a direct support professional must build a close,
trusted relationship with an individual with disabilities;
Whereas a direct support professional assists an individual
with disabilities with the most intimate needs, on a daily
basis;
Whereas direct support professionals provide a broad range
of support, including--
(1) preparation of meals;
(2) helping with medications;
(3) bathing;
(4) dressing;
(5) mobility;
(6) getting to school, work, religious, and recreational
activities; and
(7) general daily affairs;
Whereas a direct support professional provides essential
support to help keep an individual with disabilities
connected to the family and community of the individual;
Whereas direct support professionals enable individuals
with disabilities to live meaningful, productive lives;
Whereas direct support professionals are the key to
allowing an individual with disabilities to live successfully
in the community of the individual, and to avoid more costly
institutional care;
Whereas the majority of direct support professionals are
female, and many are the sole breadwinners of their families;
Whereas direct support professionals work and pay taxes,
but many remain impoverished and are eligible for the same
Federal and State public assistance programs on which the
individuals with disabilities served by the direct support
professionals must depend;
Whereas Federal and State policies, as well as the Supreme
Court, in Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 581 (1999), assert the
right of an individual to live in the home and community of
the individual;
Whereas, in 2008, the majority of direct support
professionals are employed in home and community-based
settings and this trend is projected to increase over the
next decade;
Whereas there is a documented critical and growing shortage
of direct support professionals in every community throughout
the United States; and
Whereas many direct support professionals are forced to
leave jobs due to inadequate wages and benefits, creating
high turnover and vacancy rates that research demonstrates
adversely affects the quality of support to individuals with
disabilities: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) designates the week beginning September 8, 2008, as
``National Direct Support Professionals Recognition Week'';
(2) recognizes the dedication and vital role of direct
support professionals in enhancing the lives of individuals
with disabilities of all ages;
(3) appreciates the contribution of direct support
professionals in supporting the needs that reach beyond the
capacities of millions of families in the United States;
(4) commends direct support professionals as integral in
supporting the long-term support and services system of the
United States; and
(5) finds that the successful implementation of the public
policies of the United States depends on the dedication of
direct support professionals.
____________________
PROGRAM
Mr. REID. Mr. President, we are going to be able to move through this
PEPFAR legislation. It would be good for our country if we pass it. I
also have spoken to the Speaker. She agrees with me and Senator
McConnell that we should move this housing fix quickly. The President
and his people have submitted to us some language that we think, from
all we can tell, is appropriate. Senator Dodd is agreeing we should
move forward. I think there is a sense we should do this within the
next couple of days. This is something that is important.
With the housing crisis, the main reason we do this is to make sure
people understand that we have faith in our financial markets. Fannie
and Freddie, we believe, with the attention being focused on them over
the weekend and today, have stabilized, and that is the way it should
be. We are going to try to move forward on this very quickly.
____________________
ORDERS FOR TUESDAY, JULY 15, 2008
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate
completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10 a.m.
tomorrow, Tuesday, July 15; that following the prayer and pledge, the
Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two
leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate
proceed to a period of morning business for up to 1 hour, with the time
equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their
designees, with the Republicans controlling the first half and the
majority controlling the second half; that following morning business,
the Senate resume consideration of S. 2731, the Global AIDS bill, and
when the Senate resumes consideration of the bill, the majority leader
or his designee be recognized to move to table the DeMint amendment No.
5078. I further ask the Senate stand adjourned from 12:30 to 2:15 p.m.
to allow for the weekly policy luncheons.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. REID. I would say, Mr. President, Senators should expect the
first vote of the day to occur as early as 11 a.m. tomorrow morning.
____________________
ADJOURNMENT UNTIL 10 A.M. TOMORROW
Mr. REID. Mr. President, if there is no further business to be
brought before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand
adjourned under the previous order.
There being no objection, the Senate, at 7:27 p.m., adjourned until
Tuesday, July 15, 2008, at 10 a.m.
____________________
NOMINATIONS
Executive nominations received by the Senate:
In the Air Force
The following named officer for appointment as Vice Chief
of Staff, United States Air Force, and appointment to the
grade indicated while assigned to a position of importance
and responsibility under title 10, U.S.C., sections 8034 and
601:
To be general
LT. GEN. WILLIAM M. FRASER III
The following named officer for appointment in the United
States Air Force to the grade indicated while assigned to a
position of importance and responsibility under title 10,
U.S.C., section 601:
To be lieutenant general
MAJ. GEN. LARRY D. JAMES
The following Air National Guard of the United States
officer for appointment in the Reserve of the Air Force to
the grade indicated under title 10, U.S.C., sections 12203
and 12212:
To be major general
BRIG. GEN. KELLY K. MCKEAGUE
In the Army
The following named officer for appointment in the United
States Army to the grade indicated while assigned to a
position of importance and responsibility under title 10,
U.S.C., section 601:
To be lieutenant general
MAJ. GEN. ROBERT E. DURBIN
The following named officer for appointment in the United
States Army to the grade indicated while assigned to a
position of importance and responsibility under title 10,
U.S.C., section 601:
To be lieutenant general
LT. GEN. RONALD L. BURGESS, JR.
[[Page 14803]]
The following named officer for appointment in the United
States Army to the grade indicated while assigned to a
position of importance and responsibility under title 10,
U.S.C., section 601:
To be lieutenant general
LT. GEN. JOHN F. KIMMONS
In the Marine Corps
The following named officer for appointment to the grade of
lieutenant general in the United States Marine Corps while
assigned to a position of importance and responsibility under
title 10, U.S.C., section 601:
To be lieutenant general
MAJ. GEN. GEORGE J. FLYNN
The following named officers for appointment in the United
States Marine Corps to the grade indicated under title 10,
U.S.C., section 624:
To be brigadier general
COLONEL JUAN G. AYALA
COLONEL RONALD F. BACZKOWSKI
COLONEL WILLIAM B. CROWE
COLONEL MICHAEL G. DANA
COLONEL WILLIAM M. FAULKNER
COLONEL WALTER L. MILLER, JR.
COLONEL JOSEPH L. OSTERMAN
COLONEL CHRISTOPHER S. OWENS
COLONEL GREGG A. STURDEVANT
COLONEL GLENN M. WALTERS
In the Army
THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICERS FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE GRADE
INDICATED IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C.,
SECTION 624:
To be lieutenant colonel
STEPHEN L. AKI
RODRIGUE ALEANDRE
JOEL O. ALEXANDER
EDWARD W. ALLEN II
PAUL M. ALLMON
TODD K. ALSTON
LISA L. ANDERSON
SEAN D. ANDERSON
WILLIAM J. ANDERSON
CARMEN R. ANTHONY
MICHAEL J. ARNOLD
OSWALDO C. ARROYO
SPENCER O. ASHFORD
HOUSTON E. BAKER
RONALD L. BAKER
SHERWOOD P. BAKER II
ROY D. BANZON
CHARLES H. BARBER
DALLIS L. BARNES
KIMMIE M. BARTENSLAGER
MICHAEL A. BAUMEISTER
KIRBY D. BEARD
DAVID M. BEDARD
LAMONICA BELL
CHRISTOPHER A. BENN
THOMAS F. BENTZEL
CRAIG S. BESAW
DERELL M. BIBBS
JOHN C. BIVONA, JR.
CHARLES E. BLEDSOE
ELIZABETH E. BLEDSOE
MICHAEL D. BLOMQUIST
JAMES W. BOGART
LAURA B. BOZEMAN
STEVEN R. BRADDOM
JAMES T. BRADY II
WILLIAM T. BRENNAN
CHRISTOPHER M. BRIDGES
JOHN C. BROOKIE
CHRISTOPHER L. BROWN
EVAN J. BROWN
JAMES L. BROWN
KEVYN M. BRYANT
SHATRECE B. BUCHANAN
CLYDE M. BUCKLEY
GREGORY N. BUNN
BRENDEN D. BURKE
ADAM W. BUTLER
DAVID B. BYERS
JILL F. CAHILL
LINNIE W. CAIN, JR.
EARL D. CALEB
JOHN C. CALHOUN
MIKE A. CALVIN
WILLIAM J. CAMPBELL III
JASON A. CARRICO
JEFFERY A. CARTER
WILLIAM D. CARUSO
YONG S. CASSLE
ERNEST R. CHAMBERS
JOSEPH H. CHAN
JEAN R. CHAUSSE
QUINZEL E. CHESTNUT
DAVID D. CHIPCHASE
HARRIET A. CLANCY
SHAY V. COATES
GREGORY H. COILE
WILLIAM C. COKER
ROBERT M. COLLINS
JOSE A. COLONRODRIGUEZ
AARON J. COOK
ALANNA M. COOK
JOHN L. COOMBS
KENNETH J. COON
JAMES W. CRAFT III
JACOB E. CRAWFORD III
CARMELO A. CRESPOAGUADO
ELISABETH G. CROOKS
LANCE G. CURTIS
FRANK G. DAVIS II
PAUL M. DAVIS
STEPHEN R. DAVIS
TOYA J. DAVIS
ROBERT A. DAWSON
GLENN A. DEAN III
RICHARD B. DEBANY
ELIZABETH DELBRIDGEKEOUGH
ROY A. DESILVA
CHRISTOPHER E. DEXTER
PAUL D. DISMER
ROBERT A. DIXON, JR.
WILLIE L. DRUMGOLD, JR.
JEROME C. DUFFY, JR.
PAUL R. DWIGANS
LANCE R. ELDRED
MICHAEL G. ELLIOTT
BRUCE E. ELLIS
KEVIN L. ELLISON
MICHAEL F. ENNABE
MARK A. EVANS
MARK M. EVANS
MARY V. EWING
DALE L. FARRAND
ANN G. FINLEY
TODD J. FISH
JAMES R. FLANDERS
MICHAEL E. FOSTER, SR.
SABRINA E. FRANCIS
DANIEL L. FURBER
KENNETH L. GAMBLES
GAVIN J. GARDNER
CRAIG R. GARDUNIA
ANTHONY GAUTIER
KEVIN L. GEISBERT
LANCE G. GIDDENS
FRANK V. GILBERTSON
TIMOTHY M. GILHOOL
AMERICUS M. GILL III
KEVIN D. GILSON
BRETT F. GORDON
STEPHANIE E. GRADFORD
MARKO K. GRAHAM
PETER N. GREANY
ALEXANDER E. GREENWICH
AMANDA P. GREIG
SCOT W. GREIG
CRAIG L. GROSENHEIDER
SUSAN M. GROSENHEIDER
GREGORY H. GRZYBOWSKI
JAMES E. GULLEY, JR.
MARTY G. HAGENSTON
RICHARD T. HAGGERTY
MARC A. HAMILTON
YEE C. HANG
MATHEW J. HANNAH
STEVEN G. HANSON
DIANA M. HARDY
CYNTHIA HARGROW
DARYL M. HARP
RASHANN D. HARRIS
TERRECE B. HARRIS
STACIE I. HATTEN
JON HAWKINS
SHAWN L. HAWKINS
ANTHONY L. HAYCOCK
JERED P. HELWIG
MARK E. HENRIE
THOMAS J. HENTHORN, JR.
SEAN A. HILBER
COFIELD B. HILBURN
STEVEN B. HINES
JOHN B. HINSON
RICHARD J. HOERNER
DEAN M. HOFFMAN IV
MARK A. HOLLINGSWORTH
JAMES P. HOOPER
KAROLYN I. HOOPER
JANE M. HOSTETLER
HEIDI J. HOYLE
ROBERT S. HRIBAR
KAREN S. HUBBARD
WILLIAM T. HUNT, JR.
DONALD W. HURST III
NOAH HUTCHER
ANDREW J. HYATT
ERIC G. IACOBUCCI
SULA L. IRISH
ALICIA D. JACKSON
WILLIAM D. JACKSON
VERNON E. JAKOBY
MARK A. JOHNSON
WILLIAM C. JOHNSON, JR.
ERNEST C. JONES
DOUGLAS M. KADETZ
JOHN D. KAYLOR, JR.
NELSON G. KERLEY, JR.
CHARLES F. KIMBALL
FEDERICA L. KING
JOHN C. KIRALY
NORMAN B. KIRBY, JR.
STEPHEN L. KNOTTS
CHARLES H. KOEHLER III
MICHAEL K. KOLB
JOHN N. KOTZMAN
CHRISTINA M. KRYCH
CALYES L. KYNARD II
JEFFERY M. LACAZE
CHRISTOPHER J. LACKOVIC
CYNTHIA LANG
TRACY L. LANIER
KELLY D. LAUGHLIN
ROBERT N. LAW
JOSEPH H. LAWSON III
RICARDO LEBRON
WILLIAM E. LEE III
WON S. LEE
KENNETH M. LEEDS, JR.
CHRISTOPHER D. LELJEDAL
CYNTHIA A. LERCH
DOUGLAS A. LEVIEN
JOHN D. LOONEY
CARLOS E. LOPEZGUZMAN
ROBERT W. LOVE, JR.
DOUGLAS S. LOWREY
SIDNEY J. LOYD
ERIC W. LUDWIG
BRIAN J. LYTTLE
EDWARD D. MADDOX
ROBIN L. MAHADY
VICTOR M. MARRERO
GARY A. MARTIN
MICHAEL B. MARTIN
JOHN P. MAYER
ROBERT A. MCCASLIN
WILLIAM J. MCCLARY
DAVID J. MCCONNELL
RANDY E. MCGEE
DENNIS M. MCGOWAN
MICHAEL T. MCTIGUE
KEITH J. MCVEIGH
SIDNEY W. MELTON
GERARDO V. MENESES
CHRISTOPHER D. MEREDITH
MARI E. MEW
ROBERT J. MICELI
ROBERT E. MIDDLETON
KENDRA L. MILLIKEN
DAVID L. MORGAN III
CALVIN A. MORRIS
JOSEPH R. MORROW
ROBERT S. MOTT
MARC A. MUELLER
HAKEEM A. MUHAMMAD
IAN D. MURDOCH
VERNON L. MYERS
MICHAEL T. NAIFEH
PAUL J. NAROWSKI II
JUDSON P. NELSON, JR.
THOMAS D. NETZEL
DANA A. NORTON
VINCENT C. NWAFOR
ERIC P. OLSON
GREGORY OQUENDO
GERARD J. OVERBEY
GEORGE PADILLA
KIYOUNG A. PAK
CHRISTOPHER PALFI
KEVIN P. PAUL
WANDA L. PEE
ELIJAH PETTY, JR.
CHARLES G. PHILLIPS
TERESA A. PLEINIS
PEYTON POTTS
SHAWN B. POWELL
DEMETRIUS R. PRICE
IVAN J. QUINONES
ERIC C. RANNOW
AUDREY RANSOM
CRAIG M. RAVENELL
JOHN A. REDINGER II
JAMES E. REXFORD
MARK A. RIDGLEY
HAROLD T. RIGGINS III
STEPHEN J. RILEY
EARL W. RILINGTON, JR.
AARON D. ROBERSON
ROCHELLE C. ROBERSON
KRISTIAN A. ROGERS
JUAN ROSAS
GEORGE L. ROSS
MATTHEW H. RUEDI
GREGORY M. RUPKALVIS
MARK W. RUSSELL
THOMAS J. RYAN
RANDI E. RZESZOT
ROY E. SALYER
GREGORY E. SANDERS
ANTHONY J. SATTERFIELD
ARI J. SCHEIN
BRADLEY C. SCHUTZ
MATTHEW M. SCHWIND
TOMMIE L. SHERRILL
ERIC P. SHIRLEY
SCOTT A. SHORE
CRAIG M. SHORT
PAUL D. SHULER
GLENN T. SIMPKINS
JONATHAN B. SLATER
ZORN T. SLIMAN
ERIC J. SLOUGHFY
PHILLIP E. SMALLWOOD
CATHERINE A. SMITH
CRYSTAL S. SMITH
JAMES M. SMITH
GARY M. SOLDATO
[[Page 14804]]
WILLIAM E. SPARROW
GARY E. SPEAROW
MARC A. SPENCER
KATHRYN A. SPLETSTOSER
CHARLES A. STAMM
JOYCE B. STEWART
SCOTT W. STEWART
WILLIAM L. STEWART, JR.
TIMOTHY R. STIANSEN
LAWRENCE R. STILLER
MARK T. STINER
DANIEL L. STONE
DONALD W. STONER III
CHRISTOPHER G. STRACK
DARYL L. STRONG
CRAIG TACKETT
MARK E. TALBOT
RICHARD J. TATE
CLINT C. TAYLOR
JOHN M. THANE
ROBERT J. THOMAS
JAMES M. THORNE
LEE M. TONSMEIRE
MILES E. TOWNSEND
MICHAEL E. TRAXLER
PATRICK J. UNZICKER
LUIS A. URBINA
VINCENT C. VALLEY
ANGEL L. VELEZ
MENDEL D. WADDELL
LAURA K. WAGES
THOMAS L. WAILD, JR.
ALLEN F. WALKER
SUSAN M. WALTON
TIMOTHY A. WARNER
EUGENE WARREN
DONALD A. WEYLER
KEVIN S. WHITE
CRAIG A. WHITTEN
DEAN E. WILEY
DONALD B. WILHIDE
JIMMIE L. WILLIAMS, JR.
JOSEPH V. WILLIAMS
DONALD K. WOLS
CARL E. WOMACK, JR.
JERRY L. WOOD
GLENN W. WOOLGAR
CHARLES WORSHIM III
BROADUS H. WRIGHT III
TIMOTHY W. ZIMMERMAN
THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICERS FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE GRADE
INDICATED IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C.,
SECTION 624:
To be lieutenant colonel
EARL E. ABONADI
MARCUS P. ACOSTA
ROY H. ADAMS III
ARTHUR A. ADDLEMAN
EDWARD J. ALCOCK
ROBERT F. ALVARO
MICHAEL R. ANDERSON
STEVEN ANGERTHAL
RICHARD T. APPELHANS
KRIS A. ARNOLD
RAUL M. ARROCHA
ERIC E. ASLAKSON
MATTHEW D. ATKINS
MICHAEL A. BACHAND
JOSEPH A. BAIRD
STEVEN L. BAIRD
MARION P. BAKALORZ
MATTHEW C. BALLARD
JOHN L. BARRETT, JR.
LEE A. BAUBLITZ
PHILIP A. BAUDE
HASHEM BAYATPOOR
TERRY A. BAYLISS
JAIME T. BAZIL
WILLIAM V. BECK
SHANNON D. BEEBE
ROY L. BEHNE
JOHN A. BENEDICT
ERIC J. BENEFIELD
DAVID W. BERNARD
ALLEN T. BERRY
TODD A. BERRY
WOLFGANG T. BIGGERSTAFF
KIM T. BIVIN
ERIC W. BLAIR
NANCY E. BODYK
MATTHEW A. BOEHNKE
JOSE R. BRACERO, JR.
DAVID M. BRADSHAW
MONICA F. BRADSHAW
JOHN D. BRANCH
STEVEN E. BREWER
SCHUYLER M. BRISTOW
SCOTT D. BROOKS
JASON M. BROWN
MICHAEL L. BROWN
DANIEL W. BURNETT
GUY M. BURROW
THOMAS M. BUTLER
JASON T. CALDWELL
JAVIER E. CARDONA
CHARLES A. CARLTON
ROBERT H. CARR
TANIA M. CHACHO
MICHAEL A. CHANDANAIS
MARY R. CHEYNE
LAWRENCE W. CHINNERY, JR.
JOO E. CHO
JEFFREY S. CHRISMAN
CECIL L. CLARK
PATRICK S. COFFMAN
CHARLES O. COLLINS
ANDREW A. COLLUM
KEITH A. COLLYER
KURT P. CONNELL
WILLIAM D. CONNER
JOHN A. CONNIFF
MICHAEL T. COOPER
DENNIS D. COWHER
PAUL G. CRAFT
CHRISTOPHER M. CRAWFORD
BRADY A. CROSIER
JOSEPH A. CRUSE
ELOY E. CUEVAS
BRADLEY W. CULLUM
ROBERT M. CUNNINGHAM
WILLIAM P. CZAJKOWSKI, JR.
DENNIS C. DANIELS
MARK D. DAVEY
QUACEY L. DAVIS
RICHARD S. DAVIS
KETTI C. DAVISON
STEPHEN E. DAWSON
JOHN M. DEMKO
JAMES B. DICKEY
MICHELLE L. DIGRUTTOLO
GORDON E. DODSON, JR.
MARK H. DOTSON
GREGORY J. DOUBEK
TIMOTHY A. DOYLE
RUSSELL G. DRAPER
TODD C. DUDLEY
GLORIA D. DUNKLIN
BRIAN R. DUNMIRE
CHRISTOPHER R. DURHAM
MARC A. EDQUID
DONALD W. EDWARDS, JR.
DOUGLASS EDWARDS
WILLIAM B. EGER
DEBORAH M. ELLIS
MELISSA D. FAHRNI
MARTIN J. FARENFIELD
ANDREW F. FARNSLER
STEVEN G. FINLEY
SCOTT T. FLEEHER
ROSS D. FLORES
THOMAS F. FOSTER
KATHY FOX
JOHN F. FRAVEL III
EARL A. FREEMAN
DANIEL FRIEND
KEITH A. GALLEW
ALPHONSO L. GAMBLE
DAVID A. GIGLIOTTI
DANIEL R. GINN
THOMAS P. GLOVER
MARTIN D. GLYNN
RICARDO GONZALEZ
DUANE K. GREEN
JOSEPH D. GRIMES
PETER J. HABIC
MICHAEL HAKEMAN
JERRY A. HALL
MARIE L. HALL
TYRONE J. HALL
DAN R. HANSON
JAMES E. HARDY
GARRICK M. HARMON
BLAIRE M. HARMS
ELLIOT E. HARRIS
JOHN K. HARRIS
LARRY D. HARRISON II
CHRISTOPHER L. HARTLEY
JAMES E. HARVEY
LINDA T. HARVEY
JASON R. HAYES
STEVEN A. HEDDEN
TROY K. HEINEMAN
TERRY W. HERRING
BRADLEY C. HILTON
CLIFFORD M. HODGES
JAMES R. HOGAN
THOMAS P. HOLLIDAY, JR.
ERIC A. HOLLISTER
JEFFREY B. HOUSE
MATTHEW J. INGRAM
JEFFREY L. JENNETTE
ALAN L. JOHNSON
ANTONIO D. JOHNSON
JOHN D. JOHNSON
STEVEN W. JOHNSON
THOMAS C. JOHNSON
TODD A. JOHNSON
BENJAMIN C. JONES
DAVID C. JONES
DAVID M. JONES
DOUGLAS D. JONES
MARTINA L. JONES
SHANNON D. JUDNIC
PIERRE D. JUTRAS
WILLIAM H. KACZYNSKI
GUY M. KAPUSTKA
KIM T. KAWAMOTO
DAVID R. KING
BRET C. KINMAN
MICHAEL G. KIRKLAND
KENNETH F. KLOCK
DAVID L. KNIGHT
WILLIAM K. KONDRACKI
KEVIN J. KRACKENBERGER
DAVID P. KRAHL
DANIEL F. KUNTZ
THOMAS M. LAFLEUR
LINDA M. LAMM
PAUL E. LANZILLOTTA
ERIC J. LARSEN
KEVIN T. LAUGHLIN
TIMOTHY R. LAWRENCE
CARLETON A. LEE
KEVIN H. LEE
JASON LERNER
MARK J. LESZCZAK
PETER S. LEVOLA
DOUGLAS R. LEWIS
WILLIAM I. LEWIS, JR.
BRIAN J. LIEB
MARVIN G. LOERA
DARON L. LONG
SEAN W. LONG
JOHN S. LYERLY
KEVIN R. LYNCH
SUZANNE B. MACDONALD
ANDREW W. MACK
MICHAEL L. MANSI
MICHAEL A. MATNEY
CYNTHIA A. MATUSKEVICH
CHRISTOPHER T. MAYER
TIMOTHY J. MAYNARD
EDWARD W. MCCARTHY
ANDREW S. MCCLELLAND
RICHARD K. MCCLUNG
JAMES E. MCDONOUGH
JAMES T. MCGHEE
MICHAEL D. MCKAY
JOHN M. MCNEALY
CHARMAINE R. MEANS
ANNETTE C. MERFALEN
TIMOTHY J. MERTSOCK
MARIA K. METCALF
WILLIAM P. MIGOS
MICHAEL J. MILLWARD
BILLY M. MIRANDA
GARY P. MISKOVSKY, JR.
CAMERON G. MITCHELL
JOHN A. MOBERLY
PHILIP P. MONBLEAU
CHARLES P. MOORE
DONALD E. MOORE
KERRY E. MOORES
TODD T. MORGAN
NICOLE R. MORRIS
MARK L. MOSS
JOHN A. MOWCHAN
TIMOTHY R. MURDOCK
THOMAS G. NEEMEYER
LANDY T. NELSON, JR.
ANGEL L. NIEVESORTIZ
JOHN F. NOLDEN, JR.
MATTHEW H. NUHSE
CHARLES B. OBRIEN
EDWARD P. OCONNOR
JOSEPH T. ONEIL
ANDREW S. ORNELAS
RANDALL G. OWENS
WESLEY P. PADILLA
JOHN PARENTE, JR.
MARK B. PARKER
JOEL S. PAWLOSKI
WILLIAM F. PEARMAN
GREGORY H. PENFIELD
MELANIE S. PEREZ
DAVID C. PERRINE
KEITH C. PHILLIPS
JEANMARC PIERRE
SEAN L. PIERSON
GEOFFREY D. PINSKY
WILLIAM R. PITTMAN IV
CHRISTIANE L. PLOCH
JAMES S. POWELL
CLIFTON PRAT
BRIAN W. PREISS
JOHN D. PRICE
JAMES B. PUGEL
RICHARD J. QUIRK IV
ALAN L. RAMOS
FIRMAN H. RAY
JOEL D. RAYBURN
VIRGINIA REED
ROBERT N. RIDDLE
MARK S. RILEY
LORA A. RIMMER
ROYAL S. RIPLEY
WENDY L. RIVERS
PAUL W. ROBYN
RONALD D. ROGERS
STEPHEN C. ROGERS
PAUL D. ROMAGNOLI
KEVIN P. ROMANO
DANA RUCINSKI
DANIEL J. RUDER
ROBERTO RUIZ
CRAIG A. SALO
DANNY B. SALTER
PAUL M. SALTYSIAK
[[Page 14805]]
RONALD D. SARGENT, JR.
REID L. SAWYER
PETER J. SCAMMELL
ROBERT J. SCANLON
ROBERT W. SCHAEFER
WILLIAM M. SCHAUM, JR.
PATRICK J. SCHULER
ROBERT C. SCHULTE
JOHN W. SCHURTZ
CHRISTINA M. SCHWEISS
CHARLES E. SEGARS
SUZANNE M. SELF
DENNIS S. SENTELL, JR.
MICHAEL R. SEVERSON
GERALD W. SHAW
JEROME R. SHAY, JR.
EUGENE V. SHEELY
EULYS B. SHELL II
THOMAS R. SHENK
AARON R. SHIELDS
JOHN A. SINCLAIR
NANDKUMAR R. SINGH
SCOTT H. SINKULAR
DALE K. SLADE
DARREN R. SMITH
STEPHEN M. SMITH
ROBERT SOBESKI
BRIAN T. SOLDON
MICHAEL J. SORRENTINO
STEVEN J. SPARLING
JOHN F. SPENCER III
JEFFERY W. STANSFIELD
JEFFREY A. STARKE
BRIAN L. STEED
TAMMY L. STOCKING
GEOFFREY M. STOKER
OLIN K. STRADER
JASON T. STRICKLAND
ANN L. SUMMERS
FRANK F. TANK
RALPH M. TAYLOR
AARON P. TIPTON
PAUL J. TODD
THOMAS B. TREDWAY
MICHAEL F. TREVETT
DAVID W. TROTTER
JAMES D. TURINETTI IV
CURTIS L. TYGART
ROBERT H. VALIEANT
VERNON N. VANDYNE
BRET P. VANPOPPEL
JUAN C. VEGA
JONATHAN W. VERNAU
WILLIAM T. VIAR
GREGORY C. VIGGIANO
LISA C. VINING
ROBERT A. VITT
GLENN J. VOELZ
DALE L. VOLKMAN
TERESA A. WARDELL
JASON F. WEECE
JOHN W. WEIDNER
KENNETH M. WEILAND II
DON L. WILLADSEN
DAVID G. WILLIAMS
DAVID T. WILLIAMS
JEFFREY N. WILLIAMS
BRET D. WILSON
DAVID N. WILSON
EDWARD C. WILSON
TROY S. WISDOM
LARRY N. WITTWER
KEVIN P. WOLFLA
DOUGLAS R. WOODALL
JASON A. WOODFORD
DONALD R. WORDEN
ROBERT B. WORSHAM
MICHAEL A. YORK
JON W. YOUNG
RICHARD L. ZELLMANN
PAUL M. ZEPS, JR.
SCOTT M. ZNAMENACEK
THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICERS FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE GRADE INDICATED IN
THE UNITED STATES ARMY UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C., SECTION 624:
To be lieutenant colonel
JEFFREY W. ABBOTT
BRIAN W. ADAMS
JAY R. ADAMS
JOHNNY D. ADAMS
LAMAR D. ADAMS
MARK E. ADAMS
KEVIN D. ADMIRAL
LAWRENCE AGUILLARD III
MARK J. AITKEN
BARBI L. ALEANDRE
JOSEPH P. ALESSI
MARK E. ALEXANDER
STEPHEN B. ALEXANDER
CRAIG J. ALIA
JOHN R. ALLEN
MARK A. ALVAREZ
MAXWELL J. AMMONS
CURTIS T. ANDERSON II
DOUGLAS A. ANDERSON
JOEL K. AOKI
CHAD R. ARCAND
PATRICIA A. ARCARI
TIMOTHY J. ATKINS
CHARLES H. AUER, JR.
TODD A. AULD
CORBIN K. BACKMAN
JAMES J. BAILEY
JOHN M. BAILEY, JR.
ALLAN P. BAKER
ALAN K. BAL
STEPHEN H. BALES
REGGINIAL R. BARDEN II
BALLARD C. BARKER
SEAN W. BARNES
TROY D. BARNES
WILLIAM A. BARROW
SAMUEL S. BARTON
BRENT M. BARTOS
STEVEN G. BASSO
SEAN T. BATEMAN
RYAN D. BATES
STACY M. BATHRICK
PABLO BATISTAHERNANDEZ
CRAIG S. BAUMGARTNER
DAVID R. BAXTER
DERRICK E. BAXTER
THOMAS A. BAYER II
JAMES E. BEAN
JOHN C. BEATTY
WILLIAM T. BECK
MARY S. BELL
WILLIAM J. BENNER
DOUGLAS W. BENNETT
CRAIG R. BENSON
ANGEL N. BERMUDEZCASTRO
SEAN C. BERNABE
KOLIN V. BERNARDONI
ROBERT K. BERTRAND
MICHAEL J. BEST
ROBERT E. BEY
MARK O. BILAFER
DAVID E. BITNER
JASON J. BLAIS
ROBERT G. BLANKENSHIP
NATHAN B. BLOOD
GLEN B. BLUMHARDT
MARC E. BOBERG
KENNETH D. BOGGS
THOMAS R. BOLEN
GEORGE M. BOND
JOHN M. BONE
GREGORY A. BORCHERDING
DAVID T. BOROWICZ
BRIAN L. BOWEN
RAYMOND D. BOWYER
KEITH B. BRACE
TERRENCE L. BRALEY
JAMES M. BRAMBLETT
DAVID B. BRICKER
RONALD S. BRIDEGAM
MARSHALL W. BRIDGES
MICHAEL S. BROOKS
PAUL T. BROOKS
WINSTON P. BROOKS
MICHAEL D. BROPHY
EDWIN C. BROUSE
CHARLES M. BROWN
EDMOND M. BROWN
KEVIN S. BROWN
TIMOTHY A. BRUMFIEL, SR.
PATRICK D. BRUNDIDGE
ERIC D. BRUNKEN
JAMES D. BRUNS, JR.
JOHN T. BRYANT
SANTIAGO G. BUENO III
CHRISTOPHER A. BURNS
THOMAS D. BURTON
CHRISTOPHER S. BUTLER
CURTIS A. BUZZARD
DAVID A. CALDWELL
PATRICK A. CALLAHAN
SCOTT A. CAMPBELL
CAMERON M. CANTLON
JAMES F. CARLISLE
CHRISTOPHER J. CASSIBRY
ROBERT C. CASTELLI
GEOFFREY A. CATLETT
INGRID I. CENTURION
EDWARD P. CHAMBERLAYNE
BEVIN K. CHEROT
SCOTT M. CHIASSON
WARREN CHRISTOPHER
BRETT M. CLARK
SEAN D. CLEVELAND
DONN T. COFFMAN
CHRISTOPHER COGLIANESE
MALCOLM C. COLE II
CHRISTOPHER L. COLEMAN
LIAM S. COLLINS
CHRISTOPHER L. CONNOLLY
JOHN W. CONNOR
ROBERT J. CONNOR, JR.
FRANK J. COOK
NATHAN E. COOK II
CHRISTOPHER C. CORBETT
NICHOLAS P. CORRAO
SCOTT A. COULSON
CHRISTOPHER J. COX
DARREN V. COX
BRUCE R. COYNE
JAMES R. CRAIG
PAUL A. CRAVEY
ELTON E. CRAWFORD II
GEOFFREY A. CRAWFORD
TIMOTHY CREIGHTON
STEPHEN W. CROLEY
JOHN D. CROSS
CURTIS L. CRUM
MARC J. CUMMINS
ROBERT A. CURRIS
SAMUEL W. CURTIS
JOHN M. CUSHING
SHAWN L. DANIEL
BARRY E. DANIELS, JR.
TIMOTHY J. DARGIE
WILLIAM E. DARNE
WILLIAM E. DAVENPORT II
MICHAEL L. DAVIDSON
TIMOTHY C. DAVIS
HAROLD C. DEMBY
JEFFREY C. DENIUS
MICHAEL C. DEROSIER
CHRISTOPHER D. DESSASO
TORREY A. DICIRO
SCOTT DICKEY
KEVIN J. DIERMEIER
SHANE C. DILLOW
CRAIG M. DOANE
DAVID P. DOHERTY
JAMES H. DONAHUE, JR.
MICHAEL C. DONAHUE
DAVID A. DOSIER
CHRISTOPHER P. DOWNEY
DAVID S. DOYLE
DANIEL J. DUDEK
TIMOTHY M. DUFFY
GERALD R. DULL
JAMES A. DUNCAN
THOMAS A. DUNCAN II
LANDY D. DUNHAM
MICHAEL K. DYE
BRIAN R. EBERT
MARSHALL V. ECKLUND
MICHAEL E. EDWARDS
RICHARD J. EDWARDS
JAMES W. ELLERSON, JR.
TODD G. EMOTO
MICHAEL J. ERNST
ARDRELLE L. EVANS
MARCUS S. EVANS
JAMES M. FALCONE, JR.
ROGER E. FARRIS
MATTHEW H. FATH
EDWARD F. FEARS
KYLE E. FEGER
KURT P. FELPEL
ENRICCO C. FINLEY
DARREN P. FITZGERALD
TIMOTHY J. FLETCHER
DARREN M. FLOWERS
ROBERT D. FOSTER, JR.
TODD M. FOX
TIMOTHY R. FRAMBES
CHARLES D. FREEMAN
BRIAN P. FREIDHOFF
ROBERT G. FREYLAND
TOD A. FRIANT
JAMES A. FRICK
ANTHONY E. FRITCHLE
STUART D. FURNER
ANDREW C. GAINEY
MADALYN S. GAINEY
JARED J. GALAZIN
JOSE F. GARCIA
LISA A. GARCIA
PAUL N. GARCIA
NICOLE J. GARDNER
GREG W. GAUNTLETT
PATRICK L. GAYDON
ANDY J. GENASCI
CRAIG W. GENDREAU
DARRYL L. GEROW, SR.
KIRK E. GIBBS
JAYSON C. GILBERTI
JOSEPH B. GILION
MICHAEL M. GILL
JEFFREY S. GLOEDE
PAUL L. GOETHALS
DAVID J. GOETZE
ROBERT J. GONDOLFO
GORDON M. GORE
JOHN R. GOSSART
JOEL C. GRANTHAM, JR.
GARY R. GRAVES
DARRELL L. GREEN
SCOTT A. GREEN
TIMOTHY M. GREENHAW
ROBERT W. GRIEGO
RHETT B. GRINER
DANIEL GUADALUPE
EUGENIA K. GUILMARTIN
THOMAS B. GUKEISEN
NATHANIEL D. GUSTIN
ROBERT A. GUTIERREZ
[[Page 14806]]
DOUGLAS B. GUTTORMSEN
YI S. GWON
RAYMOND E. HACKLER
JUSTIN D. HADLEY
DAVID W. HAINES
DAVID W. HAINES
SAMUEL E. HALES
PHILIP J. HALLIBURTON
THOMAS B. HAM
VICTOR S. HAMILTON
THOMAS D. HANSBARGER
WILLIAM M. HARDY, JR.
GREGORY S. HARKINS
FRANK W. HARRAR
ANTHONY N. HARRIS
JAMES R. HARRIS, JR.
MICHAEL D. HASTINGS
STUART A. HATFIELD
JOHN R. HAUBERT IV
THOMAS M. HAWES
JAMES E. HAYES III
KEITH C. HAYES
SHAWN Y. HAYESDAVIS
CYNTHIA A. HAZEL
SCOTT F. HEADEN
DENNIS S. HEANEY
TOWNLEY R. HEDRICK
JOSEPH E. HEFFERNAN
ERIC D. HENDERSON
MICHAEL D. HENDERSON
THOMAS C. HENSLEY
WILLIAM E. HERBERT IV
JOSEPH J. HERRMANN
VERNON W. HERTEL
JIMMY J. HESTER
EARL B. HIGGINS, JR.
RONALD B. HILDNER
TIMOTHY C. HILGNER
JARED D. HILL
DAWN L. HILTON
JOHN D. HIXSON
SCOT R. HODGDON
DOUGLAS C. HOENIG
MARC F. HOFFMEISTER
MARK A. HOLLER
DARYL O. HOOD
HAROLD D. HOOKS, JR.
JOHN M. HOPPMANN
ARTURO J. HORTON
PATRICK V. HOWELL
JAMES E. HUBER
WILLIAM H. HUFF IV
HOWARD T. HUNT
MICHAEL J. INDOVINA
JOSEPH T. IRWIN, JR.
JAMES E. JACKSON
PETER D. JACKSON
GREGORY K. JACOBSEN
MICHAEL E. JAMES
MARK D. JERNIGAN
WILLIAM B. JOHNSON
KEVIN L. JOHNSTON
HERBERT A. JOLIAT
BENJAMIN S. JONES
DAVID E. JONES
GUY M. JONES
KENNETH E. JONES
PAUL A. JONES
JAMES J. JORDANO
STEPHANIE A. JUNG
ROBERT P. KADERAVEK
MATTHEW E. KALESKAS
YVETTE M. KANNEY
JOHN W. KARAGOSIAN
MICHAEL T. KATONA
MICHAEL B. KELLEY
RICHARD R. KELLING
CARL D. KELLY, JR.
JASON E. KELLY
BRETT E. KESSLER
CHRISTOPHER J. KIDD
ROBERT F. KIERMAYR
ANDREW B. KIGER
MICHAEL K. KING
HERMAN F. KIRSCH
SEAN G. KIRSCHNER
DARREN J. KLEMENS
KEVIN M. KLOPCIC
STEPHEN G. KNEELAND
NIAVE F. KNELL
JOHN A. KNIGHT
JOHN H. KNIGHTSTEP
TIMOTHY J. KNOWLES
ANDREW W. KOLOSKI
DAVID R. KRAMER
ROBERT S. KRENZEL, JR.
CHARLES L. KURZ
KERIEM X. KVALEVOG
MICHAEL J. LACKMAN
ALBERT A. LAHOOD, JR.
ALLAN H. LANCETA
JAMES D. LANDER
ADAM W. LANGE
GLENN E. LAPOINT
JONATHAN C. LARSEN
MICHAEL M. LARSEN
MICHAEL J. LAWRENCE
DAVID J. LEACH
KEVIN C. LEAHY
THEODORE M. LEBLOW
SEAN M. LEEMAN
HERBERT E. LEPLATT
TIMOTHY P. LEROUX
DAVID R. LEWIS
JACKIELYN LEWIS
THOMAS E. LEWIS, JR.
OTTO K. LILLER
JOHN A. LOBASH, JR.
JOSEPH G. LOCK
DAVID T. LONDON
ARTHUR J. LONTOC
JOE A. LOPEZ
PETER B. LUGAR
BRIAN J. LUNDAY
MATTHEW J. MACHON
WESLEY F. MACMULLEN
THAMAR A. MAIN
ROBERT MANNING III
CRAIG J. MANVILLE
CARL W. MAROTTO
TIMOTHY J. MARSHALL
JOSEPH J. MARTIN
MARK T. MARTINEZ
SILAS G. MARTINEZ
JEFFREY D. MARTUSCELLI
CHARLES J. MASARACCHIA
MICHAEL L. MATHEWS
JAMES A. MAXWELL
PAUL E. MAXWELL
JOSEPH MCCALLION, JR.
MICHAEL P. MCELRATH
JIMMY R. MCFALL
MICHAEL J. MCGUIRE
MATTHEW M. MCHALE
KEVIN R. MCKAY
MATTHEW R. MCKINLEY
AGUSTIN MCLAMBQUINONES
LESTER A. MCLAUGHLIN, JR.
WILLIAM R. MCMILLAN
STEPHEN M. MCMILLION
LONNIE J. MCNAIR, JR.
GLENN M. MCRILL
CLINTON S. MCWHORTER
MICHAEL J. MELITO
JUAN MENDOZA, JR.
JEFFREY A. MERENKOV
GARRET K. MESSNER
JODY C. MILLER
RUSSELL S. MILLER
SHANNON T. MILLER
STEPHEN A. MILLER
STEVEN M. MILLIKEN
JON R. MILNER
ANDREW L. MILTNER
RONALD J. MINTY, JR.
JAMES M. MISHINA
JOHN P. MITCHELL
KOREY O. MITCHELL
BRADLEY F. MOCK
JEFFREY J. MONTE
JON P. MOORE
LANCE D. MOORE
MATTHEW P. MOORE
MATTHEW R. MOORE
MAXIMO A. MOORE
CATHERINE L. MORELLEOLIVEIRA
CHRISTOPHER S. MORETTI
ANDREW MORGADO
SEAN M. MORGAN
JASON R. MORRIS
SHANON J. MOSAKOWSKI
DEWEY A. MOSLEY
RICHARD L. MULLINS
WILLIAM C. NAGEL
VINCENT D. NAVARRE
DAVID R. NEHRING, JR.
ROBERT J. NEITZEL
BRUCE W. NELSON
JACK H. NELSON
STEVEN W. NETTLETON
MARK A. NEWBY
BRANDON D. NEWTON
DEMETRIOS J. NICHOLSON
HEATH J. NIEMI
ROLLAND C. NILES
ARNOLD J. NOONAN
JARED H. NORRELL
JEREMIE J. OATES
ROBERT A. OBRIEN IV
THOMAS W. OCONNOR, JR.
TROY G. ODONNELL
MICHAEL T. OESCHGER
CRYSTAL M. OLIVER
STANNUS P. ORR
ANDREW A. OSBORN
LANCE D. OSKEY
STEVEN E. OSTERHOLZER
DAVID L. PAINTER
DAVID L. PARKER
DARREN N. PARSONS
MICHAEL J. PATE
FLINT M. PATTERSON
THOMAS D. PATTON, JR.
BRIAN A. PAYNE
NATALIE M. PEARSON
ISAAC J. PELTIER
JOSEPH PEPPER, JR.
CARLOS M. PEREZ
CELESTINO PEREZ, JR.
MARIO L. PEREZ
JEFFREY C. PERRY
JO D. PHILLIPS
ROBERT G. PICHT, JR.
TODD A. PLOTNER
JOHN A. POLHAMUS
STEPHEN D. POMPER
JOSHUA J. POTTER
ANDREW T. POZNICK
TIMOTHY L. PRATER
CURTIS W. PRICE
KEITH T. PRITCHARD
KEITH C. PRITCHETT
ROLAND V. QUIDACHAY
JOHN L. RAFFERTY, JR.
ROBERT L. RAGLAND
TROY J. RAMIREZ
DAVID L. RAUGH
BRIAN D. RAY
DAVID G. RAY
MARK R. READ
THEODORE R. READ
DAVID M. REARDON, JR.
SHERRI K. REED
RICHARD P. REESE III
NEIL A. REILLY, JR.
CHAD A. REIMAN
JOHN C. ROADCAP
BRANDON S. ROBBINS
CHRISTOPHER K. ROBBINS
ELIZABETH L. ROBBINS
DANIEL M. ROBERTS
LORI L. ROBINSON
RICHARD E. ROBINSON III
JASON P. ROCK
ROBERT M. RODRIGUEZ
THOMAS J. ROE
RICHARD R. ROLLER
ELBERT G. ROSS
SAMANTHA B. ROSS
DANIEL N. ROUSE
JAMES D. ROUSE
JOSHUA M. RUDD
THOMAS E. RUDE
PHILIP J. RYAN
ROBERT W. RYAN
SEAN P. RYAN
WILLIAM A. RYAN III
WILLIAM S. SACHSE, JR.
FRANKLIN R. SAFFEN
SAMUEL J. SAINE
JUAN M. SALDIVAR, JR.
JAMES R. SALOME
DAVID L. SANDERS III
KENNETH J. SANDERSON
HENRY SANTIAGOGONZALEZ
CHRISTOPHER N. SANTOS
KENNETH W. SCHEIDT
ROBERT L. SCHILLER, JR.
RANDY D. SCHLIEP
CHRISTOPHER F. SCHMITT
KARL K. SCHNEIDER
ERIC D. SCHOUREK
JEROME P. SCHULZ
GERALD R. SCOTT
DONALD A. SCULLI
CLAY A. SEABOLT
PHILIP M. SECRIST III
DAVID A. SEGULIN
JAMES L. SHARP II
BRYAN L. SHARTZER
DAVID M. SHELLY
LAWRENCE L. SHEPHERD
KENNETH J. SHEPPARD
PETER A. SICOLI
JEREMY T. SIEGRIST
JEREMY L. SIMMONS
THOMAS N. SIMONS, JR.
MARK A. SIMPSON
TERRY L. SIMPSON
HARVINDER SINGH
MARK A. SISCO
BRIAN D. SLACK
NOEL C. SMART
ELIZABETH R. SMITH
FELTON E. SMITH, JR.
GREGORY M. SMITH
KELLY H. SMITH
RAYMOND P. SMITH
TIMOTHY C. SMITH
IRIS M. SOBCHAK
STEVEN J. SOIKA
SYDNEY R. SONS, JR.
GROVER R. SOUTHERLAND
GERALD J. STALDER
THOMAS A. STAMP, JR.
FRANK J. STANCO, JR.
MICHAEL L. STANDISH
MICHAEL D. STEEN
DARRYL D. STEPHENS
KENNETH T. STEPHENS
JOEL R. STEPHENSON
LARRY D. STEPHNEY
JOSHUA T. STEVENS
GEOFFREY T. STEWART
WILLIAM D. STEWART
JOHN J. STRANGE, JR.
LANCE D. STRATTON
CHRISTIAN A. SULIT
CHAD R. SUNDEM
BRETT G. SYLVIA
JOHN F. TAFT
MUFUTAU A. TAIWO
CURTIS D. TAYLOR
SCOTT L. TAYLOR
STEWART S. TAYLOR
RANDALL L. THRASH
[[Page 14807]]
JOHN L. THROCKMORTON III
PAMELA S. TING
KEVIN S. TITUS
MATTHEW A. TOLLE
MICHAEL S. TRACY
BART R. TRAGEMANN
BRIAN TRIBUS
MICHAEL N. TROTTER
COLIN P. TULEY
DENNIS M. TURNER
JERRY A. TURNER
BRIAN TUSON
PATRICK T. TVRDIK
DIRK W. TYSON
ELBERT D. VALENTINE
PRAXITELIS N. VAMVAKIAS
JACK E. VANTRESS
CHARLES M. VELESARIS
GUILLERMO A. VENTURA
ERIC L. VICKERY
SON P. VO
DOUGLAS J. WADDINGHAM
ALAN R. WAGNER
DAVID S. WALKER
ERIC L. WALKER
ERIK J. WALKER
NATHANIEL F. WALLACE
CHRISTOPHER S. WALTON
FRANK J. WALTON
BRAD W. WAMBEKE
FORTE D. WARD
JAMES E. WARD
STEVEN A. WARMAN
PAUL A. WARMUSKERKEN
ADOLPHUS WEEMS III
ERIC J. WEIS
JOHN B. WEISNER
RANDALL E. WHEELER
MATTHEW R. WHITEHEAD
DAVID R. WILDER
ALFRED G. WILLIAMS
GREGORY A. WILLIAMS
JASON D. WILLIAMS
BOB E. WILLIS, JR.
ROBERT L. WILSON
SEAN E. WILSON
TARPON S. WISEMAN
THOMAS E. WOODIE
PATRICK T. WRIGHT
ROBERT A. WRIGHT IV
CHRISTOPHER V. WYNDER
JOSEPH L. WYSZYNSKI
BRIAN K. YEE
VINCENT M. YZNAGA
ANDREW M. ZACHERL
PETER D. ZIKE
THOMAS D. ZIVKOVIC
____________________
WITHDRAWAL
Executive Message transmitted by the President to the Senate on July
14, 2008 withdrawing from further Senate consideration the following
nomination:
AIR FORCE NOMINATION OF LT. GEN. WILLIAM M. FRASER III, TO
BE GENERAL, WHICH WAS SENT TO THE SENATE ON APRIL 23, 2008.
[[Page 14808]]
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES--Monday, July 14, 2008
The House met at 12:30 p.m. and was called to order by the Speaker
pro tempore (Mr. Jackson of Illinois).
____________________
DESIGNATION OF SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE
The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following
communication from the Speaker:
Washington, DC,
July 14, 2008.
I hereby appoint the Honorable Jesse L. Jackson, Jr., to
act as Speaker pro tempore on this day.
Nancy Pelosi,
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
____________________
MORNING-HOUR DEBATE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of
January 4, 2007, the Chair will now recognize Members from lists
submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning-hour debate.
____________________
RECESS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 12(a) of rule I, the
Chair declares the House in recess until 2 p.m. today.
Accordingly (at 12 o'clock and 31 minutes p.m.), the House stood in
recess until 2 p.m.
____________________
{time} 1400
AFTER RECESS
The recess having expired, the House was called to order by the
Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Jackson of Illinois) at 2 p.m.
____________________
PRAYER
The Chaplain, the Reverend Daniel P. Coughlin, offered the following
prayer:
On this Monday in July, Lord, Congress seeks Your blessing as it
gathers to take up its work of policy and legislation for the United
States of America.
The problems facing the Nation, the concerns of its citizens, as well
as life itself, will not be settled with simplistic solutions. Since
the light of truth is sought in every corner of economic darkness, and
energy is needed to sustain every aspect of contemporary life, we stand
humbly before You admitting our limitations.
Lord, give the Members of the House of Representatives the ability to
listen intently to differing opinions and respond creatively. May their
faith in You be strong enough to stretch every self-interest to the
broader vision of the common good, expecting Your intervention in
ordered routine or Your radical twist to basic intent.
Thus may all seek Your wisdom to guide this government and this
Nation now and forever.
Amen.
____________________
THE JOURNAL
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair has examined the Journal of the
last day's proceedings and announces to the House his approval thereof.
Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Journal stands approved.
____________________
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Will the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe) come
forward and lead the House in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Mr. POE led the Pledge of Allegiance as follows:
I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of
America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
____________________
COMMUNICATION FROM THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE
The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following
communication from the Clerk of the House of Representatives:
Office of the Clerk,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC, July 14, 2008.
Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
The Speaker, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Madam Speaker: Pursuant to the permission granted in
Clause 2(h) of Rule II of the Rules of the U.S. House of
Representatives, the Clerk received the following message
from the Secretary of the Senate on July 14, 2008, at 12:42
p.m.:
That the Senate passed without amendment H.R. 4289.
That the Senate passed S. 1046.
That the Senate passed with an amendment H. Con. Res. 236.
With best wishes, I am
Sincerely,
Lorraine C. Miller,
Clerk of the House.
(By Deborah M. Spriggs, Deputy Clerk).
____________________
CONGRATULATIONS TO DR. HARRIS PASTIDES
(Mr. WILSON of South Carolina asked and was given permission to
address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, on Friday, the Board of
Trustees of the University of South Carolina unanimously selected Dr.
Harris Pastides as the 28th president of the university since 1801.
Prior to his being selected as president of USC, Dr. Pastides had been
Vice President for Research and Health Sciences. His appointment
completes a long and thorough selection process chaired by Trustee
Miles Loadholt of Barnwell, and I commend the university on their
extraordinary work in choosing a strong and capable individual to lead
the university.
As an alumnus of USC law school, I cherish the relationship the
university continues to form with the South Carolina community, and its
national leadership in areas of research and discovery; most notably,
the university's research in biomedical technology, as well as fuel
cell and hydrogen technology. I welcome Dr. Pastides' and his wife
Patricia's dedication to these goals.
I wish to thank Dr. Andrew Sorensen and his wife, Donna, for their
remarkable leadership of the university for the past 6 years.
In conclusion, God bless our troops, and we will never forget
September the 11th.
____________________
POST OFFICE CONGRESS
(Mr. POE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1
minute.)
Mr. POE. Mr. Speaker, almost every morning I talk to my parents who
are both in their 80s and are very inquisitive about what goes on in
Congress.
Today, like most Mondays, I tell them we are working on postal
legislation. I don't really go further and tell them the legislation
actually is just naming post office buildings throughout the vast
plains and prairies of America. After all, we have named 72 Federal
buildings in Congress.
According to the Wall Street Journal, almost 30 percent of our
legislation passed this Congress has been naming Federal buildings.
Today I see we will be naming two more post offices.
Today Mom said she can't even afford gas to get to the post office.
Mr. Speaker, maybe this ``Drill Nothing Congress'' should find more
energy for Americans. Open up the Outer Continental Shelf to crude oil.
Congress
[[Page 14809]]
needs to get to work and solve the gasoline issue. We can name post
office buildings at some other time.
There has been enough talk about energy. Now action is demanded.
However, it seems when all is said and done, more is said than done
about the energy problem. Maybe we should rename our Congress the Post
Office Congress.
And that's just the way it is.
____________________
ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the Chair
will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules
on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered, or on which
the vote is objected to under clause 6 of rule XX.
Record votes on postponed questions will be taken after 6:30 p.m.
today.
____________________
NATIONAL SEA GRANT COLLEGE PROGRAM AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2008
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 5618) to reauthorize and amend the National Sea Grant
College Program Act, and for other purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 5618
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``National Sea Grant College
Program Amendments Act of 2008''.
SEC. 2. REFERENCES.
Except as otherwise expressly provided therein, whenever in
this Act an amendment or repeal is expressed in terms of an
amendment to, or repeal of, a section or other provision, the
reference shall be considered to be made to a section or
other provision of the National Sea Grant College Program Act
(33 U.S.C. 1121 et seq.).
SEC. 3. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.
(a) Findings.--Section 202(a) (33 U.S.C. 1121(a)) is
amended--
(1) by amending paragraph (1)(D) to read as follows:
``(D) encourage the development of preparation, forecast,
analysis, mitigation, response, and recovery systems for
coastal hazards;'';
(2) in paragraph (2) by striking ``program of research,
education,'' and inserting ``program of integrated research,
education, extension,''; and
(3) by striking paragraph (6) and inserting the following:
``(6) The National Ocean Research Priorities Plan and
Implementation Strategy issued by the National Science and
Technology Council's Joint Subcommittee on Ocean Science and
Technology on January 26, 2007, identifies research
priorities for compelling areas of interaction between
society and the ocean, and calls for the engagement of a
broad array of ocean science sectors (government, academia,
industry, and non-government entities) to address the areas
of greatest research need and opportunity.
``(7) The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
through the national sea grant college program, offers the
most suitable locus and means for such commitment and
engagement through the promotion of activities that will
result in greater such understanding, assessment,
development, utilization, and conservation. The most cost-
effective way to promote such activities is through continued
and increased Federal support of the establishment,
development, and operation of programs and projects by sea
grant colleges, sea grant institutes, and other institutions,
including strong collaborations between Administration
scientists and research and outreach personnel at academic
institutions.''.
(b) Purpose.--Section 202(c) (33 U.S.C. 1121(c)) is amended
by striking ``to promote research, education, training, and
advisory service activities'' and inserting ``to promote
integrated research, education, training, and extension
activities''.
SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.
(a) Amendments.--Section 203 (33 U.S.C. 1122) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (11) by striking ``advisory services'' and
inserting ``extension services'';
(2) in each of paragraphs (12) and (13) by striking ``(33
U.S.C. 1126)''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(17) The term `regional research and information plan'
means a plan developed by one or more sea grant colleges or
sea grant institutes that identifies regional priorities to
implement the National Ocean Research Priorities Plan and
Implementation Strategy.
``(18) The term `National Ocean Research Priorities Plan
and Implementation Strategy' means such plan and strategy
issued by the National Science and Technology Council's Joint
Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology on January 26,
2007.''.
(b) Repeal.--Section 307 of the Act entitled ``An Act to
provide for the designation of the Flower Garden Banks
National Marine Sanctuary'' (Public Law 102-251; 106 Stat.
66) is repealed.
SEC. 5. NATIONAL SEA GRANT COLLEGE PROGRAM, GENERALLY.
(a) Program Elements.--Section 204(b) (33 U.S.C. 1123(b))
is amended--
(1) by amending in paragraph (1) to read as follows:
``(1) sea grant programs that comprise a national sea grant
college program network, including international projects
conducted within such programs and regional and national
projects conducted among such programs;'';
(2) by amending paragraph (2) to read as follows:
``(2) administration of the national sea grant college
program and this title by the national sea grant office and
the Administration;''; and
(3) by amending paragraph (4) to read as follows:
``(4) any regional or national strategic investments in
fields relating to ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes resources
developed in consultation with the board and with the
approval of the sea grant colleges and the sea grant
institutes.''.
(b) Technical Correction.--Section 204(c)(2) (33 U.S.C.
1123(c)(2)) is amended by striking ``Within 6 months of the
date of enactment of the National Sea Grant College Program
Reauthorization Act of 1998, the'' and inserting ``The''.
(c) Functions of Director of National Sea Grant College
Program.--Section 204(d) (33 U.S.C. 1123(d)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2)(A), by striking ``long-range'';
(2) in paragraph (3)(A)--
(A) by striking ``(A)(i) evaluate'' and inserting ``(A)
evaluate and assess'';
(B) by striking ``activities; and'' and inserting
``activities;''; and
(C) by striking clause (ii); and
(3) in paragraph (3)(B)--
(A) by redesignating clauses (ii) through (iv) as clauses
(iv) through (vi), respectively, and by inserting after
clause (i) the following:
``(ii) encourage collaborations among sea grant colleges
and sea grant institutes to address regional and national
priorities established under subsection (c)(1);
``(iii) encourage cooperation with Minority Serving
Institutions--
``(I) to enhance collaborative research opportunities for
faculty and students in the areas of atmospheric, oceanic,
and environmental sciences, and remote sensing;
``(II) to improve opportunities for, and retention of,
students and faculty from Minority Serving Institutions in
the NOAA related sciences; and
``(III) to increase the number of such students graduating
in NOAA science areas;''; and
(B) in clause (iv) (as so redesignated) by striking
``encourage'' and inserting ``ensuring''.
SEC. 6. PROGRAM OR PROJECT GRANTS AND CONTRACTS.
(a) Exemption From Limitation on Cost Share.--Section
205(a) (33 U.S.C. 1124(a)) is amended in the matter following
paragraph (2), by inserting ``or that are appropriated under
section 208(b)'' before the period at the end.
(b) Special Grants; Maximum Amount.--Section 205(b) (33
U.S.C. 1124(b)) is amended by striking the matter following
paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
``The total amount that may be provided for grants under this
subsection during any fiscal year shall not exceed an amount
equal to 5 percent of the total funds appropriated for such
year under section 212.''.
SEC. 7. EXTENSION SERVICES BY SEA GRANT COLLEGES AND SEA
GRANT INSTITUTES.
Section 207(a) (33 U.S.C. 1126(a)) is amended in each of
paragraphs (2)(B) and (3)(B) by striking ``advisory
services'' and inserting ``extension services''.
SEC. 8. FELLOWSHIPS.
(a) Restriction on Use of Funds Available for
Fellowships.--Section 208 (33 U.S.C. 1127) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(c) Restriction on Use of Funds.--Amounts available for
fellowships under this section, including amounts accepted
under section 204(c)(4)(F) or appropriated under section 212
to implement this section, shall be used only for award of
such fellowships and administrative costs of implementing
this section.''.
(b) Technical Correction.--Section 208(a) (33 U.S.C.
1127(a)) is amended by striking ``Not later than 1 year after
the date of the enactment of the National Sea Grant College
Program Act Amendments of 2002, and every 2 years
thereafter,'' and inserting ``Every 2 years,''.
SEC. 9. NATIONAL SEA GRANT ADVISORY BOARD.
(a) Redesignation of Sea Grant Review Panel as Board.--
[[Page 14810]]
(1) Redesignation.--The sea grant review panel established
by section 209 of the National Sea Grant College Program Act
(33 U.S.C. 1128), as in effect before the date of the
enactment of this Act, is redesignated as the National Sea
Grant Advisory Board.
(2) Membership not affected.--An individual serving as a
member of the sea grant review panel immediately before the
enactment of this Act may continue to serve as a member of
the National Sea Grant Advisory Board until the expiration of
such member's term under section 209(c) of such Act (33
U.S.C. 1128(c).
(3) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation,
document, paper, or other record of the United States to such
sea grant review panel is deemed to be a reference to the
National Sea Grant Advisory Board.
(4) Conforming amendments.--
(A) In general.--Section 209 (33 U.S.C. 1128) is amended by
striking so much as precedes subsection (b) and inserting the
following:
``SEC. 209. NATIONAL SEA GRANT ADVISORY BOARD.
``(a) Establishment.--There shall be an independent
committee to be known as the National Sea Grant Advisory
Board.''.
(B) Definition.--Section 203(9) (33 U.S.C. 1122(9)) is
amended to read as follows:
``(9) The term `Board' means the National Sea Grant
Advisory Board established under section 209.'';
(C) Other provisions.--The following provisions are each
amended by striking ``panel'' each place it appears and
inserting ``Board'':
(i) Section 204 (33 U.S.C. 1123).
(ii) Section 207 (33 U.S.C. 1126).
(iii) Section 209 (33 U.S.C. 1128).
(b) Duties.--Section 209(b) (33 U.S.C. 1128(b)) is amended
to read as follows:
``(b) Duties.--
``(1) In general.--The Board shall advise the Secretary and
the Director concerning--
``(A) strategies for utilizing the sea grant college
program to address the Nation's highest priorities regarding
the understanding, assessment, development, utilization, and
conservation of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes resources;
``(B) the designation of sea grant colleges and sea grant
institutes; and
``(C) such other matters as the Secretary refers to the
Board for review and advice.
``(2) Biennial report.--The Board shall report to the
Congress every two years on the state of the national sea
grant college program. The Board shall indicate in each such
report the progress made toward meeting the priorities
identified in the strategic plan in effect under section
204(c). The Secretary shall make available to the Board such
information, personnel, and administrative services and
assistance as it may reasonably require to carry out its
duties under this title.''.
(c) Extension of Term.--Section 209(c)(2) (33 U.S.C.
1128(c)(2)) is amended by striking the second sentence and
inserting the following: ``The Director may extend the term
of office of a voting member of the Board once by up to 1
year.''.
(d) Establishment of Subcommittees.--Section 204(c) (33
U.S.C. 1123(c)) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(8) The Board may establish such subcommittees as are
reasonably necessary to carry out its duties under subsection
(b). Such subcommittees may include individuals who are not
Board members.''.
SEC. 10. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) Authorization.--Section 212(a) (33 U.S.C. 1131(a)) is
amended to read as follows:
``(a) Authorization.--There are authorized to be
appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this title--
``(1) $66,000,000 for fiscal year 2009;
``(2) $72,800,000 for fiscal year 2010;
``(3) $79,600,000 for fiscal year 2011;
``(4) $86,400,000 for fiscal year 2012;
``(5) $93,200,000 for fiscal year 2013; and
``(6) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2014.''.
(b) Repeal of Distribution Requirement.--Section 212 (33
U.S.C. 1131) is amended by striking subsection (c), and by
redesignating subsections (d) and (e) as subsections (c) and
(d), respectively.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from
Guam (Ms. Bordallo) and the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Guam.
General Leave
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and
include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from Guam?
There was no objection.
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5618, the National Sea Grant College
Program Amendments Act of 2008, is legislation that I introduced this
past March. The bill reauthorizes the National Sea Grant College
Program Act to improve marine resource conservation, management and
utilization.
Sea Grant Colleges sponsor a wide range of applied and basic marine
science research, education, training and technical assistance programs
promoting the understanding, the assessment, the development, the
utilization and the conservation of ocean, coastal and Great Lakes
resources. The reauthorization bill affords the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration the ability and the flexibility to
strengthen the current network of Sea Grant Colleges and their
collaborating institutions through fiscal year 2014. It does so based
on the sensible recommendation of the Sea Grant Association, the Sea
Grant Review Panel, the National Sea Grant Program Office, and other
stakeholders.
By reauthorizing this program, the opportunity for enlisting more
partnering institutions and increasing the overall number of designated
Sea Grant Colleges remains. Capacity building for eventual Sea Grant
College designation is ongoing at several institutions. And I note that
in reauthorizing the program, H.R. 5618 keeps intact in current law the
authority for NOAA to provide administrative, technical and financial
assistance to institutions preparing and aiming for eventual Sea Grant
College designation. The current eligibility criteria have ensured
ultimate success with the entire program.
The University of Guam, in my district, Mr. Speaker, continues to
plan for eventual designation. I support NOAA's efforts to assist with
capacity building at the University of Guam and at other institutions
in the Western Pacific region and across the United States that are
working to develop the expertise and resources necessary to be
designated a Sea Grant Institution.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, I note that in reauthorizing the overall
program, we also renewed the authority for the continuation of the
highly successful Dean John A. Knauss Marine Policy Fellowship program.
Several of us here serving in Congress have had the extraordinary
opportunity to host a legislative Sea Grant Fellow in our office. The
skill and the competency of the Sea Grant fellows are a testament to
the strength and the depth of the Sea Grant College program. The
contributions of Sea Grant fellows in both the executive and the
legislative branches have helped ensure policy is both crafted and
implemented with an invaluable science perspective.
In reauthorizing the National Sea Grant College Program, Congress
reaffirms its national value to protecting our human and our
environmental health to the design and the utilization of sustainable
development practices, and to the overall advancement of important
research and extensive activities in the Marine Sciences.
With our support, the network of Sea Grant Colleges is positioned to
continue collaborative ground-breaking research and engagement in the
Marine Sciences with stakeholders in communities all across the United
States.
Mr. Speaker, I therefore ask Members on both sides to support passage
of this noncontroversial bill.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, the majority, capably led
by Congresswoman Madeleine Bordallo of the Republic of Guam, has
superbly explained the bill. The National Sea Grant College Program has
been an important component in addressing local and regional research
for needs for ocean and Great Lakes issues. The program, such as the
one at Buford, South Carolina, has been extremely effective in
disseminating science-based information to citizens through education
and outreach programs.
H.R. 5618 reauthorizes this important marine science program, and I
support its passage with particular appreciation for the Buford
Laboratory.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers on this
particular piece of legislation. I want to thank my colleague, Mr.
Wilson of South Carolina, for his supportive remarks.
Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R.
5618, amending the National Sea Grant College Program Act and
reauthorizing the program that is scheduled to expire fiscal year 2008.
[[Page 14811]]
First and foremost, I want to commend Congresswoman Bordallo of Guam,
Chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, and Oceans of
the Committee on Natural Resources, for taking the initiative to
introduce this important legislation. This bill is an example of the
efforts by the Congress to support our many Sea Grant College programs
in improving marine resource conservation and management.
H.R. 5618 implements changes in the Sea Grant Program, which is
administered by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
NOAA, that were recommended by the National Research Council in their
2006 report that has strong support from the various agencies and the
Sea Grant Association. Such recommendations include increasing the
interaction between the National Sea Grant and the individual state
programs. It will improve programmatic performance reviews that will
strengthen oversight and accountability but at the same time will
ensure that Sea Grant programs are consistent and supportive of the
national objectives. Importantly, the increase in funding levels will
greatly assist in the needs of our coastal and Great Lake communities
and will improve program activities and research that have been at a
standstill because of flat-funding for the past few years.
Like our national land grant programs, the National Sea Grant College
Program is a powerful resource in maintaining America's status in the
world for research and development of our marine sciences. It is a
program that we must continue to strengthen and support.
Mr. Speaker, this legislation will authorize funding for the National
Sea Grant Program until FY 2014. The inclusion of the many
recommendations by the NRC in the language of the bill and the strong
support of the Federal agencies and the Sea Grant Association reinforce
the necessity to pass this legislation immediately. Given that almost
54 percent of our population lives on the coast, the U.S. has continued
to provide so little for marine policy research. Through H.R. 5618, I
am hopeful that we are able to increase this necessary funding to
monitor the drastic changes that are greatly affecting our coastlines.
I am grateful for the work that Sea Grant has been able to provide
through research and projects to my Congressional district. Through the
University of Hawaii, Sea Grant has a strong presence at the American
Samoa Community College and has continued to educate students of the
necessity in protecting our reefs and marine environments. They have
also continued to provide the tools for marine research that is
urgently needed by the U.S. territories.
For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to pass H.R. 5618. Again, I
thank my colleagues for their support of this legislation.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5618 the National
Sea Grant College Program Amendments Act of 2008 authored by my friend
and chairwoman of the Natural Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries,
Wildlife and Oceans, Representative Madeleine Bordallo.
The National Sea Grant College Program has, since 1966, provided
research grants, traineeships and fellowships which help graduate
students and researchers study areas of the ocean which have strong
effects on people. This is mostly done through the State Sea Grant
programs which operate in most coastal States in conjunction with major
universities. The Sea Grant programs provide valuable research and
education into the economics, public health, and environmental impacts
where people connect with the oceans. I have trouble thinking of a
better return to the public on our research investments.
The National Sea Grant program operates the Dean John A. Knauss
National Marine Policy Fellowship which provides graduate students in
ocean science and environmental studies the opportunity to bring their
expertise as a fellow in a Congressional office or in a Federal agency
office to gain experience and impact ocean policy. In my tenure in
Congress, I have had 11 Sea Grant Fellows in my office. They have
provided invaluable knowledge and passion for the oceans that have
improved my understanding and helped to bolster my fight for the
oceans.
In California, we are lucky to have two Sea Grant Programs: the
California Sea Grant program operated through the world class
University of California system and the Southern California Sea Grant
program operated through the University of Southern California. These
programs are on the ground in California connecting the research and
policy community, providing research grants, and educating the public,
scientists, and policy makers on the importance of human interactions
with the ocean.
Mr. Speaker, the National Sea Grant programs have done a lot with a
little money and I am confident that they will continue this tradition.
I cannot emphasize enough the need for this Congress to provide for
ocean stewardship now. The oceans and the Great Lakes belong to all the
people of the United States and it is our duty to understand the
implications of our actions on them. I support the National Sea Grant
College Program Amendment Act and I urge my colleagues to join me.
Ms. BORDALLO. I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 5618, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES SYSTEM BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 1714) to clarify the boundaries of Coastal Barrier Resources
System Clam Pass Unit FL-64P.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 1714
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. REPLACEMENT OF CERTAIN COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES
SYSTEM MAPS.
(a) In General.--The map subtitled ``FL-64P'', relating to
the Coastal Barrier Resources System unit designated as
Coastal Barrier Resources System Clam Pass Unit FL-64P, that
is included in the set of maps entitled ``Coastal Barrier
Resources System'' and referred to in section 4(a) of the
Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3503(a)), is hereby
replaced by another map relating to that unit entitled
``Coastal Barrier Resources System Clam Pass Unit, FL-64P''
and dated July 21, 2005
(b) Availability.--The Secretary of the Interior shall keep
the map referred to in subsection (a) on file and available
for inspection in accordance with section 4(b) of the Coastal
Barrier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3503(b)).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from
Guam (Ms. Bordallo) and the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Guam.
General Leave
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from Guam?
There was no objection.
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1714 is noncontroversial legislation
that would replace the Coastal Barrier Resources System map designated
as Clam Pass Unit FL-64P to correct legitimate inaccuracies. This
legislation is identical to noncontroversial legislation reported by
the Committee on Resources during the 109th Congress.
The new map, dated July 21, 2005, that would be adopted by passage of
this legislation, would remove approximately 48 acres of private land
from the otherwise protected area, or the OPA, that was established in
1990 to include the Clam Pass Conservation Area. Private land owners
indicated that these lands were never held within the conservation
area, and were erroneously included in the OPA. The U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, after completing an exhaustive investigation, agreed
that these areas, in fact, were added in error.
{time} 1415
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service fully supports this technical
correction legislation which will also add approximately 68 acres of
undeveloped land to the OPA that were previously omitted. In addition,
Mr. Speaker, the new map that would be adopted also has been certified
as accurate by all local authorities.
Again, I ask my colleagues to support passage of this
noncontroversial bill.
[[Page 14812]]
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1714, introduced by
Congressman Connie Mack of Florida, corrects an honest mapping mistake
made in the Coastal Barrier Improvement Act of 1990. Under current law,
only Congress can add or delete property from the Coastal Barrier
Resources System.
Under this bill, 48 acres of previously held land would be removed
from the system, which would allow the affected homeowners to qualify
for Federal flood insurance. We would be making this change because
this property is not contained within the designated Clam Pass
Conservation Area, these are not inholdings, and these lands were never
held for conservation or recreation purposes.
We would be providing this relief because this bill satisfies the
threshold of being a legitimate mapping mistake. The Fish and Wildlife
Service testified in support of this technical correction, and the new
implementing map would add 65 acres of conservation land to the Coastal
Barrier Resources System that was overlooked when the unit was
originally created. As a result, the net effect of H.R. 1714 is to
actually increase the size of the system by 17 acres.
I would urge an ``aye'' vote on H.R. 1714.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers on this
legislation. Again, I want to thank my colleague from South Carolina
(Mr. Wilson) for supporting this noncontroversial piece of legislation,
and I urge Members to support the bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 1714.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
FISH STOCKING IN NORTH CASCADES NATIONAL PARK SERVICE COMPLEX LAKES
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 3227) to direct the Secretary of the Interior to continue
stocking fish in certain lakes in the North Cascades National Park,
Ross Lake National Recreation Area, and Lake Chelan National Recreation
Area, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 3227
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. PURPOSE.
The purpose of this Act is to authorize the National Park
Service to allow the stocking of fish in certain lakes under
certain conditions in the North Cascades National Park, Ross
Lake National Recreation Area, and Lake Chelan National
Recreation Area.
SEC. 2. STOCKING OF CERTAIN LAKES IN NORTH CASCADES NATIONAL
PARK, ROSS LAKE NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, AND
LAKE CHELAN NATIONAL RECREATION AREA.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of the Interior, acting
through the Director of the National Park Service, may
authorize the stocking of fish in lakes in the North Cascades
National Park, Ross Lake National Recreation Area, and Lake
Chelan National Recreation Area.
(b) Conditions.--The following conditions shall apply to
stocking of lakes under subsection (a):
(1) The Secretary is authorized to allow stocking in up to,
but not to exceed, 42 lakes. The 42 lakes which may be
stocked are those lakes identified for potential stocking
under Alternative B of the 2005 North Cascades National Park
Service Complex Mountain Lakes Fishery Management Plan Draft.
(2) The Secretary shall only stock fish that are--
(A) native to the slope of the Cascade Range on which the
lake to be stocked is located; and
(B) functionally sterile.
(3) The Secretary is authorized to coordinate the stocking
of fish with the State of Washington.
(c) Reports.--The Secretary shall continue a program of
research and monitoring of the impacts of fish stocking on
park resources and shall report the results of such research
and monitoring to the appropriate committees of Congress
every 5 years.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from
Guam (Ms. Bordallo) and the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Guam.
General Leave
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and
include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from Guam?
There was no objection.
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3227 authorizes the National Park
Service to stock fish in the North Cascades National Park, the Ross
Lake National Recreation Area, and Lake Chelan National Recreation
Area. These lakes do not naturally contain fish, but fish stocking has
been conducted in these lakes periodically since the late 1800s.
The North Cascades National Park is currently working on the Mountain
Lake Fisheries Management Plan Environmental Impact Statement that
evaluates fish stocking in the park. The Draft Environmental Impact
Statement found that fish stocking could only take place in these lakes
if the National Park Service was granted the authority to do so by
Congress. During committee consideration of H.R. 3227, changes were
made to the bill to incorporate suggestions from the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement.
Mr. Speaker, we have no objections to H.R. 3227.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time
as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, Congressman Doc Hastings of Washington State and the
cosponsors of this bill should be congratulated for their efforts to
ensure continuation of a long-standing and highly successful program
that creates fishing opportunities in the North Cascades region.
For over 100 years, 91 of the 245 lakes in the North Cascades Complex
have been stocked with fish. This has created recreational
opportunities that are important to the quality of life and the region
and help sustain the local economy.
I urge support for the bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers on this
legislation. Again, I want to thank the gentleman from South Carolina
for his cooperation in managing these three bills this afternoon on the
floor.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to
support H.R. 3227, legislation to allow for the continued stocking of
fish in certain alpine lakes in the North Cascades National Park
Complex, including the North Cascades National Park, Ross Lake National
Recreation Area, and Lake Chelan National Recreation Area.
Many of these lakes have been stocked since the turn of the 20th
century, long before they became part of the National Park complex. For
decades, volunteer groups, working with the State of Washington, have
stocked trout in a number of lakes in this area under carefully
constructed management plans written by State and Park Service
biologists. In addition, congressional consideration of the creation of
the North Cascades National Park points to allowing fish stocking.
In order to protect this longstanding practice in the North Cascades,
I introduced H.R. 3227 to ensure that fish stocking can continue. While
I believe the original text of this bill provided the clearest path to
the protection and continuation of fish stocking, I am also confident
that this amended text also fully ensures the stocking of fish in these
lakes.
I would like to briefly mention two of the changes to the
legislation. First, the amended version of H.R. 3227 reduces the number
of lakes that can be studied from 91, which is the number of lakes that
have historically had fish stocking, to 42. I believe this reduction
was unnecessary but am supporting it to ensure the advancement of this
legislation. In my view, it should be left up to scientists in the Park
Service and the State of Washington to decide which lakes should be
stocked. Congress does not have the proper science to study which lakes
are best and, therefore, we should not be arbitrarily limiting the
number of lakes that can be studied.
[[Page 14813]]
The changes made in the Resources Committee also limited the type of
fish that can be used to stock the lakes. After working with the
National Park Service and the State of Washington, my original
legislation was drafted to allow fish that are either native to the
watershed or functionally sterile to be used. The version before us
today states that the fish have to be both native to the Cascade Range
and functionally sterile. The one word change from ``or'' to ``and''
puts a needless burden on those who stock the lakes. Those involved
with fish stocking want to ensure that the lakes and the surrounding
area are kept in pristine condition. In addition, the National Park
Service and the State of Washington are the only entities with the
authority to stock the lakes. Again, it is my view that these decisions
should be left up to science and the people working in the North
Cascades to decide what fish are both safe for the environment and the
best for stocking. This change will only serve to increase the cost and
the effort needed to stock the lakes of the North Cascades--but such a
compromise moves this bill forward.
Despite my disagreement on the wisdom of changes made to this
legislation, I am pleased that the House has the opportunity to pass
H.R. 3227 today. Although the version before us is far from perfect, it
does allow fish stocking to rightfully continue in the North Cascades.
Compromise is never easy, and at times it produces a diminished
product. That is the case today. However, I can support it as a result
of bipartisan negotiations and agreement. But, more importantly, I can
support it because it provides firm protections to continue fish
stocking where it was always intended to be allowed.
Finally, I would like to thank many of my Washington state colleagues
who cosponsored H.R. 3227, including Rick Larsen, Norm Dicks, and Cathy
McMorris Rodgers, Brian Baird and Adam Smith. I especially would like
to note the assistance provided by Norm Dicks, whose involvement in
this issue goes back to his time as a staff member in Congress. I urge
all my colleagues to support this legislation to make sure that my
constituents and many other residents of Washington and our surrounding
States can continue to enjoy the recreation opportunities created by
fish stocking in the North Cascades.
Ms. BORDALLO. I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 3227, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
The title was amended so as to read: ``A bill to authorize the
Secretary of the Interior to allow stocking fish in certain lakes in
the North Cascades National Park, Ross Lake National Recreation Area,
and Lake Chelan National Recreation Area.''.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
NATIONAL DAY OF THE COWBOY
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to
the resolution (H. Res. 984) expressing support for the designation of
July 26, 2008 as ``National Day of the Cowboy''.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The text of the resolution is as follows:
H. Res. 984
Whereas pioneering men and women, known as cowboys, helped
establish the American West;
Whereas the cowboy embodies honesty, integrity, courage,
compassion, respect, a strong work ethic, and patriotism;
Whereas the cowboy spirit exemplifies strength of
character, sound family values, and good common sense;
Whereas the cowboy archetype transcends ethnicity, gender,
geographic boundaries, and political affiliation;
Whereas the cowboy is an excellent steward of the land and
its creatures;
Whereas the cowboy lives off the land and works to protect
and enhance the environment;
Whereas cowboy traditions have been part of the American
culture for generations;
Whereas the cowboy continues to be an important part of the
economy, through the work of approximately 727,000 ranchers
in all 50 States, and contributes to the well-being of nearly
every county in the Nation;
Whereas annual attendance at professional and working ranch
rodeo events exceeds 27,000,000 fans, and the rodeo is the
7th most watched sport in the Nation;
Whereas membership and participation in rodeo and other
organizations that promote and encompass the livelihood of
the cowboy spans race, gender, and generations;
Whereas the cowboy is a central figure in literature, film,
and music, and occupies a central place in the public
imagination;
Whereas the cowboy is an American icon; and
Whereas the ongoing contributions made by cowboys and
cowgirls to their communities should be recognized and
encouraged: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
(1) expresses support for the designation of a ``National
Day of the Cowboy''; and
(2) encourages the people of the United States to observe
the day with appropriate ceremonies and activities.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from
Guam (Ms. Bordallo) and the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Guam.
General Leave
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their
remarks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from Guam?
There was no objection.
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I stand to join my colleagues in the consideration of H.
Res. 984 which supports the designation of July 26, 2008, as National
Day of the Cowboy.
H. Res. 984 was introduced by Representative Gabrielle Giffords of
Arizona on February 13, 2008, and since then, the bill has garnered the
support and cosponsorship of 52 Members of Congress, both men and
women, from both sides of the aisle. The measure was considered and
passed by voice vote out of the Oversight Committee on June 12, 2008.
Mr. Speaker, it is reasonable to assert that our great country
wouldn't be what it is today without the significant influences of the
cowboy. This is why each year a day is set aside for Americans to
celebrate the contributions of the cowboy and cowgirl to our Nation's
culture and heritage. With the advocacy of the National Day of the
Cowboy Organization for the past several years, the National Day of the
Cowboy has been celebrated by the public through education, the arts,
special events, rodeos, and other community activities.
This year, July 26 has been selected as the day for honoring and
preserving the rich history of the cowboy settlement in the American
West, an act that forever changed the landscape of our country.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Arizona for introducing
this thoughtful measure, and I urge all of my colleagues to join me in
celebrating the American cowboys and cowgirls by agreeing to pass H.
Res. 984.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time
as I may consume.
I rise today in support of the resolution designating July 26, 2008,
as the National Day of the Cowboy.
For the last 3 years on the last Saturday of July, people across
America gathered to honor one of the greatest icons of our Nation, the
American cowboy. National Day of the Cowboy first emerged in July of
2005 in large part to the efforts of the late United States Senator
Craig Thomas of Wyoming.
Cowboys are the original heroes of American culture. From the
earliest western settlers to present-day ranchers and cattlemen, their
tireless courage, integrity, and adventurous spirit has made them a
symbol of values that built this great Nation.
Their trade nourishes our bodies as well as our souls. The values
inspire each of us. From Maine to California, from twisted urban
streets to the vast, open plains, Americans envy and respect those who
each day, ride off into the sunset.
I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this resolution and
leave you with the words of poet laureate Ron Wilson--
We give thanks for all that cowboys and cowgirls do,
To keep the Cowboy way alive and true.
[[Page 14814]]
So we honor this legacy for the value it will employ,
As we celebrate the National Day of the American Cowboy.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I thank my
colleague from South Carolina for supporting this resolution.
Ms. GIFFORDS. Mr. Speaker, I am proud that today the House is
considering H. Res. 984, a resolution I sponsored that officially
designates July 26, 2008, as the ``National Day of the Cowboy.''
Located in beautiful Willcox, Arizona, the National Day of the Cowboy
organization works to increase national support for the proclaimed
``Cowboy Day,'' and to publicize news and information about the
resolution and campaign, so that active participation in celebration of
the National Day of the Cowboy continues to grow each year.
Many thanks to Bethany Braley, executive director and publisher of
the National Day of the Cowboy organization, for her tireless vision to
remind future generations of the cowboys' contribution to America's
rich western heritage.
While the U.S. Senate has recognized the National Day of the Cowboy
in 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008, H. Res. 984 represents the first time
that the U.S. House of Representatives has officially recognized the
contribution of the cowboy and cowgirl to America's culture and
heritage. I am pleased to be a part of the 4th Annual National Day of
the Cowboy designation. On June 20, 2008, the National Day of the
Cowboy resolution also passed in the Arizona State Legislature, making
Arizona the first State to pass the resolution.
Our legendary cowboy and cowgirl are embraced and respected by people
the world over as symbols of rugged individualism. Each represents a
commitment to explore, work hard and seek adventure while demonstrating
the personal determination to survive. He/she is loyal to an honorable
code of ethics as well as persistent and tenacious in the face of any
challenge.
In honor of cowboys and cowgirls worldwide, I encourage Americans to
observe the National Day of the Cowboy on Saturday, July 26, 2008, with
appropriate ceremonies and activities.
Ms. BORDALLO. I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo) that the House suspend the rules
and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 984.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
BISHOP RALPH E. BROWER POST OFFICE BUILDING
Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and
pass the bill (H.R. 5506) to designate the facility of the United
States Postal Service located at 369 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive in
Jersey City, New Jersey, as the ``Bishop Ralph E. Brower Post Office
Building''.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 5506
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. BISHOP RALPH E. BROWER POST OFFICE BUILDING.
(a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal
Service located at 369 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive in Jersey
City, New Jersey, shall be known and designated as the
``Bishop Ralph E. Brower Post Office Building''.
(b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation,
document, paper, or other record of the United States to the
facility referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be
a reference to the ``Bishop Ralph E. Brower Post Office
Building''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Davis) and the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois.
General Leave
Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their
remarks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Illinois?
There was no objection.
Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
As a Member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform, I am pleased to join my colleagues in the consideration of H.R.
5506 which names the postal facility in Jersey City, New Jersey, after
Bishop Ralph E. Brower. H.R. 5506, which was introduced by
Representative Albio Sires of New Jersey on February 27, 2008, was
reported from the Oversight Committee on June 12, 2008, by voice vote.
This measure has the support of the entire New Jersey delegation and
provides this body a chance to recognize the contributions and
accomplishments of a distinguished and highly respected gentleman from
the Garden State of New Jersey, the admirable Bishop Ralph E. Brower.
{time} 1430
Unfortunately, Representative Sires is unable to join us on the floor
today, but nonetheless, he asked that his statement of support be
submitted for the Record.
Born into humble beginnings in North Carolina as the eldest of six
children, Bishop Brower's educational aspirations led him to attend
Laurinburg Institute and Kettle College of North Carolina. He received
his master's degree from Kings College in Briarcliff Manor, New York,
his master's in divinity from Florida State University, and his Ph.D.
from Grambling State University.
Bishop Brower began to make his mark on New Jersey and the community
of Jersey City in the early 1950s when he took the helm of St.
Michael's Methodist Church. Over the years, he has overseen the growth
of the congregation from six members to the thousands that now worship
at St. Michael's.
Largely responsible for helping the church and its congregation
blossom into a positive force for change in the community, Bishop Ralph
E. Brower undoubtedly deserves the honor of having a United States
postal facility named after him.
Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in support
of this measure by voting in favor of H.R. 5506.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time
as I may consume.
I rise in support of H.R. 5506, a resolution to designate the post
office located at 369 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive in Jersey City, New
Jersey, as the ``Bishop Ralph E. Brower Post Office Building.''
Bishop Ralph E. Brower, a Methodist pastor and native of North
Carolina, has been a vital presence in the religious and civic
communities of northern New Jersey for over five decades.
A community leader and accomplished intellectual, Bishop Brower is,
above all, a devoted family man. Married to his loving wife, Alberta,
for over 60 years, the bishop has been the guiding force in the lives
of his three wonderful children and 18 grandchildren and great-
grandchildren.
His dedication to his denomination and community is exemplary, and it
is fitting to name the post office in Jersey City, New Jersey, in his
honor.
Generous and compassionate, Bishop Brower's passion for religious and
civic duties is fueled by a personal commitment to intellectual
development. After receiving his B.A. from Kettle College, he went on
to earn an M.A. from Kings College, and finally a Ph.D from Grambling
State University.
Academic accolades only scratch the surface of a man who has devoted
so much of his life to improving the lives of the people surrounding
him. He served in numerous positions including as the Commissioner for
the Jersey City Redevelopment Agency and 4 years as the Deputy Mayor of
Jersey City. His service demonstrates that he truly is a man of the
people. This devotion has not gone unnoticed. Over the years, the
Bishop has received a number of accolades for his civic devotion by
organizations such as the New Jersey Urban League and NAACP.
Mr. SIRES. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5506 which would
designate the U.S.
[[Page 14815]]
Postal Service building located at 369 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive in
Jersey City, New Jersey as the ``Bishop Ralph E. Brower Post Office
Building.''
Bishop Ralph E. Brower has dedicated more than 50 years of his life
in service to the community of Jersey City, New Jersey. In 1954, he was
called to build the St. Michael Methodist Church. He started the church
with only six members, and served their parish as pastor for over 54
years.
In addition to his role as pastor, Bishop Brower served the Jersey
City community in many ways. His professional and ministerial
accomplishments also include being president of the Interdenominational
Ministerial Alliance for 25 years; Hudson County Chaplain for 25 years;
commissioner for the Jersey City Redevelopment for 5 years; and deputy
mayor for 4 years.
With his lifetime of dedication to public service and ministry,
Bishop Ralph E. Brower consistently illustrates his caring and
commitment to the Jersey City community.
I am thrilled to celebrate this dedicated community leader through
this legislation. I cannot think of better way to honor Bishop Brower's
work then to designate a U.S. Postal Office in his name.
I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my
time.
Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my
time and urge passage.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 5506.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
MINNIE COX POST OFFICE BUILDING
Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and
pass the bill (H.R. 4010) to designate the facility of the United
States Postal Service located at 100 West Percy Street in Indianola,
Mississippi, as the ``Minnie Cox Post Office Building''.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 4010
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. MINNIE COX POST OFFICE BUILDING.
(a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal
Service located at 100 West Percy Street in Indianola,
Mississippi, shall be known and designated as the ``Minnie
Cox Post Office Building''.
(b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation,
document, paper, or other record of the United States to the
facility referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be
a reference to the ``Minnie Cox Post Office Building''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Davis) and the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois.
General Leave
Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their
remarks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Illinois?
There was no objection.
Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
might consume.
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the House Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform, I am pleased to join my colleagues, particularly the
gentleman from Mississippi, in the consideration of H.R. 4010 which
names a postal facility in Indianola, Mississippi, after the first
black postmistress in the United States of America, Ms. Minnie Geddings
Cox.
Introduced on October 30, 2007, by Congressman Bennie Thompson, the
Representative of Mississippi's Second Congressional District, H.R.
4010 is cosponsored by the State's entire delegation. Congressman
Thompson's measure, H.R. 4010, was reported from the Oversight
Committee on June 12, 2008, by voice vote.
This afternoon's postal naming bill honoring our country's first
black female postmaster is designed to pay tribute to Minnie M. Cox,
who served as the postmaster of Indianola, Mississippi, during the
administrations of Presidents Benjamin Harrison, William McKinley, and
Theodore Roosevelt.
As we can see, Mississippi has a long, glorious history, and Ms. Cox
is indeed a part of it. Ms. Cox's legacy stands as a beacon for all
Americans to admire and emulate, in tribute to all that she
accomplished by breaking barriers and providing quality service to her
hometown of Indianola, Mississippi.
So, Mr. Speaker, let us pass H.R. 4010 and designate the postal
office building located at 100 West Percy Street in Indianola,
Mississippi, as the ``Minnie Cox Post Office Building.''
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time
as I may consume.
I rise in support of H.R. 4010, legislation to designate the post
office at Indianola, Mississippi, as the ``Minnie Cox Post Office
Building.''
Minnie M. Geddings Cox was born in 1869 in a Mississippi emerging
from the Civil War. After graduating from Fisk University, she returned
to teach in the common schools in her hometown of Lexington.
In 1891 at the age of 22, Ms. Cox was appointed postmistress of
Indianola by President Benjamin Harrison, becoming the first black
postmistress of the United States. She was reappointed by President
William McKinley and, again, by President Theodore Roosevelt.
In 1902, however, some of the local whites of Indianola demanded Ms.
Cox's resignation, determined to remove her from her leadership
position solely because of her race.
Ms. Cox refused, but when threats against her and her family
persisted, she submitted her resignation to be effective in January
1903. Theodore Roosevelt felt that Ms. Cox had been aggrieved and
refused to accept her resignation. Instead, he closed the post office
in Indianola, rerouted the mail, and continued paying Ms. Cox.
It is important to remember determined and dedicated Americans such
as Minnie Cox and be ready to stand for what is right when people are
treated unjustly.
Let us now commemorate this courageous woman by naming the post
office building in Indianola in honor of Minnie Cox.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of
H.R. 4010, legislation designating the United States Post Office
located at 100 W. Percy Street in Indianola, Mississippi as the
``Minnie Cox United States Post Office''.
Minnie M. Geddings Cox was one of two daughters born to William and
Mary Geddings of Lexington, Mississippi. She graduated from Fisk
University and first taught school at the common schools in Lexington.
Soon after, she married and assisted her husband, Wayne, when he was
principal of the Indianola Colored Public School.
Minnie M. Geddings Cox, was appointed postmistress of Indianola,
Mississippi in 1891, by President Benjamin Harrison, and was
reappointed by President William McKinley; thereby, becoming the first
Black postmistress of the United States. On January 25, 1900, President
McKinley raised the rank of the Indianola Post Office from fourth class
to third class and appointed Mrs. Cox for a full 4-year term.
However, in the fall of 1902, under the presidency of Theodore
Roosevelt, a controversy brought national attention to Mrs. Cox. James
K. Vardaman, running for governor, in 1902 used Minnie Cox as proof
that African Americans had too much power, and that President Theodore
Roosevelt was a Negrophile. Vardaman, who was indeed elected governor,
called Theodore Roosevelt that ``coon-flavored miscegenationist in the
White House.''
Jim Crow Laws overran Reconstruction in America and whites wanted
blacks eliminated from leadership positions. Mrs. Cox was threatened
with violence by local whites, who held several mass or mob meetings to
demand her removal (her term expired in 1904). The mayor and sheriff
declined to protect her, and as a result of the increased tension and
threats of physical harm, she resigned as postmaster, effective January
1, 1903, and left town for a time.
President Roosevelt believed Mrs. Cox had been wronged, and that the
authority of the
[[Page 14816]]
federal government was being compromised and refused to accept her
resignation. Instead, he closed Indianola's post office on January 2,
1903, rerouted the mail to Greenville, MS, thirty miles away and Minnie
Cox continued to receive her salary. For four hours in January 1903,
the Indianola postal event was debated on the floor of the United
States Senate, and appeared on the front pages of newspapers across the
country. One year later, at the expiration of Mrs. Cox's term, in
February 1904, the post office was reopened, but demoted in rank from
third class to fourth class.
Minnie Cox and her husband Wayne W. Cox, who had been an employee in
the railway mail service, returned to Indianola and organized the
``Delta Penny Savings Bank.'' They had been substantial property owners
before 1903, and they bought more land and became successful bankers as
well. Much of the success of African-Americans is attributed to Wayne
and Minnie Cox. Both descendants of parents who were former slaves,
through their ability to penetrate barriers, promote progress, and
instill pride as educators, bankers, entrepreneurs, real estate
investors, and political activists, exemplify remarkable courage,
wisdom and tenacity.
United in matrimony October 31, 1889, Wayne and Minnie Cox had one
daughter, Ethel Grant Cox. The Coxes acquired thousands of acres of
land and ranked among the wealthiest of the race in Mississippi. Their
spacious home sat on some five acres of land in the white section of
town. As premier supporters of the business enterprises of blacks in
the state, they sold homes to hundreds of African Americans on terms
that would not have been possible if they were dealing with people who
had no interest in them.
Today, a street in Indianola named in their honor, Cox Street, bears
their name. Also, the city's most popular park, Cox Park, located
within minutes of the business district at Faisonia Avenue and West
Gresham Street in Indianola, is named in their honor. Minnie Cox died
in 1933.
Mr. Speaker, I stand here today to in strong support of this
resolution and urge Congress to pass this legislation renaming the Post
Office in Indianola, MS, after the first African-American postmistress,
Mrs. Minnie Cox.
Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance
of my time.
Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I would urge passage of this
resolution and yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 4010.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
RECOGNIZING THE 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE CROSSING OF THE NORTH POLE BY
THE USS ``NAUTILUS''
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to
the resolution (H. Res. 1067) recognizing the 50th anniversary of the
crossing of the North Pole by the USS Nautilus (SSN 571) and its
significance in the history of both our Nation and the world.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The text of the resolution is as follows:
H. Res. 1067
Whereas the USS Nautilus (SSN 571), built and launched at
Electric Boat in Groton, Connecticut, on January 21, 1954,
was the first vessel in the world to be powered by nuclear
power;
Whereas the USS Nautilus overcame extreme difficulties of
navigation and maneuverability while submerged under the
polar ice, and became the first vessel to cross the
geographic North Pole on August 3, 1958;
Whereas the USS Nautilus continued on her voyage and became
the first vessel to successfully navigate a course across the
top of the world;
Whereas the USS Nautilus, having claimed this historic
milestone and returned home to Naval Submarine Base New
London, continued to establish a series of naval records in
her distinguished 25-year career, including being the first
submarine to journey ``20,000 leagues under the sea'';
Whereas the USS Nautilus completed these significant and
laudable achievements during a critical phase of the Cold
War, providing a source of inspiration for Americans and
raising the hopes of the Free World;
Whereas the USS Nautilus was the first naval vessel in
peacetime to receive the Presidential Unit Citation for its
meritorious efforts in crossing the North Pole;
Whereas Commander William R. Anderson of the United States
Navy was awarded the Legion of Merit for his role in
commanding the USS Nautilus during its historic voyage;
Whereas the USS Nautilus and its contribution to world
history was praised by a range of American Presidents,
including President Harry Truman, President Dwight D.
Eisenhower, President Lyndon B. Johnson, President Jimmy
Carter, and President Bill Clinton; and
Whereas President Eisenhower described the voyage to the
North Pole as a ``magnificent achievement'' from which ``the
entire free world would benefit'': Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
(1) recognizes the historic significance of the journey to
the North Pole undertaken by the USS Nautilus;
(2) commends the officers and crew of the USS Nautilus on
the 50th anniversary of their magnificent achievement;
(3) recognizes the importance of the USS Nautilus' journey
to the North Pole as not only a military and scientific
accomplishment, but also in confirming America's longstanding
interest in this vital region of the world;
(4) commends the role of the USS Nautilus and the United
States Submarine Force in protecting the interests of the
free world during the Cold War; and
(5) supports the continuing role of the United States
Submarine Force in defending our Nation in the 21st century.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Connecticut (Mr. Courtney) and the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Connecticut.
General Leave
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
on the resolution under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Connecticut?
There was no objection.
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, as the author of House Resolution 1067, I rise today in
strong support, which honors an important anniversary not only to my
district but to our Navy and our country.
In June 1958, the USS Nautilus (SSN 571), the world's first nuclear-
powered submarine, departed Seattle, Oregon, as part of a top secret
operation called Operation Sunshine. Unknown to many at the time, the
Nautilus was embarking on a historic mission that took it on a course
north to the arctic ice cap. At 11:15 p.m. on August 3, 1958, the boat
became the first vessel to cross the geographic North Pole when
Commander William Anderson, Nautilus' commanding officer, announced to
his crew: ``For the world, our country, and the Navy--the North Pole.''
This historic crossing of 90 North took place at a critical time in
our Nation's history: the Cold War was heating up; the Soviet Union had
seemingly laid claim to space with the launch of Sputnik; and many
Americans and many around the world were looking for something to rally
around, a sign that we were not ceding big ideas and notable
achievements to others. Nautilus' sonar man, Al Charette, one of my
constituents, described their journey as an effort to out-Sputnik the
Russians and they did it.
Few on board the Nautilus realized the scope of their achievement.
They were simply sailors doing their job and doing it well. However, on
reaching the North Pole, the Nautilus clearly demonstrated our undersea
superiority and opened the region to decades of scientific research and
exploration.
The crossing of the North Pole was praised by numerous world leaders
at the time, being described by President Eisenhower as a magnificent
achievement from which the entire free world would benefit. A ticker
tape parade was held in honor of the crew in New York City. The
Nautilus became the first naval vessel in peacetime to receive the
Presidential Unit Citation for its meritorious efforts in crossing the
North Pole, and Commander William R. Anderson was awarded the Legion of
Merit.
In the 50 years since, the United States Navy and Coast Guard have
repeatedly followed in the footsteps of
[[Page 14817]]
this historic voyage. Dozens of U.S. submarines, in addition to
specially fitted vessels and general aircraft of the United States
Coast Guard, have journeyed to the top of the world in service to their
country and to reinforce our Arctic presence. These submarines and
their intrepid crews have broken through the surface, charted new
courses, and expanded our knowledge of the Arctic.
I myself have had the unique opportunity to see this work firsthand
when I traveled aboard the USS Alexandria, a Groton-based submarine, to
observe the 2007 Ice Exercises in the Arctic Circle. While the
technology and capabilities of our submarines has changed in the 50
years since the Nautilus' journey, the unmatched skill, the dedication
and the talent of our submariners continues to allow our Nation to
retain an important presence in this critical part of the world.
I just want to add, Mr. Speaker, having the opportunity again to be
onboard a submarine under the ice just reinforces to me anyway the
incredible accomplishment of the Nautilus. At the time, scientific
opinion believed that it was physically impossible for a submarine to
pass under the North Pole because of blockages by the ice and the
shifting movements of the ice under the North Pole. This was a vessel
which was completely and utterly alone at the time. If there was any
accident, if there was any problem, basically they were completely on
their own and had no means of any type of rescue or support.
Built and launched at Electric Boat in Groton, Connecticut, on
January 21, 1954, the Nautilus was the first vessel in the world to be
powered by nuclear power. After claiming their historic milestone at 90
North and returning home to Naval Base New London, the Nautilus
continued to establish a series of naval records in her distinguished
25-year career, including being the first submarine to journey 20,000
leagues under the sea.
The history and legacy of the Nautilus is not the only meaningful
story to my congressional district but to the entire submarine force
and to our Nation. Today, the Nautilus proudly serves as a museum where
visitors from around the world come to learn about both her history-
making service to our country and the role of the submarine force in
securing our Nation. The Nautilus truly helped set the tone as the
standard bearer for the submarine force, and achievements like the
crossing of 90 North both proved the capabilities of our Nation at a
critical time in our history and raised the bar for all who came after
her.
Too often the critical achievements of our submarine force, our
silent service, go unnoticed. The resolution today rightfully honors
not only the officers and crew of the Nautilus but all those who played
a part in her success, from the highest levels of our government, to
the countless support ships and personnel who helped her along the way,
and finally, the talented workforce at Electric Boat who gave us the
first and finest submarine in our history.
I would like to enter two articles from the New London Day into the
Record, one highlighting the opening of the new exhibit at the
Submarine Force Museum in Groton and an editorial praising the
achievements of the Nautilus and her crew.
{time} 1445
I will also enter into the Record at a later date a list of the crew
who journeyed to 90 North so that their names will be tied to the
historic achievements in today's resolution.
I want to thank the Commander of the naval submarine base in New
London, Captain Mark Ginda, who first planted the idea for this
resolution in my staff's mind. And in addition, since I introduced H.
Res. 1067, my office has received nearly 50 e-mails from individuals
all across the country who served or whose loved ones served aboard the
Nautilus' journey to 90 North. I want to thank them for their comments
and their strong support. In particular, I want to thank Captain
Anderson's widow, who I met at the Farragut Square anniversary service
for the submarine force earlier this year, who was just an incredibly
gracious, wonderful person who has done everything that she can to make
sure that the memory of this incredible achievement is brought forth to
young people all across the country and is a strong supporter of our
Navy.
And most especially, I want to recognize the veterans of the
Nautilus' journey to 90 North that I am privileged to represent here in
Congress. We are all proud of them and the legacy they have established
for our submarine force and our Nation.
H. Res. 1067 is a much-deserved recognition of the important role the
submarine force plays in the security of our Nation, and I urge its
passage.
[From the New London Day, June 30, 2008]
50 Years Later, ``Nautilus'' Crew Still Feels It Could Repeat Polar
Feat
(By Jennifer Grogan)
Groton.--Former USS Nautilus crew members say it does not
seem like 50 years have passed since they made their historic
crossing of the North Pole under the ice cap, and that if the
Navy would kindly give them another nuclear power plant, they
could man their ship and head back out to sea.
``When you first join the Navy and look forward to 20 years
and retirement, you say, `That's forever.' I put 28 in and it
seems like it all happened just yesterday,'' said Al
Charette, a sonarman on board for the North Pole trip.
``Every time we have a reunion, the crew thinks we should go
out and get that ship underway. We're ready. We're still a
crew.''
``We remember each little feature of rigging it for dive.
We feel very confident we could do that again,'' said Jack
Kurrus, an engineman also on the trip. ``Wouldn't it be nice
to go to sea one more time?''
Nautilus (SSN 571) left Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, on July 23,
1958, under top-secret orders to conduct Operation Sunshine,
the first crossing of the North Pole by a ship. About 10
months earlier, the Soviet Union had launched the first
artificial satellite into space.
``We wanted to out-Sputnik the Russians,'' Charette said.
The crew of 116 men reached the North Pole at 11:15 p.m. on
Aug. 3, 1958. They received the Presidential Unit Citation,
the first ever issued in peacetime.
Charette, Kurrus and another former crew member, Joe
Degnan, were at the U.S. Navy Submarine Force Museum Friday
for the unveiling of a new exhibit that commemorates the 50th
anniversary of their voyage. The exhibit, which includes
artifacts and previously unpublished color images, runs
through March 2009.
The successful 1958 trip was not the Nautilus' first
attempt to cross from the Pacific to the Atlantic over the
top of the world.
The crew was in the Arctic a year earlier to see how the
submarine would operate under the ice. When the ship lost
power to its gyrocompasses, Cmdr. William R. Anderson gave
the order to turn back because there was no way to fix the
ship's position.
``We spent 72 hours trying to find our way out and that was
really, really scary,'' Kurrus said.
Nautilus visited the Pacific in 1958, under the cover of
teaching those in the Pacific Fleet about nuclear submarines.
The submarine headed to the North Pole but encountered heavy
ice and shallow water on the way. At one point, the 320-foot
submarine had just a few feet of water over its sail and
about 20 feet below the keel.
The crew returned to Pearl Harbor and waited a month for
the ice to break up and melt before making another attempt to
go to Portland, England, by way of the North Pole.
Kenneth Carr, who was then a lieutenant and later retired
as a vice admiral, said it was ``pretty routine on board'' as
they neared 90 degrees North on Aug. 3, 1958.
Carr said he asked the scientist on the trip, ``how will we
know we crossed the pole?'' Dr. Waldo K. Lyon pointed to a
machine with a green dot going around in a circle.
``He said the dot would stop and go in the other direction,
and it did,'' Carr said. ``It wasn't anything dramatic.''
Once the Nautilus surfaced, Anderson sent a message to the
Navy--``Nautilus 90 North.''
``I'm not sure we really appreciated the depth of what had
just happened, and I think it was a long time before any of
us realized it,'' Charette said. ``All we knew was when we
ended up in England, everyone and their brother wanted an
autograph.''
Those on board nicknamed themselves PANOPOs, an acronym
from the phrase from the Pacific to the Atlantic via the
North Pole. A ``Welcome Home PANOPOs'' banner is one of the
artifacts on display in the new exhibit. Sarah Martin, who
works at the Naval Submarine Base, was the graphic designer
for the exhibit.
Several events are planned at the museum leading up to the
anniversary, including a book signing and lecture by Alfred
McLaren about the USS Queenfish on July 12 and by Don Keith
about the Nautilus on Aug. 2, and a ceremony on the Nautilus
Aug. 3.
The Nautilus Alumni Association is planning a reunion Sept.
25-28 at the Groton Inn and Suites.
[[Page 14818]]
____
[From the New London Day, July 9, 2008]
Wonder of ``Nautilus''
Even after 50 years, the feat of the men and their boat,
USS Nautilus, is astounding. Crossing the North Pole under
the polar ice cap in a nuclear-powered submarine constituted
much more than the single event itself. The voyage unlocked
the tremendous potential of submersibles powered in a way
that they could travel indefinitely on a mission. And
imaginations soared.
There has followed one generation after another of nuclear
submarines, each more capable than its predecessors, but the
pioneering brilliance of Nautilus remains a marker for naval
historians. So, too, does the relentless pursuit of
excellence that characterized Adm. Hyman G. Rickover's
direction of the Navy's nuclear power program.
As reporter Jennifer Grogan's feature story June 30
revealed, the voyage also created an impenetrable bond among
the crew and officers of Nautilus. At the time of the trip,
few in civilian life quite understood the magnitude of the
Nautilus' accomplishment. But succeeding classes of
submarines have made clear the almost limitless capabilities
of these boats.
The self-confidence and optimism displayed by the veterans
in Ms. Grogan's story is a modem expression of the morale of
the crew that ventured north in 1958. Those men and the
imagination that conceptualized their voyage are a credit to
the Navy's versatility and technical skills.
That is why it is especially fitting that the Nautilus,
open to the public, resides here next to the Submarine Base,
an interesting naval laboratory for all to see. If you
haven't yet taken the time to pay a visit, we urge you to do
so.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of House Resolution 1067,
recognizing the 50th anniversary of the crossing of the North Pole by
the USS Nautilus and its significance in the history of both our Nation
and the world.
I want to commend my colleague on the House Armed Services Committee,
Representative Joe Courtney of Connecticut, for sponsoring this
important resolution, as well as the 20 other cosponsors, including
Representative Roscoe Bartlett, the ranking member of the Seapower and
Expeditionary Forces Subcommittee.
Submarines have been a central component of our Nation's naval forces
for over a century. Congress authorized the construction of the
Nautilus in July 1951. After merely 26 months of construction, unheard
of by today's standards, the first nuclear-powered submarine--indeed,
the first nuclear-powered vessel in the world--was commissioned into
the United States Navy. Shortly thereafter, on the morning of January
17, 1955, Nautilus' first Commanding Officer, Commander Eugene P.
Wilkinson, ordered the boat away from the pier and signaled the
historic message, ``Underway on Nuclear Power.'' From that day forward,
Nautilus continued to break all submerged speed and distance records.
This included the historic mission to the North Pole on August 3, 1958.
In honoring the USS Nautilus, I note that now, just as 50 years ago,
both quality and quantity matter with respect to our naval fleet.
Although our current military conflicts have caused us to rightly focus
on the health of our ground forces, it is again time for the Nation to
have a strategic outlook on the future role of our naval forces. We
should do our level best to maintain our maritime dominance and forward
presence around the globe.
I will conclude by noting that the USS Nautilus' journey from the
North Pole is historically significant and a magnificent scientific and
military achievement. I am proud that the United States Navy has set an
international standard of excellence.
So, Mr. Speaker, I call upon all Americans to pause and honor the
service and sacrifice of not only those brave Americans who crossed the
North Pole 50 years ago, but all those who have served and continue to
serve in the defense of our Nation and its values.
I urge my colleagues to support this most worthy resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman for his
strong support for this measure, and just for the record indicate that
on August 3 the Nautilus Museum will be holding a formal event to
celebrate the 50th anniversary of this, again, incredible scientific
and historic achievement by the U.S. Navy. Again, I just want to salute
the efforts of all those people involved and urge passage of the
resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney) that the House suspend the
rules and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 1067.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be
postponed.
____________________
HONORING THE SERVICE AND SACRIFICE OF THE 101ST AIRBORNE DIVISION
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to
the resolution (H. Res. 1080) honoring the extraordinary service and
exceptional sacrifice of the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault),
known as the Screaming Eagles, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The text of the resolution is as follows:
H. Res. 1080
Whereas the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault), or the
Screaming Eagles, headquartered in Fort Campbell, Kentucky,
has faithfully answered America's call for service since its
formation on August 15, 1942;
Whereas the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) defense
of Bastogue during World War II is regarded as one of the
great achievements in United States military history;
Whereas the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) is the
only air assault division in the world;
Whereas the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) has since
deployed tens of thousands of young men and women to Iraq and
Afghanistan no less than three times in support of the Global
War on Terrorism, performing counter-insurgency operations,
securing liberty for such nations to deny safe-haven to
terrorists, and helping build a better future for such
nations;
Whereas over 6,000 Screaming Eagles have made the ultimate
sacrifice and countless others have been injured in multiple
operations since inception; and
Whereas the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) has
recognized its ``rendezvous with destiny,'' serving the
Nation in five wars, with 19 of its members having been
awarded the Medal of Honor: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
(1) recognizes the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault),
also known as the Screaming Eagles, as one of the great
Divisions in American military history;
(2) recognizes that America owes a tremendous debt to the
101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) for the extraordinary
service, sacrifice, and patriotism of the soldiers of the
Division and their families; and
(3) acknowledges that the contributions of the 101st
Airborne Division (Air Assault) to ensure the continued
safety and security of this nation will not go unnoticed.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Connecticut (Mr. Courtney) and the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Connecticut.
General Leave
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
on the resolution under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Connecticut?
There was no objection.
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 1080,
honoring the extraordinary service and exceptional sacrifice of the
101st Airborne Division, more commonly known as the Screaming Eagles.
On August 16, 1942, the day the 101st Airborne Division was
activated, Major
[[Page 14819]]
General William C. Lee observed that ``The 101st has no history, but it
has a rendezvous with destiny.'' Since that day over 60 years ago, the
101st Airborne Division has distinguished itself time and again.
Currently headquartered at Fort Campbell, Kentucky, the 101st
Airborne Division has faithfully answered America's call to service and
has a distinguished history as the only air assault division in the
world. The division cleared the way for the 1st and 4th Infantry
Divisions at Omaha and Utah Beach on D-day in Normandy.
One of the most notable of the Screaming Eagles' achievements was the
defense of Bastogne, Belgium during the Battle of the Bulge, where the
division was surrounded by advancing enemy forces who demanded their
immediate surrender. Brigadier General Anthony McAuliffe led the 101st
through the siege, which was broken on December 26, 1944.
The division again proved its laudable skill and courage fighting
bitter battles in Vietnam. The 101st established an extraordinary
helicopter force of troops trained and ready for combat in Vietnam.
Dense jungle and uneven terrain made the use of helicopters highly
desirable for maneuverability and aided in the Tet Offensive.
The 101st Airborne Division (Air Mobile) was designated the 101st
Airborne Division (Air Assault) in October 1974. The Screaming Eagles
continued their rendezvous with destiny by faithfully completing combat
missions in the Middle East, and humanitarian and peacekeeping missions
in Rwanda, Somalia, Haiti, and in Bosnia. During the 1990 invasion of
Kuwait, the division conducted the largest air assault in history.
Today, the 101st continues their history of exemplary combat service
to our Nation in Iraq and Afghanistan. Thousands of men and women
proudly wear the patch of the Screaming Eagle on their right shoulder
as they deploy to defend the liberties that we enjoy here in the United
States. Today, we recognize the Screaming Eagles and the hundreds of
thousands of their brethren in uniform who volunteer to defend our
Nation each and every day.
I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this resolution
honoring the extraordinary service and exceptional sacrifice of all
those who have served and are serving in the 101st Airborne Division
known as the Screaming Eagles.
For more than 65 years, since its formation in 1942, the division has
established a record of bravery, commitment, military prowess and
excellence that marks it as one of the great military units in American
history.
When activated, the division's first commander told his men that,
while the division had no history, it had a ``rendezvous with
destiny.'' And through five wars, the soldiers of that division have
never failed that vision.
In World War II, from Normandy to Holland to Bastogne, and Hitler's
Eagle's Nest, the division fought with great distinction. More than
2,000 of its members died defending freedom. Deployed to Vietnam for 7
years, the division never failed to accomplish any mission.
Though few of its battles became household names, the division's
4,000 deaths and 17 Medals of Honor are evidence of the unhesitating
courage and sacrifice the division has made in Southeast Asia.
Today, tens of thousands of the 101st soldiers have deployed to Iraq
and Afghanistan, helping to secure liberty for those nations, denying a
safe haven to terrorists, and helping to protect America's interests.
So, Mr. Speaker, it is entirely fitting that we honor the 101st
Airborne Division as one of the great American military units. More
importantly, we must recognize and honor the tremendous debt that we
owe to all who have served so well in this storied and historic
division.
I want to thank my colleague, Mr. Whitfield, for introducing this
resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may
consume to my friend and colleague from Kentucky, Mr. Ed Whitfield.
Mr. WHITFIELD of Kentucky. I certainly want to thank the gentleman
from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney) and the gentleman from Alabama (Mr.
Rogers) as well as Chairman Skelton and Ranking Member Hunter for
bringing this resolution to the floor today.
As has been said, Fort Campbell, Kentucky is the home of the 101st
Airborne Division known as the Screaming Eagles, which is the only air
assault division in the world. It has been my distinct privilege and
pleasure to represent the First Congressional District of Kentucky,
which is the home of this great unit.
I would also like to say that, while this resolution focuses
explicitly on the 101st Airborne Division, Fort Campbell is also the
home of the 160th Special Aviation Regiment, the Fifth Special Forces
Group, the 86th Combat Support Hospital, and we have many young men and
women also serving at the Blanchfield Army Hospital as well as the
Garrison Command at Fort Campbell.
I was delighted that the gentleman from Connecticut and the gentleman
from Alabama talked briefly about the history of this great 101st
Airborne Division. I might say that, throughout its history, 19
individuals of that unit have received the highest declaration offered
by the U.S. Government, which is the Medal of Honor.
Since Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom began,
thousands of members of the 101st Airborne Division have been deployed
no less than three times, performing dangerous counter-insurgency
operations and working to secure liberty in nations that once served as
safe havens for terrorists.
I might also say that we pay special tribute to the nearly 200
members of the 101st Division who have lost their lives fighting the
global war on terrorism, and throughout its proud history over 6,000
have lost their lives.
Despite the dangers and difficulties faced by these soldiers and
their loved ones, I might say that 65 percent reenlist and request to
stay with the 101st Airborne Division, which certainly demonstrates the
loyalty to the proud history and tradition of this unit.
I'd like to thank all of the cosponsors of this resolution. The brave
soldiers of the 101st Airborne Division have never hesitated to answer
this Nation's call to duty, and it is my great privilege to honor them
with this resolution.
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, again, I just want to salute Mr.
Whitfield's and Mr. Rogers' fine comments. They've said it all.
Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res.
1080, a resolution honoring the extraordinary service and sacrifice of
the Screaming Eagles of the 101st Airborne Division of the United
States Army and their families. I am proud to represent in this chamber
a portion of Fort Campbell, where the Screaming Eagles are based.
This resolution is especially timely as soldiers from the 101st
Airborne Division are currently deployed to Afghanistan and Iraq. In
April, Major General Jeffrey Schloesser, who commands the Screaming
Eagles, took over as the senior U.S. commander in Afghanistan. Under
General Schloesser, the 101st Airborne Division took over command of
Regional Command East, an area comprised of 14 provinces in eastern
Afghanistan. At the same time, three Brigade Combat Teams from the
101st Airborne Division are serving in Iraq. Many of the soldiers have
been deployed multiple times in Afghanistan and Iraq, some of those
deployments under the command of General David Petraeus, now the
Commander of U.S. Central Command.
One need only look at the history of the Screaming Eagles to
understand the legacy of the 101st Airborne Division. Originally
activated during World War I, the Screaming Eagles would go on to serve
in World War II,
[[Page 14820]]
Vietnam, and Desert Storm, along with their most recent deployments to
Afghanistan and Iraq.
During World War II, the soldiers of the 101st Airborne Division
would have the distinction of being the first Americans to land in
France as part of the D-Day invasion. Nearly 60 years later, the
Screaming Eagles became the first conventional unit to deploy in the
Global War on Terror; participated in Operation Anaconda, a tough early
battle in Afghanistan; and help lead the invasion into Iraq.
Mr. Speaker, thank you for joining us today to honor the 101st
Airborne Division, the men and women who have earned their place in
history. They and their families will be in our thoughts and prayers as
they continue to serve with distinction.
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney) that the House suspend the
rules and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 1080, as amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and
nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be
postponed.
____________________
EXPRESSING APPRECIATION OF CONGRESS TO THE FAMILIES OF MEMBERS OF ARMED
FORCES
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to
the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 295) expressing the deepest
appreciation of Congress to the families of members of the United
States Armed Forces.
The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
The text of the concurrent resolution is as follows:
H. Con. Res. 295
Whereas more than 2,000,000 Americans are demonstrating
their devotion to the United States and freedom by serving in
the United States Armed Forces;
Whereas there are a multitude of family members, including
mothers, fathers, siblings, spouses, and children, supporting
each member of the Armed Forces;
Whereas, even in peacetime, the family of a member of the
Armed Forces makes concessions given the inherent dangers of
military service and the frequent relocations resulting in
disruption of everyday routine;
Whereas, during wartime, family members endure increased
sacrifices, forgo time with their loved one, and face
increased worry and uncertainty when their loved one serves
extended tours overseas or engages in enhanced training
activities;
Whereas an increasing number of family members have taken
on volunteer responsibilities in organizations associated
with the Armed Forces;
Whereas the family of a member of the Armed Forces wounded
in action willingly accepts the additional role of caregiver,
even when it requires postponement of personal goals;
Whereas the families of members of the Armed Forces serve
as a pillar of strength and encouragement for those serving
the interests of the United States at home and abroad; and
Whereas the families of members of the Armed Forces play a
critical role in providing emotional support and readjustment
assistance as members transition from military life to
civilian life: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
concurring), That Congress expresses its deepest appreciation
to the families, both immediate and extended, of members of
the United States Armed Forces for the unwavering support,
both physical and emotional, that family members give their
loved ones while they answer the call to serve their country
and keep the United States safe.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Connecticut (Mr. Courtney) and the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Connecticut.
General Leave
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
on the resolution under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Connecticut?
There was no objection.
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of House Current
Resolution 295, which expresses the deep appreciation of Congress to
the families of members of the United States Armed Services.
{time} 1500
Over 2 million American men and women are serving in the Armed Forces
today. These military men and women have parents, spouses, and children
who are being asked to sacrifice their time with their loved one. Given
the high operational tempo, these families have faced continued and
sustained separation from their servicemember, many of whom have been
deployed more than one time.
Living without the support of a beloved servicemember can be a daily
struggle, and especially so for young children. Even so, our military
families rise to the challenge with incredible strength and
perseverance. These families are proud to know that the sacrifices that
they and their loved one makes are to serve the country they love.
When a member returns home, it is our military families who are there
for warriors. They provide our first line of defense to ensure that
warriors who are wounded or need assistance receive the help that they
have earned and deserve. Families are often the first to identify the
needs of their loved one and to help ensure that those needs are met.
Many families have made tremendous sacrifices to support their wounded
warrior, often giving up their own personal goals to ensure that our
wounded warriors are well cared for.
Military families are also unsurpassed in their devotion to their
military communities. We depend on military family members who
volunteer to support units and other families. As the demand has only
increased over time with repeated deployments, the responsibilities
that these family members have undertaken has also increased tenfold.
These are Americans who answer the call in their hearts to serve the
men and women who protect our homeland. Their strength, compassion, and
unselfish sacrifice truly epitomize all that is good about the American
spirit.
House Concurrent Resolution 295 is our way in the Congress of
expressing our sincerest appreciation to our military families for the
unwavering support that they give to the men and women who serve to
keep the United States safe. I urge my colleagues to join me in support
of this very important resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I rise in support of House Concurrent Resolution 295, which expresses
the deepest appreciation of Congress to the families of members of the
United States Armed Forces. I would like to thank Mr. Bilirakis of
Florida for introducing this resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I am honored to pay tribute today to the force behind
the force: the military family. It has long been known that the
military services recruit individuals but we retain families. This has
never been more true or more critical than it is today.
The support our troops receive from their loving families--mothers,
fathers, sisters, brothers, spouses, and children--is intangible but it
is nothing less than a powerful force multiplier.
Today millions of Americans have one or more family members serving
in the Armed Forces. These incredible families attempt to lead normal
lives while their loved ones stand in harm's way, fulfilling our
Nation's oath to serve and protect. The strength of the military family
is astounding. Military parents give their sons and daughters to our
Nation and pray relentlessly for their safe return. They look forward
to every letter and phone call, while fearing the ringing of the phone
and the doorbell at the same time.
As we celebrate military families, let us not forget the sacrifices
of the children. Military children are special in
[[Page 14821]]
their strength and their maturity. They do not always have
``hometowns,'' but they have a heightened sense of family both in the
traditional sense and in the special characteristics of the military
community.
Military families have an uncanny resilience. They are some of the
strongest citizens in this country, and I am privileged to recognize
them not only today but every day.
I urge my colleagues to support this very important resolution.
Without the support of our military families, the Armed Forces would
not be the incredible power they are today.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to my
friend and colleague and leader, the distinguished chairman of the
Armed Services Committee, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton).
Mr. SKELTON. I thank the gentleman from Connecticut for his
leadership on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, we recall that our Nation has been at war for over 6
years. It is often in times of conflict that our uniformed services are
called upon, as in wartime now, to extraordinary duty.
It is their families that we seem from time to time to forget, but
the support of their families is so very important. They are a very
special group. Military families regularly face months of separation,
one, two, three, and in some cases, four deployments. Children being
born--I recall, Mr. Speaker, not all that long ago coming into port and
then helicoptered out to the USS Harry S. Truman and seeing a good
number of sailors being allowed to leave the ship first to meet their
family and to meet the newborn children of those families that they had
never seen before. Stories of children being born, of precious moments
like graduations and birthdays being separated.
I think it is important that we in Congress recognize the importance
and give moral support and comfort and thanks to those military
families who bond together in times of crisis and help each other. And
I think it's incumbent upon every American not only to say thanks and
show appreciation to those we see in uniform but to do the same thing
for the spouses and the children in those wonderful families.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield such time
as he may consume to the sponsor of this legislation, the gentleman
from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis).
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res.
295, which I introduced. I would like to thank Chairman Skelton and
Ranking Member Hunter for allowing this resolution to come to the
floor. I also want to thank Mr. Courtney and, of course, Mr. Rogers.
Among the many things that make our Nation so great is our strong and
valiant military. The strength, courage, and dedication of the men and
women in uniform keep us safe at home from threats abroad. While
Congress rightfully has and continues to recognize these men and women,
so too should we honor their family members who serve as constant
pillars of strength for them.
Behind each and every one of the more than 2 million individuals
serving in the United States Armed Forces is a multitude of family
members, be it mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, spouses, aunts,
uncles, extended family, offering encouragement and providing the
emotional and physical support our defenders need to successfully
protect our Nation. These family members make daily sacrifices as they
forgo time with their loved ones and face increased worry and
uncertainty as members of the Armed Forces serve extended tours abroad
and engage in more frequent training missions.
Even under the most difficult circumstances, when one of our soldiers
is wounded in action, these families willingly take on the role of
caregiver. They selflessly postpone their personal goals and rearrange
their lives to meet the physical and emotional needs of their loved
ones as they transition back to civilian life.
Our members of the Armed Forces are able to exhibit the level of
strength and devotion that is their trademark, in part because of the
network of support that they know they have at home. That is why I have
introduced H. Con. Res. 295, which recognizes the integral role the
families of our servicemembers play in defense of our Nation.
Mr. Speaker, it is with great honor and privilege that I rise today
to express my deepest appreciation to the immediate and extended
families of the members of the Armed Forces for their unwavering
support that they provide to our Nation's heroes. I urge all my
colleagues to do the same by supporting this resolution.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for
time, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.
Con. Res. 295, which takes the initiative in extending the appreciation
of Congress to both the members of the United States Armed Forces and
their families.
First, I want to commend the chief sponsor, Mr. Bilirakis of Florida,
for his great efforts in introducing this important bill.
As a former member of our United States Armed Forces, I want to
personally convey my gratitude to Congressman Bilirakis and all of the
co-sponsors for bringing this vital resolution forth. It is an example
of the Congress' dedication to those serving our country around the
world and our efforts to assist their families in various ways.
Mr. Speaker, with increased conflicts around the world needing our
armed forces' attention, the amount of our active troops has increased
exponentially. According to the Department of Defense (DOD), we
currently have over 2 million personnel serving. Of that number, there
are more than 700,000 households with at least one parent deployed on
active military duty. While deployed, the remaining family provides
much needed support to their military members through correspondence
and packages. Yet, many times, these families do not have the resources
to provide the full support they desire. Fortunately, the Department of
Defense offers assistance through numerous programs. For example, the
Military Homefront aids service members, whether active or retired, and
their families with DOD Quality of Life programs. Even with the
available programs, more programs are needed in order to provide for
both the immediate and extended families of our current and past
military personnel.
In response to this growing need, Congressman Bilirakis introduced H.
Con. Res. 295 on February 13, 2008. This includes not only the support
of the United States Armed Forces, but also support of their families
through any physical and emotional ordeals that may arise as their
loved ones devote their lives to their country. As the Representative
for American Samoa, I realize the great importance of supporting our
military families. The Samoan people take great pride in serving our
nation and have shown it through our high recruitment numbers. Yet
regrettably, we also have the highest casualty rate per capita. Just a
few weeks ago, a son of American Samoa, Lt. Col. Max Galea'i was killed
while supporting combat operations in Iraq's Al Anbar Province. Last
week, I was honored to accompany Max's family, his wife Evelyn and four
beautiful children, to American Samoa where Max was laid to rest. The
42-year old commander of the 2nd Battalion, 3rd Marines from the Marine
Corps Base Hawaii represented the epitome of a proud military member,
and for his dedication and for the dedication of all our service men
and women and their families, we must support this bill.
For the sake of their commitment and sacrifice, we must honor our
United States Armed Forces by supporting those most important to them,
their families. I urge my colleagues to pass H. Con. Res. 295, and I
thank you for your support of this very important resolution.
Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to applaud the families of
members of our United States Armed Forces.
Today, the United States House of Representatives passed H. Con. Res.
295, a concurrent resolution ``expressing the deepest appreciation of
Congress to the families of members of the United States Armed
Forces.'' I was proud to add my support to this legislation.
In northeast Florida, we are honored to live in an area with a large
community of military members and families. They are a tremendous
asset, not only to our Nation as a whole, but to our local
municipalities as well.
While husbands and wives are serving our Nation all over the world
through military service, their families are also sacrificing for the
benefit of our Nation. Their willingness to frequently relocate,
separate from spouses and parents, and ``face increased worry and
uncertainty when their loved one serves extended
[[Page 14822]]
tours overseas'' demonstrates their commitment to our Nation. For that
and more, they deserve our deepest and most grateful thanks.
Many times these families are not recognized, nor seen in the
spotlight of our society. While there are no medals awarded to spouses
or children, their sacrifice and service could not be any more
distinctive.
It has been said that families are the fabric from which any strong
culture is built, and certainly the strength of our military families
bolsters the foundation of America.
So it is with great appreciation and sincere thanks that I salute
some 3 million United States Armed Forces members and their families
serving our Nation around the world.
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney) that the House suspend the
rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res. 295.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and
nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be
postponed.
____________________
RECOGNIZING THE 60TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE INTEGRATION OF THE ARMED FORCES
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to
the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 297) recognizing the 60th
anniversary of the integration of the United States Armed Forces, as
amended.
The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
The text of the concurrent resolution is as follows:
H. Con. Res. 297
Whereas the United States has always had strong Armed
Forces made up of courageous men and women serving the ideals
of duty, honor, and country;
Whereas the Armed Forces were unfortunately once a place of
segregation of the races;
Whereas despite segregation, minority members of the Armed
Forces, such as the Tuskegee Airmen, who trained at historic
Moton Field in Macon County, Alabama, demonstrated honor and
bravery above and beyond the call of duty;
Whereas the bravery and sacrifice of all members of the
Armed Forces regardless of race during World War II and prior
conflicts is a matter of national honor;
Whereas the integration of the Armed Forces beginning in
1948 was a seminal event in our Nation's history and
instilled the democratic ideal of equality in the military;
and
Whereas the continued bravery and dedication of every
member of the Armed Forces continues to be a source of pride
to every American: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
concurring), That it is the sense of Congress to honorably
and respectfully recognize the historic significance and to
celebrate the 60th Anniversary of President Truman's
Executive Order 9981 signed on July 26, 1948 that declared it
to be the policy of the President that there shall be
equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in the
armed services without regard to race, color, religion or
national origin thereby beginning the process of ending
segregation in the United States Armed Forces.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Connecticut (Mr. Courtney) and the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Connecticut.
General Leave
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
on the resolution under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Connecticut?
There was no objection.
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise in support of House Concurrent Resolution 297, which
recognizes the 60th anniversary of the beginning of the integration of
the Armed Forces.
Our military men and women are representative of the fabric of
American society. They originate from every region of the world and
represent the beautiful diversity of our planet. They bring forth with
them a wide array of diverse talents and skill sets that has long made
the U.S. military the superpower it is today.
House Concurrent Resolution 297 celebrates the 60th anniversary of
President Harry Truman's 1948 executive order declaring that the
equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in the Armed
Forces was the policy of the President. We celebrate this seminal event
in our Nation's history for installing the democratic ideals of
equality in our military and our country.
During the Second World War, the Tuskegee Airmen broke the color
barrier within the Armed Forces to become the first black pilots,
navigators, and bombardiers. It was the impenetrable code created from
the Navajo language and utilized by the Navajo Code Talkers that helped
save lives in the Pacific. Japanese American soldiers volunteered to
serve in uniform while their families were held in concentration camps
in the United States. It was the ingenuity of refugee scientists
escaping anti-Semitism in their homeland that led to the American
acquisition of nuclear technology. Diversity has made our Armed Forces
and our Nation safer and stronger.
Unfortunately, our Armed Forces was once a place of discrimination
and segregation. Many Americans of African, Asian, and Hispanic descent
who served in the Armed Forces struggled against frequent episodes of
racism and bigotry. Often these American servicemembers felt that they
were fighting two wars, one against a foreign enemy and the other
against racism from within their own ranks.
Despite great adversity, Americans of minority descent proudly served
with honor and bravery, above and beyond the call of duty. We in
Congress recognize their contributions and honor them for their
sacrifices. The bravery and sacrifice of all members of the Armed
Forces, regardless of race, color, or creed, will always be a matter of
national honor.
Today the multi-racial makeup of our troops is a testament to the
democratic ideals that all Americans hold dear, that all men and women
are created equal. Our diverse forces serve as a proud example for the
rest of the world in these times of racial and religious intolerance.
I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this important
resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I rise in strong support of this resolution commemorating the 60th
anniversary of the beginning of integration in the United States Armed
Forces.
{time} 1515
Throughout the course of our Nation's history, the men and women of
the armed services have defended our liberties with bravery, honor and
sacrifice. But because our Nation racially segregated its military
prior to 1948, generations of African Americans selflessly served our
Nation with the knowledge that they were fighting abroad for many of
the freedoms that they were frequently denied here at home. Despite
this injustice, not only did African Americans serve honorably to fight
for all our freedoms, they did so with dignity and bravery that earned
many of them our Nation's top military honors.
One of the most important events in our Nation's history that helped
move our country toward a more integrated America occurred on July 26,
1948, when President Harry S. Truman signed Executive Order 9981. This
important order, which we acknowledge with this resolution today,
ordered that there be equality of treatment with all persons in the
armed services regardless of race, color, religion or national origin.
Even though it took years to accomplish the complete integration of
the armed services, it was Executive Order 9981 that began the process.
[[Page 14823]]
Of the many units that served with distinction, I particularly would
like to recognize the contributions of the Tuskegee Airmen, who trained
at historic Moton Field in my congressional district in Alabama.
As most of us know, over the course of World War II, the Tuskegee
Airmen became one of the most highly decorated units in the Armed
Forces. These brave pilots destroyed more than 1,000 German aircraft
while accumulating an unprecedented record of flying more than 200
bomber escort missions over central and southern Europe.
These brave Americans served without the loss of a single bomber to
enemy aircraft and returned home with some of our Nation's highest
military honors. But they also returned home to a racially segregated
America. It's that injustice, and the steps our Nation has taken to
help right that wrong, that we are helping recognize today. I'm also
delighted that this body will help further recognize the occasion with
a ceremony in the Capitol Rotunda later this month.
I would like to thank Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Hoyer, and
Chairman Skelton for allowing this resolution today. I'd also like to
thank my good friend and colleague from Florida, Mr. Kendrick Meek, for
his strong support of this resolution.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to my
friend and colleague, the distinguished chairman of the Armed Services
Committee, the gentleman from the State of Missouri, the same State
that brought us President Harry Truman, Mr. Ike Skelton.
Mr. SKELTON. I thank my friend from Connecticut for yielding and take
this opportunity to mention the fact that my fellow Missourian,
President Harry S. Truman, on the 26th day of July, 1948, signed
Executive Order 9981 establishing the ``policy of the President that
there shall be equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in
the armed services with regard to race, color, religion, or national
origin.'' That executive order also established the President's
Committee on Equality of Treatment and Opportunity in our armed
services.
On the 23rd of this month, our Congress will recognize the 60th
anniversary of the beginning of the process of integration for our
military.
African American men and women have served this Nation with honor,
courage, commitment, even as they were denied the basic constitutional
freedoms promised to all Americans. Their successful integration of
forces paved the way for further integration of women, Asians,
Hispanics, and other ethnic minorities.
The cosmopolitan make-up of our armed services is a testament to the
American value that we hold dear, that all men are created equal. It is
also a reflection of our society that we should treat all individuals,
regardless of their race, their color, or national origin with respect
and with dignity. And with these days of conflict, our forces, our
military forces of our country, are an example of what can be achieved
by respecting one's differences and working together to achieve a
common goal.
House Concurrent Resolution 297 recognizes the 60th anniversary. I
applaud those who have sponsored it, and I applaud the fact that we are
taking it up today and recognizing the importance of this anniversary.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for
time at this time so I will yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my friend and
colleague, the gentleman from New Jersey who serves on the Education
and Labor Committee, Mr. Payne.
Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much for yielding.
Let me commend the sponsor of this great resolution and also let me
just commend Representative Skelton for the outstanding work that he
has done for so many years in the Armed Services Committee.
I stand in support of this resolution, H. Con. Res. 297, because as
we all know, there were many, many African Americans who have fought
valiantly through many of the wars. I'm very proud to have an uncle who
just passed away 2 years ago, 3 years ago, who was in the invasion of
Normandy. I used to recall as a young boy receiving the letters that he
would send that were photocopied and made about the size of your hand
where anything they felt was strategic was blacked out. And my Uncle
John was a staff sergeant. As I mentioned, he was in the invasion of
Normandy. And his wife, Ruth Garrett, who is still alive, worked in
Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey for the war effort making weapons for
our armed services. He was very proud when the World War II monument
was opened, and he proudly sat with his uniform and his cap and his
medals and made us very, very proud of his service. Even today, one of
my employees, Richard Turner, is serving in Iraq.
But there have been African Americans who have served for so many
years. It took Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt to fly with the Tuskegee Airmen
for them to finally allow the Tuskegee Airmen to fly in combat because
there was resistance to that. And as we know, the first person, as a
matter of fact, to die in the Revolutionary War was Crispus Attucks
back in 1770 on March 5 when he and four other patriots were taken down
by the British to start the Revolutionary War in the Battle of Bunker
Hill where we had Crispus, and where we had Salem Poor who fought at
the battle of Bunker Hill. And we can go on and on.
A neighbor of mine, Needham Roberts and Sergeant Henry Johnson,
captured 30 German soldiers in World War I and kept them captive for
over a month. And people wondered how two soldiers could have kept so
many enemy soldiers at bay. And so I am so proud to have this
recognition and certainly pay tribute to Harry S. Truman. He was a
person who had said ``the buck stops here.'' He was from Missouri. He
said that he'll take the heat, and he did.
And so I would just like to once again commend so many of the men and
women who continue even today to show their appreciation and strength
for our Nation as they serve valiantly in the United States Armed
Services.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, it is with deep pride that I rise to
commemorate the 60th anniversary of the integration of the Armed
Forces. As I stand here today, our forces around the world are united
in their efforts to preserve our liberty; however, it was not long ago
that the men and women of the Armed Forces faced forced division, even
while protecting our unity.
African Americans have been essential to the creation and
preservation of our Nation. These valiant men and women fought abroad
for freedom and security in segregated units, while their own families
were subject to oppression and inequality on the home front. Despite
this, African-American troops still honored the ideals of the United
States and courageously defended the country; many of them would go on
to earn top military honors.
Fortunately the United States military would not remain so divided.
On July 26, 1948, President Harry Truman signed Executive Order 9981,
mandating the equal treatment of all persons in the armed services
without regard to race, color, religion or national origin. In addition
to beginning the process of immigration, Executive Order 9981 also
established the President's Committee on Equality of Treatment and
Opportunity in the Armed Services. While it would take years for the
integration of the armed services to be completed, it was Executive
Order 9981 which began to pave the path to unity.
The Revolutionary War was spurred by a document, the Declaration of
Independence, which proclaimed, ``All men are created equal''. Many
African Americans fought in the Revolution, while experiencing unequal
treatment. Another document, Executive Order 9981, authored by
President Truman, was able to begin the integration of the armed
services, which ended this pervasive inequality and segregation. The
signing of Executive Order 9981 was a pivotal moment in our history and
I wholeheartedly support its commemoration.
I commend my colleagues, Representatives Mike Rogers and Kendrick
Meek, for bringing this legislation to the floor.
Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 297
Recognizing the 60th Anniversary of the integration of the Armed
Services. The bill recognizes the anniversary of President Truman's
executive order
[[Page 14824]]
declaring a policy of equality of treatment and opportunity for all
persons in the armed services without regard to race, color, religion,
or national origin.
The legacy of racism in America is one that runs so deep that even
those that were willing to die for this country did not have basic
rights while living in it. The process of getting army integration to
be reflected in the law took over 15 years, but just like racial
inequality throughout the U.S., it took much longer de facto.
I served in the all-black 503rd Field Artillery Battalion in the 2nd
Infantry Division during the Korean War from 1948 until 1952. Today I
am proud to see that it is a much different reality for our servicemen
of color. Today we fight side by side with all races with one mission
and respect for the value of each individual life. But we take this
time to honor the 60th anniversary because we must continue to honor
those that fought for this country while suffering under the extra
burden of inequality, as well as those that fought for justice in the
army and outside of it.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the 60th
anniversary of the integration of the United States Armed Forces.
On July 26, 1948, President Harry Truman signed Executive Order 9981
which stated that the Armed Services must extend equal opportunity to
everyone who served in the military. Although the true fulfillment of
this vision finally occurred 15 years after President Truman signed
this Executive Order, July 26, 1948 remains a defining moment in our
Nation's history because the leader of the Free World made it known
that a united Nation needed a united military.
This extraordinary document was signed shortly after World War II
when American troops and their allies restored hope, justice, and life
to millions of people who were suffering under horrific dictatorship
and terror. In the deadliest and most wide spread war in human history,
the world had seen the valor, fortitude, and humility of the American
military. Upon returning home, however, more than 400,000 African
American World War II veterans were faced with the bitter reminder that
they did not receive equal rights in the military in which they served
and in the country that they loved.
Mr. Speaker, from the Revolutionary War to the present wars in Iraq
and Afghanistan, blacks and other people of color have fought and died.
In the years prior to desegregation, many black soldiers fought with
the hope that if they demonstrated their bravery and dedication in
battle, they could obtain the respect and opportunity in the military
and civilian sector. Unfortunately, formal and informal practices of
segregation and discrimination in the military and in our country
prevented this hope from becoming and reality.
In the years leading to an unprecedented time of prosperity, growth,
and development in the United States, President Truman dared to sign a
document that would position our military and country in a new
direction. At last, America would have laws that would ensure that
people would have the right to serve their country and be treated
equally regardless of their race, color, religion, or national origin.
Sixty years after Executive Order 9981 was signed and 45 years after
the proclamations in this document were implemented, the U.S. military
now includes the full spectrum of our great country. More than 1.4
million men and women make up America's active and reserve forces. They
can serve with the knowledge that there are laws to ensure that they
receive the same rights and liberties that they fought to secure for
others.
Mr. Speaker, as we celebrate the 60th anniversary of the initial call
to integrate our nation's Armed Forces, we must remember to continue
the legacy of eliminating discrimination and bigotry from the
institutions that represent our country and make it great. I urge my
colleagues to cosponsor this resolution and demonstrate our continued
commitment to laws that promote liberty, equality and justice in every
sector of our society.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor and privilege to stand
before you today in support of H. Con. Res. 297, a measure that
recognizes the 60th anniversary of the integration of the United States
Armed Services.
On July 26, 1948, President Harry S. Truman signed Executive Order
9981, declaring that all members of the military are equal regardless
of race, color, religion, or national origin. These long-overdue words
marked the beginning of the end of institutionalized discrimination in
the U.S. Armed Services, and instilled into the military the democratic
principle of equality.
Prior to this executive order, minority soldiers not only fought
against our enemies, but also struggled against prejudice at home and
in the military. In spite of these unjust circumstances, many
segregated units were universally renowned for their courage and valor,
such as the 54th Massachusetts Regiment during the American Civil War,
the Harlem Hellfighters (369th Infantry Regiment) in World War I, and
the Tuskegee Airmen and the 100th Battalion and the 442nd Combat
Infantry group in World War II. We should never forget the sacrifices
they made to preserve the ideals of freedom and democracy.
It has been 60 years since President Truman courageously and justly
integrated the U.S. Armed Services. Our military was strong then, but
it is stronger now, in no small part because all service men and women
serve together as equals. Indeed, this year America may elect its first
African-American Commander in Chief.
Indiana's First Congressional District enjoys a rich diversity that
has helped produce some of the most capable units in the armed
services. Servicemembers from Northwest Indiana have fought in
integrated units during every military engagement since World War II.
Right now, Indiana has the fourth-largest National Guard in the United
States, with more troops deployed in Iraq than any other State in the
union. I am extremely proud of the patriotic men and women from Indiana
who have served and are serving in uniform, and thank them for their
service to our country. The successes of Indiana's men and women in
uniform of all races, colors, religions, and countries of origin, and
across all generations, have been echoed throughout the Nation.
Mr. Speaker, at this time I ask that you and my other distinguished
colleagues join me in honoring the 60th anniversary of the integration
of the United States Armed Services. Such integration has enriched our
military with the same democratic equality that they have fought so
valiantly to protect.
Mr. CLEAVER. Mr. Speaker, in 1940 the U.S. population was about 131
million, 12.6 million of which was African American, or about 10
percent of the total population.
During World War II, the Army had become the Nation's largest
minority employer. Of the 2.5 million African Americans males who
registered for the draft more than one million were inducted into the
armed forces. African Americans, who constituted approximately 11 per
cent of all draftees Along with thousands of black women, these
inductees served with distinction in all branches of service and in all
Theaters of Operations during World War II.
I have a proud personal connection to one of those who risked their
lives in the segregated service. Over 966 Black military aviators were
trained at the Tuskegee Airfield. One of these men, I am proud to say,
was my uncle, the Reverend LeRoy Cleaver, Jr.
The Tuskegee Airmen carried a heavy burden. Every single mission,
every success, every failure was viewed in relation to the color of
their skin. They could fly the skies valiantly and return to the tarmac
only to have their white peers refuse to return their salutes.
Even the Nazis asked why African American men would fight for a
country that treated them so unfairly. Yet the Tuskegee Airmen were
eager to fly and die for a Nation that had done little for them.
These men, like over a million others who fought in World War II,
fought two wars: One was in Europe, and the other in the hearts and
minds of Americans.
As a poignant example, the white commander of the Tuskegee airfield
was once asked--with all seriousness--how do African Americans fly? He
said, ``Oh, they fly just like everybody else flies--stick and
rudder.'' Little by little, every victory at war was translated to a
victory here in the United States.
On February 2, 1948, President Truman, in no small part due to the
bravery of the men of Tuskegee, announced in a special message to
Congress that he had, ``instructed the Secretary of Defense to take
steps to have the remaining instances of discrimination in the armed
services eliminated as rapidly as possible.''
President Truman's former colleagues and drinking partners, the
Senators from the Southern States immediately threatened a filibuster.
The typically bull-headed man from Missouri forced the issue by using
his executive powers. Among other things, Truman bolstered the civil
rights division, appointed the first African American judge to the
Federal bench, named several other African Americans to high-ranking
administration positions, and most important, 60 years ago on July 26,
1948, he issued an executive order abolishing segregation in the armed
forces and ordering full integration of all the services.
Executive Order 9981 declared that ``there shall be equality of
treatment and opportunity for all persons in the armed forces without
regard to race, color, religion, or national origin.'' By the end of
the Korean conflict, almost all the military was integrated.
The men and women I am proud to represent in Missouri's Fifth
District have contributed a great deal to this Nation we love. They
[[Page 14825]]
have fought wars, supplied the expansion the West, founded religions,
painted masterpieces, composed symphonies--but perhaps none have done
more to shape the face of the earth than President Truman. May history
always remember Executive Order 9981 as quintessential Truman. In
classic Truman style, the order was an example of making a decision not
because it was easy, but because it was the right thing to do.
Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I would like to open by saying
inclusion of all members of society regardless of race, creed or color,
is the strength of our all volunteer Armed Forces. Saturday, July 26,
2008 will mark the 60th anniversary when President Harry S. Truman
signed Executive Order 9981 demonstrating the moral courage to ``do
what was right and honorable''--to integrate the armed forces of our
country. Since the Revolutionary War, African Americans have
participated in cod every war or conflict. There were, at the time,
countless examples of bravery and noteworthy service that spanned from
Crispus Attucks to the 54th Massachusetts Regiment the Buffalo
Soldiers, to the Tuskegee Airmen. Service in the greatest war or World
War II was the culmination of much collective sacrifice and many
individual acts of patriotism. The decision to issue Executive Order
9981 which integrated the armed forces confirmed that diversity is our
strength and not our weakness. Since the signing of Executive Order
9981, I can forthrightly say that our country has been stronger and a
better society overall.
President Truman and his advisors recognized that complete racial
integration at all ranks is an essential prerequisite to a cohesive and
highly effective fighting force. We see success with the challenges of
diversity as being critical to national security. One poignant example
is the way our armed forces were hampered with racial conflict in the
ranks during the Vietnam conflict in the 1960s and 1970s. This serves
as an effective lesson on the importance of inclusion and equal
opportunity at all levels of leadership.
However, there has been progress, and I believe that the U.S.
Military is a pioneer in providing equal opportunity for its uniformed
members above and beyond what is usually seen in the civilian
workforce. In truth, a senior military boardroom is a much closer
semblance of our society than the average corporate boardroom. But, we
can and should do better because it is simply the right and necessary
thing to do. Senior military leadership diversity is a matter of
strategic importance to the future well-being of our fighting forces. I
have initiated dialogue with the senior leadership of each service
branch to lay this issue on the table for a healthy discussion.
Of particular note and at their request, I have met with the
Commandant of the Marine Corps (General Conway), the Chief of Naval
Operations (Admiral Roughead) twice, the Secretary of the Army (General
Casey) and plan to meet with the new Secretary of the Air Force
(nominee General Schwartz) in the very near future. Their willingness
to discuss difficult topics and issues is a testament to their
dedication to finding a suitable and longstanding resolution to
establishing diversity within DoD. We collectively believe that
diversity within DoD and more specifically at the most senior or Flag
officer level is critical to recruiting and retention as well as the
national security of this nation.
Over the past few years there has been some progress in terms of
promotion of Flag level officers and assignment to high profile
positions critical to national security. Two examples are Lieutenant
General Lloyd Austin currently serving as Commander Multi-National
Forces (MNF) in Iraq and Major General Walt E. Gaskin who served as the
Commander Multi-National Forces (MNF) West in Iraq.
It is prudent that we accept the fact that diversity is a necessary
component within the officer corps of the services and more
specifically the Flag officer pool. Of greatest importance is the most
senior flag level rank, which represents the major decision-making and
influential officer level population within the Department of Defense.
Rather than substituting my interpretation of the myriad ideas
discussed in my recent meetings, I think it is best to provide a forum
for all of the principal stakeholders and subject matter experts to
delve deeper into the issue and provide the Committee on Armed Services
with their recommendations. I have respectfully laid before the House
Armed Services Committee language creating a Commission on senior
military leadership diversity in the House FY09 NDAA.
The Commission will review current policy and programs to provide
recommendations to the Pentagon to insure that qualified minority and
female officers are given the same career advancement opportunities as
their counterparts.
As you know, of the 39 active four-star Generals, there is currently
only one minority, General Kip Ward of Africa Command (AFRICOM). Of the
141 three-star level or 0-9 rank Flag level officers, there are only
six minority Generals and five female Generals. Minorities of African-,
Hispanic-, Asian-, Pacific Islanders, American Indians, and Native
Alaskan decent represent slightly over 19 percent of the over 207,000
officers in the four service branches, but make up over 38 percent of
the enlisted ranks.
I believe that just as President Truman had the courage to sign
Executive Order 9981 that integrated the armed services in 1948 that it
is now time to take a holistic look at the makeup of our officer corps
from the most junior to the most senior leadership position to insure
that it is diverse and balanced.
We now have the opportunity in our nation's history to begin to put
in place a long term solution to the long term challenge of
establishing diversity at all levels within our military.
I believe that the onus falls our shoulders to provide a continuation
of the courageous initiative that President Truman undertook in order
to fully realize integration at all levels within the armed forces and
in particular at the senior leadership level.
I respectfully request that the Congress continue to support the
establishment of a Commission to discuss diversity in the officer corps
and insure equal access to opportunities for the most senior leadership
ranks of our Armed Forces.
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney) that the House suspend the
rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res. 297, as
amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and
nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be
postponed.
____________________
REGULATORY IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2007
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in
the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 3564) to amend title 5, United
States Code, to authorize appropriations for the Administrative
Conference of the United States through fiscal year 2011, and for other
purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the Senate amendment is as follows:
Senate amendment:
On page 2, lines 9 through 11, strike ``$1,000,000 for
fiscal year 2008, $3,300,000 for fiscal year 2009, $3,400,000
for fiscal year 2010, and $3,500,000 for fiscal year 2011''
and insert ``$3,200,000 for fiscal year 2009, $3,200,000 for
fiscal year 2010, and $3,200,000 for fiscal year 2011''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Schiff) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert) each
will control 20 minutes
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
General Leave
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include
extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. SCHIFF. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, the Federal regulation process is one of the most
important ways by which our Nation implements public policy. Each year,
agencies issue thousands of regulations to promote safety in our lives,
from the food we eat, to the cars we drive, to the air we breathe.
Although regulations play a critical role in protecting so many
aspects of our daily lives, there is no independent, nonpartisan entity
that Congress can rely upon to help us ensure that these regulations
are working as intended.
[[Page 14826]]
The Administrative Conference of the United States was just such an
entity, a public-private think tank that provided invaluable guidance
to Congress about how to improve the administrative and regulatory
process.
First authorized by President John F. Kennedy, the Conference made
numerous recommendations over the course of its 27-year existence, many
of which were enacted into law. The conference was last funded into in
1995. H.R. 3564, the Regulatory Improvement Act of 2007, would
reauthorize it for 3 years.
Some might ask why we are reauthorizing an entity that has been out
of existence for so long. Let me mention three important reasons.
First, the Conference can save taxpayer dollars, in fact, millions of
dollars. When it was in existence, it helped agencies implement many
cost-saving procedures and make numerous recommendations to eliminate
excessive litigation costs and long delays.
Just one agency alone, the Social Security Administration, estimated
that the Conference's recommendation to change that agency's appeal
process yielded approximately $85 million in savings. Indeed, Justice
Stephen Breyer testified before the Subcommittee on Commercial and
Administrative Law about the ``huge'' savings to the public resulting
from the Conference's recommendations. Justice Antonin Scalia likewise
agreed that it was an enormous bargain.
Second, the Administrative Conference promoted innovation among
agencies. For example, it convinced 24 agencies to use alternative
dispute resolution for issues concerning the private sector. The
Conference also spearheaded implementation of the Negotiated Rulemaking
Act, the Equal Access to Justice Act, and the Magnuson-Moss Warranty
Act, governing consumer product warranties.
The Conference played a major role in encouraging agencies to
promulgate smarter regulations. It did this by working to improve the
public's understanding and participation in the rulemaking process,
promoting judicial review of agency regulations, and reducing
regulatory burdens on the private sector.
Third, and perhaps most importantly, Congress needs the conference.
Experience with the Congressional Review Act proves that there are
limitations in Congress' ability to provide aggressive oversight of the
regulatory process.
Congressional recognition of the Conference's significant
contributions to the regulatory process is probably best evidenced by
the fact that legislation assigning responsibilities to it continues to
be introduced in nearly every Congress, including the current one.
The Congressional Research Service advises that reactivation of the
Conference now would come at ``an opportune time,'' especially in light
of efforts by the White House to augment its involvement in the
regulatory process.
There are few entities that have enjoyed more bipartisan support than
the Administrative Conference, and understandably so. It is all about
promoting good government.
I commend my colleague, the ranking member of the Subcommittee on
Commercial and Administrative Law, Chris Cannon of Utah, for his
leadership in continuing to pursue reauthorization of the conference.
Last October, the House passed this bill on suspension by voice vote
without amendment. The Senate late last month finally acted and passed
the bill with a small amendment which essentially reauthorizes the
Conference at a level of funding in the amount of $3.2 million.
I urge my colleagues to concur in the Senate amendment so we can send
this bill to the President.
I reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 1530
Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I thank my friend from California for his work on this bill, and
thank the chairman of the committee and also the ranking members of the
subcommittee and committee.
I am delighted to see us conclude today our consideration of H.R.
3564 which would reauthorize the Administrative Conference of the
United States. The bill we consider today was amended slightly by the
Senate which required this action by us today. But I strongly urge the
House to concur in the Senate's amendment today. I also urge the
Appropriations Committee and the House to appropriate funds promptly to
ACUS. We need this exemplary agency once again to become a living,
breathing entity and reality.
So why is that? As the distinguished Member from Utah (Mr. Cannon)
remarked when we originally voted out the bill, and quoting from prior
adage, ``The government that governs best, governs least. And when the
government does govern, it should govern at its best.'' He is exactly
right. That is the role of ACUS, to ensure that when the government
acts, it acts at its best.
The small appropriations that we historically invested in ACUS
yielded us major overall savings in time and in money. ACUS
consistently pinpointed ways for the government to reduce the cost it
incurs and that it imposes. As we confront the specter of exploding
Social Security and Medicare entitlement costs hijacking the Federal
budget, we need ACUS all the more. We must do everything we can to
avoid waste in our spending and to lighten the government burden on our
economy. By reauthorizing and refunding ACUS, we can take important
steps in that effort. I again thank the gentleman from California for
his work.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how many more speakers my
colleague from Texas has remaining.
Mr. GOHMERT. I have no further speakers, and I yield back the balance
of my time.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas and I thank
the Speaker as well as the work of Mr. Cannon of Utah. I urge passage
of the bill.
As we have seen most recently in the actions and inactions by the FDA
dealing with the salmonella incidents, or whether it is the Consumer
Product Safety Commission and some of the issues involving manufactured
products from other countries, the regulatory process is
extraordinarily important in protecting the American people. Congress
is doing its best to oversee these agencies, but we can use the
assistance of this important conference, and I join my colleague in
urging passage of this bill.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support
of H.R. 3564, Regulatory Improvement Act of 2007. The administrative
conference was first created inside the Department of Justice by
President Kennedy. Later, it was moved out of the Department of Justice
by President Johnson. The mission was a private partnership to discuss
administrative law and regulatory system and how to make it better.
Supreme Court Justices Breyer and Scalia served on the Conference
before becoming Justices and both have testified in the past for its
re-authorization. This bill reauthorizes the Administrative Conference.
I support this bill and I encourage my colleagues to do likewise.
The Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS), an
independent agency and advisory committee created in 1968, studied U.S.
administrative processes with an eye to recommending improvements to
Congress and agencies. From 1968 to 1995, the ACUS issued approximately
200 recommendations, most of which have been at least partially
implemented. Congressional funding for ACUS was terminated in 1995.
ACUS's recommendations were published periodically in the Code of
Federal Regulations prior to 1995. Little known ``outside the
Beltway,'' ACUS was a unique entity. Comprised of between 75 and 101
individuals drawn from agencies, academia, and the private sector, the
Conference was classified as both an independent agency and a federal
advisory committee. Organizationally, it consisted of a Chair, a
Council, and an Assembly. The Chair, appointed by the President and
confirmed by the Senate for a five-year term, was responsible for the
day-to-day activities and supervision of the 18 permanent staff. The
Council, which functioned like a board of directors, consisted of ten
members appointed by the President for three-year terms, five of whom
were always current senior federal officials. The Assembly was made up
of the Chair, the Council, and the other members of
[[Page 14827]]
the Conference, a majority of whom had to come from government service.
All of the members (other than the Chair) served without compensation.
The primary, although not exclusive, function of the Conference was
to study administrative processes with an eye to recommending
improvements to Congress and the agencies. It performed this function
by commissioning studies by law professors expert in the administrative
process that then were reviewed by one of six standing committees:
adjudication, administration, governmental processes, judicial review,
regulation, and rulemaking. The recommendations developed by committees
of the Conference would be considered for adoption by the Assembly in
plenary sessions, which were typically held twice a year.
The improvements occasioned by the Conferences recommendations are
legion. Inasmuch as the Conference never had the power to impose its
recommendations on unwilling subjects, the fact that so many of its
recommendations bore fruit is a testimony to their intrinsic sense.
Some, like the Conference's recommendation in 1968, its first year of
operation, to eliminate a jurisdictional amount in suits under the APA,
were followed by Congress in passing new legislation. Another example
is its recommendation to provide administrative penalty authority to
agencies to increase the effectiveness of agency enforcement activities
at lower cost, first proposed by the Conference in 1972 and since
adopted by Congress in over 200 statutes. A third is its 1980
recommended solution to unseemly races to the courthouse in rulemaking
appeals, adopted by Congress in 1988.
Other recommendations, like the Conference's early recommendation to
eliminate the exemption from the APA's notice-and-comment requirements
for rules relating to public property, loans, grants, benefits, and
contracts, were sufficiently influential to lead agencies to adopt the
recommendations on their own. Its recommendation in 1988 on
Presidential Transition Workers' Code of Ethical Conduct were used by
President Bush as the basis for his transition standards of conduct,
and the Clinton administration likewise followed what had become
standard procedures. From 1968 to 1995, the Conference issued
approximately 200 recommendations, most of which have been at least
partially implemented.
Probably the area in which the Conference had its greatest influence
was in introducing and supporting the use of alternative dispute
resolution techniques in agency practice. Its recommendation in 1982
provided procedures by which agencies could negotiate proposed
regulations, and it followed the recommendation with support and
encouragement to agencies to experiment with this new technique.
Ultimately, Congress adopted the Negotiated Rulemaking Act in 1990,
virtually copying the procedures contained in the Conference's original
recommendation. Similarly, in 1986 the Conference issued the first of
some fifteen recommendations on using alternative means of dispute
resolution in agency adjudications. In 1990 Congress again followed the
Conference's lead and enacted the Administrative Dispute Resolution
Act. Recognizing the Conference's leadership role in this area, that
Act gave the Conference the principal role for coordinating and
promoting ADR in the federal government.
Another area in which the Conference had a major influence involved
its study of Presidential review of agency rulemaking undertaken during
the Reagan administration. This was a subject that had the potential to
become highly partisan, but the Conference's reputation for neutrality
and expertise enabled it to review the practice, generally validate its
exercise, and makes certain recommendations to improve its openness and
public acceptability. Because of the Conference's track record of
useful and expert studies of the administrative process, all the
regulatory reform bills considered by the Senate in the last session
included provisions for the Conference to study the effects of the
legislation.
The Conference's contribution to administrative law and procedure was
not limited just to studies. Drawing on its expertise, ACUS issued
numerous publications designed to assist agencies in their
administrative processes. For example, in 1972 the Conference published
the first edition of its Manual for Administrative Law Judges (now in
its 3d edition); in 1978 it published its Interpretive Guide to the
Government in the Sunshine Act; in 1981 it issued Model Rules for
Agency Implementation of the Equal Access to Justice Act. The latter
two of these documents were responsive to Congress' requirement for
agencies to consult with the Conference in implementing these statutes.
In addition, the Conference has published sourcebooks on Federal
Administrative Procedure, Negotiated Rulemaking, and Alternative
Dispute Resolution, as well as the Guide to Federal Agency Rulemaking.
Finally, in recent years, following the collapse of the Soviet Union,
Congress authorized the Conference to lend its expertise to newly
emerging democracies in their creation of administrative law and
procedures. As a result, the Conference sponsored seminars in the
Ukraine, Hungary, the People's Republic of China, and South Africa.
The ABA has long been a strong supporter of the Conference, and over
the years the Conference and the Section on Administrative Law and
Regulatory Practice have enjoyed a close and mutually supportive
relationship. This bill reauthorizes the administrative conference.
I support this Act and encourage my colleagues to support it also.
Mr. SCHIFF. I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff) that the House suspend the rules
and concur in the Senate amendment to the bill, H.R. 3564.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the Senate amendment was concurred in.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
HONORING THURGOOD MARSHALL ON THE 100TH ANNIVERSARY OF HIS BIRTH
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the
concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 381) honoring and recognizing the
dedication and achievements of Thurgood Marshall on the 100th
anniversary of his birth.
The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
The text of the concurrent resolution is as follows:
H. Con. Res. 381
Whereas Thurgood Marshall was born in Baltimore, Maryland,
on July 2, 1908, the grandson of a slave;
Whereas Thurgood Marshall developed an interest in the
Constitution and the rule of law in his youth;
Whereas Thurgood Marshall graduated from Lincoln University
in Pennsylvania with honors in 1930, but was denied
acceptance at the all-white University of Maryland Law School
because he was African-American;
Whereas Thurgood Marshall attended law school at Howard
University, the country's most prominent black university,
and graduated first in his class in 1933;
Whereas Thurgood Marshall served as the legal director of
the National Association for the Advancement of Colored
People (NAACP) from 1940 to 1961;
Whereas Thurgood Marshall argued 32 cases before the
Supreme Court of the United States, beginning with the case
of Chambers v. Florida in 1940, and won 29 of them, earning
more victories in the Supreme Court than any other
individual;
Whereas, as Chief Counsel of the NAACP, Thurgood Marshall
fought to abolish segregation in schools and challenged laws
that discriminated against African-Americans;
Whereas Thurgood Marshall argued Brown v. Board of
Education before the Supreme Court in 1954, which resulted in
the famous decision declaring racial segregation in public
schools unconstitutional, overturning the 1896 decision in
Plessy v. Ferguson;
Whereas Thurgood Marshall was nominated to the United
States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit by President
John F. Kennedy in 1961, and was confirmed by the United
States Senate in spite of heavy opposition from many Southern
Senators;
Whereas Thurgood Marshall served on the United States Court
of Appeals for the Second Circuit from 1961 to 1965, during
which time he wrote 112 opinions, none of which were
overturned on appeal;
Whereas Thurgood Marshall was nominated as Solicitor
General of the United States by President Lyndon Johnson, and
served as the first African-American Solicitor General from
1965 to 1967;
Whereas Thurgood Marshall was nominated as an Associate
Justice of the Supreme Court by President Johnson in 1967,
and served as the first African-American member of the
Supreme Court;
Whereas Thurgood Marshall sought to protect the rights of
all Americans during his 24 years as a justice on the Supreme
Court;
Whereas Thurgood Marshall was honored with the Liberty
Medal in 1992, in recognition of his long history of
protecting the rights of women, children, prisoners, and the
homeless; and
[[Page 14828]]
Whereas Thurgood Marshall died on January 24, 1993, at the
age of 84: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
concurring), That Congress--
(1) honors the dedication and achievements of Thurgood
Marshall;
(2) recognizes the contributions of Thurgood Marshall to
the struggle for equal rights and justice in the United
States; and
(3) celebrates the lifetime achievements of Thurgood
Marshall on the 100th anniversary of his birth.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Schiff) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
General Leave
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to
include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, this resolution commemorates the life and work of
Thurgood Marshall on the 100th anniversary of his birth, which was July
2, 1908.
I commend the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne) for his
leadership in allowing us to recognize an American whose life work was
marked by the principles of justice, equality, and freedom, and I am
pleased to cosponsor this legislation.
It is hard to know where to begin in reciting Justice Marshall's
accomplishments. While best known for breaking the color barrier on the
Supreme Court, Justice Marshall is honored because he was an expert
jurist who worked on behalf of all Americans. Born 100 years ago in
Baltimore, Maryland, and with just one generation between him and
slavery, Thurgood Marshall experienced its legacy of segregation and
racist hatred in his own time.
Rather than allow that legacy to defeat him, however, he dedicated
his life to removing its stain from our society. His courageous
determination propelled him to success in the classroom, in the
courtroom, and on the bench.
When he was denied admission on the basis of race to the University
of Maryland's School of Law, he attended Howard University's School of
Law and graduated first in his class in 1933.
When he challenged the separate-but-equal status quo in his capacity
as legal director of the National Association for the Advancement of
Colored People, the NAACP, from 1940 through 1961, he won 29 out of 32
cases before the Supreme Court, the most Supreme Court cases won by any
attorney.
Later, as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
from 1961 to 1965, he would author 112 opinions, with not one of them
being overturned.
Thurgood Marshall would continue his service to this country in two
very distinguished capacities. He served as the first African American
Solicitor General, from 1965 until 1967. That year, he was appointed
associate justice on the U.S. Supreme Court, the first African American
Justice, where he served until he retired in 1991.
While Justice Marshall is best known for his lead role in the cases
culminating in the 1954 decision in Brown v. Board of Education, which
laid the foundation for the dismantling of Jim Crow segregation, he
fought racial segregation in every aspect of society, and this pursuit
for a fair and just America made him one of the Nation's best advocates
of civil rights.
In Chambers v. Florida, he challenged a biased criminal justice
system. In Shelley v. Kraemer, he challenged discrimination in housing.
And in Smith v. Allwright, he challenged inequitable voting practices.
Finally, in commemorating Justice Marshall, we acknowledge not just a
good lawyer and judge, but a good man who reminded us that ``in
recognizing the humanity of our fellow beings, we pay ourselves the
highest tribute.''
Thurgood Marshall should be remembered as an individual who raised
the morale, spirit and conscience of this country and who tirelessly
fought social injustice throughout his life.
I ask my colleagues to join me in support of this resolution that
calls upon us to recognize the important legacy of Thurgood Marshall, a
man who challenged and inspired Americans to live up to the principles
and ideals on which this country was founded.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I again thank my friend from California, I thank the
chairman of the committee, the ranking member of the committee, and
those who have worked on this bill.
I rise in support of House Concurrent Resolution 381 honoring and
recognizing the dedication and achievements of Thurgood Marshall on the
100th anniversary of his birth.
Thurgood Marshall, born in Baltimore, Maryland, on July 2, 1908, was
the grandson of a slave. But after graduating first in his class from
Howard Law School in 1933, he went on to serve as the legal director of
the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and
argued over 30 cases before the Supreme Court of the United States. He
won 29 of them, including the landmark decision Brown v. Board of
Education in 1954, which held that racial segregation in public schools
was unconstitutional.
Thurgood Marshall, as most people know, was later nominated to the
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit by President John
F. Kennedy in 1961. He served there as the first African American
Solicitor General from 1965 to 1967. And in 1967, he was nominated by
President Johnson to be an associate justice of the Supreme Court, its
first African American member.
I recall the days before I took the oath as a district judge back in
Texas. I was told by a retired judge who was dying of cancer that it
was a good job and a noble job, but that it would be the loneliest job
I had ever held. I can only imagine that would have been true for any
Supreme Court Justice, but particularly true for the first African
American Justice on the Supreme Court. It had to be a lonely job; yet
he honored himself and he honored this country with his brilliant work.
Thurgood Marshall will be remembered for the many Supreme Court
decisions he had a hand in writing, including the concurring opinion in
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. Amos.
Justice Marshall made so much in the way of contributions that are so
far-reaching and still very timely today. For example, we have had the
remaining Presidential candidates of both political parties express
support for allowing faith-based organizations to take part in Federal
social service programs. So it is worth remembering that in the Amos
case Justice Marshall joined with Justice Brennan in stating that
section 702(a) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was constitutional. That
section of the Civil Rights Act has, from its inception, exempted
nonprofit, private religious organizations engaged in both religious
and secular nonprofit activities from title VII's prohibition on
discrimination in employment on the basis of religion. If religious
organizations are to be allowed to join Federal social service efforts,
they must be allowed to remain religious organizations, and they can
only do so if they are allowed to be free to compose themselves of
individuals who share their religious world view. Justice Marshall
recognized that, and so should we.
He even had something to say about vouchers for education. In Witters
v. Washington Department of Services for the Blind, Justice Marshall
upheld a voucher program in which ``vocational assistance is provided
under a program that is paid directly to the student, who transmits it
to the educational institution of his or her choice.'' Justice Marshall
held that such programs are constitutional where the resources
``ultimately flow to religious institutions as a result of the
genuinely independent and private choices of aid recipients.''
It is also worth noting that he did allow exception to the Civil
Rights Act
[[Page 14829]]
to allow religious institutions to hire people who agreed with their
religious beliefs.
I would urge all of my colleagues to join me in supporting House
Concurrent Resolution 381 in recognizing Justice Marshall's judicial
legacy. It was profound, it was far-reaching, and it changed the
country for the good. That rich legacy includes his support for the
right of religious organizations to maintain their religious identity,
for government voucher programs that allow individuals to exercise free
and independent choices, even when those best choices or services are
provided by religious organizations. It is a real honor for me to get
to honor the legacy of Thurgood Marshall.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, at this point I would like to yield 1 minute
to the majority leader of the House of Representatives, the
distinguished gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend from California
(Mr. Schiff), congratulate Mr. Payne for his leadership on this effort,
and Mr. Gohmert for his joining in bringing this legislation to the
floor.
I come from the State of Maryland, and Thurgood Marshall is one of
the great sons of our State. But I must tell you something that you
will find, I think, ironic. If you go to the State capitol which is the
oldest State capitol still in use as a State capitol in this country,
and you look on the east front of the capitol and you walk out the
front, there is a statue on the east front that overlooks the Annapolis
harbor, and that statue is of a justice of the Supreme Court of the
United States from the State of Maryland. His name is Roger Brooke
Taney, the author of the Dred Scott decision.
But if you walk out the door to the west and look out on Rowe
Boulevard, there is another statue, another Justice, another son of
Maryland; and that Justice is Thurgood Marshall.
{time} 1545
I have always thought it somewhat ironic that juxtaposed in the
Maryland State Capitol are these two justices, both of whom were
learned, both of whom served their country, one of whom, however, whose
judgment was skewed by the times in which he grew up, whose brilliance
was diminished by his failure to see the promise of America, and
another who--notwithstanding the fact that he was discriminated against
and his people were discriminated against by a country that professed a
promise of equal opportunity for all. Nevertheless, the love for his
country rose above that segregated environment to preach the principles
and to seek their reality.
Today we recall the life and legacy of one of America's champions of
civil rights, Thurgood Marshall. Justice Marshall is, as I have said,
one of Maryland's greatest sons.
If you come to my office and visit the majority leader's office, you
will see, just outside of my door, six portraits of very distinguished
Marylanders. One, the first President of the United States, John
Hanson. Now, I know that George Washington was technically first
President of the United States of America, but John Hanson was the
first president of the Continental Congress. You will see others,
signers of the Declaration of Independence, but there will be that
picture just outside of my door of Thurgood Marshall, because of what
he stood for and what his life stands for today.
Few lives were as consequential to the cause of American equality,
and it's fitting that we pause the work of legislating and remember
that life. Thurgood Marshall said that his life-long fascination with
the Constitution began in grade school, when, as a punishment,
interestingly, as a punishment, a teacher forced him to read it cover
to cover. Even then he must have been struck by the gulf between that
document's promise of equal protection and the reality of a segregated
America, a gulf that turned that promise into a lie for millions of our
citizens.
Thurgood Marshall spent his career working to restore that promise
and dismantling the structures of segregation piece by piece. Nearly
two decades before the famous case of Brown vs. Board of Education, he
was at the forefront of a legal movement that aimed to chip away at
discrimination through the courts.
His first victory was also in some ways his sweetest. He convinced
the Maryland Court of Appeals to desegregate the University of Maryland
law school 6 years after that very school had barred him on account of
his race. Over the years to come, he rarely lost a case. In fact, he
won 29 out of 32 cases he argued before the Supreme Court.
Another famous Marylander and his wife, whom I know, is Speaker
Jackson, himself a distinguished African American leader of a
distinguished African American family. I know so well the Mitchell
family, Clarence Mitchell, Jr., the NAACP's representative in
Washington, known as the 100th Senator; and Juanita Jackson Mitchell,
one of the first African Americans admitted to the University of
Maryland law school.
Some of the credit must go to Thurgood Marshall and his legendary
powers of persuasion. But credit, I think, also belongs to the powerful
simplicity of his argument that separate can never be equal, that the
Constitution belongs to Americans of all colors. His career as an
advocate culminated with Brown, which overturned ``separate but
equal,'' and it overturned it for good. Not only did it overturn it
finally, but also for the good of our people.
Thurgood Marshall later distinguished himself as a Federal judge and
a solicitor general before President Lyndon Johnson nominated him as
America's first African American Supreme Court justice. President
Johnson called the appointment, and I quote, ``The right thing to do,
the right time to do it, the right man, and the right place.''
Justice Marshall, of course, as we all know, proved him absolutely
correct. He served on the Court with distinction for almost a quarter
of a century as one of its leading defenders of individual liberty and
civil rights. Other civil rights leaders gave us inspiration, uplift
and prophetic challenge. Thurgood Marshall added something to that
contribution, dogged advocacy and the discipline of the law.
As a newspaper editorial put it at the time of his death, ``We make
movies about Malcolm X, we get a holiday to honor Dr. Martin Luther
King. But every day we live with the legacy of Justice Thurgood
Marshall.'' Thurgood Marshall would be the first to acknowledge just
how far America remains from the promise of equality, an equality that
exists in fact, every bit as in law.
But he would be the last to be discouraged. He said that ``A child
born to a black mother in a State like Mississippi, by merely drawing
its first breath in the democracy has exactly the same right as a white
baby born to the wealthiest person in the United States. It's not true,
but I challenge anyone to say it's not a goal worth working for.''
The great thing that we remember about Thurgood Marshall, as I said
at the beginning, is that confronted with segregation, confronted with
racism, confronted with a negative reaction to his color, he, as so
many civil rights leaders have done in the past, as Nelson Mandela did
in South Africa, as so many other civil rights leaders throughout this
world have done, he rose above the hate and the division to bring
clarity to our Constitution and unity to our people.
How appropriate it is to remember Thurgood Marshall on the eve of his
100th year.
Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, at this time I would yield to my friend,
Mr. Chabot from Ohio, such time as he may consume.
Mr. CHABOT. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Con. Res. 381, a
resolution recognizing the dedication and achievements of Thurgood
Marshall on the 100th anniversary of his birth.
Justice Marshall's life was full of distinction and firsts, including
successfully arguing to overturn the separate but equal doctrine before
the U.S. Supreme Court and the seminal case of Brown v. Board of
Education, serving
[[Page 14830]]
as the Nation's first African American solicitor general and later
serving as the first African American U.S. Supreme Court justice, a
position that he held for 24 years.
Still, at an early age with the premise that all men are created
equal, Justice Marshall dedicated his life to bringing meaning to the
protections enshrined in our Constitution. His work transformed this
Nation. First, at the NAACP and later in the public sector, Justice
Thurgood Marshall put civil rights at the forefront of this Nation's
conscience, ensuring that the Constitution and rule of law applied
fairly to all citizens.
I commend the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey, Congressman
Payne, for ensuring that Thurgood Marshall's legacy lives on. I urge my
colleagues to support this resolution.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, at this time it is my great pleasure to
yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne).
Mr. PAYNE. Let me begin by thanking my fellow colleagues, Mr. Sherman
included, who joined me in the cosponsorship of this commemorative
resolution, which honors Justice Thurgood Marshall's legacy and his
dedication to civil rights and public service.
Thurgood Marshall was born the grandson of a slave back in Baltimore,
Maryland, on July 2, 1908. Marshall's mother, Norma Marshall, was one
of the first black persons to graduate from Columbia Teacher's College
in New York City. His father, William Canfield Marshall, worked as a
railroad porter and as head steward at an exclusive white club. Mr.
Marshall was the first black person to serve on a grand jury in
Baltimore in the 20th century.
Thurgood Marshall grew up in Baltimore and graduated from an all-
black high school at the age of 16. During his childhood, his parents
taught him to argue by making him prove every statement he made and by
challenging every point he made. At school, as it was mentioned
earlier, when Thurgood Marshall got into trouble, the principal would
make him sit in the basement and read the U.S. Constitution.
Students couldn't return to class until a section of the Constitution
was memorized. Evidently Thurgood Marshall had an opportunity, because
he memorized a great deal of the Constitution, but that moved him into
the interest of being a lawyer rather than a dentist, which his mother
wanted him to be.
After graduating from high school, Justice Marshall attended Lincoln
University, a historically black university in Chester, Pennsylvania, a
school that many outstanding blacks from the United States and abroad
went to, including the first president of Ghana, Kwame Nkrumah.
However, education was such a priority for the Marshall family that
Mrs. Marshall sold her engagement ring in order to send Thurgood
Marshall to school. After his graduation with honors at Lincoln
University, Justice Marshall applied to the University of Maryland Law
School. He was not accepted because he was black, and that set in
motion the events of his future.
That same year, Marshall was accepted at Howard Law School, and he
went on to graduate in the class of 1933. Upon graduating, Justice
Marshall started his own practice in Baltimore. The next year he
discovered the NAACP and became an active member.
As a matter of fact, Justice Marshall then sued the University of
Maryland's law school, where he was not admitted, and won the case
about discrimination. So he did get justice in the end.
From 1940 to 1961, Thurgood Marshall served as legal director of the
NAACP, which allowed him to travel throughout the United States
representing numerous court cases. Most of the clients had disputes
involving questions of racial justice, which ranged from common crimes
to appellate advocacy, raising the most intricate matters of
constitutional law.
I had the privilege to follow his work very closely, because I was
then president in the middle 1950s of the NAACP youth councils in
college chapters and attended the NAACP convention in Detroit in 1957
when Dr. Martin Luther King received the Spingarn Award.
Of course, Thurgood Marshall was still a person that we all admired.
As we heard, out of the 32 cases, he won 29 of them, earning more
Supreme Court victories than any other individual before the Supreme
Court and as chief counsel of the NAACP, the landmark Brown v. Board of
Education in 1954, which overturned Plessy v. Ferguson of 1897, saying
that ``separate but equal'' was constitutional.
In 1961, John F. Kennedy appointed Thurgood Marshall to the United
States Court of Appeals in the Second Circuit, despite heavy opposition
from many southern Senators. Thurgood Marshall served on the United
States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit from 1961 to 1965. As we
heard, he wrote 112 opinions, none of which was overturned on appeal.
In 1965, President Johnson appointed Thurgood Marshall to the
position of solicitor general, which he held from 1965 to 1967. Then in
1967, President Johnson appointed Thurgood Marshall as the first
African American Justice to serve on the Supreme Court.
During his 24 years of service in the Supreme Court, Thurgood
Marshall promoted affirmative action and sought protection for the
rights of all Americans.
{time} 1600
In 1992, he was honored with the Liberty Medal recognizing his long
history of protecting individual rights of women, children, prisoners,
and homeless.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from New Jersey
has expired.
Mr. SCHIFF. I yield the gentleman 30 additional seconds.
Mr. PAYNE. Justice Marshall once said, ``Sometimes history takes
things into its own hands.'' His commitment to civil rights and public
service resonate still today. I ask you to listen to the words of
Justice Marshall and strongly support this resolution by recognizing
his contributions to humanity, acknowledged July 2, 2008, the 100th
anniversary of his birth.
Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers. But in the
spirit with which Thurgood Marshall conducted himself, I can't help but
think, as the son of a teacher, that he would be pleased if the name of
the teacher that may have changed history by having him memorize part
of the Constitution had her or his name entered, and if no one on the
floor knows who that is, Mr. Speaker, I would ask unanimous consent for
48 hours to revise and extend my remarks so that we get the name of
that teacher that helped this student, Thurgood Marshall, change
history be inserted into the Congressional Record.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Texas?
There was no objection.
Mr. GOHMERT. With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I would now be delighted to yield 3 minutes
to the gentleman from Illinois, Danny Davis.
Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the gentleman
from New Jersey for introducing this resolution. I was thinking that in
1954, I was a pre-adolescent, just beginning to read, write and try and
understand what was going on. And where I lived, I remember the first
school bus that I rode on was actually made from a flatbed truck that
Mr. Arthur Dooley had. And when the schools were consolidated, he put a
cabin on it and some wooden benches, and that was my first ride on a
school bus.
Then I remember the next year, we inherited a school bus from the
white school. Then, I remember that all of the books that I read, all
of the while that I was growing up, had someone else's name in the
books when we got them, after they had been used by the other school
system where I lived.
And so, when I think of Thurgood Marshall, not only do I think of the
tremendous impact that he continues to have today, but I think of the
impact that he had on the lives of individuals like myself, who lived
in an environment that was obviously very separate and very unequal.
What he did will last as long as America lasts because he clearly
[[Page 14831]]
showed that there could be an opportunity for people to experience some
of what we call the goodness and the greatness of America. And for that
reason, I come to commemorate him today.
Mr. Speaker, I wish to take a moment to support H. Con. Res. 381,
which celebrates the contributions and achievements of Thurgood
Marshall on the 100th anniversary of his birth. Born in Baltimore,
Maryland, on July 2, 1908, Thurgood Marshall was the grandson of a
slave and at an early age his father, William Marshall, instilled in
him an appreciation for the United States Constitution and the rule of
law. He attended undergraduate school at Lincoln University in
Pennsylvania. In 1930, he was accepted to Howard Law School; however,
he also applied to the University of Maryland Law School, but was
denied admission because he was Black. This event caused the direction
of his professional life to focus on equal desegregated education. As
an African-American man who lived through segregation and oppression he
once said, ``Today's Constitution is a realistic document of freedom
only because of several corrective amendments. Those amendments speak
to a sense of decency and fairness that I and other Blacks cherish.''
As an attorney and during his tenure on the Supreme Court, Justice
Marshall's opinions did much to advance the decency and fairness of our
laws, making America a much stronger nation.
Thurgood Marshall's tireless work within the justice system to
eradicate the legacy of slavery and destroy the racist segregation
system of Jim Crow clearly demonstrated his dedication to the struggle
for equal rights and justice in the United States. As chief legal
counsel to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored
People, NAACP, he championed one of the most important cases for equal
rights, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, the landmark case that
demolished the legal basis for segregation in America. He continued to
push for equal rights as the first African-American Supreme Court
Justice, succeeding in creating new protections under law for women,
children, prisoners, and the homeless. By these accomplishments,
Thurgood Marshall established a record for supporting the voiceless
Americans and left a legacy that recognizes that discrimination
includes factors beyond just race and gender. He built a structure of
individual rights that has become the cornerstone of protections for
all Americans. I commemorate the years he has served and the
improvements he has made to this great Nation.
Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Con. Res.
381, a resolution honoring one of the greatest legal minds and civil
rights pioneers of the 20th century, Thurgood Marshall. I thank
Congressman Payne for introducing this resolution and for his
leadership on so many important issues.
When I think of 20th century trailblazers, Thurgood Marshall ranks
among America's greatest heroes. It is an honor and a privilege to pay
tribute to this legal giant as the House commemorates the 100th
anniversary of his birth.
As Thurgood Marshall stated so eloquently, ``A man can make what he
wants of himself if he truly believes that he must be ready for hard
work and many heartbreaks.'' His life's work truly embodied this
quotation. Rising from the segregated streets of Baltimore, Maryland to
the hallowed halls of the Supreme Court of the United States, Thurgood
Marshall's story is one of triumph and courage. More than the first
African-American Supreme Court Justice, Thurgood Marshall was a true
pioneer whose selfless acts advanced the cause of civil rights not only
in the United States, but around the world.
It was more than 50 years ago when Thurgood Marshall and his fellow
Howard University School of Law colleagues and professors launched
their campaign to topple the house Jim Crow built. They acted in the
audacious belief that the citadel of ``separate but equal'' built on
the foundation of Plessey v. Ferguson could be brought down. Thurgood
Marshall's faith that justice will triumph over power was vindicated
when the Supreme Court issued its unanimous opinion in the landmark
case of Brown v. Board of Education. That decision outlawed de jure
segregation in public education, and fueled an international civil
rights revolution that continues to this day.
The victory in Brown v. Board was not Thurgood Marshall's first, nor
would it be his last triumph before the Court he would later grace for
nearly a quarter century. Thurgood Marshall was the principal architect
of equality, working through the courts to eradicate the legacy of
slavery and destroy the segregation system of Jim Crow.
There was Shelley v. Kramer, which held that racial restrictive
covenants in housing were unconstitutional. There was Smith v.
Allwright, which outlawed the infamous ``dual primaries,'' excluding
blacks from the voting in the primary election from which the general
election winner always emerged. Before Thurgood Marshall ascended to
the federal bench as Circuit Judge and later Supreme Court Associate
Justice Marshall, he would argue 32 cases before the Supreme Court,
tallying 29 victories, more than any other individual in history.
Thurgood Marshall's deep faith and commitment to the cause of
equality was the key to his success and to the legacy he leaves us. The
legal strategy he developed as the chief lawyer for the NAACP and the
judicial philosophy he refined as a member of the Supreme Court
reoriented the federal judiciary as champion and protector of civil
rights and individual liberty. The Civil Rights Movement for which the
Brown ruling gave momentum greatly influenced leaders who later fought
for the rights of women, the disabled, the politically oppressed, and
the environment. Even the media has Thurgood Marshall to thank for the
enhanced protection of its liberties.
Mr. Speaker, all Americans are indebted to the late Justice Thurgood
Marshall. Throughout his life, he bravely worked to help our country
make real the promise of the Declaration of Independence. and extend
the blessings and protections of our great Constitution to all
Americans. His work honored America and so it is fitting that Congress
pause to pay tribute to this great American by marking the 100th
anniversary of his birth.
Margaret Mead said, ``Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful
committed people can change the world; indeed, it is the only thing
that ever has.''
The remarkable life of Thurgood Marshall is irrefutable proof that
one person can make a difference.
Happy Birthday, Justice Marshall.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of
this legislation that honors an individual of unprecedented stature and
achievement. This leader was a fighter who stood boldly on the front
lines of democracy to fight for liberty and equality for all. This
legal giant is none other than the late Thurgood Marshall.
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., said that we all can be great because we
all can serve. It is my responsibility to pay tribute to the late great
Thurgood Marshall who served our Nation by transforming it.
The late Thurgood Marshall put in place mechanisms to elevate the
United States to its greatest potential. As a result, all Americans
presently can reap the benefits of Thurgood Marshall's arduous travail.
One of his greatest victories was his work in the landmark Supreme
Court case of Brown v. Board of Education in 1954. In Brown, the
Supreme Court ruled that ``separate but equal'' public education was
unconstitutional because it could never be truly equal.
Marshall's arguments before the Supreme Court were myriad and
historic. In total, Marshall won an unprecedented 29 out of the 32
cases he argued before the Supreme Court.
In 1961, President John F. Kennedy appointed Marshall to the United
States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. On June 13, 1967,
President Johnson appointed Marshall to the Supreme Court following the
retirement of Justice Tom C. Clark. In appointing Marshall, President
Johnson declared this was ``the right thing to do, the right time to do
it, the right man and the right place.'' He was the 96th person to hold
the position, and the first African-American.
Today I stand before you, as many of my colleagues do, as a proud
product of Thurgood Marshall's vision for equal access to education.
Because of Thurgood Marshall's profound vision, one's access to
education is no longer dependent upon the color of their skin or their
income, but upon the demonstration of their academic promise, and
scholarly merit and capability. Notwithstanding Marshall's legendary
achievements in civil rights, America has much work to do. In thinking
of our progress, I am reminded of the Bible in Jeremiah 8:20, ``The
harvest is past, the summer is ended, and we are not saved.'' America
has reaped the harvest of Marshall's life, Marshall's life is now past,
and America has much work to do in civil rights. American people are
not yet saved. The problem of this century, as it has been in past
centuries, is still the problem of the color line. America has made
great strides in this regard. Nonetheless, America still has work to
do.
Although there are still some barriers to overcome, Thurgood Marshall
removed the road block that stymied America from being as good as its
promise. Thurgood Marshall also impacted the international community.
Mr. Marshall was asked by the United Nations and
[[Page 14832]]
the United Kingdom to help draft the constitutions of the emerging
African nations of Ghana and what is now Tanzania. It was felt that the
person who so successfully fought for the rights of America's oppressed
minority would be the perfect person to ensure the rights of all
African citizens, both Black and White, in these two former European
colonies.
Being the right man or woman at the right time is no easy task. There
is no room for passiveness or reluctance to action. Following in the
tradition of the late Thurgood Marshall, we, the representatives of the
United States citizenry, are the right people at the right time.
Although our current battles differ slightly from those of Thurgood
Marshall, we are faced with our own battles which include, the economy,
creating affordable housing, immigration, Iraq, the pursuit of energy
independence, and making sure that our veterans are properly taken care
of.
The precedent that the late Thurgood Marshall set, in fighting to
make the U.S. as great as its promise, should be our motivation to pass
good legislation to protect the rights of American people as we honor
and recognize his dedication and achievements on this 100th anniversary
of his birth.
Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to join me in recognizing a
true hero, Thurgood Marshall who died on January 24, 1993, at the age
of 84. Let us honor his dedication and achievements as we recognize his
contributions to the struggle for equal rights and justice in the
United States.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues for their eloquent
words, and I join them in urging the passage of this resolution
recognizing a genuine American giant.
I yield back the balance of our time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff) that the House suspend the rules
and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res. 381.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the concurrent resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
SENSE OF HOUSE REGARDING FLAGS ON GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the
resolution (H. Res. 1182) expressing the sense of the House of
Representatives that American flags flown on Federal Government
buildings and on Federal property be made in the United States.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The text of the resolution is as follows:
H. Res. 1182
Whereas, on June 14, 1777, the Stars and Stripes was
officially adopted as the national flag of the United States;
Whereas Francis Scott Key was so inspired by the sight of
the American flag still flying over Baltimore's Fort McHenry
after a British bombardment that he wrote the ``Star-Spangled
Banner'' on September 14, 1814;
Whereas the American flag has 7 red and 6 white horizontal
stripes;
Whereas these stripes represent the 13 original States;
Whereas the flag still has its field of blue, which
represents the Union and contains 50 stars, one for each
State;
Whereas many brave men and women have fought and died for
the freedoms that this flag represents; and
Whereas the sight of this banner brings feelings of joy,
courage, pride, and unity for all Americans: Now, therefore,
be it
Resolved, That it is the sense of the United States House
of Representatives that all American flags flown over Federal
buildings be entirely produced in the United States.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Serrano). Pursuant to the rule, the
gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff) and the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Gohmert) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
General Leave
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include
extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. SCHIFF. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, this resolution, introduced by Bob Filner of California,
chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, is both appropriate and
timely. It expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that
American flags flown on Federal Government buildings and on Federal
property should be made in the United States.
As with many basic products sold in the U.S. today, it can be
difficult to find a flag that is made in America. But the American flag
is not just any product. It is our national symbol, and especially when
it flies over Federal Government property, it ought to be made in
America by Americans.
I am proud that the Architect of the Capitol flies only American-made
flags. When one of our constituents or a community organization
receives a flag flown over the Capitol, they can be sure it was made in
the U.S.A.
When we see the American flag, it should remind us of American
workers whose jobs are sometimes now being shipped overseas to
countries with lower labor and worker safety protections. The American
flag represents the values of our Nation, values that cannot be
reconciled with the conditions in many overseas factories.
There is a lot we need to do to ensure that America retains the jobs
that drive our economy. But as one step, if only a small symbolic step,
let us assure the American people that we will not fly imported
American flags over Federal property. The flags we fly will be made by
American workers in American factories. They will never be made in
foreign sweatshops or by children.
I urge my colleagues to support this resolution. And I want to
commend the gentleman from California for introducing it.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume,
and I thank the gentleman from California, and I do rise in support of
House Resolution 1182, a sense of Congress that U.S. flags flown over
Federal buildings should be made in the good old U.S.A.
The flag represents our unity and strength to the rest of the world,
and it is only fitting that U.S. flags flown over Federal buildings be
a product of our own country's labor and resources. Americans produce
the best in the world when they put their minds to it, and it is
entirely appropriate that the flag staffs on our Federal buildings be
reserved for the best in the world, made right here in America.
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the Speaker and
Chairman Conyers for bringing H. Res. 1182 to the floor today. This
important resolution expresses the sense of the Congress that all
American flags flown over Federal Government buildings and on Federal
property should be made in the United States.
The U.S. Census bureau estimates that $5.3 million worth of American
flags were imported from other countries in 2006, mostly from China.
Even though U.S. law requires every flag be labeled with its ``country
of origin,'' the figure of foreign-made American flags has steadily
grown over the past few years. This is an absolute shame! I am glad
that the office of the Architect of the Capitol has reassured me that
flags that we fly everyday over this very Capitol are proudly made in
the United States.
As we celebrated Independence Day last week, we were reminded that
the American flag is much more than our national symbol. It embodies
our courage, liberty, and justice. The flag reminds us each and every
day of the blood that was shed so that we may enjoy our freedoms. So as
we proudly fly the Stars and Stripes, we must ensure that they are
homespun in the United States. I urge my colleagues to vote for H. Res.
1182.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.
Res. 1182 introduced by my distinguished colleague from California,
Representative Filner. This important legislation seeks to express the
sense of the House of Representatives that American flags flown on
Federal Government buildings and on Federal property be made in the
United States.
On June 14, 1777, the Stars and Stripes were officially adopted as
the national flag of the United States. Francis Scott Key was so
inspired by the sight of the American flag still flying over
Baltimore's Fort McHenry after a British bombardment that he wrote the
``Star-Spangled Banner'' on September 14, 1814.
[[Page 14833]]
The American flag has 7 red and 6 white horizontal stripes; these
stripes represent the 13 original States.
The flag still has its field of blue, which represents the Union and
contains 50 stars, one for each State. Many brave men and women have
fought and died for the freedom that this flag represents. The sight of
this banner brings feelings of joy, courage, pride, and unity for all
Americans. Therefore, it should be the sense of the United States House
of Representatives that all American flags flown over Federal buildings
be entirely produced in the United States.
For more than 200 years, the American flag has been the symbol of our
Nation's strength and unity. It's been a source of pride and
inspiration for millions of citizens. And the American Flag has been a
prominent icon in our national history. On June 14, 1777, in order to
establish an official flag for the new Nation, the Continental Congress
passed the first Flag Act, ``resolved that the flag of the United
States be made of thirteen stripes, alternate red and white; that the
Union be thirteen stars, white in a blue field, representing a new
Constellation.''
Between 1777 and 1960, Congress passed several acts that changed the
shape, design and arrangement of the flag and allowed for additional
stars and stripes to be added to reflect the admission of each new
state. Executive Order of President Eisenhower dated January 3, 1959--
provided for the arrangement of the stars in seven rows of seven stars
each, staggered horizontally and vertically. Executive Order of
President Eisenhower dated August 21, 1959--provided for the
arrangement of the stars in nine rows of stars staggered horizontally
and eleven rows of stars staggered vertically which made official the
design of the flag that we know today.
Therefore, we should not reserve the right to make our Nation's flag
at home, where blood was shed by brave men who had a vision for a free
country rooted in democracy and justice. Although we may outsource many
things, I support that we preserve the integrity of the symbol that
serves as the very essence of our national anthem. This anthem serves
to remind us of the United States flag, also known as the Star-Spangled
Banner, which waves over the land of the free and the home of the
brave. When we rise to pledge allegiance to our country, we place our
hand over our beating heart; then we sing the delicate notes of the
Star-Spangled Banner, but most of all we fix our gaze upon our Nation's
flag. This time of reverence serves as a moment of introspection. Not
until we fully come to grips with ourselves can we apply the wisdom
that is needed to gather solutions for international issues.
Our Nation was founded upon the principles of liberty, equality and
justice, which are reflected by the symbol of our Nation's flag.
Therefore, I strongly support this powerful resolution that says that
flags flown on Federal Government buildings and on Federal property be
made in the United States. I urge my colleagues to join me in
supporting this resolution.
Mr. GOHMERT. I hope all my colleagues will join me in supporting this
resolution.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SCHIFF. I join my colleague from Texas in urging support of this
measure, and yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff) that the House suspend the rules
and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 1182.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
HONORING THE DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION ON ITS 35TH ANNIVERSARY
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the
concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 369) honoring the men and women of
the Drug Enforcement Administration on the occasion of its 35th
anniversary.
The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
The text of the concurrent resolution is as follows:
H. Con. Res. 369
Whereas the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) was
created by an Executive order on July 6, 1973, and merged the
previously separate law enforcement and intelligence agencies
responsible for narcotics control;
Whereas the first administrator of the DEA, John R.
Bartels, Jr., was confirmed by the Senate on October 4, 1973;
Whereas since 1973, the men and women of the DEA have
served our Nation with courage, vision, and determination,
protecting all Americans from the scourge of drug
trafficking, drug abuse, and related violence;
Whereas the DEA has adjusted and refined the tactics and
methods by which it targets the most dangerous drug
trafficking operations to bring to justice criminals such as
New York City's Nicky Barnes, key members of the infamous
Colombian Medellin cartel, Thai warlord Khun Sa, several
members of the Mexican Arellano-Felix organization, Afghan
terrorist Haji Baz Mohammad, and international arms dealer
Viktor Bout;
Whereas throughout its 35 years, the DEA has continually
adapted to the evolving trends of drug trafficking
organizations by aggressively targeting organizations
involved in the growing, manufacturing, and distribution of
such substances as marijuana, cocaine, heroin,
methamphetamine, Ecstasy, and controlled prescription drugs;
Whereas in its 227 domestic offices in 21 field divisions,
the DEA continues to strengthen and enhance existing
relationships with Federal, State, and local counterparts in
every State in the Union to combat drug trafficking;
Whereas in this decade alone, DEA special agents have
seized over 5,500 kilograms of heroin; 650,000 kilograms of
cocaine; 2,300,000 kilograms of marijuana; 13,000 kilograms
of methamphetamine; almost 80,000,000 dosage units of
hallucinogens; and made over 240,000 arrests;
Whereas in its 87 foreign offices in 63 countries, the DEA
has the largest international presence of any Federal law
enforcement agency;
Whereas its personnel continue to collaborate closely with
international partners around the globe, including in such
drug-producing countries as Colombia, Mexico, Afghanistan,
and Thailand;
Whereas the results of this international collaboration in
this decade alone have led to the indictments of 63 leaders,
members, and associates of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of
Colombia, a designated foreign terrorist organization, as
well as 144 arrests and detainments of narcotics traffickers
for violations of Afghan and United States narcotics laws and
terrorist-related offenses;
Whereas through the creation of the Diversion Control
Program in 1971, the DEA now registers and regulates over
1,200,000 registrants, while simultaneously combating the
continually-evolving threat posed by the diversion of
controlled pharmaceuticals;
Whereas the DEA continues to hit drug traffickers
financially, where it hurts the most, denying drug
trafficking organizations $3,500,000,000 in fiscal year 2007
alone, exceeding their 5-year goal of $3,000,000,000 annually
by fiscal year 2009;
Whereas DEA special agents continue to work shoulder-to-
shoulder with Federal, State, and local law enforcement
officials throughout the Nation in a cooperative effort to
put drug traffickers behind bars;
Whereas throughout its history, many DEA employees and
members of the agency's task forces have given their lives in
the line of duty, including: Charles Archie Wood, Stafford E.
Beckett, Joseph W. Floyd, Bert S. Gregory, James T. Williams,
Louis L. Marks, James E. Brown, James R. Kerrigan, John W.
Crozier, Spencer Stafford, Andrew P. Sanderson, Anker M.
Bangs, Wilson M. Shee, Mansel R. Burrell, Hector Jordan, Gene
A. Clifton, Frank Tummillo, Richard Heath, Jr., George F.
White, Emir Benitez, Gerald Sawyer, Leslie S. Grosso,
Nickolas Fragos, Mary M. Keehan, Charles H. Mann, Anna Y.
Mounger, Anna J. Pope, Martha D. Skeels, Mary P. Sullivan,
Larry D. Wallace, Ralph N. Shaw, James T. Lunn, Octavio
Gonzalez, Francis J. Miller, Robert C. Lightfoot, Thomas J.
Devine, Larry N. Carwell, Marcellus Ward, Enrique S.
Camarena, James A. Avant, Charles M. Bassing, Kevin L.
Brosch, Susan M. Hoefler, William Ramos, Raymond J. Stastny,
Arthur L. Cash, Terry W. McNett, George M. Montoya, Paul S.
Seema, Everett E. Hatcher, Rickie C. Finley, Joseph T.
Aversa, Wallie Howard, Jr., Eugene T. McCarthy, Alan H. Winn,
George D. Althouse, Becky L. Dwojeski, Stephen J. Strehl,
Juan C. Vars, Jay W. Seale, Meredith Thompson, Frank S.
Wallace, Jr., Frank Fernandez, Jr., Kenneth G. McCullough,
Carrol June Fields, Rona L. Chafey, Shelly D. Bland, Carrie
A. Lenz, Shaun E. Curl, Royce D. Tramel, Alice Faye Hall-
Walton, Elton Armstead, Larry Steilen, Terry Loftus, Jay
Balchunas, and Richard E. Fass;
Whereas many other DEA employees and task force officers
have been wounded or injured in the line of duty; and
Whereas over 9,000 employees of the DEA, including special
agents, intelligence analysts, diversion investigators,
program analysts, forensic chemists, attorneys, and
administrative support, along with over 2,000 task force
officers, and over 2,000 vetted foreign officers, work
tirelessly to hunt down and bring to justice the drug
trafficking cartels that seek to poison our citizens with
dangerous narcotics: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
concurring), That Congress--
[[Page 14834]]
(1) congratulates the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)
on the occasion of its 35th anniversary;
(2) honors the heroic sacrifice of the agency's employees
who have given their lives or have been wounded or injured in
service of our Nation; and
(3) gives heartfelt thanks to all the men and women of the
DEA for their past and continued efforts to defend the
American people from the scourge of illegal drugs and
terrorism.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Schiff) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
General Leave
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include
extraneous material on the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. SCHIFF. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the brave men
and women of the Drug Enforcement Administration on the occasion of its
35th anniversary. The DEA's employees include not only the special
agents, but intelligence analysts, diversion investigators, program
analysts, forensic chemists, attorneys and administrative support
staff, together with task force officers and vetted foreign officials.
These men and women work tirelessly to hunt down and bring to justice
the drug trafficking cartels that profit by poisoning our citizens with
dangerous narcotics.
The DEA and its dedicated officers have served our Nation with
courage, vision and determination, protecting all Americans from the
scourge of drug trafficking, drug abuse and related violence. It is
fitting that we recognize their accomplishments and express our
gratitude for their service.
Throughout its 35 years, the DEA has combated the evolving trends of
drug trafficking by aggressively targeting both domestic and
international organizations involved in the unlawful growing,
manufacturing and distribution of such substances as marijuana,
cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, Ecstasy and controlled prescription
drugs. These successes are unfortunately not without tragic costs.
Over its history, more than 75 DEA employees and task force members
have given their lives in the line of duty, with many others wounded.
During the time I served with the U.S. Attorney's Office in Los
Angeles, I had many, many occasions to work with DEA officers. I saw
the professionalism of their work, their determination, their bravery
and courage.
For some time I worked on the investigation into the capture, murder
and torture of Enrique Camarena and, along with my colleagues, worked
to investigate and bring to justice some of those that were responsible
for the death of that courageous agent. So I have great personal regard
for the many employees of the DEA, their proud history and the great
work they do.
It is a commitment to duty almost too great to ask of anyone, yet
these dedicated men and women of the DEA and their families face the
risks and endure the hardships to make our Nation safer for all of us.
And so, Mr. Speaker, this resolution is a well-deserved tribute to
the DEA on the occasion of its 35th anniversary.
I urge my colleagues to support it, and I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise in support of H. Con. Res. 369. This concurrent resolution
does honor the men and women of the Drug Enforcement Administration on
the occasion of its 35th anniversary.
The Drug Enforcement Administration, or DEA, was created by President
Nixon in July 1973. The DEA was established to create a single unified
command to conduct ``an all-out global war on the drug menace.''
The DEA has the core mission to enforce U.S. controlled substances
laws that regulate drugs such as marijuana, cocaine, heroin,
methamphetamine, Ecstasy and controlled prescription drugs. Initially,
the DEA had 1,470 special agents and a budget of less than $75 million.
Its foreign presence consisted of 43 foreign offices in 31 countries.
Since that time the DEA has grown substantially and is now 5,235
special agents, a budget of more than $2.3 billion, and 87 foreign
offices in 63 countries.
I have personally seen them at work, both here and abroad, and know
that the DEA agents are on the front lines of our war on drugs. They
are courageous individuals, and they are to be honored and commended.
DEA special agents work to track and identify the individuals and
organized crime syndicates that grow, manufacture and traffic drugs
into the U.S. To accomplish that mission, the DEA manages a national
drug intelligence program by cooperating with Federal, State, local and
foreign officials to collect, analyze and disseminate strategic and
operational drug intelligence information. The DEA and its multi-
jurisdictional partners form task forces that use this intelligence to
plan highly successful operations.
In May, a DEA-led task force completed an investigation called
``Operation Sudden Fall'' in San Diego. This investigation resulted in
the arrest of 96 individuals, including 75 San Diego State University
students who were involved with the trafficking of cocaine, marijuana
and Ecstasy on the university's campus.
As the plague of drugs has become more pervasive, the DEA has also
increased its international efforts to combat drug trafficking abroad.
The DEA coordinates with the United Nations, Interpol and foreign
governments to develop programs designed to reduce the availability of
illicit drugs in the United States such as crop eradication, crop
substitution and training of foreign officials.
{time} 1615
These international efforts bring significant results. Recently,
Colombia extradited 14 members of a paramilitary and drug trafficking
group to the United States to face charges of drug trafficking, support
to a terrorist organization, and money laundering.
In June, the DEA worked with partners in Afghanistan to conduct
Operation Albatross. This effort resulted in the seizure of 262 tons of
hashish, the largest of any known drug seizure in history.
As H. Con. Res. 369 notes, in this decade alone, DEA agents have
seized over 5,500 kilograms of heroin, 650,000 kilograms of cocaine,
2.3 million kilograms of marijuana, 13,000 kilograms of
methamphetamine, almost 80 million dosage units of hallucinogens, and
made over 240,000 arrests. This is a tremendous amount of poison that
they have prevented from entering our fellow citizens.
In supporting this resolution, I join my colleagues in, one,
congratulating the DEA on the occasion of its 35th anniversary; two,
honoring the heroic sacrifice of the agency's employees who have given
their lives or have been wounded or injured in service of our Nation;
and three, giving heartfelt thanks to all of the men and women of the
DEA for their past and continued efforts to defend the American people
from the scourge of illegal drugs and terrorism.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to yield 3
minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).
Mr. PASCRELL. Thank you for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the men and women of the Drug
Enforcement Administration on the occasion of their 35th anniversary.
We must take every opportunity to honor our brave law enforcement
officers, but we often forget the critical importance of the DEA and
the terrible dangers that their officers face in order to keep our
streets safe from drugs. When you look at the list of those who have
given their lives, Mr. Speaker, we know how serious this is. And we
have this issue occur on our streets every day.
[[Page 14835]]
I want to congratulate the DEA acting administrator, Michele M.
Leonhart, for leading this commendable agency through its 35th year. I
want to give great thanks to Gerald McAleer, Special Agent in charge of
the DEA New Jersey division, for all of the tremendous work he's done
to team with local law enforcement in order to provide the most
effective level of security against drugs in our neighborhoods.
Just 3 days ago, the DEA in New Jersey teamed with Passaic County
Prosecutor James F. Avigliano to arrest six individuals affiliated with
the Trey 9 set of the Bloods street gang who were peddling large
quantities of drugs in Newark, Parsippany, and in my town of Paterson,
New Jersey. These arrests were executed as part of New Jersey Governor
Jon Corzine's Crime Initiative to target criminal gangs, drugs, and
guns.
This particular 35-day investigation was initiated by the
prosecutor's office of gang/narcotics task force, the Drug Enforcement
Administration, the United States Postal Office, and the Clifton Police
Department, proving once again that our greatest level of homeland
security can only come from Federal, State, and local enforcement
agencies working in this partnership.
In regards to the DEA's efforts in this high-profile drug bust, I can
provide no greater testament to the urgency of the work than by quoting
Prosecutor James Avigliano who stated this: ``Without the outstanding
cooperation with the DEA Newark office, we would have been unable to
arrest six major gang leaders and confiscate a substantial quantity of
narcotics. The assistance provided by the DEA is key to our continued
success in taking high level dealers and large quantities of drugs off
the street.''
It is due to the critical nature of their work that I am very
thankful that we saw fit to approve much-needed funding of the DEA in
last year's Consolidated Appropriations Act that put 200 more agents on
the street after having to endure a long hiring freeze in previous
years. No justification for that whatsoever, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. SCHIFF. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
Mr. PASCRELL. We must do more to honor the DEA and I pledge my full
support.
Mr. Speaker, let me plead with you and my fellow Members on both
sides of the aisle that there is no greater threat to the United States
of America than the undermining of our will and our morale with the
issuing of drugs through proliferation through our streets. There is no
greater danger, Mr. Speaker. I cannot say it enough. The DEA
understands that. Hopefully the Congress will come to understand it as
well.
Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, at this time I have no other speakers.
I reserve the remainder of my time.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, at this time it gives me great pleasure to
yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Ruppersberger).
Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support and
recognition of House Resolution 369 honoring the men and women of the
Drug Enforcement Administration on the occasion of its 35th
anniversary.
For the last 35 years, the men and women of the DEA have served their
country with distinction and honor while fighting one of the most
dangerous problems this country faces today. Drug use and the violence
associated with drug trafficking touches every American's life in some
way or another. The men and women of the DEA are working tirelessly
every day to prevent drugs from coming into the United States and to
prevent or dismantle the manufacturing and distribution of drugs within
our borders. This is no easy task.
The DEA consistently adapts to changes in the drug trade. From
dismantling illegal Internet pharmacies to identifying new trends in
manufacturing and distribution, the DEA is and must be at the top of
their game. Because the DEA has the greatest presence overseas of any
Federal law enforcement agency, diplomacy and collaboration with the
leadership of drug-producing countries, like Colombia, is essential for
their efforts to be effective. The men and women of the DEA are up to
the challenge.
The over 9,000 employees of the DEA are an asset to the country, and
I'm proud to honor them every day. They are in very dangerous places
putting their lives on the line every day. I want to thank them for
their dedication and their commitment to the agency and our country. I
urge my colleagues to support the resolution.
Mr. GOHMERT. With that, Mr. Speaker, we would urge our colleagues to
join us in this resolution's support.
My friend from Ohio will be managing the next two bills, the Debbie
Smith Reauthorization Act, and the one to follow. Before I finish
yielding back my time, I would like to express my thanks to my friend
from California, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, the ranking
member of Judiciary, as well as our chairman in Crime, Bobby Scott, on
the Debbie Smith reauthorization. I will not be here to be able to
speak on that, but I am so grateful we were able to keep that from
being overly burdened with things that would keep it from achieving its
goal which, here again, helps everybody, including the DEA agents, when
we do that job properly. I'm so grateful that we're going to be able to
take that up and get that done today.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, just to conclude on the legislation
recognizing the 35th anniversary of the DEA, I recall very well the
loss of two DEA agents in the City of San Marino, very close to my
district, back when I was with the U.S. Attorney. They were involved in
a buy-bust. It was a small amount of drugs, a small amount of money, I
think amounting to some $35,000. These two agents, one was killed in a
shoot-out with the drug dealers, the other shot at point-blank range
execution style when these young drug dealers decided they would rather
keep the $35,000 and kill two people for it.
This is the kind of risk the DEA agents face every day. We're
extraordinarily grateful to have such courageous men and women working
within the agency. I urge the passage of the recognition bill.
Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.
Con. Res. 369, honoring the men and women of the United States Drug
Enforcement Administration on the occasion of its 35th Anniversary.
Earlier this year, I had the opportunity to visit the DEA's training
facility in Quantico, Virginia.
This training facility is designed to prepare local law enforcement
agents to deal with the specific hazards surrounding small, clandestine
methamphetamine labs. More than 100 law enforcement officers from my
home state of Nebraska have taken part in the training.
We also had the opportunity to speak briefly with agent trainees at
the DEA training facility.
I truly appreciate these men and women who are battling against the
evil of illegal drugs in the heartland of Nebraska and throughout our
country.
These individuals--both the agents on the street and their
instructors--deserve commendation for their dedication and sacrifice.
Through public education, vigilance, and the efforts of law
enforcement, we can curb the spread of dangerous drugs in our
communities.
Mr. SCHIFF. I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff) that the House suspend the rules
and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res. 369.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the concurrent resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
DEBBIE SMITH REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2008
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 5057) to reauthorize the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant
Program, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
[[Page 14836]]
H.R. 5057
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Debbie Smith Reauthorization
Act of 2008''.
SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF THE DEBBIE SMITH DNA BACKLOG GRANT
PROGRAM.
(a) Amendments.--Section 2 of the DNA Analysis Backlog
Elimination Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 14135) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by redesignating paragraphs (3) through (5) as
paragraphs (4) through (6), respectively;
(B) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following new
paragraph:
``(3) To carry out, for inclusion in such Combined DNA
Index System, DNA analyses of samples from missing or
unidentified persons, including samples from the remains,
personal effects, or biological relatives of such persons.'';
(C) in paragraph (4) (as redesignated by subparagraph (A)),
by striking ``paragraph (1) or (2)'' and inserting
``paragraph (1), (2), or (3)''; and
(D) in paragraph (5) (as so redesignated), by striking ``in
paragraph (1)'' and inserting ``in paragraphs (1) and (3)'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (6), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon;
(B) in paragraph (7), by striking the period and inserting
``; and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(8) provide assurances that the State or unit of local
government has implemented, or will implement not later than
2 years after the date of such application, a process under
which the State or unit, respectively, provides for the
collection, for purposes of inclusion in the Combined DNA
Index System of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, of DNA
samples from all felons who are imprisoned in a prison of
such State or unit, respectively, (including all felons
imprisoned in such prison or unit, respectively, as of the
date of the enactment of the Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act
of 2008).'';
(3) in subsection (c)(3)--
(A) by striking subparagraphs (A) through (D);
(B) by redesignating subparagraph (E) as subparagraph (A);
and
(C) by inserting after subparagraph (A) (as so
redesignated) the following new subparagraph:
``(B) For each of the fiscal years 2010 through 2014, not
less than 40 percent of the grant amounts shall be awarded
for purposes under subsection (a)(2) of this section.''; and
(4) by amending subsection (j) to read as follows:
``(j) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to the Attorney General for grants under
subsection (a)--
``(1) $151,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
``(2) $200,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2010
through 2014.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by paragraph (2)
of subsection (a) shall apply to grants made on or after
January 1, 2009.
SEC. 3. STUDY TO ASSESS THE DNA ANALYSIS BACKLOG.
(a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) despite the funding provided for more than 5 fiscal
years by the Federal Government to assist in the reduction of
the DNA analysis backlog, the backlog continues to exist in
many crime laboratories around the country;
(2) as a consequence of the continuance of the DNA analysis
backlog, many violent crimes that could be solved remain
unsolved, and individuals who have been wrongfully convicted
who could be determined to be innocent through DNA testing
remain in prison; and
(3) the causes of the DNA analysis backlog are complex and
require a thorough and detailed study.
(b) Study Required.--The National Academy of Sciences
shall, in consultation with no fewer than 3 forensic science
practitioners from States and units of local government,
conduct a study to determine the resources and other
requirements necessary to eliminate the DNA analysis backlog
and to prevent such a backlog from reoccurring after it has
been eliminated.
(c) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the National Academy of Sciences shall
submit to the Attorney General and to Congress a report on
the results of the study conducted under subsection (b).
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $2,000,000 for
fiscal year 2009.
SEC. 4. INCENTIVES FOR PERMANENT STATE-GENERATED DNA FUNDING
STREAMS.
(a) Matching Funds.--For each fiscal year beginning after
the date of the enactment of this Act, each eligible DNA
funding State, with respect to a funding mechanism described
in subsection (b) implemented by such State, shall be
eligible for Federal matching funds to carry out such
mechanism in an amount determined to be appropriate by the
Attorney General.
(b) Eligible DNA Funding States Described.--For purposes of
this section, the term ``eligible DNA funding State'' means a
State that demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Attorney
General that the State has implemented (and applies) a
permanent funding mechanism that generates funds, whether by
fees or penalties, that are allocated by the State only for
purposes of the analysis of DNA samples for law enforcement
purposes.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section such sums as may
be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2009 through 2013.
SEC. 5. EVALUATION OF DNA INTEGRITY AND SECURITY.
(a) Evaluation.--Not later than one year after the date of
the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the
Attorney General shall evaluate the integrity and security of
DNA collection and storage practices and procedures at a
sample of crime laboratories in the United States to
determine the extent to which DNA samples are tampered with
or are otherwise contaminated in crime laboratories. Such
sample shall be a representative sample of crime laboratories
in the United States.
(b) Report.--The Attorney General shall annually report to
Congress the findings of the evaluation conducted under
subsection (a).
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $10,000,000 for
each of the fiscal years 2009 through 2015.
SEC. 6. INCENTIVES FOR STATES TO COLLECT DNA SAMPLES FROM
INDIVIDUALS ARRESTED FOR OR CHARGED WITH MURDER
AND SEX CRIMES.
(a) In General.--In the case of a State that receives funds
for a fiscal year under subpart 1 of part E of title I of the
Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 and that
has an implemented enhanced State DNA collection process for
such year, the amount of funds that would otherwise be
allocated for that fiscal year to the State under such
subpart shall be increased by 10 percent.
(b) Enhanced State DNA Collection Process Defined.--For
purposes of this section, the term ``enhanced State DNA
collection process'' means, with respect to a State, a
process under which the State provides for the collection,
for purposes of inclusion in the Combined DNA Index System of
the Federal Bureau of Investigation, of DNA samples from the
following individuals who are at least 18 years of age:
(1) Such individuals who are arrested for or charged with a
criminal offense under State law that consists of murder or
voluntary manslaughter or any attempt to commit murder or
voluntary manslaughter.
(2) Such individuals who are arrested for or charged with a
criminal offense under State law that has an element
involving a sexual act or sexual contact with another and
that is punishable by imprisonment for more than 1 year, or
an attempt to commit such an offense.
(3) Such individuals who are arrested for or charged with a
criminal offense under State law that consists of a specified
offense against a minor (as defined in section 111(7) of the
Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (42 U.S.C.
16911(7))), or an attempt to commit such an offense.
The expungement requirements under section 210304(d) of the
DNA Identification Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14132(d)) shall
apply to any samples collected pursuant to this section for
purposes of inclusion in the Combined DNA Index System.
(c) Effective Date.--The provisions of this section shall
apply to grants made on or after the date of the enactment of
this Act.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated, in addition to funds made available under
section 508 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act
of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3758), such sums as may be necessary to
carry out this section for each of the fiscal years 2009
through 2013.
SEC. 7. ADDITIONAL STUDY AND REPORT ON INVESTIGATIONS AND
PROSECUTIONS RELATED TO CODIS ``HITS''.
(a) Study.--The Inspector General of the Department of
Justice shall carry out a study on--
(1) the number of instances in which DNA samples that are
matched with samples included in the Combined DNA Index
System database of the Federal Bureau of Investigation that
are followed up on by appropriate law enforcement entities;
(2) the number of such matches described in paragraph (1)
that are brought to the attention of a prosecutor;
(3) the number of the investigations described in paragraph
(2) that result in a trial; and
(4) in the case of matches described in paragraph (1) that
were not followed up on by appropriate law enforcement
entities, were not brought to the attention of a prosecutor,
or did not result in a trial--
(A) the reasons why such matches were not pursued
accordingly; and
(B) the resulting impact on the criminal justice system,
including whether other
[[Page 14837]]
crimes were committed that could have been prevented if such
matches had been pursued accordingly.
(b) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Inspector General shall submit to
Congress a report on the study under subsection (a).
SEC. 8. NATIONAL DNA INDEX SYSTEM ADVISORY BOARD.
(a) Establishment.--The Attorney General shall establish
the National DNA Index System Advisory Board (in this section
referred to as the ``NDIS Advisory Board'' to develop and, if
appropriate, periodically revise standards and requirements
for the use of and access to the index described in section
210304(a) of the DNA Identification Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C.
14132(a)).
(b) Membership.--Not later than 30 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Director of the Federal Bureau
of Investigation shall appoint members to the NDIS Advisory
Board as follows:
(1) At least 4 directors of State or local forensic
laboratories.
(2) One representative from the Federal Bureau of
Investigation.
(3) One representative from the Scientific Working Group on
DNA Analysis Methods.
(4) One representative from the Office of Legal Policy of
the Department of Justice.
(5) One representative from the National Institute of
Justice.
(6) One representative from the National Academies of
Science.
(7) One State or local prosecutor.
(8) One criminal defense attorney.
(9) One representative from the National Institute of
Standards and Technology.
(10) One member of the academic community who specializes
in DNA privacy issues.
(11) One crime victim or crime victim advocate.
(12) One representative of a State police agency.
(13) One representative of a local police agency.
(c) Application of FACA.--The Federal Advisory Committee
Act (5 U.S.C. App.), other than section 14 of such Act, shall
apply to the NDIS Advisory Board.
(d) Notice, Comment, and Publication.--The Attorney General
shall provide for public notice and comment for each standard
developed under this section and for publication of each such
standard.
(e) Pay and Reimbursement.--
(1) No compensation for members of ndis advisory board.--
Except as provided in paragraph (2), a member of the NDIS
Advisory Board may not receive pay, allowances, or benefits
by reason of their service on the Board.
(2) Travel expenses.--Each member shall receive travel
expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence under
subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code.
(f) Quality Assurance Standards.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the NDIS Advisory Board shall
develop (and provide recommendations to the Director of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation on) standards governing the
use of and access to the index described in subsection (a).
The NDIS Advisory Board shall periodically update such
standards as appropriate. The standards shall provide for the
expedited uploading into such index by State and local
forensic laboratories of DNA analyses of samples obtained
from persons convicted of crimes, including such analyses
processed by private forensic laboratories.
(2) Consideration of additional proposals to expedite
processing and uploading of dna samples.--Not later than one
year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the NDIS
Advisory Board shall also provide recommendations to the
Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation on the
following:
(A) The feasibility and desirability of entering into
agreements with private forensic laboratories to enable
direct access to the Combined DNA Index System of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation for the purpose of uploading DNA
analyses of samples obtained from persons convicted of
crimes.
(B) The feasibility and desirability of providing for more
limited technical review audits of DNA analyses of samples
prior to uploading such data into the Combined DNA Index
System.
(C) The feasibility and desirability of permitting greater
participation in the technical review of DNA analyses of
samples by contractor personnel.
(D) The feasibility and desirability of allowing immediate
upload of DNA profiles obtained from crime scene samples and
rape kits.
(3) Issuance of policies, procedures, and standards.--The
Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, with the
approval of the Attorney General, after taking into
consideration the recommended policies, procedures, and
standards recommended by the NDIS Advisory Board under this
section shall issue (and revise from time to time) policies,
procedures, and standards relating to the administration of
the National DNA Index System including, standards for
quality assurance, testing the proficiency of forensic
laboratories, and forensic analysts, in conducting analyses
of DNA.
(g) Exclusivity of Policies, Procedures, and Standards.--
The policies, procedures, and standards issued under
subsection (f)(3) shall be the exclusive policies,
procedures, and standards issued with respect to State,
local, and private laboratories that participate in the
National DNA Index System. Polices, procedures, laboratory
audit requirements, standards, and any other manner of
regulation or control (other than any condition imposed
pursuant to a grant awarded through the Department of
Justice) may not be inconsistent with, or expand upon
provisions contained in such approved policies, procedures,
or standards.
SEC. 9. DNA TECHNOLOGY ENHANCEMENT GRANTS.
(a) In General.--The Attorney General shall establish a
grant program under which the Attorney General may make
grants to States and units of local government to purchase
forensic DNA technology or to improve such technology.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated $50,000,000 for each of the fiscal years
2009 through 2013 to carry out subsection (a).
SEC. 10. REAUTHORIZATIONS OF CERTAIN DNA-RELATED GRANT
PROGRAMS.
(a) DNA Training and Education for Law Enforcement,
Correctional Personnel, and Court Officers.--Section 303(b)
of the Justice For All Act of 2004 (42 U.S.C. 14136(b)) is
amended by striking ``2009'' and inserting ``2014''.
(b) Sexual Assault Forensic Exam Program Grants.--Section
304(c) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 14136a(c)) is amended by
striking ``2009'' and inserting ``2014''.
(c) DNA Research and Development.--Section 305(c) of such
Act (42 U.S.C. 14136b(c)) is amended by striking ``2009'' and
inserting ``2014''.
(d) DNA Identification of Missing Persons.--Section 308(c)
of such Act (42 U.S.C. 14136d(c)) is amended by striking
``2009'' and inserting ``2014''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Schiff) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
General Leave
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include
extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5057, the Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act of 2008,
authorizes the Attorney General to provide grants to States to assist
them in reducing the enormous DNA evidence backlog in the Nation's
laboratories. This important legislation will help to solve more
crimes. It will help to solve more crimes more quickly, and perhaps
most importantly, it will help to ensure that other crimes are
prevented altogether.
Across our Nation, law enforcement officers and prosecutors have come
to recognize the role that DNA evidence can play in solving crimes. As
a result, ever-increasing numbers of DNA samples are being collected
from crime scenes and offenders. There is no better example that
demonstrates the effectiveness of DNA technology in solving crimes than
that of Debbie Smith, the bill's namesake.
In 1989, Ms. Smith was kidnapped in her Virginia home and viciously
attacked by a stranger who threatened her life should she report the
attack. Nevertheless, with remarkable courage and determination, she
reported the rape, and the crime lab preserved the DNA evidence of her
attacker. Eventually, when the perpetrator was required to provide a
DNA sample for a separate violent crime he was convicted for, a match
was made to the sample collected from his attack on Ms. Smith,
identifying him as her attacker.
Mr. Speaker, Debbie Smith and her husband, Rob, are here with us
today, and I would like to ask them to stand so we can not only
acknowledge their presence but thank them for their courage and
determination and their work which has served as the driving force
behind this legislation.
The remarkable law enforcement value of DNA evidence has
unfortunately been limited by the enormous backlog of DNA samples still
awaiting analysis. This means that crimes remain unsolved, violent
offenders remain at large, and innocent individuals may be wrongfully
imprisoned. H.R.
[[Page 14838]]
5057 would significantly increase the funding levels authorized for
this important program and would also provide for important studies to
further improve the system. H.R. 5057 also includes a number of other
important initiatives that were adopted during the committee process.
Beginning in the 1990s, the Nation's crime labs were largely
unprepared for the onslaught of requests for DNA services. Samples
continue to pour into our Nation's crime labs at a pace faster than
they can be processed. In order to address backlog problems, many
States have begun outsourcing some of the work to accredited private
laboratories. However, the FBI requires the crime labs perform in-house
technical reviews of 100 percent of database samples from contract
labs. While this requirement is certainly important with regard to
forensic casework samples, it is found to be an onerous requirement
with regard to the rather simple swabs that are taken from convicted
offenders.
{time} 1630
In fact, these requirements add substantial additional costs and
further delay backlog reduction. Indeed, even Debbie Smith grant funds
are expended on fulfilling these onerous requirements.
The National Institute of Justice has confirmed that ``the burden of
these requirements has increased the backlog of convicted offender
samples, cost millions of dollars, and forced crime laboratories to
remove staff from analyzing rape kits and other forensic samples.''
In order to address this issue, I offered a bipartisan provision with
my colleague Representative Dan Lungren that would create a new
National DNA Index System Advisory Board to ensure diverse
representation of views, including State and local lab directors,
officials from the FBI and DOJ, and other relevant stakeholders.
The board is directed to develop new standards governing the use of
the Federal index that provide for the expedited uploading by State and
local forensic labs of convicted offender profiles generated by private
labs. These new standards are to be issued within 6 months.
In addition, the board is directed to look into the feasibility of
other measures that would greatly expedite analysis and uploading, as
well as backlog reduction. These include the feasibility and
desirability of entering into agreements with private forensic labs to
enable direct access to CODIS for the purpose of uploading DNA analyses
of samples obtained from persons convicted of crimes; the feasibility
and desirability of providing for more limited technical review audits
of DNA analyses of samples prior to uploading such data into CODIS; and
the feasibility and desirability permitting greater participation in
the technical review process of contractor personnel.
I also authored another provision in this legislation that aims to
increase the crime-solving abilities of our DNA databases.
Today, 12 States collect samples from murder and sex crime arrestees,
including my home State of California. Four of these States, including
California, collect or are preparing to collect samples from all felony
arrestees.
Virginia was the first State to expand its database to include
arrestees, and since then, the State has seen a total of 398 hits to
their arrestee database, 74 of which were associated with sexual
assault cases. For the first two months of this year alone, six hits to
arrestees were made, the first hit coming just after the upload of the
first 80 samples into the database.
A 2005 Chicago study examined the criminal activities of only eight
individuals and found that 60 violent crimes could have been prevented,
including 53 murders and rapes, if DNA was required for felony arrests.
In one example, Andre Crawford was charged with 11 murders and one
attempted murder/aggravated sexual assault. If the State had required
him to give a DNA sample during an earlier felony arrest, the
subsequent 10 murders and one rape would not have occurred.
In another example, Mario Villa was charged with four rapes, linked
by DNA to two other rapes, and a main suspect in an additional rape and
two attempted rapes. If the State had required him to give a DNA sample
during an earlier felony arrest, eight rapes or attempted rapes could
have been prevented.
A recent Maryland study looked at the criminal histories for three
offenders and found that 20 crimes, including rapes, sexual assaults,
and murder could have been prevented had their DNA samples been
required upon arrest.
Mr. Speaker, States who have moved to collect arrestee samples, such
as Virginia and California, are greatly increasing the power of the
national DNA network, while States with far narrower collection regimes
are making the Federal database, which Congress has invested a
substantial amount of money in, less sufficient. These States can still
avail themselves of the Federal database and take full advantage of the
expansive collection regimes of other States.
Therefore, a provision of this bill would provide incentives for
States to follow the lead of the 12 States that currently collect
samples from individuals arrested for or charged with murder and sex
crimes. These States who would enact such an enhanced collection
process would be eligible for a 10 percent increase in Federal formula
law enforcement funds.
Since State backlogs are so huge and Federal funds remain limited,
States have had to share a significant portion of the burden to fund
these activities. However, State funding can fluctuate from year-to-
year given the budget process and competing priorities. Some States,
such as California, have penalty fee structures in place that provide a
more stable and consistent funding stream.
Proposition 69 in California provided for a $1 penalty for every $10
or fraction thereof upon every fine, penalty and forfeiture levied on
criminal offenses, including traffic expenses, but excluding parking.
Over $40 million has been raised in California since its inception, and
this has taken some of the burden off the Federal Government and the
Debbie Smith grant funds available each year.
States should be encouraged to put such structures in place and for
their ability to not rely as heavily on Federal resources.
Therefore, I authored a provision in this bill that would authorize
the Attorney General to provide matching funds to those States that
have implemented permanent funding mechanisms that generate funds,
whether by fees or penalties, that are allocated by the State only for
the purpose of analyzing DNA samples for law enforcement purposes.
Finally, this legislation includes a separate grant authorization for
upgrading laboratory capability and infrastructure. And it provides
supplemental grant incentives for States to fund their own DNA
initiatives.
We have a comprehensive bill that will give lawmakers the best
information for formulating policy, as well as provide law enforcement
the most up-to-date tools and technology for solving crimes.
I'd like to commend Carolyn Maloney of New York for her leadership in
authoring this bill. I also want to thank Chairman Conyers and Ranking
Member Smith of Texas, as well as Subcommittee Chairman Bobby Scott and
Ranking Member Louie Gohmert for their leadership in making this a
fully bipartisan effort.
I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I am pleased to join the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff) in
support of H.R. 5057, the Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act.
Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney introduced this legislation to
reauthorize the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Elimination Grant Program
through fiscal year 2014 at $151 million per year.
DNA has become an invaluable tool in identifying and convicting
criminal suspects. At the same time, the increased use of DNA evidence
in criminal prosecutions has also increased
[[Page 14839]]
DNA collection and processing requests. The result is a substantial
backlog in processing DNA evidence across the country.
The Debbie Smith program provides grants to State and local
governments to reduce the DNA backlog of samples collected and entered
into the national DNA database. The program, originally authorized in
2000, expires at the end of fiscal year 2009.
Since 2000, DNA backlog grants have assisted State and local
governments with the collection of 2.5 million DNA samples from
convicted offenders and arrestees for inclusion in the national DNA
database. The backlog grants have also funded the testing of
approximately 104,000 DNA cases between 2004 and 2007.
While the Debbie Smith Program has indeed been successful in reducing
the backlog, there is still work to do. A 2003 Department of Justice
report indicated a backlog of 48,000 DNA samples. The current backlog
is expected to be just as high.
Mr. Speaker, every 2.7 minutes a person becomes a victim of sexual
assault in this country. That's 22 Americans every hour, 528 every day,
and over 3,600 every week who are the victims of rape or sexual
assault. Debbie Smith was one of these victims, and it took 6 years
before her assailant was identified through DNA evidence.
I also would like to commend Debbie Smith and her family for their
courage and determination to help others who may become victims and
also to prevent others from becoming victims in the future. It's very
commendable for her and very brave of her and her family to step
forward and go through what they have gone through.
There is another aspect of this bill that I would also like to
highlight, and that is the expansion of the grant program to locate and
identify missing persons and human remains. There are estimated to be
more than 40,000 sets of unidentified human remains just, oftentimes,
literally sitting on the shelves in medical examiner offices or in law
enforcement offices or in coroner offices around the country. These
cases have been put at the bottom of the list far too often, while most
recent cases are investigated and solved using DNA technology. Yet,
many of the 40,000 are also victims of heinous crimes.
For example in 1996, a woman who became a very good friend of myself
and the staff people in my office, Debbie Culberson, her daughter
Carrie died a gruesome death. While the murderer was convicted and will
serve the rest of his life in jail, Carrie has never been found.
Evidence has led investigators to the Ohio River, which divides the
States of Ohio and Kentucky, but we don't know for sure.
Grants such as those made available by H.R. 5057 will ensure that law
enforcement nationwide have the resources to make identifying these
human remains a priority as well.
Congress has a responsibility to assist States with investigating,
prosecuting, and severely punishing those who commit rapes and other
sexual offenses and provide justice for victims. The Debbie Smith
Reauthorization Act protects victims by providing Federal funding to
process the DNA evidence needed to take violent criminals off the
streets.
I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important
legislation.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to recognize the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) for 4 minutes.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the distinguished member of the
Judiciary Committee and the manager of the minority side, as well as
the chairman of the full committee, Mr. Conyers; the ranking member,
Mr. Smith; the subcommittee Chair, Mr. Scott; and the ranking member,
Mr. Gohmert.
As a member of the subcommittee on crime and a senior member of the
House Judiciary Committee, I rise with great enthusiasm to support H.R.
5057, the Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act of 2008.
And I salute Mr. and Mrs. Smith. This is not a new bill to me.
Congresswoman Maloney has worked very hard and has engaged the many
women of the Congress to look at this issue in many, many different
ways. We thank you, Debbie Smith for your courage, and we thank you for
your bravery.
This is an important initiative. There are many improvements that
have made this bill even better, but had it not been for Debbie Smith
and her courage, we would not be where we are today.
As my colleague has already said, this bill was named for Debbie
Smith who was kidnapped in her Virginia home and raped by a stranger.
The Debbie Smith DNA backlog grant bill authorized grant money to
States to collect samples from crime scenes and convicted persons.
This legislation also allows us to conduct DNA analysis and enter
these results into a comprehensive national database. Debbie Smith's
attacker remained unidentified for over 6 years, until a DNA sample
collected from a convicted person serving time in Virginia State prison
revealed his involvement in her rape. Although eventually identified,
the 6 years between crime and identification allowed Ms. Smith's
attacker to engage in more criminal activity.
What is the purpose and value of this legislation? It is to ensure
that the perpetrator, the person who has acted in a violent and heinous
way, is tried and convicted in a direct and fair and just manner, and
that this individual is taken off the streets in order not to harm
anyone else.
I am very gratified that we have expanded this legislation and that
it is also an opportunity not only to ensure that those who have
committed the crime are ``doing the time'' but to make sure that DNA is
accurate and untainted for a fair and just results.
I support this legislation, and therefore, I offered a successful
amendment that would require the Attorney General to evaluate the
integrity and security of DNA collection and storage practices and
procedures at a sample of crime laboratories throughout the country to
determine the extent to which DNA samples are tampered with or are
otherwise contaminated in such laboratories. This is crucial. A person
who should be convicted and is still walking the streets, can create
more danger, and those who have been tried and incarcerated on
contaminated DNA deserve a fair and just recommendation of their case.
Contaminated DNA helps no one and this amendment corrects that problem.
The sample should be a representative sample and should include at
least one lab from each State. My amendment would require the Attorney
General to conduct this evaluation annually, and the Attorney General
would be required to submit the evaluation to Congress. This amendment
is necessary, and it authorizes some $10 million over a 5-year period
to allow this process to occur.
In Harris County, Texas, and other places around the Nation, DNA
evidence was contaminated and wrongfully used to convict persons based
upon faulty evidence. An investigation into the crime lab in Houston,
for example, revealed that bad management, undertrained staff, false
documentation, and inaccurate work cast doubt on thousands of DNA-based
convictions. Investigators raised serious questions about the
reliability of evidence in hundreds of cases they investigated and
asked for further independent scrutiny and new testing to determine the
extent to which individuals were wrongly convicted with faulty
evidence.
Two individuals, Mr. Rodriguez and Mr. Joshua Sutton, were victimized
by this faulty DNA process. Both served time in jail and were released
when their cases were properly reviewed.
{time} 1645
This is evidence that my amendment helps an already good bill, which
will help victims like Mrs. Smith, but it also provides the added
integrity to this system.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. SCHIFF. I would be happy to yield an additional minute to the
gentlewoman from Texas.
[[Page 14840]]
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. My amendment ensures that Congress will
exercise the appropriate oversight over the DNA Data Collection
Program. It will ensure the integrity and security of the DNA
collection and storage procedures. It is my hope that my amendment will
minimize wrongful convictions and will make the DNA storage and
collection process more reliable.
When such a sacrifice has been made by someone as brave as Mrs.
Smith, along with the work that has been done by my colleague,
Congresswoman Maloney, and this Congress, it further enhances the
Nation's criminal justice system. We all agree, the criminal justice
system should convict those who have done these dastardly acts,
incarcerate them through a fair process of justice. And then, those who
are innocent, make sure that the criminal justice system has the tools
to insure them not guilty through transparent DNA evidence.
This is the way the American's justice system should be. We want this
open fair system as much for Harris County, Texas, as we want it for
Los Angeles, Chicago, and other places around the Nation.
This bill is a bill of integrity and fairness, and it upholds the
fair justice system of the United States of America.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5057, the ``Debbie Smith
Reauthorization Act of 2008'' (reauthorizing Title II of P.L. 108-405).
This Act authorizes funding to eliminate the large backlogs of DNA
crime scene samples awaiting testing in State forensic labs. I am in
support of this bill.
In recent years, law enforcement agencies have realized the critical
value that DNA evidence has in quickly solving cases. Often, a DNA
sample result can scientifically link a perpetrator to a crime or prove
a defendant's innocence with virtual certainty. Many of the Nation's
Federal and State criminal forensics laboratories currently are
overwhelmed with innumerable samples awaiting DNA analysis.
Named for Debbie Smith, who was kidnapped in her Virginia home and
raped in nearby woods by a stranger, the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant
Program authorized grant money to states to collect samples from crime
scenes and convicted persons, conduct DNA analyses, and enter these
results into a comprehensive national database. Debbie Smith's attacker
remained unidentified for over six years, until a DNA sample collected
from a convicted person serving time in a Virginia State prison
revealed his involvement in her rape. Although eventually identified,
the six years between crime and identification allowed Ms. Smith's
attacker to engage in more criminal activity.
Re-authorization of the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program will
help law enforcement throughout the Nation. It will facilitate the
development of a comprehensive national data base against which samples
from current crime scenes can be compared. It will allow laboratories
to reduce the currently unacceptable delays in processing DNA samples.
Finally, it will provide law enforcement and prosecutors strong tools
to quickly identify and prosecute criminals, minimizing the costs of
investigation and prosecution, the possibility of prosecuting the wrong
person and the possibility of future heinous crimes.
Recognizing that the backlog of biological evidence that had to be
entered in State databases was preventing law enforcement officials
from solving many of the Nation's most heinous crimes, like the tragedy
that befell Debbie Smith, Congress passed the DNA ``Analysis Backlog
Elimination Act of 2000'' (P.L. 106-546). The bill authorized the
Attorney General to make grants to eligible States to collect DNA
samples from convicted individuals and crime scenes for inclusion in
the federal DNA database, Combined DNA Index System (CODIS), and to
increase the capacity of State crime laboratories. The Act required the
Bureau of Prisons and the military to collect DNA samples from
convicted individuals and forward these samples for analysis, and
required the FBI to expand its CODIS database to include the analyses
of these DNA samples.
The Act also amended the criminal code to require all defendants on
probation or supervised release to cooperate with the collection of a
DNA sample. The Act expressed the sense of Congress that State grants
should be conditioned upon the State's agreement to ensure post-
conviction DNA testing in appropriate cases; and that Congress should
work with the States to improve the quality of legal representation in
capital cases. Finally, the Act authorized an unspecified amount of
appropriations to the Attorney General to carry out the Act.
In 2004, DNA backlog elimination was incorporated into the Justice
for All Act of 2004'', P.L. 108-405 and was renamed the Debbie Smith
DNA Backlog Grant Program, which became Title II of P.L. 108-405. While
the Act authorized $151 million for each fiscal year 2005-2009,
Congress did not appropriate any money until FY 2008, at which time it
appropriated $147.4 million.
The Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program expires at the end of FY
2009. H.R. 5057, the ``Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act,'' which has
strong bipartisan support, would renew the law and authorize $151
million for each fiscal year 2009-2014. H.R. 5057 specifies that not
less than 40 percent of the total amount awarded in grants must be used
for DNA analyses of samples from crime scenes, rape kits and other
sexual assault evidence, and in cases that do not have an identified
suspect.
AMENDMENT
While I support this legislation, I successfully offered an amendment
at subcommittee markup. My amendment would require the Attorney General
to evaluate the integrity and security of DNA collection and storage
practices and procedures at a sample of crime laboratories throughout
the country to determine the extent to which DNA samples are tampered
with or are otherwise contaminated in such laboratories. The sample
should be a representative sample and should include at least one lab
from each State. My amendment would require the Attorney General to
conduct this evaluation annually and the Attorney General should be
required to submit the evaluation to Congress. This amendment is
necessary.
A district attorney in Harris County, Texas used evidence to
wrongfully convict persons based upon faulty evidence. An investigation
into the Houston Police Department's crime lab revealed that bad
management, under-trained staff, false documentation, and inaccurate
work cast doubt on thousands of DNA-based convictions. Investigators
raised serious questions about the reliability of evidence in hundreds
of cases they investigated and asked for further independent scrutiny
and new testing to determine the extent to which individuals were
wrongly convicted with faulty evidence.
My amendment ensures that Congress will exercise some oversight of
the program. It will ensure the integrity and security of the DNA
collection and storage and procedures. It is my hope that my amendment
will minimize wrongful convictions and will make the DNA storage and
collection process more reliable.
SCHIFF AMENDMENT
I note that one of my colleagues on the Subcommittee offered an
amendment, Mr. Schiff. I do not agree with this amendment. The
amendment would require that DNA be collected from all arrestees. This
amendment has serious civil liberties concerns.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, the reauthorization of this important
program also provides us with an opportunity to investigate some
important related issues.
From my work on this issue, I've learned that the Federal Government
is unable to determine how many hits the Federal Government informs
States about are actually followed up on by law enforcement. I think
this data is very important for policymakers to have.
A few years ago, USA Today engaged in a comprehensive examination of
DNA cases. In one case, the DNA of a convicted child molester matched
DNA from an attempted sexual assault of a 10-year-old girl. Police did
not contact the offender until after he had molested another 10-year-
old child 6 months later.
In another case, the DNA of a career felon matched DNA left at a rape
and abduction from 2001. At the time the offender was serving a prison
sentence for assault. The police did not contact him until 8 months
later, after he had been released from prison and only after being
alerted by the rape victim, who encountered the offender by chance
while walking in a local park.
These are two examples of situations where there was a match made in
the Federal database. States were informed about it, but no action was
taken, with tragic consequences. Therefore, I have authored a provision
in this bill that would direct the Department of Justice Inspector
General to investigate and report on how many CODIS database hits are
actually followed up on by law
[[Page 14841]]
enforcement, how many of those hits are ultimately brought to the
attention of a prosecutor and how many go to trial.
Importantly, the report will also shed additional light on the
factors that play in the event that matches were not followed up on. In
particular, we asked the IG to determine the reason why matches were
not pursued accordingly, and to determine the resulting impact on the
criminal justice system, namely, whether other crimes were committed
that could have been prevented if the matches were pursued accordingly.
Mr. HELLER of Nevada. Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge my colleagues to
vote for the Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act (H.R. 5057), a bill that
I cosponsored and strongly support. I appreciate the efforts of my
colleague from New York, Mrs. Maloney, in bringing this legislation and
previous bills regarding DNA evidence to the House floor.
A tragic death that took place in my District early this year
highlights the need for Congress to support the Debbie Smith DNA
Backlog Grant Program at the U.S. Department of Justice, DOJ. As many
of my colleagues know from national news reports, nineteen-year-old
Brianna Denison was abducted, strangled to death, and left in a vacant
field in southeast Reno. Based on DNA evidence, law enforcement
determined that Brianna's murder was the work of a serial offender
linked to several other attacks in the Reno area.
Like a majority of states, Nevada has experienced a significant
backlog in DNA processing. At the time of Brianna's murder, more than
3,000 samples were waiting to be processed in Nevada alone. Local law
enforcement petitioned the Reno community for donations that would
enable them to expedite processing of samples collected as part of
Brianna's case and tackle the statewide backlog. Nevadans contributed
nearly $300,000 to eliminate the backlog of DNA samples in our State.
This significant outpouring of support demonstrates the American
people's commitment to fighting crime through DNA technology. Congress
should take this opportunity to mirror the priorities of those we
represent. In an age where DNA technology has the potential to solve
previously unsolvable crimes and quickly put violent offenders behind
bars, there is no excuse for failing to equip law enforcement agencies
with the tools and personnel they need to quickly process DNA.
The Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act provides a vital means of
reducing the DNA evidence backlog in labs across the country. I joined
26 of my colleagues, including the author of this legislation, in
sending a letter to appropriators earlier this year urging
appropriators to provide full funding for the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog
Grant Program. Few investments could be more important to effective law
enforcement in the 21st century. The national DNA database has made
matches or otherwise aided in more than 51,000 cases since its
inception. While the DNA of Brianna's killer was unfortunately not
detected as Nevada's samples were processed in recent months, it is
quite possible that the DNA of Brianna's killer is backlogged in
another state. Also worth noting is the fact that Nevada law
enforcement was able to link 30 unsolved cases to known offenders as a
result of eliminating our state's DNA backlog. Assuming a similar
success rate nationwide, hundreds--if not thousands--of criminals could
be put behind bars if law enforcement could process all DNA samples on
hand. Thousands of victims and families whose cases are currently
unsolved could find closure.
Ensuring that all crime-related DNA samples are entered in the
nationwide database makes every community in every district safer.
Supporting the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program tells law
enforcement that Congress supports their crimefighting efforts with the
best technology available, and shows the American people our commitment
to taking violent criminals off our streets. I strongly encourage my
colleagues to support the Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act as well as
efforts to provide full funding for this vital program.
Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of
H.R. 5057, ``The Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act,'' legislation that I
introduced to ensure that the nationwide backlog of DNA evidence is
processed. I was pleased to have been joined in introducing the
legislation by the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Judiciary
Committee, Chairman Conyers and Ranking Member Smith, and I want to
thank them for their support and commitment to this issue. I also want
to commend Chairman Scott and Ranking Member Gohmert for their
leadership in getting H.R. 5057 to the Floor today.
I have been working on this issue since 2001 when I, along with
former Representative Steve Horn, held a hearing in the Government
Reform Committee where we heard from the courageous rape survivor,
Debbie Smith. Debbie recounted her horrifying story . . . how an
intruder broke into her home and raped her in the nearby woods. Six
years later her assailant was charged with her rape because DNA
processing techniques had produced a ``cold hit.''
Inspired by Debbie's story, I resolved to do something to combat the
epidemic of violence against women in the United States, where a sexual
assault occurs every two minutes.
I knew that DNA processing techniques could serve as conclusive proof
in countless other rape cases. But I was outraged that a backlog of
hundreds of thousands of rape kits, with DNA evidence already
collected, were gathering dust in police stations and crime labs all
over the country . . . all because of inadequate government funding.
It was for Debbie, and the thousands of rape survivors like her, that
I authored ``The Debbie Smith Act'' to provide federal funding to
process the unconscionable backlog of DNA evidence.
I first introduced this legislation in 2001. In 2004, it was signed
into law as part of the ``Justice For All Act,'' comprehensive DNA
legislation that has helped bring justice to rape survivors and their
families across the country.
The ``Justice For All Act'' accomplished several critical objectives
including authorizing the necessary funding, $151,000,000 in each
fiscal year from FY2005 through FY2009, to start processing the backlog
of DNA evidence through the creation of the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog
Grant Program. Since 2004, millions of dollars in funding have been
appropriated under the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program.
Because this groundbreaking program's authorization expires at the
end of FY2009, H.R. 5057 extends the program through FY2014. Estimates
place the number of unprocessed rape kits nationwide in the tens and
possibly hundreds of thousands. Each kit represents an innocent life
and a rapist who may commit multiple rapes before he is caught.
DNA is remarkable evidence. It doesn't forget, it can't be confused,
it can't be intimidated and it doesn't lie. While an eyewitness can
easily get mixed up about height, weight, hair color--DNA never changes
its story.
Debbie's bravery and dedication to working with me to pass ``The
Debbie Smith Act,'' which was no small feat, has already made a
tremendous impact on our justice system. I also want to acknowledge
RAINN for its steadfast support of ``The Debbie Smith Reauthorization
Act'' and for its efforts on behalf of sexual assault victims and
survivors.
Tragically, only six percent of rapists will spend any time in jail.
Congress must continue to support programs, like the Debbie Smith DNA
Backlog Grant Program, that help to put rapists in prison and reduce
violence against women.
I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, in the absence of any further speakers, I
yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 5057, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
The title was amended so as to read: ``A bill to reauthorize the
Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program, and for other purposes.''.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
CRIMINAL HISTORY BACKGROUND CHECKS PILOT EXTENSION ACT OF 2008
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
Senate bill (S. 3218) to extend the pilot program for volunteer groups
to obtain criminal history background checks.
The Clerk read the title of the Senate bill.
The text of the Senate bill is as follows:
S. 3218
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Criminal History Background
Checks Pilot Extension Act of 2008''.
[[Page 14842]]
SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF PILOT PROGRAM.
Section 108(a)(3)(A) of the PROTECT Act (42 U.S.C. 5119a
note) is amended by striking ``a 60-month'' and inserting ``a
66-month''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Schiff) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
General Leave
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include
extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, the Criminal History Background Checks Pilots Extension
Act of 2008 will allow a simple 6-month extension to the National Child
Safety Pilot Program passed as a part of the PROTECT Act of 2003.
I am proud to sponsor the House version of this bill. The Senate has
already taken up the legislation by unanimous consent, so if the House
votes to pass this bill, as I hope it will, it will go to the President
to be signed into law.
We're fortunate to have millions of Americans who generously give
their time and energy to volunteer and mentor children. In 1986, as a
then young lawyer, I volunteered as a Big Brother for a 7-year-old in
the Greater Los Angeles area. That relationship has been one of the
most rewarding and enduring that I've ever had. It also taught me
firsthand the trust that we place in the adult in a mentoring
situation. It's important that we protect children by taking reasonable
and practical steps to help guard against the chance that a convicted
child abuser or sex offender might conceal his or her past and place
our children at risk.
Since 2003, and earlier, States have been authorized to access
national fingerprint-based background checks through the FBI on behalf
of youth-serving organizations. Unfortunately, as of today, only one-
third of States have the infrastructure in place for a youth-serving
organization to get a background check from the FBI in an affordable
and timely manner.
In passing the PROTECT Act, Congress acted in response to the need to
protect children from predators who could gain access to children under
the guise of volunteering. Mentoring groups, large and small, want
access to the information they need to protect children, and the pilot
has been extremely successful in providing that access through a fee-
supported system at no cost to taxpayers.
The pilot demonstrated that there was a clear need for this program
to protect children. Six percent of checks conducted came back with
serious criminal records, in many cases records that would have not
turned up through a search of a State database or through a name-based
commercial search. We have cases from around the Nation in which
applicants for volunteering positions with children were sex offenders,
repeat felons, and child abusers.
The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children reviewed files
in which an applicant had a criminal record in four States, including a
conviction for murder, which they didn't reveal to the organization.
Losing access to these checks would be disastrous for hundreds of
small, community-based mentoring organizations.
Due to the success of the program, we have extended the pilot twice
before. It is now set to expire July 31 unless we extend it again. This
bill would provide a 6-month extension to give us all time to work on
an appropriate permanent bill that protects our children, while also
protecting the privacy of potential volunteers.
I am proud to sponsor, along with my colleague, Mr. Rogers of
Michigan, the Child Protection Improvements Act, a bill which would do
just that. We will continue to work with stakeholders and the Judiciary
Committee to put in place a permanent system of protection.
The pilot program has demonstrated that youth-serving organizations
correctly want to watch out for children and want access to affordable,
accurate and prompt background checks to help them do so. We need to
keep the pilot program in place while we develop the permanent bill.
I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 3218, the Criminal History
Background Checks Pilot Extension Act of 2008, which extends the Child
Safety Pilot Program for volunteer organizations for an additional 6
months.
Originally created in 2003 under the PROTECT Act, the Child Safety
Pilot Program has proven to be an effective resource for groups such as
the Boys and Girls Clubs of America, the National Mentoring
Partnership, and the National Council of Youth Sports.
Through the pilot program, any nonprofit organization that provides
youth-focused care, as defined in the National Child Protection Act of
1993, may request criminal history background checks from the FBI on
applicants for volunteer or employee positions that entail working with
children.
Currently, over 10,000 background checks have been administered
through the Child Safety Pilot Program. Of those checks, 7.5 percent of
all workers screened had an arrest or conviction on their record.
Crimes uncovered included rape, child sexual abuse, murder, and
domestic battery. Over 25 percent of applicants with a criminal record
committed crimes in States other than where they were applying to work.
If it weren't for the Child Safety Pilot Program, employers may not
have known that the applicants had criminal records.
Volunteer organizations across the country are working hard to
provide safe learning and growing environments for our children. That
means hiring professional and responsible employees. S. 3218 extends a
program that has successfully helped these groups do just that.
I urge my colleagues to join in supporting this important
legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I join with my colleague in urging passage
of this legislation.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support
of S. 3218, the ``Criminal History Background Checks Pilot Extension
Act of 2008''. First, I would like to thank my distinguished colleague,
Adam Schiff of California, for introducing this much-needed piece of
legislation. This bill will amend the ``PROTECT Act of 2003'' by
extending for six months the currently expiring Child Safety Pilot
Program. This program will allow certain volunteer organizations to
obtain national and state criminal history background checks on their
volunteers. I strongly encourage my colleagues to support this act.
The ``Criminal History Background Checks Pilot Extension Act of
2008'' is critical because it will ensure that our Nation's children
remain safe from predators and sex-offenders. By allowing volunteer
organizations working with children the option of State and Federal
background checks, we protect our children from our greatest fear: that
the very organizations that set out to help our children, inadvertently
harm them.
The ``PROTECT Act of 2003'' was aimed at defending children from the
horrors of exploitation, abuse, and abduction. Yet, if we fail to act
now, the act's 60-month ``Child Safety Pilot Program'' will expire. We
cannot afford to leave volunteer groups without this critical tool, and
in the process leave countless children at risk.
Upon enactment, the ``Criminal History Background Checks Pilot
Extension Act of 2008'' will extend by 6 months the ``Child Safety
Pilot Program'', and will allow certain volunteer organizations to
continue utilizing the national and state criminal history background
checks. With passage of this act, we take one step forward to a day
when all the children of our Nation are safe from the harms and horrors
of abuse.
Currently in the US, there are over 100,000 cases of child abuse,
abduction, or exploitation, each year. It is imperative that we do not
allow this number to escalate out of carelessness. Why should we allow
an extra
[[Page 14843]]
Amber Alert to occur when it would be so easy to prevent?
The Amber Alert Network which was first implemented in the State of
Texas is an important element in attaining a truly secure environment.
This system is part of an additional level of protection. Yet, programs
like Amber Alert lose their significance when they are not accompanied
by meaningful precautions. The background checks that the ``Criminal
History Background Checks Pilot Extension Act of 2008'' makes possible,
allow us to stop Amber Alerts before they happen.
I have always seen the safety of children as an issue of tremendous
importance. Whether it is through this bill, protecting children from
sex-offenders, or in recent legislation such as H.R. 3397, safeguarding
children against lead-poisoning, or in other acts improving school
safety, I believe that the well-being of our children must be one of
our foremost concerns.
I urge my colleagues to support this act to protect the children of
Texas' 18th and the children of our Nation.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the Senate bill, S. 3218.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the Senate bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
A CHILD IS MISSING ALERT AND RECOVERY CENTER ACT
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 5464) to direct the Attorney General to make an annual grant
to the A Child Is Missing Alert and Recovery Center to assist law
enforcement agencies in the rapid recovery of missing children, and for
other purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 5464
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``A Child Is Missing Alert and
Recovery Center Act''.
SEC. 2. DIRECTING THE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO MAKE ANNUAL GRANTS
TO A CHILD IS MISSING ALERT AND RECOVERY CENTER
TO ASSIST LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES IN
RECOVERING MISSING CHILDREN.
(a) In General.--The Attorney General, acting through the
Administrator of the Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention, shall annually make a grant to the A
Child Is Missing Alert and Recovery Center.
(b) Specified Use of Funds for Recovery Activities,
Regional Centers, Education, and Information Sharing.--A
Child Is Missing Alert and Recovery Center shall use the
funds made available under this Act--
(1) to operate and expand the A Child Is Missing Alert and
Recovery Center to provide services to Federal, State, and
local law enforcement agencies to promote the quick recovery
of a missing child in response to a request from such
agencies for assistance by utilizing rapid alert telephone
calls, text messaging, and satellite mapping technology;
(2) to maintain and expand technologies and techniques to
ensure the highest level of performance of such services;
(3) to establish and maintain regional centers to provide
both centralized and on-site training and to distribute
information to Federal, State, and local law enforcement
agency officials about how to best utilize the services
provided by the A Child Is Missing Alert and Recovery Center;
(4) to share appropriate information with the National
Center for Missing and Exploited Children, the AMBER Alert
Coordinator, and appropriate Federal, State, and local law
enforcement agencies; and
(5) to assist the National Center for Missing and Exploited
Children, the AMBER Alert Coordinator, and appropriate
Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies with
education programs.
SEC. 3. DEFINITION OF MISSING CHILD.
For purposes of this Act, the term ``missing child'' means
an individual whose whereabouts are unknown to a Federal,
State, or local law enforcement agency.
SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
For grants under section 2, there are authorized to be
appropriated to the Attorney General $5,000,000 for each
fiscal year from fiscal year 2009 through fiscal year 2014.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Schiff) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
General Leave
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have an additional 5 legislative days to revise and extend their
remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under
consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5464, the ``A Child is Missing Alert and Recovery
Center Act,'' helps address the terrifying experience of when a family
member or friend goes missing.
Under current law, there are programs such as Amber Alert to help
missing children who are abducted or become victims of foul play. But
these programs do not extend to situations where a child or elderly
person becomes missing in other more innocent ways. H.R. 5464 fills
this gap and authorizes money for annual grants to the A Child is
Missing Alert and Recovery Center. This national nonprofit program
provides assistance to local law enforcement throughout the country in
all situations of missing persons, not only those involved in criminal
activity.
The center helps when a small child fails to come home from school or
a grandmother suffering from Alzheimer's disease walks out of her home
in the middle of the night. When the terrifying event of a missing
person is reported to the police, the responding police officer can
call the center, which operates 365 days a year, 24 hours a day. Based
on information from the call, the center quickly prepares a recorded
message that includes a description of the missing person, along with a
location where the person was last seen. Within minutes, the center
sends this recording to thousands of phones within a radius of the last
known location. This activity can save not only precious lives, but
also critically needed enforcement resources that would otherwise be
spent in extended searches for missing persons.
The bill before us today will make a significant contribution to the
protection of children and vulnerable adults throughout the United
States. I want to thank the sponsor of this bill, Ron Klein of Florida,
for his leadership on this very important issue. I urge my colleagues
to support the legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5464, a bill that would
authorize the A Child is Missing Program for the next 5 years.
I would like to thank the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Klein) for his work on this important bill.
The A Child is Missing Program is an unsung tool that our law
enforcement and communities have been using since 1997 to locate
missing children and also elderly that are missing due to Alzheimer's
or other difficulties.
I would also like to recognize the founder of this program that was
founded back in January 1997. I had the opportunity to meet with her in
Cincinnati, the Greater Cincinnati area, Norwood, in particular, Sherry
Friedlander, who is in the gallery today. And if she could stand, I
would like to acknowledge her.
Statistics released by the Center for Missing and Exploited Children
reveal that more than 2,000 children go missing each day in this
country. Let me repeat that, 2,000 children go missing every day in
this country.
{time} 1700
We know that the first couple of hours a child is missing are
critical to the successful recovery of that child. While the AMBER
Alert is a critical tool, it takes hours to initiate. The A Child is
Missing program fills that void, alerting and mobilizing the community
almost immediately. The A Child is Missing program has been credited
with over 300 safe-assisted recoveries and is supported by law
enforcement organizations all over the
[[Page 14844]]
country. In my own district, the First District of Ohio, local law
enforcement agencies have directly benefited from the program. In fact,
just this past May, we highlighted the program's success in the city of
Norwood, as I mentioned before, Norwood, Ohio.
H.R. 5464 will ensure that the program has the resources it needs
over the next 5 years to continue serving communities like Norwood,
Ohio, and communities all over the country. I urge my colleagues to
support this critical program by passing H.R. 5464.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from
references to occupants of the gallery.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to yield 5
minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Klein).
Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as the lead sponsor
of H.R. 5464 to urge my colleagues to vote in support of the A Child is
Missing Alert and Recovery Center Act. And before I begin, I would like
to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff) and the gentleman
from Ohio, as he supported the bill in committee as well; as well as
Mr. Conyers of Michigan, the Chair of our Judiciary Committee; and the
Chair of the Crime Subcommittee, Mr. Scott of Virginia, for their
extraordinary leadership and support in moving this bill out of their
committees and on to the floor. And also I would like to acknowledge
and thank the ranking members, Mr. Smith and Mr. Gohmert. Mr. Gohmert
was especially supportive during the hearing on the legislation in the
Crime Subcommittee, and I would personally like to thank him for his
remarks and support.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5464 would expand the widely praised A Child is
Missing nonprofit organization into a national program with regional
centers under the Department of Justice. The authorized funds would
allow for the purchase of future technologies and techniques,
centralized and on-site training, and for the distribution of
information to Federal, State, and local law enforcement agency
officials on the best ways to utilize the round-the-clock services
provided by the A Child is Missing Alert and Recovery Center.
Currently, A Child is Missing is the only program of its kind that
assists in all missing cases involving abduction, children who are
lost, wander, or run away; and adults with special needs such as the
elderly who suffer with Alzheimer's, which is a concern in my district
in south Florida.
When a person is reported missing to the police, A Child is Missing
utilizes the latest technology to place 1,000 emergency telephone calls
every 60 seconds to residents and businesses in the area where the
person was last seen. It works in concert with the existing AMBER Alert
system and all other child safety programs and has the support of law
enforcement agencies all across our country.
A Child is Missing also fills a critical gap in time in the most
dangerous cases. Although the AMBER Alert has been an extremely
successful program, there is still a crucial void of 3 to 5 hours in
many cases from when a child is first reported missing and when an
AMBER Alert shows up on our highways or is announced, which is only
activated when cases of criminal abduction have been issued. This
critical period of time can be the difference between whether a child
lives or dies. Recently, a Washington State Attorney General's office
study showed that among cases involving children abducted and murdered,
74 percent were slain in the first 3 hours. This only highlights the
importance of this time element. Adding to this problem is the resource
and manpower limitations facing many local law enforcement agencies.
Roughly half of these officers in the United States have 25 or fewer
officers, and an average 12-hour search for a missing child can cost up
to $400,000.
A Child is Missing helps to fill this critical gap in time as well as
complement the AMBER Alert during the ongoing search. We know this for
a fact because we have heard it from countless law enforcement officers
from all over the United States.
So the issue isn't whether A Child is Missing works or not. The real
issue is that not enough local communities have access to the program.
The founder and president of A Child is Missing, Sherry Friedlander
from my home community of Ft. Lauderdale, has done an exceptional job
in creating and spreading this program not only in our community but
throughout all 50 States. But if we are going to bring the program to
every community in all these States, then we will need to leverage the
resources of the Federal Government, and that's exactly what this
legislation does.
H.R. 5464 has broad bipartisan support in Congress. We have
cosponsors from all across the country including Ohio, Kentucky, Texas,
Indiana, and New York. In the Senate companion legislation was
introduced by Senator Menendez and is cosponsored by Senator Hatch, the
distinguished former chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. We
have such support because A Child is Missing provides a service that
transcends politics. Our children are not Democrats or Republicans.
They are our children, and they are all of our responsibility, and
their protection requires us to work together to do what's best for
their continued safety.
That's why, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues today to support H.R.
5464.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, thank you for your leadership
in bringing this very important bill to the floor. I support this bill
and urge my colleagues to do the same. This bill is good and it is
necessary.
The bill is sponsored by Mr. Klein and has bi-partisan support. It
has 21 cosponsors, including the following Judiciary members: Chairman
Conyers, Chairman Scott, Mr. Chabot, Mr. Nadler, Mr. Wexler, Mr. Cohen,
Mr. Johnson, Ms. Sutton, and Ms. Wasserman Schultz.
A child goes missing every 40 seconds. The successful recovery of
missing children often requires a quick response. In 1997, Sherry
Friedlander, the founder of A Child is Missing (ACIM), saw the need for
a rapid-response program to persons who go missing, especially in
situations that do not involve abductions. In response to this need,
she established ACIM, a national non-profit organization that offers
free assistance to law enforcement 365 days of the year, 24 hours per
day. The program is not limited to children, but extends to elderly
persons (suffering from senility or Alzheimer's), mentally challenged
or disabled individuals and college students.
When law enforcement receives a call regarding a missing person, the
first-responder can immediately call ACIM for help. The officer
provides critical information to ACIM, such as the person's age and
description and the last time/place seen. ACIM uses that information to
record a message that, within minutes, is sent via phone to 1000s of
locations within a radius of the last sighting of the person. Through
their computer mapping system, ACIM also can identify ``hot spots,''
such as water or wooded areas.
ACIM complements the Amber Alert program by providing different
services. While Amber Alert focuses on children who are abducted, ACIM
covers all ``persons'' who go missing, including situations where
criminal intent may not be at issue. Amber Alert uses television and
highway signs to broadcast information about the abducted child and the
related vehicle, while ACIM uses a rapid response telephone alert
system and covers cases where there is no vehicle involved. The ACIM
notification system often can respond more quickly than the Amber Alert
program.
ACIM would use the requested money to operate and expand the existing
ACIM office in Florida, to develop Regional Centers for on-site
training and communication with local law enforcement, to maintain and
expand their computer and phone technologies, and to assist the
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, the AMBER Alert
Coordinator, and appropriate law enforcement agencies with training.
H.R. 5464 authorizes $5 million annual grants for 2009 through 2014
to A Child is Missing Alert and Recovery Center (ACIM) to assist law
enforcement in the rapid recovery of missing children and other
individuals.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses and look forward to
their testimony. I hope that we can ensure the health and safety of the
young and the elderly--two vulnerable populations--whose rights I have
long championed.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
[[Page 14845]]
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 5464.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT PROGRAM REAUTHORIZATION
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
Senate bill (S. 231) to authorize the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice
Assistance Grant Program at fiscal year 2006 levels through 2012.
The Clerk read the title of the Senate bill.
The text of the Senate bill is as follows:
S. 231
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF GRANTS.
Section 508 of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and
Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3758) is amended by
striking ``for fiscal year 2006'' through the period and
inserting ``for each of the fiscal years 2006 through
2012.''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Schiff) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
General Leave
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include
extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant, or Byrne/JAG Program, is
named after Edward Byrne, a New York City police officer killed by a
violent drug gang 20 years ago.
The Byrne/JAG Program is the only source of Federal funding for
multi-jurisdictional efforts to prevent and fight crime. The funding is
used by States and local governments to support a broad range of
activities to prevent and control crime and to improve the criminal
justice system.
Specific uses include law enforcement, prosecution, and court
programs; crime prevention and education programs; community-based
programs; drug treatment, planning, and evaluation efforts; and crime
victim and witness programs.
Simply put, this program enables States to employ all aspects of
fighting crime, rather than simply using the so-called ``get tough''
approach limited to making more arrests and making sentences longer.
Nationwide, the program has resulted in major innovations in crime
control, including drug courts, gang prevention strategies, and
prisoner reentry programs, all of which provide proven and highly
effective crime prevention.
In turn, these innovations demonstrate that the best crime policy
incorporates programs that help at-risk youth avoid criminal behavior
and that prepare prisoners for reentry into society so they have
meaningful and productive alternatives to crime when they return home.
S. 231 would simply reauthorize the Byrne/JAG Program at its current
funding level, which is $1.095 billion, through 2012. The House passed
substantially identical legislation by voice vote last month. Passing
the Senate version will enable us to send this important bill to the
President.
I urge my colleagues to support this measure.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise in support of S. 231, a bill to reauthorize the Edward Byrne
Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program through fiscal year 2012.
This bill continues to fund the Department of Justice Byrne/JAG Grant
Program at the fiscal year 2006 level. The House passed companion
legislation, H.R. 3546, just a few weeks ago.
The Byrne/JAG Program provides assistance to State and local law
enforcement officials. These grants support a wide range of law
enforcement activities to prevent and control crime and improve the
criminal justice system. Byrne/JAG grants may be used to help pay for
personnel, overtime, or equipment. Funds are also used for statewide
initiatives, technical assistance, and training.
In June the FBI released its 2007 Unified Crime Report detailing the
statistics for violent crime nationwide. The rate for violent crimes,
including robbery, sexual assault, and murder, decreased nationally.
However, the report also showed that the rate of violent crime
increased in some communities across the country.
Our Nation's law enforcement officials are dedicated to preventing
crime and keeping our communities safe, and their efforts should be
applauded. Congress plays an important role in supporting State and
local law enforcement officials by continuing to reauthorize programs
like this at appropriate levels.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. LOEBSACK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of
reauthorization of the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant
program. As a cosponsor of the House version of this bill, I am pleased
that this legislation will reauthorize a program that is vital not only
to my District, but to Iowa, and States across the country.
Byrne JAG is one of our country's most effective law enforcement
tools. It is the only source of federal funding for multi-
jurisdictional efforts to prevent, fight, and prosecute drug-related
and violent crime. The program funds drug treatment; keeps our
communities safe by increasing the number of officers on the street;
and gives local law enforcement officers the tools they need to shut
down the production and distribution of illegal drugs.
With the help of Byrne JAG funding, State and local law enforcement
officers across the country have made tremendous strides in combating
illegal drugs. A recent study found that Byrne JAG funded programs have
led to 220,000 arrests, the seizure of 54,000 weapons; the destruction
of 5.5 million grams of methamphetamine, and the elimination of almost
9,000 methamphetamine labs.
In Iowa, reported methamphetamine labs have dropped 90 percent since
their peak in 2004. Meanwhile, meth treatment admissions have increased
and Iowa now has the third highest rate of meth treatment in the
country. Child abuse due to meth labs is in decline, and three recent
Iowa Youth Surveys have shown steady decline in substance use among
6th, 8th, and 11th grade students.
What these statistics make clear is that Byrne JAG is proven,
effective, and critical to public safety. This reauthorization lays the
groundwork for robust funding for Byrne JAG through 2012, and I urge my
colleagues to not only support adoption of the bill but to also support
full funding for the program in this and coming years.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S.
231 to reauthorize the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant,
Byrne-JAG, Program at fiscal year 2006 levels through 2012. The Byrne-
JAG monies are supposed to be used to make America a safer place. I
support the reauthorization, and I would urge my colleagues to do
likewise.
Why Byrne-JAG is Necessary
Byrne-JAG allows States and local governments to support a broad
range of activities to prevent and control crime and to improve the
criminal justice system, which States and local governments have come
to rely on to ensure public safety. They support: law enforcement,
prosecution and court programs, prevention and education, corrections
and community programs, drug treatment, planning, evaluation,
technology improvement programs, and crime victim and witness programs,
other than compensation. In short, they are an indispensable resource
that States use to combat crime.
Recent Cuts in Byrne JAG Funding
Unfortunately, in fiscal year 2008 the Byrne-JAG program was cut by
two-thirds. Although
[[Page 14846]]
Congress authorized over $1 billion, only $520 million were
appropriated for fiscal year 2007. The appropriation was then
drastically reduced to $170.4 million in fiscal year 2008, and the
President has proposed further cuts for the fiscal year 2009 budget.
Past Problems with Byrne JAG
The trend to reduce the grant funding may result, in part, from
instances where Byrne-JAG funding has been abused. For example, in 1999
Byrne-JAG funding was used in the infamous Tulia outrage in which a
rogue police narcotics officer in Texas set up dozens of people, most
of them African-American, in false cocaine trafficking charges. In
other instances, jurisdictions used the funding to fund task forces
focused solely on ineffective, low-level drug arrests, which has put
the task force concept-and the diminished standards of drug enforcement
that it has come to represent--in the national spotlight.
The most well-known Byrne-funded scandal occurred in Tulia, Texas
where dozens of African-American residents, representing 16 percent of
the town's black population, were arrested, prosecuted and sentenced to
decades in prison, even though the only evidence against them was the
uncorroborated testimony of one white undercover officer with a history
of lying and racism. The undercover officer worked alone, and had no
audiotapes, video surveillance, or eyewitnesses to collaborate his
allegations. Suspicions eventually arose after two of the accused
defendants were able to produce firm evidence showing they were out-of-
State or at work at the time of the alleged drug buys. Texas Governor
Rick Perry eventually pardoned the Tulia defendants, after four years
of imprisonment, but these kinds of scandals continue to plague the
Byrne grant program.
These scandals are not the result of a few ``bad apples'' in law
enforcement; they are the result of a fundamentally flawed bureaucracy
that is prone to corruption by its very structure. Byrne-funded
regional anti-drug task forces are Federally funded, State managed, and
locally staffed, which means they do not really have to answer to
anyone. In fact, their ability to perpetuate themselves through asset
forfeiture and Federal funding makes them unaccountable to local
taxpayers and governing bodies.
The scandals are more widespread than just a few instances. A 2002
report by the ACLU of Texas identified 17 scandals involving Byrne-
funded anti-drug task forces in Texas, including cases of falsifying
government records, witness tampering, fabricating evidence, stealing
drugs from evidence lockers, selling drugs to children, large-scale
racial profiling, sexual harassment, and other abuses of official
capacity.
Texas is not the only State that has suffered from Byrne-funded law
enforcement scandals. Scandals in other States have included the misuse
of millions of dollars in Federal grant money in Kentucky and
Massachusetts, false convictions based upon police perjury in Missouri,
and making deals with drug offenders to drop or lower their charges in
exchange for money or vehicles in Alabama, Arkansas, Massachusetts, New
York, Ohio, and Wisconsin. A 2001 study by the Government
Accountability Office found that the Federal Government fails to
adequately monitor the grant program and hold grantees accountable.
Amendment Considered But Not Offered
Because of these abuses, I would have offered an amendment when this
bill was considered at the Full Judiciary Committee markup. My
amendment would have addressed the responsible use of Byrne-JAG monies.
Specifically, my amendment would have required that a State that
receives Byrne-JAG money should collect data for the most recent year
for which such funds were allocated to such State, with respect to:
(1) The racial distribution of criminal charges made during that
year;
(2) the nature of the criminal law specified in the charges made; and
(3) the city of law enforcement jurisdiction in which the charges
were made.
My amendment would have required a condition of receiving funds that
the State should submit to the Attorney General the data collected by
not later than one year after the date the State received funds.
Lastly, the report should be posted on the Bureau of Justice Statistics
website and submitted to the Attorney General.
My amendment is good because arrests will be transparent and the
light of day and public airing of any problems will be the greatest
disinfectant. My amendment is an attempt to make law enforcement more
responsible, more accountable, and more just in their dealings with
persons of all races and backgrounds. My amendment is but a small price
to pay to rid the Nation of scandals and disasters that occurred in
Tulia, Texas and elsewhere.
My amendment, which I would have offered, would provide oversight and
accountability. It is not burdensome. It will not prevent the States
from collecting and funding programs under the Byrne Grant program. My
amendment does, however, shed light on any maladies that might exist in
the system. Once we see the problems, we can fix them. My amendment is
responsible and aims to make the Byrne-Grant program a better program
by ensuring that the funding is used appropriately and is used with
oversight.
No More Tulias
While I support the Byrne-JAG reauthorization, I would also urge my
colleagues to also support my bill, H.R. 253, No More Tulias: Drug Law
Enforcement Evidentiary Standards Improvement Act of 2007. This bill
also enhances accountability with respect to the use of Byrne-JAG
monies.
First, it prohibits a State from receiving for a fiscal year any drug
control and system improvement (Byrne) grant funds, or any other amount
from any other law enforcement assistance program of the Department of
Justice, unless the State does not fund any antidrug task forces for
that fiscal year or the State has in effect laws that ensure that: (1)
a person is not convicted of a drug offense unless the facts that a
drug offense was committed and that the person committed that offense
are supported by evidence other than the eyewitness testimony of a law
enforcement officer or individuals acting on an officer's behalf; and
(2) an officer does not participate in a antidrug task force unless
that officer's honesty and integrity is evaluated and found to be at an
appropriately high level.
Second, H.R. 253, No More Tulias, requires that states receiving
Federal funds under the No More Tulias Act to collect data on the
racial distribution of drug charges, the nature of the criminal law
specified in the charges, and the jurisdictions in which such charges
are made. I urge my colleagues to support my No More Tulias Act so that
we can quickly bring the bill to markup.
I also urge my colleagues to support Byrne-JAG.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I join my colleague in urging passage of the
legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the Senate bill, S. 231.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the Senate bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
RECESS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 12(a) of rule I, the
Chair declares the House in recess until approximately 6:30 p.m. today.
Accordingly (at 5 o'clock and 12 minutes p.m.), the House stood in
recess until approximately 6:30 p.m.
____________________
{time} 1831
AFTER RECESS
The recess having expired, the House was called to order by the
Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Patrick J. Murphy of Pennsylvania) at 6
o'clock and 31 minutes p.m.
____________________
REPORT ON RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 415, TAUNTON
RIVER WILD AND SCENIC DESIGNATION
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida, from the Committee on Rules, submitted a
privileged report (Rept. No. 110-758) on the resolution (H. Res. 1339)
providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 415) to amend the Wild
and Scenic Rivers Act to designate segments of the Taunton River in the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts as a component of the National Wild and
Scenic Rivers System, which was referred to the House Calendar and
ordered to be printed.
____________________
ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, proceedings
[[Page 14847]]
will resume on motions to suspend the rules previously postponed.
Votes will be taken in the following order:
H. Res. 1067, by the yeas and nays;
H. Res. 1080, by the yeas and nays;
H. Con. Res. 297, by the yeas and nays.
The first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote.
Remaining electronic votes will be conducted as 5-minute votes.
____________________
RECOGNIZING THE 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE CROSSING OF THE NORTH POLE BY
THE USS ``NAUTILUS''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the
motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 1067,
on which the yeas and nays were ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney) that the House suspend the
rules and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 1067.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 375,
nays 0, not voting 59, as follows:
[Roll No. 486]
YEAS--375
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Allen
Altmire
Arcuri
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Carter
Castle
Castor
Cazayoux
Chabot
Chandler
Childers
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Conyers
Cooper
Courtney
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Lincoln
Deal (GA)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Everett
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Feeney
Ferguson
Filner
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gingrey
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Green, Gene
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lamborn
Lampson
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Latta
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Mahoney (FL)
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neugebauer
Nunes
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Poe
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Putnam
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sali
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tierney
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (FL)
Westmoreland
Wexler
Whitfield (KY)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman (VA)
Wolf
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--59
Andrews
Bachmann
Barrow
Bonner
Boswell
Braley (IA)
Broun (GA)
Brown, Corrine
Costa
Costello
Cramer
Cubin
Davis (CA)
Davis, Tom
Doolittle
Ellison
Fossella
Franks (AZ)
Granger
Graves
Green, Al
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hulshof
Jefferson
Johnson (IL)
Jones (OH)
Kilpatrick
Kind
LaTourette
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Maloney (NY)
Miller, George
Moore (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Neal (MA)
Pearce
Platts
Pryce (OH)
Radanovich
Rohrabacher
Rush
Saxton
Scott (VA)
Shays
Sires
Tancredo
Taylor
Tiberi
Towns
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Wasserman Schultz
Welch (VT)
Weller
Wilson (NM)
Woolsey
{time} 1859
Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and
the resolution was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
HONORING THE SERVICE AND SACRIFICE OF THE 101ST AIRBORNE DIVISION
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the
motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 1080,
as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney) that the House suspend the
rules and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 1080, as amended.
This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 378,
nays 0, not voting 56, as follows:
[Roll No. 487]
YEAS--378
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Allen
Altmire
Arcuri
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Carter
Castle
Castor
Cazayoux
Chabot
Chandler
Childers
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Conyers
Cooper
Courtney
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Lincoln
Deal (GA)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Everett
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Feeney
Ferguson
Filner
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frank (MA)
[[Page 14848]]
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gingrey
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lamborn
Lampson
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Latta
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Mahoney (FL)
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neugebauer
Nunes
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Poe
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Putnam
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sali
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tierney
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weldon (FL)
Westmoreland
Wexler
Whitfield (KY)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman (VA)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--56
Andrews
Bachmann
Barrow
Bonner
Boswell
Braley (IA)
Broun (GA)
Brown, Corrine
Costa
Costello
Cramer
Cubin
Davis (CA)
Davis, Tom
Doolittle
Ellison
Fossella
Granger
Graves
Green, Al
Gutierrez
Hirono
Hulshof
Jefferson
Johnson (IL)
Jones (OH)
Kilpatrick
Kind
LaTourette
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Maloney (NY)
Miller, George
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Neal (MA)
Pearce
Platts
Pryce (OH)
Radanovich
Rohrabacher
Rush
Saxton
Scott (VA)
Shays
Sires
Speier
Tancredo
Taylor
Tiberi
Towns
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Wasserman Schultz
Weller
Wilson (NM)
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes
remaining in this vote.
{time} 1906
So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and
the resolution, as amended, was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Ms. HIRONO. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 487, had I been present, I
would have voted ``yea.''
____________________
RECOGNIZING THE 60TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE INTEGRATION OF THE ARMED FORCES
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the
motion to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, H.
Con. Res. 297, as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney) that the House suspend the
rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res. 297, as
amended.
This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 378,
nays 0, not voting 56, as follows:
[Roll No. 488]
YEAS--378
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Allen
Altmire
Arcuri
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castle
Castor
Cazayoux
Chabot
Chandler
Childers
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Conyers
Cooper
Courtney
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Lincoln
Deal (GA)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Everett
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Feeney
Ferguson
Filner
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gingrey
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lamborn
Lampson
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
Latta
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Mahoney (FL)
Marchant
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neugebauer
Nunes
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Poe
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Putnam
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sali
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tierney
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weldon (FL)
Westmoreland
[[Page 14849]]
Wexler
Whitfield (KY)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman (VA)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--56
Andrews
Bachmann
Barrow
Bonner
Boswell
Braley (IA)
Broun (GA)
Brown, Corrine
Carter
Costa
Costello
Cramer
Cubin
Davis (CA)
Davis, Tom
Doolittle
Ellison
Fossella
Granger
Graves
Green, Al
Gutierrez
Hulshof
Jefferson
Johnson (IL)
Jones (OH)
Kilpatrick
Kind
LaTourette
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Miller, George
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Neal (MA)
Pearce
Platts
Pryce (OH)
Radanovich
Rohrabacher
Rush
Saxton
Scott (VA)
Shays
Sires
Tancredo
Taylor
Tiberi
Towns
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Wasserman Schultz
Weller
Wilson (NM)
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes
remaining in this vote.
{time} 1914
So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and
the concurrent resolution, as amended, was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The title was amended so as to read: ``Concurrent resolution
recognizing the 60th anniversary of the beginning of the integration of
the Armed Forces''.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, due to personal reasons, I was unable to
attend several votes today. Had I been present, I would have voted
``yea'' on H. Res. 1067--Recognizing the 50th anniversary of the
crossing of the North Pole by the USS Nautilus, SSN 571, and its
significance in the history of both our Nation and the world; ``yea''
on H. Res 1080-- Honoring the extraordinary service and exceptional
sacrifice of the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault), known as the
Screaming Eagles; and ``yea'' on H. Con. Res. 297--Recognizing the 60th
anniversary of the integration of the United States Armed Forces.
____________________
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, on July 14, 2008, I missed 3 recorded votes.
I take my voting responsibility very seriously. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``yea'' on recorded vote No. 486, ``yea'' on recorded
vote 487, and ``yea'' on recorded vote 488.
____________________
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, July 14, 2008, I missed
recorded votes. Had I been present, the Record would reflect the
following votes:
1) H. Res. 1067--Recognizing the 50th anniversary of the crossing of
the North Pole by the USS Nautilus (SSN 571) and its significance in
the history of both our Nation and the world, ``yes.''
2) H. Res. 1080--Honoring the extraordinary service and exceptional
sacrifice of the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault), known as the
Screaming Eagles, ``yes.''
3) H. Con Res. 297--Recognizing the 60th anniversary of the
integration of the United States Armed Forces, ``yes.''
____________________
DEMOCRAT MAJORITY IS HOLDING AMERICA HOSTAGE
(Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida asked and was given permission to
address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida. Mr. Speaker, in the 1970s our
Nation was held hostage by OPEC starting an oil embargo that drove up
gasoline prices and damaged the American economy. Today it's not OPEC
holding us hostage but rather the Democratic majority that refuses to
expand domestic energy production.
My constituents are hurting, $4.10 a gallon of gasoline for regular,
smaller boxes of cereal, diesel prices are through the roof hurting
those truckers and higher prices for air conditioning bills. All of
these increased costs shrink the wallets of working Americans and hurt
even more the seniors on fixed incomes.
When will this majority wake up and realize that 73 percent of
America approves of drilling? When will the majority admit that their
energy policy will do nothing at all to lower prices at the pump?
Mr. Speaker, ideas to raise the gas tax 50 cents when we are in the
midst of a national gasoline crisis are a bad joke pushed on the
American public. We need to support our constituents and support
drilling.
____________________
HONORING THURGOOD MARSHALL ON THE 100TH ANNIVERSARY OF HIS BIRTH
(Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to address
the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today, as I indicated
earlier in the afternoon, H. Con. Res. 381 was being debated and that
is the honoring and recognizing the dedication and achievements of
Thurgood Marshall on the 100th anniversary of his birth. Let me thank
Congressman Payne for his legislative initiative, the House Judiciary
Committee Chairman John Conyers and Ranking Member Mr. Lamar Smith.
I stand here today as a living example of the legacy and the
leadership of Justice Thurgood Marshall. Who would have thought as he
broke the color line in Brown versus Topeka Board of Education that he
would have opened the doors of opportunity for those from the East to
the West and from the North to the South?
Most people don't know that America during the 1950s and earlier than
that continued to be a segregated America. It did not matter where you
lived. Thurgood Marshall had the courage to take this case to the
United States Supreme Court. And the Warren court had the courage and
rightness of mind to be able to establish an equal education for all.
I applaud Thurgood Marshall who was appointed to the Court of Appeals
by President John F. Kennedy and ultimately the first African American
to sit on the United States Supreme Court. He was one who understood
justice. He was one who recognized the equality of all people. He was
one who recognized that America is better when it reflects and
appreciates its diversity.
Thank you, Justice Marshall, for the freedom and the opportunity you
have given even to me.
____________________
SPECIAL ORDERS
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Cohen). Under the Speaker's announced
policy of January 18, 2007, and under a previous order of the House,
the following Members will be recognized for 5 minutes each.
____________________
FACES OF THE FALLEN MEMORIAL
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, last week, I received a
notice from the Chief Administrative Officer and the Architect of the
Capitol directing me to remove a memorial located outside of my office
that honors fallen Marines from Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. The
notice stated that the Faces of the Fallen memorial does not comply
with the new hallway policy of the House.
However, memorials to honor the lives of those killed in Iraq and
Afghanistan are respectfully displayed and should not fall under the
Hallway Policy's jurisdiction.
In 2004, Congressman Rahm Emanuel and I introduced legislation
calling for an exhibit in the Capitol Rotunda to honor U.S.
servicemembers who have died in Iraq and Afghanistan. Our legislation
was never considered. Instead, House Speaker Dennis Hastert directed
the construction of a memorial listing names of the fallen in the foyer
of the Rayburn House Office Building.
Because we believed more should be done to honor the lives of our
fallen servicemembers, I, along with other Members of Congress, began
to display more proper memorials outside our individual offices.
Hundreds of visitors from my district and others have stopped to view
the
[[Page 14850]]
faces of fallen Marines from Camp Lejeune displayed outside my door. It
is seeing the faces of these Marines, the fathers, the mothers, the
sisters, the brothers, the sons and the daughters that deeply impact
these visitors.
Since the media has reported the attempt to remove the Faces of the
Fallen memorial displayed outside my office, I have heard from
constituents and people across the country who believe these memorials
should remain on display.
An article published yesterday in the Jacksonville Daily News
distributed in the area surrounding Camp Lejeune quoted two women who
understand what it means to lose a loved one who has served our Nation.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit the article for the Record.
The article quotes Deborah May, a woman whose husband was killed in
Iraq in 2003. She told the Jacksonville Daily News that she has walked
through the hallways of the House office buildings and she supports the
memorials on display. And I quote Mrs. May: ``When I go, I take my
small children with me. The very least they could do is put a picture
there to show my children that my husband is remembered and that this
is what our government is about and our country and the freedoms we
have.''
The article also quotes Vivianne Wersel, the president of the
Surviving Spouses Support Group at Camp Lejeune, who said that the
memorial is as much as an icon as the American flag. And I quote her:
``These servicemembers have given their lives for a conflict and
something they believed in. I think that it is a reminder for those
that are visiting Congress and that is what America is all about. They
can walk the halls of Congress because of these young men that have
given them the freedom to speak and the freedom to live.''
Last week, I wrote a letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi to explain the
history behind these memorials and to ask her support in preserving
their display. I know she understands the importance of honoring the
servicemembers who have sacrificed for our Nation. And I thank her for
honoring my request that the House observe a moment of silence each
month to remember those killed or wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan. I
hope that Speaker Pelosi will agree with many of us in Congress and
people across this Nation that these memorials should remain on
display.
And before closing, Mr. Speaker, I want to show a picture of a child
whose father died in Iraq for this country. This is a picture of Tyler
Jordan whose father, Phillip Jordan, was a gunnery sergeant with the
United States Marine Corps. And this young man is receiving the flag on
his father's grave on his coffin. Four years ago, I had this picture
sent to me so I could blow it up. And I want to say this to Tyler
Jordan: Your daddy, Phillip Jordan, is on this poster. He was killed
along with others in the year 2003.
A name means a lot to those who are not here any longer. But nothing
means more than for a child to come to Washington and to see his
father's face outside a congressional office.
So again I have great respect for Speaker Pelosi. And I hope she will
agree with us that these posters should remain outside the Members of
Congress' office.
And with that, Mr. Speaker, I ask God to please bless our men and
women in uniform and to please bless the families of our men and women
in uniform. And I ask God to please bless America and help us to see
the way to always remember those who died for this country and not
forget them.
God bless America.
[From the Jacksonville Daily News, July 13, 2008]
Jones Stands Ground on Lejeune Memorial in Hall Outside Office
(By Molly Dewitt)
A memorial honoring Camp Lejeune's fallen service members
may have to come down.
A ``Hallway Policy'' approved by Nancy Pelosi, house
speaker and chair of the House Office Building Commission,
limits the display and placement of items in hallways of the
House of Representatives office buildings. That includes a
display erected by Representative Walter B. Jones (R-NC)
outside his office.
Jones's Faces of the Fallen memorial consists of several
easels displaying 3-by-l posters bearing the names and faces
of Marines from Camp Lejeune who died while serving in
Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom.
The policy specifically prohibits easels from being placed
in a hallway.
``We're not talking about posters. We're not talking about
things in the hall,'' Jones said. ``We're talking about men
and women that died for this country.
The hallway policy, instituted on April 17, was ``developed
to improve House compliance with the requirements of the
Americans with Disabilities Act and the Occupational Safety
and Health Act as applied to Congress by the Congressional
Accountability Act, and the Life Safety Code,'' according to
the policy.
``This is just typical bureaucratic malarkey,'' Jones said.
No one has ever complained about loss of hallway
accessibility due to the memorial, Jones said.
``I've never had anybody come in and tell me that they had
trouble getting through the hall,'' he said.
``I've seen people with wheelchairs, I've seen a large
number of people walk by and it's never impeded anyone from
getting through the hall.''
Deborah May, whose husband Staff Sgt. Donald C. May Jr. was
killed March 25, 2003 during Operation Iraqi Freedom, said
she's walked the hallways in the House of Representatives
office buildings.
``You could have a wheelchair race down those halls,
because they're very wide,'' she said.
She wants the memorial display to remain.
``When I go, I take my small children with me. The very
least they could do is put a picture there to show my
children that my husband is remembered and that this is what
our government is about and our country and the freedoms we
have.'' May said, tearing up.
The memorial has been displayed outside of Jones' various
office locations for the past five years and several years
ago an initial attempt to remove them was made, he said.
``Those that write the rules just don't have the respect
for those who have given their life for their country,''
Jones said.
``As far as I'm concerned this is disrespectful to those
who have given their lives in Afghanistan and Iraq.''
Jones believes Pelosi will make an exception for the
memorial.
``When we're having men and women dying every day and every
week in Afghanistan and in Iraq--my God, the least that we
can do is have people walk by and see the face of one that
never came back home,'' Jones said. ``I think Ms. Pelosi will
understand.''
Jones sent a letter to Pelosi on Wednesday regarding the
matter.
It has been suggested to Jones that a listing of the names
of the fallen be placed in an entrance foyer, but he believes
that to be insufficient, he said in the letter to Pelosi.
Jones said, regardless of her decision, he plans to stand
his ground in the situation.
``We're not going to let this be an issue, were going to do
what's right,'' Jones said. ``I told them they'll have to
remove me with the posters.''
Vivianne Wersel, the president of the Surviving Spouses
Support Group at Camp Lejeune, said the memorial is as much
an icon as the American flag.
``These service members have given their lives for a
conflict and something that they believe in,'' she said. ``I
think that it is a reminder for those that are visiting
Congress and that is what America is all about. Whether my
husband's picture is in it or not, it plays a role to remind
those that walk the hall of Congress. They can walk the halls
of Congress because of these young men that have given them
the freedom to speak and the freedom to live.''
____________________
{time} 1930
HONORING THE MEMORY OF WARREN G. DAVIS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise on this occasion to first
of all say how much I appreciate this opportunity to address my
colleagues and the Nation and to talk for just a few moments on a good
and decent person, a great American. His name is Warren G. Davis.
Warren G. Davis passed away a few days ago. He was more than just an
ordinary person. God blesses us with many blessings. But there is no
greater blessing that he blesses you with than that to have a friend, a
friend for life. And that is what Warren G. Davis meant to me and our
friendship.
Warren G. Davis comes out of Texas. He was born out of Refugio,
Texas, near Victoria and near Corpus Christi, a man of God from the
very beginning. Warren Davis was a loving husband to
[[Page 14851]]
his wife of over 38 years, Linda. He was a loving father to his two
sons, Brad and Warren Junior. He was a loving brother to Fred Davis and
his cousin Harold Martin. And of course his mother, his father and his
entire beloved family mourns this hour.
But let me just say, Mr. Speaker, that not only his family mourns,
his immediate family, for this young man touched many lives. In his
community of South Lake, Texas, he played such an important role as a
community leader, for Warren not only gave to his family, but he gave
to his extended family and his entire community. He served on the
school board of South Lake from 1993 to 1996. He was a member of the
Red Creek Community Association. As a matter of fact, he served as its
president. He was also a member of the very elite community group
called the Dragons Council. It was no ordinary group, for this is an
elite fan-based booster group for the young people in that community
and supported the South Lake teams.
To show you a measure of his commitment, over the many years Warren
G. Davis never missed a single game. He gave so much of his life to
this community.
Warren Davis and I go back from the very beginning of our college
careers. He has been a friend for over 45 years to me, Mr. Speaker, for
in 1963 we both went to Florida A&M University where this young man was
also my college roommate for 4 years. We pledged fraternity together,
the Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity; oh, did he love Alpha Phi Alpha, and we
pledged the Beta Nu Chapter. We affectionately referred to ourselves as
the 12 disciples. But Warren Davis was the enforcer of our group. He
was the glue that kept us together. He learned very early to work with
different people. He not only was there as a fraternity person, but
also worked early in the student movement when we had the task of
integrating many of the public facilities in Tallahassee, Florida, as
we matriculated through Florida A&M University.
When he left Florida A&M, he started a very distinguished career in
the computer field as one of the foremost African-American executives
with the IBM corporation, working as an executive in the management and
the market and the accounting areas, and paving the way for other
African Americans to be able to follow in his footsteps.
Mr. Speaker, this is a great American and one who was humble and
humbled himself before God and understood not only who he was but whose
he was.
And so I just want to rise this afternoon to say these few words
about my great friend, my good friend, Warren Davis. Let me just say in
conclusion, Mr. Speaker, that Warren Davis fought the good fight.
Warren Davis finished his course, and Warren Davis kept the faith. And
henceforth there is put up for him a crown of righteousness which the
Lord, that righteous judge, has made available to Warren G. Davis, and
so many people both near and far all across the breadth and the scope
of America collectively say we thank God for sending Warren G. Davis
our way.
____________________
HONORING DR. MICHAEL DeBAKEY
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to honor Dr. Michael
DeBakey, the father of modern cardiovascular surgery, and for me a
personal hero. Dr. DeBakey passed away Friday night in Houston at the
age of 99. Michael DeBakey, a giant among men and a giant in medicine.
His death is a tremendous loss to the fields of medicine, science, and
technology. It is a great loss for humanity at-large.
Mr. Speaker, there are certain privileges that come with being a
servant here in the people's House. For me, one of those privileges was
meeting Dr. DeBakey. After working months to secure the Congressional
Gold Medal for the great doctor, I had the chance to sit down with him
here in Washington in April right after it was awarded to him. For 30
minutes, we were able to discuss his personal and professional
experiences over his 60 years in medicine. It was a once-in-a-lifetime
opportunity for which I am eternally grateful.
He talked about how Congress had been responsible for the advancement
of medical science in this country, how Congress had led the way with
funding for the National Institutes of Health. He talked about his
experiences going over and treating Boris Yeltsin in the Soviet Union
when he was suffering from heart disease, and Dr. DeBakey found just on
the basis purely on physical examine that the individual was quite
anemic as well, which rendered his outlook for cardiovascular surgery
much worse. They treated the anemia, and the rest, as they say, is
history.
As a fellow physician, Dr. DeBakey's work on medical advancements is
legendary. His dedication to healing those around him came not only
from his talents as a physician, but his ongoing commitment to the
larger medical community.
His motto, as we heard others mention today, was always ``strive for
nothing less than excellence.''
I would be remiss if I did not mention the education and the
entrepreneurial spirit that made him worthy of one of the Nation's
highest honors, the Congressional Gold Medal. Let me share some of his
accomplishments.
While in medical school, Dr. DeBakey developed the roller pump which
later became the major component in the heart-lung machine that is used
in open heart surgery routinely today. It was truly a visionary change.
His service and subsequent work in the Surgeon General's office
during World War II led to the development of the Mobile Army Surgical
Hospital, the so-called MASH unit. Without Dr. DeBakey, we wouldn't
have those forward surgical teams that go into combat areas and provide
vital care to our soldiers in that golden hour after injury.
This medical trailblazer also helped establish the specialized
medical and surgical center system for treating military personnel
returning home from war which we know as the Veterans Administration
Medical Center.
But it was at the Methodist Hospital in Houston where Dr. DeBakey
performed many of his groundbreaking surgeries, including the first
removal of a carotid artery blockage. He also performed the first
coronary artery bypass graft, and some of the first heart transplants
in this country as well.
He served as adviser to every President of the United States for the
last 50 years. Think of that, every President for the last 50 years
depended on Dr. Michael DeBakey for medical advice. Additionally, he
has given advice to heads of state throughout the world.
During his professional surgical career, he performed more than
60,000 cardiovascular procedures, and trained thousands of surgeons who
practice around the world today. Today, his name is affixed to any
number of organizations, centers of learning, and projects devoted to
medical education and health education for the general public. This
includes the National Library of Medicine, which is now the world's
largest and most prestigious repository of medical archives. The
collections there house resources that actually I look at several times
a week as I prepare for committee hearings.
Dr. DeBakey's contributions to medicine, his breakthrough surgeries,
and his innovative devices have completely transformed our view of the
human body and our view of longevity on this planet. The United States,
and indeed the world, were fortunate to have this medical pioneer for
as long as we did.
Mr. Speaker, it is with great sorrow that I come to the floor
tonight, but it is also with great honor that I once again share Dr.
DeBakey with this august body. Time Magazine honored him as the Man of
the Year several years ago. Indeed he was, a man for the ages and the
Man of the Year.
____________________
U.S. TROOP DEPLOYMENT
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, just 10 days ago we celebrated the 4th of
July because on that day in 1776, we first declared our Nation's
independence and sovereignty.
[[Page 14852]]
The American people have cherished and fought for that sovereignty
for 232 years, so it is only right that we respect the sovereignty of
other nations.
Last week, Iraq's Prime Minister al-Maliki said that the withdrawal
of American troops out of Iraq or a timetable for withdrawal should be
part of the current status-of-forces negotiations between his
government and the United States. He insisted that the basis for any
agreement will be respect for the full sovereignty of Iraq.
Mr. Speaker, this House should affirm Iraq's right to full
sovereignty. In fact, my colleague, Representative Lee of California,
and I have sent a letter to every Member of the House inviting all
Members to cosign a letter to Prime Minister al-Maliki supporting his
government's sovereign rights. The letter reads in part as follows:
``We, the undersigned, Members of the United States House of
Representatives, write to acknowledge and support the sovereign right
of the government of Iraq to insist that any security agreement between
the United States and Iraq include a timetable for the complete
redeployment of U.S. Armed Forces and military contractors out of Iraq.
The letter goes on to say, Mr. Speaker, ``As elected members of the
legislative branch of the world's longest continuing democracy, we
recognize that it is the national legislature that is responsible for
expressing and exercising the sovereign rights and powers that the
people have entrusted in their government.
``It is for the free people of Iraq, acting through their elected
representatives in the Iraq parliament, to decide for themselves the
terms and conditions under which they will agree to the continuing
presence of the U.S. Armed Forces and military contractors in their
country. And it is for the Congress of the United States to approve the
terms and conditions of any security agreement that commits the United
States to the defense of Iraq.''
Mr. Speaker, Prime Minister al-Maliki's statement for support for
withdrawal timetable could very well be the light at the end of the
tunnel that the American people have long been waiting for. Ending the
occupation of Iraq, which was never an imminent security threat to the
United States in the first place, would allow us to refocus on
Afghanistan where the real threat lies. It would end the U.S. military
occupation in the Middle East that has done so much to strengthen
Iran's hand in the region. And it would allow us to redirect tens of
billions of dollars back home for desperately needed investments in our
economy, our health care, energy independence, education, child care
and so much more.
The President has often said that as Iraqis stand up, we will stand
down. Prime Minister al-Maliki's statement shows that the Iraqis
believe they are ready to stand up. Now the ball is in our court. It is
time for the President to prove he meant what he said because if the
administration doesn't work with the prime minister in a serious way to
withdrawal our troops and military contractors, it will prove what so
many of us have feared all along, that the administration has no
intention of leaving Iraq ever.
Representative Lee and I urge all Members of the House to sign this
important letter to Prime Minister al-Maliki. This is a critical moment
and a crucial opportunity to end the long, bloody, disastrous
occupation of Iraq. We must seize it.
____________________
PRACTICAL ENERGY SOLUTIONS NEEDED
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, for literally months now, House Republicans
have come to the floor in a concerted effort to convince Democratic
leadership to bring legislation to the floor that would allow us to
drill here and drill now so we can all pay less at the pump.
But even as we offered practical energy solutions and a willingness
to work with the majority, Speaker Pelosi has continually blocked such
legislation from coming for a vote here in the House, and we are not
the only ones who have noticed it.
Mr. Speaker, here is a headline from today's Roll Call newspaper.
Here is what it says: ``Pelosi maneuvers to block drilling votes.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi appears intent on preventing votes on opening more
areas to offshore drilling, despite the stirrings of a revolt by rank-
and-file Democrats after months of concerted efforts by House
Republicans.'' This was in Roll Call today, Monday, July 14, 2008.
As this article notes, we are starting to hear some rumblings from
Members on the Democratic side of the aisle who are ready to put
partisan politics aside and work with Republicans on compromise
legislation that will start to decrease our pain at the pump.
Increasing numbers of rank-and-file Democrats seem to have grown tired
of their leadership's failure to allow votes on legislation that will
break our dependence on foreign oil.
Mr. Speaker, I want to show a couple of posters here and some quotes.
The first quote, ``Americans need Congress to look at real solutions in
addressing our energy needs, especially when we have $4 a gallon
gasoline. We need answers and not just slogans. We need to do it all.
We have Senators going to Saudi Arabia begging them to increase their
production, but we won't increase ours in some of the most, potential,
productive areas?'' That was a quote from a floor remark made June 26,
2008, by Mr. Gene Green of Texas.
{time} 1945
Here is another one. Another quote, ``Then we better get started,
because the longer we delay, the more we're jeopardizing the American
economy.'' That quote came from Representative Neil Abercrombie, the
gentleman from Hawaii, on Fox News on July 7 of this year, a member,
Neil Abercrombie, of the Natural Resources Committee.
Many Members on both sides of the aisle understand that there is not
one single solution to our current energy crisis, and that we must work
in a bipartisan way to develop a comprehensive plan to alleviate the
pain that American families face every time they fill their gas pumps.
I want to commend the leadership of Representative John Peterson of
Pennsylvania, and, as I said, Representative Neil Abercrombie of
Hawaii. They are now heading up a working group to form legislation
that incorporates long-term energy solutions while also providing
short-term relief for Americans who are now, today, paying $4.11 a
gallon of gas.
This bipartisan approach is what we need to find a solution. House
Republicans stand ready to find a middle way that not only guarantees
an increase in domestic production, but it also addresses concerns
about excessive speculation.
While House Republicans are prepared for a comprehensive approach
that looks not only at supply but also market factors, Speaker Pelosi
must be willing to, at the very least, allow an up or down vote on
increasing domestic supply. She must recognize that the American people
don't want any option left off the table.
As further indication that we need to increase the domestic supply of
oil, President Bush today lifted the 18 year-old executive order that
prohibited responsible energy exploration along our Nation's Outer
Continental Shelf. Let me show my colleagues that poster. Here is the
quote, ``In another push to deal with soaring gas prices, President
Bush on Monday will lift an executive ban on offshore drilling that has
stood since his father was president. But the move, by itself, will do
nothing unless Congress acts as well.'' This was from the Associated
Press today.
This decision leaves Congress as the last remaining hurdle to
domestically producing billions of barrels of oil and trillions of
cubic feet of natural gas for the American people. Allowing our Nation
to explore the energy resources available off of our coast would be a
great first step toward declaring America's energy independence.
We need to have a comprehensive approach, and I hope Members on both
[[Page 14853]]
sides of the aisle recognize that, and we need action now.
Unfortunately, sound energy policy is being held hostage by Speaker
Nancy Pelosi because she believes that it is more important to pander
to out-of-control environmentalists than to enact a ``common-sense
plan'' to lower gas prices--as she promised to the American people over
2 years ago.
Mr. Speaker, as American families and small businesses face record
prices at the pump, they are counting on their leaders in Congress to
work together on reforms to help reduce fuel costs. I call on Speaker
Pelosi and the Democratic Leadership to listen to House Republicans, a
growing coalition of House Democrats and most importantly the American
people--allow a vote on legislation that will reduce our dependence on
foreign oil.
____________________
AMERICA NEEDS TO KNOW
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, last week's rattling of Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac and the failure of IndyMac Bank are the latest wreckage of
our held-hostage economy enlarged to a trillion-dollar hole. When we
think about what is happening, the seeds of the ruin were sown in the
1990s, and those who planted the seeds got rich while pushing America
financially to the precipice.
The repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act by Congress in 1999 contributed
to our financial system's vulnerability. For the first time in a half a
century, the firewall between banking and commerce was breached. I
voted against abandoning Glass-Steagall, but the act passed
overwhelmingly in this chamber by a vote of 362-57 and over in the
other body, 90-8.
As a result, the American taxpayers are now being asked to bail out
Wall Street. The biggest high-risk investment banks and some uninsured
government instrumentalities are going right to the American people,
where they said they would never go. As these risky practices were
standardized, the question is, what happened to the regulatory bodies
charged with maintaining the safety and soundness of our financial
system? Why didn't Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac exert due diligence and
oversight? Where was Treasury's Office of Thrift Supervision?
What happened to HUD's appraisal and underwriting standards, when in
1993 and mortgage letter 93-2, and then in 1994, in HUD's mortgage
letter 94-54, HUD gave authority to lenders like Countrywide to approve
their own loans and select their own appraisers. Assuming many of these
loans were moved to market through Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, why did
their regulatory standards fall short? Who served on their boards of
directors and voted for these high-risk practices? How much were those
boards and executives compensated during those years when these risky
practices proliferated?
Evidence is beginning to surface that many of those board members
personally benefited from their own decisions. Well, through which
domestic and international institutions were the original mortgage
securitizations first moved? Which persons and which firms did it, and
which regulatory agencies sanctioned the process?
Why did Treasury's Office of Thrift Supervision fail to bat an eye
when Superior Bank, one of the first institutions to embark on subprime
lending, was earning 7\1/2\ times the industry's average return on
assets? Where was its Chicago Office of Thrift Supervision? When FDIC
finally caught up and charged Superior in 2001, it was fined $450
million, the largest fine in U.S. history much.
But why haven't other hot-dog banks been brought to justice? This
subprime crises happened because people at the highest levels wilted,
they placed America in bondage for another generation. The gaming of
our financial markets is not a new phenomenon, but each crisis seems to
get bigger, and the big fish, the kingfish, aren't brought to justice.
All the men and women who served on the boards of Freddie Mac and
Fannie Mae during the 1990s and voted for these high-risk practices
should be investigated. They made millions off their stock options and
industry connections. Are they to remain anonymous to the American
people who are being asked to pick up their horse dung after the parade
has gone through town? Who were they, and how did their votes, as board
members, contribute to this unfolding American tragedy?
I am going to place in the Record tonight the list of all the board
members at Freddie Mac from the early nineties until the early 2000s
and will be placing the same names in the Record for Fannie Mae in
future days.
Let me just say that the trillion-dollars debt that is being proposed
to be financed through the sale of U.S. bonds, let me remind the
American people, our coffers are empty as a country. Our country will
borrow more money from foreign interests to close this gap, and our
children will owe principal and interest to the bondholders, just as
they paid nearly a quarter trillion dollars on the savings and loan
crises from the 1980s.
Let me remind you the meaning of the word ``bondage,'' a state of
being bound, captive, a serve, subjugated to a controlling person or
force, subservient, dependent, a bond slave, a lackey.
What is happening to our country is truly very, very dangerous. This
never should have happened, and every single person responsible at the
highest levels in this government, who did not regulate, who did not
have oversight, who did not properly manage their regulatory systems in
order to guard against this kind of risk-prone behavior, should be
investigated, and the American people should know whose bill they are
paying for. What a tremendous tragedy for our country.
Board of Directors
Leland C. Brendsel, Chairman of the Board and CEO, Freddie
Mac.
George L. Argyros, Chairman and CEO, Arnel and Affiliates.
Thomas Ludlow Ashley, President, Association of Bank,
Holding Companies.
Armando J. Bucelo, Jr., Attorney-at-law, Law Office of
Armando J. Bucelo, Jr.
John C. Etling, President and CEO, General Reinsurance
Corporation.
Shannon Fairbanks, Managing Partner, Castine Partners.
David W. Glenn, President and COO, Freddie Mac.
George D. Gould, Vice Chairman, Klingenstein, Fields &
Company.
Barbara C. Jordan, Holder, Lyndon B. Johnson Centennial
Chair in National Policy, University of Texas in Austin.
Henry Kaufman, President, Henry Kaufman & Company, Inc.
John B. McCoy, Chairman and CEO, Banc One Corporation
James F. Montgomery, Chairman and CEO, Great Western
Financial Corporation.
Russell E. Palmer, Chairman and CEO, The Palmer Group.
Ronald F. Poe, Chairman and CEO, Dorman and Wilson, Inc.
Donald J. Schuenke, Chairman and CEO, Northwestern Mutual
Life Insurance Company.
Christina Seix, Chairman and CEO, Seix Investment Advisors,
Inc.
William J. Turner, Chairman and CEO, Turner & Partners,
Inc.
Board of Directors (as of March 7, 1994)
Leland C. Brendsel, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Freddie Mac.
David W. Glenn, President & Chief Operating Officer,
Freddie Mac.
John C. Edling, President & Chief Executive Officer,
General Reinsurance Corporation.
George D. Gould, Vice Chairman, Klingenstein, Fields &
Company.
Jerry M. Hultin, Partner, Warner & Hultin.
Barbara C. Jordan, Professor of Public Service, University
of Texas.
Henry Kaufman, President, Henry Kaufman & Company, Inc.
Raymond J. McClendon, Vice Chairman & Chief Executive
Officer, Pryor, McClendon, Counts & Co.
John B. McCoy, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, Banc One
Corporation.
James F. Montgomery, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Great Western Financial Corporation.
James B. Nutter, President, James B. Nutter and Co.
Russell E. Palmer, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, The
Palmer Group.
Ronald F. Poe, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, Dorman &
Wilson, Inc.
Donald J. Schuenke, Retired Chairman, Northwestern Mutual
Life Insurance Company.
Christina Seix, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, Seix
Investment Advisors, Inc.
William J. Turner, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Turner & Partners, Inc.
[[Page 14854]]
Board of Directors (as of March 10, 1995)
Leland C. Brendsel, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Freddie Mac.
David W. Glenn, President & Chief Operating Officer,
Freddie Mac.
John C. Etling, President & Chief Executive Officer,
General Reinsurance Corporation.
George D. Gould, Vice Chairman, Klingenstein, Fields &
Company.
Jerry M. Hultin, Partner, Warner & Hultin.
Barbara C. Jordan, Professor of Public Service, University
of Texas.
Henry Kaufman, President, Henry Kaufman & Company, Inc.
John B. McCoy, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, BANC ONE
CORPORATION.
James F. Montgomery, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Great Western Financial Corporation.
James B. Nutter, President, James B. Nutter and Co.
Russell E. Palmer, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, The
Palmer Group.
Ronald F. Poe, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, Dorman &
Wilson, Inc.
Donald J. Schuenke, Non-Executive Chairman, Northern
Telecom, Ltd.
Christina Seix, Chairman & Chief Investment Officer, Seix
Investment Advisors, Inc.
William J. Turner, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Turner & Partners, Inc.
Dennis DeConcini, Former U.S. Senator from Arizona.
Harriet F. Woods, President of the National Women's
Political Caucus, Washington, D.C.
Board of Directors (as of Feb. 1, 1996)
Leland C. Brendsel, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Freddie Mac.
David W. Glenn, President & Chief Operating Officer,
Freddie Mac.
Dennis DeConcini, Former U.S. Senator from Arizona.
John C. Etling, Retired President & Chief Executive
Officer, General Reinsurance Corporation.
Joel I. Ferguson, President. F&S Development Company.
George D. Gould, Vice Chairman, Klingenstein, Fields &
Company, L.P.
Jerry M. Hultin, Partner, Warner & Hultin.
Henry Kaufman, President, Henry Kaufman & Company. Inc.
John B. McCoy, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, BancOne
Corporation.
James F. Montgomery, Chairman, Great Western Financial
Corporation.
James B. Nutter, President, James B. Nutter and Co.
Russell E. Palmer, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, The
Palmer Group.
Ronald F. Poe, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, Dorman &
Wilson, Inc.
Donald J. Schuenke, Non-Executive Chairman, Northern
Telecom, Ltd.
Christina Seix, Chairman & Chief Investment Officer, Seix
Investment Advisors, Inc.
William J. Turner, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Turner & Partners, Inc.
Harriett F. Woods, President, Harriett Woods Productions.
Board of Directors (as of February 1, 1997)
Leland C. Brendsel, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Freddie Mac.
David W Glenn, President & Chief Operating Officer, Freddie
Mac.
Dennis DeConcini, Former U.S. Senator from Arizona.
Joel I. Ferguson, President, F & S Development Company.
George D. Gould, Vice Chairman, Klingenstein, Fields &
Company, L.P.
Jerry M. Hultin, Partner, Warner & Hultin.
Henry Kaufman, President, Henry Kaufman & Company, Inc.
Maud Mater, Senior Vice President, General Counsel and
Secretary, Freedie Mac.
John B. McCoy, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, Banc One
Corporation.
James F. Montgomery, Chairman, Great Western Financial
Corporation.
James B. Nutter, President, James B. Nutter and Company.
Russell E. Palmer, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, The
Palmer Group.
Ronald F. Poe, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, Dorman &
Wilson, Inc.
Donald J. Schuenke, Non-Executive Chairman, Northern
Telecom, Ltd.
Christina Seix, Chairman & Chief Investment Officer, Seix
Investment Advisors, Inc.
William J. Turner, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Turner & Partners, Inc.
Harriett F. Woods, President, Harriett Woods Productions.
Board of Directors (as of February 28, 1998)
Leland C. Brendsel, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Freddie Mac.
David W. Glenn, President & Chief Operating Officer,
Freddie Mac.
Dennis DeConcini, Former U.S. Senator from Arizona.
George D. Gould, Vice Chairman, Klingenstein, Fields &
Company, L.P.
Neil F. Hartigan, Partner, McDermott, Will & Emery.
Thomas W. Jones, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Salomon Smith Barney Asset Management.
Henry Kaufman, President, Henry Kaufman & Company, Inc.
Maud Mater, Senior Vice President, General Counsel and
Secretary, Freedie Mac.
John B. McCoy, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, Banc One
Corporation.
James F. Montgomery, Past Chairman, Great Western Financial
Corporation.
Russell E. Palmer, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, The
Palmer Group.
Ronald F. Poe, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, Legg
Mason Dorman & Wilson, Inc.
Donald J. Schuenke, Non-Executive Chairman, Northern
Telecom, Ltd.
Christina Seix, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer & Chief
Investment Officer, Seix Investment Advisors, Inc.
Joe Serna, Jr., Mayor, City of Sacramento, California.
William J. Turner, Co-Manager, Signature Capital, Inc.
Harriett F. Woods, President, Harriett Woods Productions.
Board of Directors (as of March 15, 2000)
Leland C. Brendsel, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Freddie Mac.
David W. Glenn, President & Chief Operating Officer,
Freddie Mac.
Dennis DeConcini, Former U.S. Senator from Arizona.
Rahm Emanuel, Managing Director, Wasserstein Perella & Co.
Joel I. Ferguson, Chairman, Ferguson Development Company.
George D. Gould, Vice Chairman, Klingenstein, Fields &
Company, L.P.
Neil F. Hartigan, Partner, McDermott, Will & Emery.
Thomas W. Jones, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, Global
Investment Management and Private Banking Group.
Henry Kaufman, President, Henry Kaufman & Company, Inc.
John B. McCoy, Retired Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Bank One Corporation.
James F. Montgomery, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Frontier Bank.
Russell E. Palmer, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, The
Palmer Group.
Ronald F. Poe, President, Ronald F. Poe & Associates.
Stephen A. Ross, Professor, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Donald J. Schuenke, Retired Chairman, Northwestern Mutual
Life Insurance.
Christina Seix, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer & Chief
Investment Officer, Seix Investment Advisors, Inc.
William J. Turner, Co-Manager, Signature Capitol, Inc.
Board of Directors (as of March 15, 2001)
Leland C. Brendsel, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Freddie Mac.
David W. Glenn, Vice Chairman & President, Freddie Mac.
Rahm Emanuel, Managing Director, Wasserstein Perella & Co.
Joel I. Ferguson, Chairman, Ferguson Development Company.
James C. Free, President & CEO, The Smith-Free Group.
George D. Gould, Vice Chairman, Klingenstein, Fields &
Company, L.P.
Neil F. Hartigan, Partner, McDermott, Will & Emery.
Harold Ickes, Partner, Ickes & Enright Group.
Thomas W. Jones, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, Global
Investment Management and Private Banking Group.
Henry Kaufman, President, Henry Kaufman & Company, Inc.
John B. McCoy, Retired Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Bank One Corporation.
James F. Montgomery, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Frontier Bank.
Russell E. Palmer, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, The
Palmer Group.
Ronald F. Poe, President, Ronald F. Poe & Associates.
Stephen A. Ross, Professor, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Donald J. Schuenke, Retired Chairman, Northwestern Mutual
Life Insurance.
Christina Seix, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer & Chief
Investment Officer, Seix Investment Advisors, Inc.
William J. Turner, Co-Manager, Signature Capital, Inc.
Board of Directors (as of March 15, 2001)
Leland C. Brendsel, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Freddie Mac.
David W. Glenn, Vice Chairman & President, Freddie Mac.
Rahm Emanuel, Managing Director, Wasserstein Perella & Co.
Joel I. Ferguson, Chairman, Ferguson Development Company.
James C. Free, President & CEO, The Smith-Free Group.
George D. Gould, Vice Chairman, Klingenstein, Fields &
Company, L.P.
Neil F. Hartigan, Partner, McDermott, Will & Emery, A law
firm, Chicago, Illinois.
Harold Ickes, Partner, Ickes & Enright Group.
Thomas W. Jones, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, Global
Investment Management and Private Banking Group.
Henry Kaufman, President, Henry Kaufman & Company, Inc.
John B. McCoy, Retired Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Bank One Corporation.
James F. Montgomery, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Frontier Bank.
Russell E. Palmer, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, The
Palmer Group.
[[Page 14855]]
Ronald F. Poe, President, Ronald F. Poe & Associates.
Stephen A. Ross, Professor, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Donald J. Schuenke, Retired Chairman, Northwestern Mutual
Life Insurance.
Christina Seix, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer & Chief
Investment Officer, Seix Investment Advisors, Inc.
William J. Turner, Co-Manager, Signature Capital, Inc.
Board of Directors (as of March 15, 2002)
Leland C. Brendsel, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Freddie Mac.
David W. Glenn, Vice Chairman & President, Freddie Mac.
Cesar B. Cabrera, President & Owner, Rocca Development
Corporation.
Michelle Engler, Trustee, Investor Series Trust & Member,
Boards of Managers, JNL Variable Funds.
George D. Gould, Vice Chairman, Klingenstein, Fields &
Company, L.P.
David J. Gribbin III, Managing Director, Clark and
Weinstock.
Thomas W. Jones, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, Global
Investment Management and Private Banking Group.
Henry Kaufman, President, Henry Kaufman & Company, Inc.
John B. McCoy, Retired Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Bank One Corporation.
James F. Montgomery, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer,
Frontier Bank.
Shaun F. O'Malley, Retired Chairman, Price Waterhouse LLP.
Ronald F. Poe, President, Ronald F. Poe & Associates.
William D. Powers, Principal, Powers, Crane & Company, LLC.
Stephen A. Ross, Professor, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Co-Chairman, Roll
and Ross Asset Management Corporation.
Donald J. Schuenke, Retired Chairman, Northwestern Mutual
Life Insurance, A life insurance company, Milwaukee,
Wisconsin, and Non-Executive Chairman, Allen-Edmonds Shoe
Company.
Cristina Seix, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer & Chief
Investment Officer, Seix Investment Advisors, Inc.
Catherine L. Stepp, Co-owner & Vice President, First Stepp
Builders, Inc.
William J. Turner, Co-Manager, Signature Capital, Inc., A
venture capital investment firm, New York, New York, and
Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, Turner & Partners, Inc.
Board of Directors (as of January 31, 2004)
Richard F. Syron, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer,
Freddie Mac.
Cesar B. Cabrera, President, Rocca Development Corporation.
Michelle Engler, Trustee, JNL Investor Series Trust and
Member of Board of Managers, JNL Variable Funds.
Richard Karl Goeltz, Former Vice Chairman and Chief
Financial Officer, American Express Company.
George D. Gould, Vice Chairman, Klingenstein, Fields &
Company, LP.
David J. Gribbin III, Former Managing Director, Clark &
Weinstock.
Thomas W. Jones, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer,
Global Investment Management.
Henry Kaufman, President, Henry Kaufman & Company, Inc.
Martin L. Leibowitz, Vice Chairman and Chief Investment
Officer, Teacher's Insurance and Annuity Association--College
Retirement Equities Fund.
John B. McCoy, Retired Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer, Bank One Corporation.
Shaun F. O'Malley, Retired Chairman, Price Waterhouse, LLP.
Ronald F. Poe, President, Ronald F. Poe & Associates.
William D. Powers, Principal, Powers, Crane & Company, LLC.
Stephen A. Ross, Professor, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology.
Donald J. Schuenke, Retired Chairman, Northwestern Mutual
Life Insurance Company, Milwaukee, Wisconsin and Non-
Executive Chairman, Allen-Edmonds Shoe Company.
Christina Seix, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Investment Officer, Seix Investment Advisors, Inc.
Catherine Stepp, Vice President, First Stepp Builders, Inc.
William J. Turner, Manager, Signature Capital, Inc.
Board of Directors (as of September 1, 2004)
Richard F. Syron, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer,
Freddie Mac.
Joan E. Donoghue, Senior Vice President and Principal,
Deputy General Counsel, Freddie Mac.
Michelle Engler, Trustee, JNL Investor Series Trust and
Member of Board of Managers, JNL Variable Funds.
Richard Karl Goeltz, Retired Vice Chairman and Chief
Financial Officer, American Express Company.
George D. Gould, Vice Chairman, Klingenstein, Fields &
Company, LP.
Thomas S. Johnson, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer,
GreenPoint Financial Corporation.
Henry Kaufman, President, Henry Kaufman & Company, Inc.
William I. Ledman, Senior Vice President of Information
Systems and Services, Freddie Mac.
John B. McCoy, Retired Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer, Bank One Corporation.
Shaun F. O'Malley, Chairman Emeritus, Price Waterhouse,
LLP.
Ronald F. Poe, President, Ronald F. Poe & Associates.
Stephen A. Ross, Professor, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology.
William J. Turner, Manager, Signature Capital, Inc.
____________________
MESSAGE FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick) is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I bring a message from the American people.
They don't like us. They viewed Congress as a body that's comprised of
individuals that they elect and expect to reason together in the best
interests of America and Americans. They don't see that happening. They
insist they have had it with the politics itself and party.
Americans are hurting because of fuel costs which are pushing up all
other costs, including food. Winter is approaching, and the pain will
grow much worse.
This crisis is seriously threatening our national security. We are
sending more money to foreign nations than ever before, many of whom
don't like us, to put it mildly. We, in government, refused to get our
financial House in order. We are forcing our Nation to depend on
foreign oil.
Oh, and in an aside, emptying our Strategic Petroleum Reserve is not
a solution. What if we are attacked, disaster? That's why reserves are
called strategic. Politicians since, and including Jimmy Carter, have
promised energy solutions.
Well, where are they? Under Carter we imported about 24 percent of
our oil, and now we import about 70 percent. The American people are
tired of hollow promises. They are demanding action now, now, not after
the election, now. They demand plans for eliminating our dependence on
oil, beginning with foreign oil, plans to use our own resource from
offshore drilling to sugar cane conversion, all the while putting
advanced batteries, hybrids, plug-in hybrids, wind, solar, hydrogen,
nuclear and any other realistic alternative on a critical fast track.
Of course, we must do everything we can to protect our environment if
for no other reason than we all must breathe clean air, consume safe
food and water, and, of course, protect God's creatures.
The people know it's their government, and they intend to take
charge. Simply put, they are mad. Those before us, as well as many
selfless heroes today, have and are now paying grievously. For this
great opportunity that we call home, this America, the American people
worked very hard to keep our Nation strong and productive. They do
their jobs. The very least we can do as U.S. Congress is do our job.
____________________
OPTIMISM
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, today on a lighter note, I would like to talk
about optimism and the wherewithal that our country has, especially
among our young people. I want to talk about a subject that doesn't
really get a lot of attention in this whole debate about energy and oil
and the fact that we are now faced with skyrocketing prices at the gas
pump.
I want to talk about investing in our future. I want to talk about
young people not only from my district but across the country, and I
want to talk about what we call green jobs, green-collar jobs. Some
people might think that's a misnomer, you know, but we have actually
changed. Blue-collar jobs have, as you know, been outsourced to other
countries.
What we are attempting to do in the Congress and something that
President
[[Page 14856]]
Bush signed into law just last December was an act that was part of the
energy bill, the energy package, that said we are going to make a
difference in this country by investing in America's future. We will
provide 10 million jobs in green technology if our government steps up
to the plate.
Now we are asking for that appropriation for $125 million to help
create, and, I think, minimally, 10 million jobs, that will be reaped
across this country that will secure our energy security here at home.
It will also send a steep message to many nonbelievers across the
country that we mean business, that we are actually going to keep these
jobs here, that these jobs won't be outsourced, that they won't be
going to China and India and Indonesia and even to Mexico, because we
are going to make an investment here.
It's, very simply, trying to set a precedent here to provide
opportunities for people to get retrained or to get into new
technology, into are renewable energy, into biofuels, and into creating
solar panels. Those manufacturing jobs that we knew as blue-collar
workers that my father as a teamster and other people in my district
represented, could be retooled to help provide and incentivize our
economy by keeping those jobs here at home.
No more of this minimum-wage jobs, but providing good, sustainable,
liveable-wage jobs for working men and women and people that could rely
on this to raise a family, not in the state that we are in right now,
where you have a single head of household, a woman, in many cases,
that's working three jobs just to make that rent, just to make that
electricity bill, just to get that extra gallon of gas to get to her
job. Those are things that we know are resonating right now with our
constituents, and they demand a change.
It isn't just enough to say that we are going to lower the energy
costs, they have to have a good-paying job to provide for all those
commodities, luxuries that they need to keep their family going.
{time} 2000
And one best way of doing it is by jump-starting the economy and by
supporting the Green Jobs Act, something that the Senate and also the
House passed again that was signed into law in December. We need $125
million to help jump-start that program.
I want to illustrate something here, a picture of some youngsters who
were actually installing on a roof, who had just completed a project in
Oakland, California, who were trained in a program, who went through an
apprenticeship program that was done in a private and public
partnership. It was to help install solar panels and to retrofit them
in some of our oldest buildings in very dilapidated parts of our
country.
What an incentive that would be to help to jump-start our communities
and to revitalize those communities that have been left behind by the
manufacturing jobs that went to other countries but also to incentivize
those places that have high unemployment like in Oakland, like in East
Los Angeles, like in the Bronx, like in Little Havana in Florida. These
places need relief, and the government has an obligation to help
provide an incentive, working closely, hand in hand, with private
industry.
The reason I say that is that I know it works, and it's working right
now in an obscure place in my district in East Los Angeles. The LA
Unified School District, which doesn't always get honors for many
things that they do, has invested in a program out of the East LA
Skills Center to help retrain individuals. The majority of those who
are participating right now happen to be middle-aged people who are
saying, ``I need to get retrained into a better paying job, a job
that's going to help me in the rest of my life and in my retirement.''
They're taking that challenge; they're going through training, and
they're being offered jobs.
One of the dilemmas that we're facing right now is that we don't have
an adequate workforce available to fill all of these potential jobs. I
say: Why? Why should we go outside and bring people in when we need to
make those investments here in the United States and in Los Angeles?
So, Mr. Speaker, I would just like to say and would like to urge my
colleagues to support the Green Jobs Act and to provide that infusion
of $125 million that will act as a stimulus package for our economy.
____________________
NEW TRENDS IN THE GROWING AFGHAN DRUG ECONOMY
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. KIRK. Mr. Speaker, with the increasing number of cross-border
attacks in Afghanistan that are coming from the Waziristan region of
Pakistan, it is more important than ever to develop a complete picture
of where al Qaeda and the Taliban terrorists are hiding and especially
of how they are funded.
Last month, the Defense Department finally recognized what many of us
in the Congress have been saying for years. The report states:
``Narcotics-related activities are fueling the insurgency in
Afghanistan and, if left unchecked, threaten the long-term stability of
the country and the surrounding region.'' It continues: ``The emerging
nexus between narcotics traffickers and the insurgency is clear.
Narcotics traffickers provide revenue and arms to the Taliban while the
Taliban provides protection to growers and traffickers and keep the
government from interfering with their activities.'' In short, the
Taliban has become a fully functioning, South Asian narco-terrorist
organization, protecting the source of 92 percent of the world's opium.
Production is so high now that the price is dropping after years of
record crops. Never one to ignore market forces, Afghan drug kingpins
are now expanding into new illicit markets, and they have become the
major supplier of the global cannabis and hashish markets.
Now, Morocco used to be the traditional main source for hashish in
the world, but that is rapidly changing. Morocco has been marginalized
in favor of Afghanistan. According to the United Nations Office on
Drugs and Crime, Morocco used to be the source of 31 percent of the
world's hashish, but by 2006, the number dwindled to just 18 percent.
In contrast, the U.N. now reports that cannabis cultivation in
Afghanistan has more than doubled since 2004. In 2004, 30,000 hectares
were under cultivation. In 2007, that number had risen to 70,000, much
of which is protected and nurtured by the Taliban as their new source
of income.
U.N. figures also show that cannabis cultivation is surging in
Taliban strongholds, including in the Kandahar, Uruzgan, Paktika,
Zabol, and Helmand Provinces. If the Great Plains are the breadbasket
of America, then these Afghan Provinces make up the production
heartland of the international narcotics trade.
The U.N. report also notes that, in these southern provinces, all of
the farmers growing poppy and now cannabis pay taxes of, roughly, 10
percent of revenues to antigovernment elements, including to the
Taliban and to al Qaeda. Taliban presence is highest in the provinces
with the greatest drug production, and violence follows wherever the
Taliban is present.
In the heroin heartland of the Helmand Province, the bloodshed is
dramatically higher than in all other Afghan provinces. Militants
launch an attack every 32 hours in Helmand, compared to just one attack
every 3 or 4 days in the rest of the country or just one attack a week
in Kabul.
The shift demonstrates that it's time for the United States and for
our NATO allies to take a stronger stand against the narcotics trade of
Afghanistan. Even the Defense Department now acknowledges a clear link
between drug trafficking and terrorist financing, a concept that used
to be very controversial in Afghanistan, but that is now clear.
Of course, in Colombia, we learned that drugs and terrorism must be
fought simultaneously. In Afghanistan and Pakistan, we must take the
lessons learned in Colombia to understand that counterterrorism
programs will not
[[Page 14857]]
work unless there is also an effective counternarcotics program to
eliminate the Taliban's source of money.
Mr. Speaker, while partisan feelings in the House surround the
mission in Iraq, the challenges of the Afghan mission are overshadowed.
The Afghan war is sometimes described as the ``good war'' or as the
``bipartisan war'' or as the ``war that our allies support.'' It is
certainly true that our forces in Afghanistan enjoy stronger support
from the American people and from our allies overseas. While we have a
NATO command in Afghanistan, our strong allied support for this mission
should not blind us to the growing problems and dangers emerging for
our troops.
The reality is this: Heroin has financed the resurgence of al Qaeda
and the Taliban, and they have now found a new source of money--hashish
and cannabis--which provide, in our estimate, hundreds of millions of
dollars to finance terror. The lessons of FARC's decline in Colombia
are clear: To wipe out terror, you have to attack its income. In both
Colombia and Afghanistan, that income comes from narcotics.
____________________
ENERGY
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 18, 2007, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton) is recognized
for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
We are going to do something a little bit differently this evening on
the House floor. We have a 1-hour Special Order of the minority and a
1-hour Special Order of the majority. The minority leader and the
Speaker have agreed to combine those two Special Orders so that both
sides can participate in the debate about energy policy. I will be
leading the minority side, and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Altmire) is going to be leading the majority side.
In the first hour, it is my understanding that I will control time
for both sides, and in the second hour, the gentleman from Pennsylvania
will control the time for both sides. We are going to try to operate in
such a fashion of cooperation which, I think, will be refreshing in
this Chamber so that both sides end up, at the end of the 2-hour
period, with equal amounts of time.
In Special Orders, you don't yield for specific amounts of time, so
what we're going to attempt to do, between looking at the two clocks
that are publicly visible and between the staff members who have
clocks, is to make sure that we balance the time out.
So, before we get started in the actual substantive debate, I'd be
happy to yield to my good friend from Pennsylvania for whatever
introductory remarks he wishes to make about the procedure.
Mr. ALTMIRE. I thank the gentleman from Texas.
It is my understanding that this format has not been attempted since
the 1990s, under Speaker Gingrich. So this is a recent historical event
that we're engaged in here, and I really to do appreciate the gentleman
and the ability to work with him, and I appreciate the gentleman from
Georgia and others for talking about energy prices and gas prices. That
is what we're going to do over the course of the next 2 hours.
Again, just to lay the ground rules, because it is a Special Order,
all time in the first hour will flow through the gentleman from Texas.
All time in the second hour will flow through our side, but we want
this to be an engaging discussion where we yield back and forth and ask
questions and inquire of each other.
We're going to keep this above board. This is not a game of gotcha.
This is to have a legitimate, honest discussion about energy prices,
about the drilling issue, about the speculation issue, and about the
Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
On our side, we're going to be joined by Members who have engaged on
this issue, such as Chairman Rahall of the Natural Resources Committee.
Chairman Rahall is going to talk about the 68 million acres of land
that are available, an issue that we know about, and that will come up.
Bart Stupak of Michigan, Congressman Stupak, is going to talk about the
speculation issue along with Congressman Murphy from Connecticut. We're
going to have Congressman Hall from New York, who is going to talk
about the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Others are welcome, who may be
watching this as we speak, to join us throughout the evening.
Those are generally the issues that we're going to talk about, so I
really do appreciate the gentleman from Texas for yielding the time.
We're going to keep this on a balanced level over the next 2 hours,
generally an hour on our side and an hour on the Republican side. I
look forward to the discussion.
So, at this time, I will yield back to the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I thank my friend from Pennsylvania.
I am going to yield myself such time as I may consume.
Well, Mr. Speaker, we have before us, as we have this debate on the
floor of the House of Representatives, a very serious situation. We
have energy prices worldwide, certainly, but in the United States of
America, specifically, we have energy prices that have gone up quite a
bit in the last several years.
If you will look here, you will see that, in February of 2007, as to
the price of unleaded gasoline at the pump, the national average was
$2.30 a gallon. By the end of June of this year, it was at $4.07. The
numbers that were given to me this afternoon when I got off the
airplane show that, today, it closed at $4.11 a gallon for gasoline,
which is a record. For diesel, it's about $4.82 a gallon.
If you will look at natural gas prices, which are used both in
industry and to heat our homes in the winter and to cook our food year
round, in February of last year, for 1,000 cubic feet of natural gas,
it was $6.60. By June, it was up to, which was the average nationally,
$10.21. We expect that, by this fall, the average national price is
going to be $12 for 1,000 cubic feet.
Now, if we sit here in the United States and do nothing, these prices
are going to stay where they are and are going to go higher. The good
news is that we have more domestic energy resources in this country
than in any other country in the world.
To just give a comparison, on this chart here, the purple and the
green and the blue are the amount of oil imports on an average basis
per day that we're importing from three of our largest sources of
imports. You can see that, from Nigeria, we're getting approximately 1
million barrels a day, from Venezuela, about 1,250,000 barrels a day
and, from Saudi Arabia, about 1,500,000 barrels a day of oil.
The orange bar, or the red bar, to the right shows the estimates from
the Minerals Management Service, the most recent estimates of the
amount of domestic energy supply that could be produced at today's
prices and with today's technology. If we were to produce in the Outer
Continental Shelf, in the areas that are currently off limits but that
we think could be produced in terms of a drilling program, that, by
itself, equals the amount of imports from Saudi Arabia.
{time} 2015
If we add the Alaska National Wildlife Reserve, which we're going to
talk about in some detail, that will be another approximately 750,000
to 1 million barrels a day.
And then one of the big ones that we really haven't done too much
about is our shale oil reserves. We have 2 trillion barrels of shale
oil in this country, and if we were to produce that, we think within
the next 5 to 10 years we could have almost 2 million, maybe 3 million
barrels of production just from that. Then if you add the tar sands,
you add coal-to-liquids--which there's a lot of bipartisan support on
the floor on both sides of the aisle--our heavy oil reserves, and then
our C02 recovery with C02 injection into depleted
oil fields, if you add all of those up, that's 10 million barrels a day
equivalent of production that we could have in the United States of
America.
[[Page 14858]]
Unfortunately, for most of these on the red bar, our friends on the
majority side, on the Democratic side, certainly the leadership--I'm
not saying that everybody on their side--but the Democratic leadership
are not only opposed, but some would say adamantly opposed. And that's
what this debate is going to be about this evening.
So with that as the opening statement, I would be happy to yield to
the distinguished chairman of the Natural Resources Committee, the
Honorable Nick Rahall of the great State of West Virginia.
Mr. RAHALL. Thank you, Mr. Barton. I appreciate your yielding, and I
certainly want to commend you and Jason Altmire, the gentleman from
Pennsylvania, for putting together this rather unique 2-hour debate,
civilized debate, I might add, on our energy situation. It comes at a
very appropriate time.
As we all know, President Bush just today by executive order lifted
the moratorium that was put into place by his father some 18 years ago,
I guess. That moratorium being on drilling in the Outer Continental
Shelf and in ANWR. And by a stroke of the pen, the President has lifted
that moratorium, and I assume now that those lands are open for
leasing; and I think that's a very important point to stress that they
are not under lease at this time but are open for leasing.
And as the gentleman from Texas, I'm sure, is aware, having a lease
in hand is not quite the same as starting the process to obtain a
lease. The latter being a rather lengthy process that can take quite a
few number of years.
I would think at this time an appropriate quote would be that quote
from the Energy Information Administration. When commenting on the
efforts to lift the moratorium on OCS and ANWR, it stated that lifting
the current moratorium, ``would not have a significant impact on
domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030.''
That's the year 2030, 22 years from now.
This is the Energy Information Administration, a part of Secretary
Bodman's Department of Energy.
And I think it's also worthy of note that 79 percent of the oil and
82 percent of the natural gas in Federal waters off America's coasts
are already available for leasing. That is today, now; not 22 years
from now.
So I think that old saying that a bird in the hand is better than two
in the bush, well, an oil lease in hand is certainly--a lease, the
actual lease in hand is certainly more preferable in terms of gaining
production today in the near future; that is today, gaining production
today, and bringing meaningful relief at the pump today, not 22 years
from now, but today, would leave one to believe that opening these some
68 million acres of Federal onshore and OCS lands that are already
under lease that can go--the companies can go out and drill on today--
today, not 22 years from now, but today--would, I think, be preferable.
And I'm not saying not including what the President has done today,
that's fine. He has done what he did.
But also I don't see--and I'm asking the gentleman from Texas this
question since it is his time--what is wrong with requiring the oil
companies to use this acreage, 68 million, that are already under lease
to go out and make some, at least a due diligent effort towards
developing those leases?
Now, I recognize that's like a housing development. You're not going
to find something on every acre that's under lease. You already know
there's nothing under a few of those acres because when you build a
housing development, you don't build a house on every inch of that
entire development. So there are some acres where there's obviously not
going to be anything there and not worth exploring.
But of that 68 million, there's only about 10 million now that is
actively under production. And if you extrapolate out the same Energy
Administration Department figures I just quoted, if you extrapolate out
what is being produced from that 10 million acres, then you come up
with roughly about a 14-year supply of natural gas by extrapolating out
those figures.
So why can we not give some push to the industry to go out and make
an effort to find out if there's anything in these 68 million acres or
not? They will say, I'm sure there's not. But how do they know that
there's not? How do we know what exists in the OCS that is now open by
today's action of the President in lifting the moratorium? How do we
know--I mean, the word ``potential'' is always used. The potential for
this large find or this potential. But I just don't--I'm asking that
question
Mr. BARTON of Texas. If the gentleman would yield?
Mr. RAHALL. I believe it's your time.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. But this is a debate, and then I will yield to
my good friend from Georgia.
First of all, I think those on the minority side would love to work
with the distinguished chairman of the Natural Resources Committee if
he wished to bring a bipartisan bill to the floor on permitting reform
on the 68 million acres that are currently available for leasing.
I think the gentleman knows that in the Energy Policy Act that passed
in 2005, we put some permit reform measures in place on a pilot program
basis. And in this Congress, there have been efforts made in H.R. 6 and
then also some of the appropriation riders to put some roadblocks in
some of those permitting process reforms. So if that's something that
we could work together with, I would be happy to do that.
The second answer I would give on the acreage that is currently under
lease is some of those areas, while they are leased, they don't appear
to have significant mineral production even at today's prices. And as
they asked the bank robber Clyde Barrow why he robbed banks, he
anecdotally is supposed to have answered, ``That's where the money
is.''
Well, some of the areas that are currently not under lease is where
we think the significant amounts of oil and gas are. But on the current
acreage, I think we would be very willing to do an inventory bill, if
the gentleman wished to work on an inventory bill. We could certainly
do an expedited permit and reform bill if the gentleman and his
leadership wished to do that. So there could be some agreement there.
Mr. RAHALL. Well, this gentleman is certainly no stranger to efforts
to reform Federal onshore oil and gas leasing program. I've been
involved in that for 20 years, I guess, through first my subcommittee
chairman on what was then called the Interior Committee, I guess, and
now certainly as chairman of the full Committee on Natural Resources.
I'm not even adverse to reforming that process to make it more
expeditious.
But I still haven't heard, and I'm still unclear, as to the fact that
leasing is the more difficult portion of going out and drilling on
these lands. Is that not accurate? Obtaining a lease, it seems to me,
is a much more difficult--and you know, even before the land is
available for leasing, for example, the land manager has to develop a
plan to determine whether or not an area is appropriate for oil and gas
drilling. Then once the Interior Department has made the land available
to leasing, then the oil and gas companies need to secure the permits
and do some preliminary exploration.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. But somewhere in there there's an option where
you actually bid.
Mr. RAHALL. That was the next step I was getting to. They have to
collect, analyze the data. Then the government has to put together an
auction for the competitive bidding process and then award the leases.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. And then you have a specified amount of time in
which to make improvements on the lease and determine whether it's
commercial.
Mr. RAHALL. Okay. Now, the 68 million already has gone through that
process. The 68 million acres we keep referring to as use-it-or-lose-
it, that has already gone through that process we both have described.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. My understanding is it's in--various acreages
[[Page 14859]]
are in various stages of that process. I think that's a true statement.
I don't think it's all completed the entire process.
Mr. RAHALL. In any case, years ahead of the lands made available
today by lifting the moratorium.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. In some cases, that's a true statement. In some
cases, it's not. There are areas that have been put under moratorium
recently by acts of Congress that were closed to commercial production,
especially in the eastern gulf of Mexico and the OCS.
Mr. RAHALL. But were they under lease?
Mr. BARTON of Texas. They were, is my understanding. And we then put
them under moratorium.
Mr. RAHALL. Okay. I'm not clear on that whether they were.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. It's something we can certainly work together
on.
Mr. RAHALL. Sure. Sure.
Anyway, the point I was trying to make is that it could take years
and years to obtain a lease, which these lands opened up today are just
starting on that process. The 68 million under our use-it-or-lose-it
legislation has already gone through that process.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Certainly the area that's never been leased is
further behind that that has been in some stages of leasing. I will
concede that point.
Mr. RAHALL. And in our use-it-or-lose-it legislation, we're simply
saying current leases are generally 10 years. They vary somewhat
depending on depth of water or where they're located. But generally, 10
years is the current leasing term. And if a company is holding that
lease for 10 years and not producing on it or not even making an
effort, showing some type of good faith, due diligent effort, as I'm
sure the gentleman knows our Federal coal is required to do, other
minerals on Federal lands that's owned by the taxpayers are required to
do, we say in our use-it-or-lose-it, if that due diligent effort is not
made, then you lose the lease and it's open again to competitive
bidding. Another company can come in and make their bid for it.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Again, we're very willing to work on some
reforms to the current lands that are leased to expedite the permitting
process and the leasing process, and hopefully those on your side would
be willing to work with us to make available more lands that haven't
yet been leased.
Mr. RAHALL. I think the major point I want to make is in our use-it-
or-lose-it legislation, it's not an anti-drilling piece of legislation.
It's a probe drilling.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I'm not aware that we've ever said it was anti-
drilling. What we've said is we want to do more than that. But we
certainly support the first steps at some pro-leasing program on the
majority side. We think that's a step in the right direction.
Mr. RAHALL. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Let me yield to my good friend from Georgia (Mr.
Westmoreland) who is responsible for, or at least partly responsible
for the fact that we're actually having the debate. It was his idea,
and he was able to convince Speaker Pelosi and minority leader Boehner
to engage in this.
I will yield him such time as he may consume.
{time} 2030
Mr. WESTMORELAND. I want to thank Mr. Barton from Texas for doing
that, and I will have to give Mr. Altmire the credit for persuading
Speaker Pelosi for allowing us to do that, and I want to thank the
gentleman for his willingness that we can do this and have a good
discussion.
And while we're doing this, I would like to ask Mr. Rahall one
question: Can you identify any lands which are leased and are not being
developed and currently who is not developing lands that they had
leased?
Mr. RAHALL. We have that on a map on where these lands are located.
I'm not sure I have it here or not. But it has been made a part of the
packet of information that our Committee on Natural Resources did send
to all Members at one point, and now as far as naming a specific
company, I can get that information. I don't have it readily on me, but
it's a matter of the public record because, as the gentleman from Texas
has already said, when they go through the competitive bidding process
to obtain the leases on the 68 million, of course, that's public
knowledge, and these are public lands.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. I guess I may not have posed my question just
exactly right, but my question would be to you, this is a 10-year
process. This is a 10-year process, and I'm assuming that each acre of
land that has been leased, by whoever leased it, is in some part of
this process of obtaining production or getting permits in order to
produce. And my question is, do you know of any of the 68 million acres
that are not in some process?
Mr. RAHALL. If they are, I cannot name a company that's not in any
process at this point, but if they are in the process, that's due
diligence.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. Okay.
Mr. RAHALL. Oh, I'm sorry. Here, leased land not producing is the
red.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. I understand that they are not producing, but is
there any----
Mr. RAHALL. Oh, you're saying they're moving toward production?
Mr. WESTMORELAND. Yes.
Mr. RAHALL. If they are moving toward production, that's due
diligence; they maintain their lease.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. So I guess my question to the gentleman is that
this 68 million that we keep hearing use-it-or-lose-it is actually in
some stage, and I have a chart here that shows the different processes.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. A very complicated chart.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. A very complicated chart, and I'm not going to
attempt to explain it all, but I will say that the purple is the pre-
leasing process. Your orange is the leasing process. The blue is the
notice of staking process, and then the green is the application for
permit to drill. And if you will notice these little red blotches on
here, these are points of entry for people who want to start litigation
during this process.
In 1992, the Democratic majority extended the leasing process from, I
believe it was either 3 or 5 years to 10 years. And so I think a
Democrat majority realized that this was a very burdensome process and
could not be done in the time period that these oil companies have been
given and extended it to 10 years.
So, you know, I just think that when we talk about 68 million acres,
out of the 2.5 billion acres that are available that we could be
drilling in, that it's not fair to say that, you know, use-it-or-lose-
it, when the people that have leased it are somewhere on this chart
trying to make this land that they have leased be productive for U.S.
oil production.
Mr. RAHALL. Well, I would respond to the gentleman that, again, as
I've said, if they are moving toward production, that's due diligence.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. I understand.
Mr. RAHALL. And our legislation would not take that lease away from
them, and you're right about the 10 years.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. But I do think if you do say the 68 million acres
out there, that they need to either use it or lose it, and the reality
is that they're trying to use it. They're just in some part of this
process, and you know, even if it's the Corps of Engineers, I know
there're several sites where the Corps is actually being sued, and
these companies have to wait on the Corps to work through their lawsuit
before they can get back into the permitting process. And then there's
other stumbling blocks that they have to go through.
But I just find it interesting that the Democrat majority in 1992 was
the one that extended this to 10 years because they understand that the
trouble and the amount of paperwork and filings and permitting process
that you have to go through, and then the same party would come back
and say, well, there's 68 million acres out there that they're not
using and so, therefore, they need to lose it when they are actually
within the law, within that 10-year period, and as far as I know, each
and every one of them that have obtained the lease are in some part of
this process.
[[Page 14860]]
Mr. RAHALL. Would the gentleman from Georgia not agree, however, that
while all of that is I'm sure accurate, that is still on these 68
million acres of land, and that's still I'm not going to say light
years but many, many years ahead of where we are on the lands made
available today by lifting the moratorium?
Mr. WESTMORELAND. I disagree with that because I feel that what the
American people want us to do is to increase our oil production. I
think that they want to see something like the gentleman from Texas
talked about in 2005, that this government could come together and we
could streamline. I mean, we've got enough smart people in our
government that could streamline this process some to bring it about,
and I know that the gentleman's in favor of that, and I look forward to
working with you and Mr. Barton to be able to streamline this so we can
get production on the ground quicker.
Now, let me say that, you know, being from an agriculture State in
Georgia, there's certain areas of the State that we grow apples.
There's certain areas of the State that we grow cotton. There's areas
of this country that produce more corn than other areas, and you
wouldn't plant corn, let's say, in the north Georgia mountains because
you wouldn't get near as good a yield as you would maybe in Nebraska or
somewhere else.
At the same time, out of 2.5 billion acres of land, and knowing the
area that's in the ANWR, and knowing the 2 trillion barrels of shale
that are out West that we know are there, why wouldn't we open those up
and give companies an opportunity to go out there? And it would not
take 22 years to increase our oil production in some of these areas,
and later on, we'll be showing a map of how much quicker I think we
could get this oil into our refineries, which brings up another point,
and then I will sit down because the gentleman from Texas has been so
kind to yield.
But the other thing we need to talk about tonight I think is the
increased refinery capability and the fact that, in our country, we've
not built a refinery in 30 years. And we are right now importing almost
7 billion barrels of refined gas into this country and about the same
amount of refined diesel. So, with that, I will sit down.
Mr. STUPAK. Would the gentleman from Texas yield on that point?
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I would be happy to yield to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Stupak).
Mr. STUPAK. I thank the gentleman.
I just want to make a couple of points. Mr. Westmoreland seems to
indicate that if we would just increase drilling somehow, we would
increase supply and everything would be wonderful. But as chairman of
Oversight and Investigations, we saw articles earlier this year which
indicated that refineries were cutting back on their production.
So myself and Mr. Shimkus from Illinois, the ranking member, we wrote
to the Energy Information Agency and asked them: What is our gas
supply? Take a look at the first 3 months of 2008, compare it to
previous years. Is it a supply-and-demand problem?
Now, it's not a Democratic issue or Republican issue. The Energy
Information Agency puts forth these facts, and here's what they said.
Gasoline inventory actually peaked on March 7, 2008, of 22 million
barrels more than March of 2007. Gasoline imports were higher than
they've been in the last 5 years when we looked back. Gasoline demand
in the U.S. is actually down eight-tenths of 1 percent. So you have
more than adequate supply, the most we've ever had in this Nation's
history, at 22 million barrels in March of 2007, more than what we're
using, but yet the price has still skyrocketed.
Now, I think all of us, Democrats, Republicans, we're all willing to
put more supply forward, trying to increase production, and in the 2005
Energy Policy Act, that Mr. Barton led that Energy Policy Act, I was a
conferee on, we streamlined a way for refineries to produce more if
they wanted to.
But you see from the Energy Information Agency, the first 3 months of
this year, there's more than adequate supply. When it comes to diesel,
we actually exported 335,000 barrels out of this country to Western
Europe and Latin America.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. You do realize that we changed the EPA or the clean
air requirements for diesel. This diesel that we are exporting to
Central American countries, our government will not let us burn in this
country.
Mr. STUPAK. I think the gentleman misunderstood. The diesel is
produced here in this country. We could have used it here in this
country because home heating oil took off. Home heating oil took off
for the east coast. We could have used it, but to keep that price, to
artificially inflate the price of home heating oil, we exported 335,000
barrels: 93,000 to Western Europe and 182,000 barrels per day to Latin
America.
So, I mean, we refined it, we produced it, we had it all right here.
But what did we say? We can get a bigger buck overseas than to provide
a service to the American people. That's what happened, according to
the Energy Information Agency, not me, Energy Information Agency.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. Well, we need to get with those folks and see if we
both can't get the same answer because the answer we're getting is
these refineries are only set up to refine this diesel to a certain
point, and because of the new standards implemented on diesel fuel for
this country, that these fuels were exported to countries that can use
that.
Mr. STUPAK. Let me keep saying, could you articulate these new diesel
standards which made diesel not usable in this country? What are those
new diesel standards?
Mr. WESTMORELAND. Well, there are new standards, of course.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Low sulfur content. The sulfur content of
diesel.
Mr. STUPAK. And when did those standards come in?
Mr. BARTON of Texas. They've been in place, and this is a guess, but
about 18 months, 2 years. Don't hold me to that specifically.
Mr. STUPAK. So, well, when the Republican Party was in control then,
in other words? There's nothing I can think of we did recently, and as
the former chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee knows, Mr.
Barton and I have done a lot of work on this issue in the last 3 years.
That's why I was surprised when you're saying new diesel standards. I
wasn't aware of any so it must have been something that came back a
couple of years ago when you-all were in charge.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I think they're being phased in, but they were
put into place several years ago. Again, I'm not an expert on when they
kicked in, but it's a very low sulfur diesel content. Now we have the
cleanest diesel standards in the world.
Mr. STUPAK. I know Western Europe is very concerned about their
diesel standards. In fact, they have the clean diesel, as we like to
call it, here in Europe and that's why they rely more on diesel than
gasoline. So when we export 92,000 barrels a day to Western Europe,
obviously that diesel is meeting their standards, which are probably
higher than ours. I'm making that assumption.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Their standards allow more sulfur content than
our standards do.
Mr. STUPAK. Very good. But the point being, on supply and demand, at
least when we look back at least the first 3 months of this year,
according to the Energy Information Agency, we had more than enough
gasoline, we had more than enough diesel, and it was just that we had
to get that price up so we exported it.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. You said that our inventory of finished gasoline
peaked at 22 million barrels; is that correct?
Mr. STUPAK. More than the previous year, more than March 2007, that's
correct.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Again, I could be corrected, and if we were all
on the Internet, somebody could blog in and tell us because there's
somebody out there that knows exactly, but we use approximately 12
million barrels of oil equivalent today for transportation
[[Page 14861]]
purposes, which would include gasoline and diesel and I think aviation
fuel. So 22 million barrels is not quite 2 days' supply.
{time} 2045
Mr. STUPAK. Sure.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. And that sounds like a huge number.
Mr. STUPAK. And when you take a look at it, what we expect our
refineries to do is refine enough for each day as we go along. And they
did, and we had more than the previous 5 years ever. So if this supply
crisis, as you seem to indicate there was, 5 years ago we should have
seen it--4 years, 3 years, 2 years, 1 year. This is the most we've ever
had, and they're claiming there's a supply problem?
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Well, if the gentleman would yield.
Mr. STUPAK. Sure.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. The gentleman has kind of outlined the problem,
but I don't think he has really quite explained it.
As he pointed out, demand for gasoline in the United States is going
down--you said eight-tenths of 1 percent, I accept that as a number. In
terms of barrels a day, it's about a half a million barrels a day it's
gone down.
Mr. STUPAK. Sure.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. The price of raw material product has gone up,
as you well know, because of all of the hearings you've done on the
Oversight Subcommittee that you chair so well.
Mr. STUPAK. Sure.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. So what you've done is put our refineries in a
squeeze. The price they can get in the market is going down because
demand is going down, and yet the price they have to pay for the raw
material is going up. So that has really squeezed their margin. And
because we've developed this almost-just-in-time refinery system in the
United States--again, using your numbers, even though it's at a 5-year
high, and I accept that as a good number--it's really only a two or
three day supply.
Mr. STUPAK. Sure. And I thank the gentleman for his comments because
he's absolutely right. The refineries are getting squeezed. In fact,
some of the smaller refineries are actually refining diesel and
gasoline at a loss because the base price of crude has skyrocketed. And
as the gentleman is well aware because he has attended the hearings
we've held jointly when you were Chair, and now as I'm the Chair of
O&I, it's the excessive speculation. I know that's the second half of
our comments here tonight, so I look forward--but the gentleman is
right. And that's why so many of the refineries and the Members who
represent the oil patch parts of our Nation have supported my
legislation, the PUMP Act, Prevent the Unfair Manipulation of Prices,
that take out the excess speculation which is causing the base product,
crude oil, to just skyrocket.
So I thank the gentleman for his comments. He's right. I would agree
with him. And later on we'll get to talk about speculation, and I look
forward to the comments.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. Would the gentleman from Texas just yield for one
minute?
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Sure. And then I want to yield to Dr. Gingrey of
Georgia, but we'll yield to Mr. Westmoreland.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. I just want to point out to my friend that this
cause is not, you know, the spike that we usually see is not some type
of temporary disruption, but it's a demand from all over the world, not
just this country, our demand has gone down some. It's not just this
country. But if you look at China and Asia and India, their demand for
this oil is going up every day. And if you look at where the world's
supply of these imports that come into this country, if you look at
Nigeria, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, and then if you look at our ability
and all the different types of untapped domestic resources that we
have, we could get over and help ourselves by producing this.
And so, just like you said, it's not just the supply and demand, it's
the fact that we have to import all of this when we have these untapped
domestic resources at our hand right here for us to use. And I think
that's the reason 73 percent of the American people are saying, hey,
look, use some of this stuff.
And with that, I yield back.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I yield to Dr. Gingrey--or I would be happy to
yield to Mr. Stupak for a brief comment if he wanted to make a comment.
Mr. STUPAK. I don't disagree with Mr. Westmoreland, what he had to
say there. The only thing I would say is that's why we are saying we've
got 68 million acres, let's drill or not.
You know, I come from northern Michigan; we have no oil, we have a
lot of trees. And when you get a contract to cut timber on the Federal
forest, you get your current year plus 5, if not, you lose that right.
Because in order to grow our trees and have a prosperous forest, you've
got to prune it out and we have to cut. Same thing with oil. If we want
to access U.S. oil, why are they sitting on these leases when the
leases have been approved for drilling and all the environmental
standards have been met? And if supply is the problem, as you claim--
and I'll grant you, that's part of it--then let's do it. No more
excuses, let's drill.
You've got 22.8 million acres in Alaska that can be drilled on right
now, but instead we seem to be focused on ANWR. I'm not even talking
about ANWR, I'm talking about the Alaska Petroleum Reserve area, the
Strategic Petroleum Reserve area, National Petroleum Reserve area. In
Alaska, 22.8 million acres we could actually drill on right now today,
permits are approved, everything is ready to go. Do it. Use it or lose
it.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. With that, I would like to yield to the
gentleman from Georgia, Dr. Gingrey.
Mr. GINGREY. I thank my colleague for yielding.
I just want to refer back to the statement the gentleman from
Michigan just made in regard to the 22 million acres in Alaska that you
could now drill on, yet our Democratic colleagues, our friends, are
denying the opportunity to drill on 2,000 acres--not 22 million--2,000
acres in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, and to obtain an equal
amount, an equal amount of petroleum from that area without harming the
environment. It makes no sense to destroy 22 million acres for the same
amount of oil that you could get out of 2,000. But that's another
subject, and I look forward as well to later in the hour, when the
gentleman is going to talk about hedging and speculation and, in his
opinion, what effect that has on the price of petroleum that we're
paying.
The gentleman from West Virginia, the distinguished chairman of the
Natural Resources Committee, was talking earlier in his opening
comments about the fact that drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf,
which we had been prohibited from doing--thank God the President lifted
that Presidential moratorium, and now the only thing that is holding us
back from going after those 20 billion barrels of petroleum and
trillions of cubic feet of natural gas is inaction on the part of this
Congress.
Now, earlier the discussion was about this use it or lose it. The
gentleman from West Virginia talked about that a lot and said, well,
you know, you've got these 68 million acres leased from the Bureau of
Land Management--by the way, that's out of 750 million acres under the
jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management. These oil companies, my
colleagues, they pay for those leases, they're not free. And so they're
kind of betting on the come, they're hoping that their geologists will
then tell them that, yes, indeed, there is a certain amount of oil in
that area of land that they have leased. And if it's true, then they're
going to go after it. If there is no oil there or if there is an
insufficient amount of oil there and it's not going to be productive to
spend that kind of money for a little amount of oil, then maybe they
will sit on those leases. And I would think that they would probably
gladly yield it back to the Federal Government--especially if they got
a refund on their money, they probably wouldn't.
But these same people that realize that right off the Outer
Continental
[[Page 14862]]
Shelf, whether it's the eastern seaboard or the Atlantic or the Pacific
or the eastern part of the Gulf of Mexico where there are trillions of
cubic feet of natural gas and billions of barrels of petroleum, that's
the leases that they want, that's the leases that they need. And it
just is beyond my comprehension to understand why the leader of this
House, Speaker Pelosi, would say that is a nonstarter.
Now, we could stand here on the Republican side of the aisle and say
to the gentleman from Michigan and others who are concerned about
noncommercial speculators and what effect that might have on the price
of a barrel of petroleum, we could say, well, you know, for us that's a
nonstarter; or you're interfering with the free market. Are you going
to do the same thing with pork bellies and wheat and corn and all these
other things that are traded on the commodities market and regulated by
NYMEX? Are you going to force them offshore by overregulating and
interfering with the natural flow of market? So, you know, we have
concerns about that.
But I don't think that our side of the aisle has said, my colleagues,
that that's a nonstarter, that we won't even discuss that. And yet your
leadership, Ms. Pelosi, the majority leader of the Senate, Mr. Reid,
has said drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf, where we know there
are trillions of cubic feet of natural gas and billions of barrels of
oil, is a nonstarter. I think that's just totally wrong, that the
American people don't want that. They want bipartisanship like we're
having here tonight in this discussion, this colloquy between the two
sides. And I think we can and should get together.
Mr. RAHALL. Would the gentleman yield?
Mr. GINGREY. I would be glad to yield to the distinguished gentleman.
Mr. RAHALL. I appreciate the gentleman from Georgia yielding.
You've mentioned ANWR and how much is available from that pristine
environmental area. And again, I'm going to quote from that infamous
Energy Information Administration of which I've quoted earlier.
First, this is a quote from President Bush June 9 of this year,
``I've proposed to Congress that they open up ANWR, open up the
Continental Shelf and give this country a chance to help us through
this difficult period by finding more supplies of crude oil which will
take the pressure off the price of gasoline. That was the President's
statement on June 9. And his own Energy Information Administration
predicts that the savings from drilling in ANWR would equal 1.8 cents
per gallon in the year 2025. And that, coupled with what I said
earlier--I think you were here--about the fact that these areas that
the President has lifted the moratorium on today would not produce any
major savings or even produce any oil until 22 years from now, it is
not going to give us the relief we need.
And let's not kid ourselves. I think we all know in this body, both
sides of this debate--or all sides of this debate I should say--that
what we do in this body is not going to bring down the price tomorrow,
next month, perhaps not next year. It takes not just increasing the
supply side like you want to do, like we want to do in our ``use it or
lose it'' legislation--that's a pro-drilling piece of legislation--but
it has to be followed with follow-up efforts in developing all,
renewable and alternative, fuels, which includes coal to liquid----
Mr. GINGREY. Well, reclaiming my time from the chairman--and I don't
disagree with his last statement, it will certainly require a
comprehensive approach; there is no doubt about that.
But the gentleman from West Virginia has said repeatedly tonight that
opening up these reserves, whether it's the Arctic National Wildlife
Reserve, where we estimate that 1.5 million barrels a day increased
production, increased domestic production--I mentioned the numbers for
the Outer Continental Shelf in regard to natural gas and petroleum, and
your response, your statement earlier was that, well, if you did that
tomorrow, if you started that tomorrow, it would be 2030--I think you
used that date--before any production of oil would be seen, and
therefore, that's not going to solve the problem. Yet your colleague
from Michigan is going to tell us in a little while how important it is
to rein in these noncommercial speculators because just the
anticipation causes the price of oil to go up or down.
And what I want to say to my colleagues is that it might take 5
years, 10 years, possibly 15 years, depending on where you're going
after the source. Certainly, mining shale out in the west, where we
could get 1.5 trillion barrels of petroleum, may take a while. But just
the fact that we're doing these things in a comprehensive way and we're
increasing the domestic supply, I will almost guarantee you that
overnight the price of a barrel of crude would drop by 20 percent.
Mr. RAHALL. Would the gentleman yield on that point?
Mr. GINGREY. I would be glad to yield.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. It's really time to let the Democrats have some
time. I think it's the gentleman from New York's turn.
Mr. RAHALL. Just very quickly I would say to the gentleman from
Georgia about causing the speculation to end and go the other way, all
these efforts would help, I don't deny that, but I think the most
immediate efforts, what the gentleman from New York is going to get
into now, Mr. Hall, and that is releasing from the SPR. We have it,
let's use it. This is an emergency. And I think that is going to show
the speculators we're serious and that's going to stop the speculation.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan briefly
and then the gentleman from New York.
Mr. STUPAK. Very briefly, I would just ask, whether it's ANWR or the
National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, would the other side, would the
minority side agree and put into the legislation that all oil or gas
discovered there or produced there would come strictly to the United
States? Because what we see in ANWR and Prudhoe Bay, that oil goes
around Laotian islands, it goes to Japan and China because it's
actually closer and they get a higher price.
So will you say that the oil in Alaska will come for U.S. citizens to
be used for American energy?
{time} 2100
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Reclaiming my time, if the gentleman from
Michigan can get our distinguished Speaker to put an ANWR bill on the
floor and let everybody have a free vote, I think I can guarantee you
that we are willing to restrict that oil and gas to be used in the
Continental United States or at least Canada and the United States and
Mexico, at least in the North American Continent. If you can get us to
get a vote on the drilling, I would bet we can get a restriction that
meets your requirement.
Mr. RAHALL. I'd vote for that.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. We will be happy to take that deal.
And now, Mr. Speaker, I want to yield to the distinguished gentleman
from New York (Mr. Hall).
Mr. HALL of New York. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Just briefly, I trust that you would offer a motion to recommit to do
just that.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Let's get to that point, and we'll work. We'll
talk.
Mr. HALL of New York. But I would just point out, going back a little
bit, this map that I was holding up for Chairman Rahall, the more
interesting thing about this map, and I hope it shows up on the
cameras, is that the purple sections here are all Federal land that may
be leased and has not been offered to lease. Now, I suggest that the
Department of Interior ought to take that--that's most of these areas.
The red is the part that is actually producing. The yellow or orange is
the part that has been leased but is not yet producing. But the purple,
most of this lower 48 or western half of the lower 48 on this map, land
available currently for leasing that has not been leased; so I would
just urge that it be leased. No Democrats that I know are opposed to
leasing, counter to whatever may have been implied out there.
I just want to mention that the one thing we can do that will have an
immediate impact, and we're talking 5,
[[Page 14863]]
10, 15 years, maybe 20 years out before ANWR or OCS has an impact,
depending on whom you listen to, but the one tool we have, that the
President has, which was used by the first President Bush in 1991 and
again by President Clinton in 2000, is the SPR, releasing oil from the
SPR to increase supply. In 1991 it resulted in a price drop of $8 per
barrel, and in the year 2000, it brought down the price of oil by
nearly 20 percent in a week. So I'm not saying it's the answer. I'm
saying that it's a temporary thing and it's a tool that was given to
the President by the Congress to deal with crises, which I believe were
in one now, as our people are telling us.
All of us at home are hearing the same thing, I think, be it from
parents driving their kids to school, commuters going to work, school
systems that are barely able to afford to keep their school buses
running, whatever it is, we need to provide immediate interim and long-
term solutions. And one immediate thing that I think we should consider
is releasing some amount of oil from the SPR.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield to the
distinguished doctor from Georgia, Dr. Tom Price.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
And I want to thank all of my colleagues for working together to
bring this evening to reality because I think it's what the American
people want, and that is a discussion about what's going on.
Mr. Speaker, we have talked about the need for increasing supply, and
I appreciate my friend from New York's saying that the SPR ought to be
released because what that argument signifies is an appreciation that
supply is important. And supply is important. And that's what the
American people understand and appreciate. They know that when there's
an increase in supply that there's a decrease in price.
We have talked about how much of the Outer Continental Shelf has been
utilized, and different maps and different charts do different things
and demonstrate different things. This is a pie chart that demonstrates
that the dark purple area is the portion of the Outer Continental Shelf
that is able to be leased. And 97 percent is not, 97 percent is not
right now.
And that's what the American people see. They see that we have got
all sorts of wonderful resources that we ought to be utilizing,
American energy for Americans, that we're not. The same can be said for
on-land areas that ought to be leased or could be available for
leasing. Onshore, the dark purple, 6 percent is that area that is able
to be leased right now for oil and gas development, and 94 percent is
not. And I think that it's imperative that we concentrate on that area
that could be utilized by Americans. Americans are frustrated because
they understand and appreciate that we're not using the resources that
we have.
My friend from Michigan talks about the fact that we have got more
than enough supply. I would suggest to my friend that Americans don't
believe we ought to be gaining 70 percent of our supply from foreign
sources. I would suggest to my friend that Americans want to utilize
American resources for Americans and that that's the kind of work that
they would appreciate our doing together on this floor, as we're
discussing tonight.
So I hope that as we move forward this evening and talk about these
issues that we identify that available energy, the resources that we
have that are available to Americans. We don't have to worry about Hugo
Chavez. We don't have to worry about folks in the Middle East. We don't
have to be held prisoner of folks that, frankly, don't like us very
much. We can utilize American resources for Americans. And I hope that
as we move forward in this discussion over the next couple of weeks
that we'll concentrate on that and have that as the hallmark for our
solutions.
And I thank my friend for yielding.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I think my friends on the majority need more
time. I would be happy to yield to my friend from Pennsylvania.
Mr. ALTMIRE. I thank the gentleman from Texas.
We're about to enter the transition, and I would just like to enter
into a colloquy with the gentleman to clarify what subject matter those
who are here--I see some new faces. Mr. Burton from Indiana has come.
We have Mr. Murphy from Connecticut, who is going to speak next for us.
Are we going to continue talking about the drilling issue and continue
along this vein?
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I didn't know that we had a specific agenda, but
certainly----
Mr. ALTMIRE. I just want to make sure the Members that are here get
to talk about what they're here to talk about.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. It's going to be energy focused. You're about to
control the time; so you will be able to set that agenda. But we're
willing to talk about anything.
Mr. ALTMIRE. It's our intention to continue this discussion. If we're
able to transition, we certainly want to get into the speculation issue
with Mr. Stupak and Mr. Murphy. And then Mr. Hall, I know, wants to
talk about the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. We are willing to talk about all those subjects.
Mr. ALTMIRE. For the next hour, that's generally what we have in
mind.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. If I could use these last few minutes to kind of
straighten out a few points, at least my opinion.
Mr. Rahall mentioned that the ``use it or lose it'' legislation was
pro-drilling. And I had the chart up, and I thought we were in complete
agreement that the 68 million acres that are leased are in some process
of permitting. So that is not a pro-drilling bill. If it was a pro-
drilling bill, then what we have done would have been to reduce the
regulations to allow this to speed up.
And let me say this. We have not exported any Alaskan oil in 8 years.
And what this brings to highlight, and I hope the gentlemen from
Michigan and Pennsylvania will take note of this and the fact that we
have had so many conflicting facts here. This is a good reason that we
need to have committee hearings, subcommittee hearings, committee
hearings, and open debate on this floor. The energy bills that we have
passed so far have come under suspension. So there have not been any
committee hearings on it.
Speaker Pelosi said, ``We are trying to get the job done around
here.'' This is her defending the use of suspensions. ``And we work
very hard to build consensus, and when we get it, we like to just move
forward with it, as we did on the Medicare bill,'' which was a
suspension bill we don't even need to talk about. But this is not about
a tool; it's about the legislative process and how we get a job done.
We have seen tonight and, Mr. Speaker, I think the American people
have seen tonight that there are so many conflicting reports that we
need to have committee hearings. We need to go through regular process
so we can debate these bills on the floor.
The last comment I will make, in 1995 President Clinton vetoed
drilling in ANWR. By today's projections from Energy, they said that we
would be getting 1 million barrels of oil a day today. That was 13
years ago. We would be getting 1 million barrels of oil. And quoting
Senator Schumer, from the other side of the aisle, he said an
additional 1 million barrels of oil a day produced in this country
would lower gas 50 cents a gallon.
So the gentleman from Texas sees these things, that we need to go
through regular order and let your Committee on Resources have some
input.
____________________
ENERGY
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Yarmuth). Under the Speaker's announced
policy of January 18, 2007, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Altmire) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority
leader.
Mr. ALTMIRE. I would ask the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price), is
it your intention to continue the discussion that we are in right now,
or are you waiting on a different subject?
[[Page 14864]]
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. No, I am pleased to continue the discussion on
energy and whatever aspect of it you would like to discuss.
Mr. ALTMIRE. So, Mr. Speaker, here for the next hour, this is where
we would like to lead this: We will continue talking about the domestic
production issue; then we will transition into the issue of speculation
in the market.
But at this point I will yield to my friend from Connecticut for
continuing this discussion, and then we are going to start the
transition. So for those of you on that side of the aisle who want to
wrap up that discussion, please feel free to talk as long as you want
about that. But it's our intention to then move into the market
speculation issue.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Connecticut.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. I thank my friend from Pennsylvania and
our colleagues from the Republican side for getting together and
engaging in what has probably been one of the more productive dialogues
that we have had in at least my short time here in this House.
I guess I wanted to offer just a few brief comments as a means to
pivot to this next conversation because I think that you see Democrats,
the majority party, focusing so much of our time on the issue that Mr.
Hall will talk about, which is taking oil currently sitting right now
available in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and putting it immediately
in supply on the market. I think you see us talking about what Mr.
Stupak will talk about, which is going after the very place in which
the price of oil is actually set. As much as we talk about the oil
companies and retailers, what it really comes down to is the price of a
barrel of oil is set on a minute-by-minute, hourly basis on the
commodities markets, the regulated/unregulated markets. I think you see
us talking about those areas more than we talk about the subject that,
quite honestly, occupies most of the time of our friends on the other
side of the aisle because we see that as the means to immediate relief.
I mean there is absolutely a conversation that should have occurred a
long time ago and needs to occur right now to take this crisis that
families are feeling and turn it into a long-term strategy both on the
demand and supply side, changing the amount of supply and the very
nature of the supply, changing the amount of the demand and the nature
of the demand, to try to make sure that we don't get into this mess 5
years from now, 10 years from now.
But what we hear I know is what you hear. I mean this energy crunch
doesn't discriminate based on the party you're registered with. Whether
you're a Republican or a Democrat, you're paying the same prices in the
Fifth District of Connecticut and Texas and in Georgia and all across
the rest of this country. People are saying to us get us relief today.
So my estimation of why we have a disagreement at the very least on
where the issue of drilling should fall on the priority list is because
we just haven't seen the evidence yet that shows that this idea that
drilling that will reach peak capacity in 20 years and may not start
for another 6 or 10 years is going to actually lead to lower prices
tomorrow or next week or the next month.
Now, Mr. Rahall is right. We don't have all these tools at our
disposal. We want prices to come down $2 by sunrise tomorrow. It's not
going to happen, and we don't have the ability in this Congress to make
all of those big, broad, short-term changes. But what we are looking at
is evidence that does not suggest that increased potential future
supply is going to lead to lower prices today. I mean just look at what
has happened over the last 6 years alone. We have seen a 361 percent
increase in drilling permits. Now, there is no correspondence between
that 361 percent increase in drilling permits and the price of oil.
Take a very specific example that we all read about just within the
last 12 months and look and see how the futures markets responded to
it. In November of last year, news came of potentially one of the most
important oil field discoveries in the last decade, the Tupi field off
the coast of Brazil. We don't know how much is there, but the estimates
already are you potentially have 8 billion to 10 billion barrels. You
would expect, by the logic that we hear here, that that immediate
notice of more supply around the corner with a government--there's no
permit contesting here. There's no political problem that we may have
in other countries. The Government of Brazil's ready to go. So we have
got 8 to 10 billion barrels, and what do we see happen in world
markets? Within 14 days the price doesn't go down, it goes up.
{time} 2115
Within 6 months, a $13 increase in the price of a barrel of oil and
in 9 months as we stand here today a $55 increase, the biggest oil
field discovery that many of us have seen in the time that we've been
in government service and the theory that that should lead immediately
to the market's responding with oil prices decreasing doesn't happen.
And so I think that is just a means of explaining why the oxygen on
this side of the aisle gets spent on issues that Mr. Hall will talk
about and Mr. Stupak will talk about, the SPR and the commodities
trading reform efforts. Because we see that as the most effective means
toward immediate price relief.
And I think if we had evidence that the markets have responded in a
different way in the recent future that potential future demand with
increased oil permits leading to lower prices or new discoveries
leading to lower prices maybe there might be a different discussion
here. But the fact is that we haven't seen that kind of response. So I
just offer that as a means to pivot on to some of the conversations
that we will have on our side of the aisle. Because I think that is
part of the explanation as to why you say see a difference in focus.
And I would be happy to yield.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Would you like a response to some of that?
Mr. ALTMIRE. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I want to make a couple of responses. First, we
will talk about the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
Under the current law, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve cannot be used
to manipulate or impact prices. It is specifically in the law. It would
take an act of Congress to change that. Under current law, the
President has to find a, has to issue a finding, a national emergency
on supply that affects the economy of the United States. I think as has
been pointed out by Mr. Westmoreland, that would certainly be a hearing
that would be worthy in the Oversight subcommittee of the Energy and
Commerce Committee, perhaps in the Natural Resources Committee that
Chairman Rahall chairs. But under current law, we would not be allowed
to release oil purely to help alleviate the pricing situation.
On the issue of this big oil field, I wasn't listening closely, but
is the gentleman referring to the big oil find off the coast of Brazil?
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. That is correct.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. There are several things about that. We're not
sure that we have the technology right now to develop that field. We
certainly don't have the infrastructure in place to produce it or to
transport it compared to up in Alaska where ANWR is within 200 miles of
the trans-Alaska oil pipeline that is currently over at half capacity
and where, as Chairman Rahall pointed out, we certainly would have to
go through the permitting process if we were to decide you could drill
in ANWR.
But I have talked to some of the majors in this country. And they
believe if we really adopted an expedited process for the permitting
process, they could have production of about 300 barrels a day within 3
to 4 years, and they think they could ramp it up to about 1 million
barrels a day or more within say 5 to 8 years.
So it's good news if Brazil has done what it has done. But because of
where that find is and how deep the water is and some of the
technological issues, it's not quite an apples-to-apples comparison.
[[Page 14865]]
Mr. GINGREY. I want to ask my colleagues if they would yield on
another point the gentleman from Connecticut made, and that is, again,
in regard to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Now it's my understanding
that in that reserve we currently have about 750 million barrels. Is
that what my colleagues agree on? And what would you suggest should be
the release? How much of that 750 million barrels would you suggest?
And as my colleague from Texas points out, we would have to change the
law. That would be something that we could enact by legislation here in
Congress. How much of that oil would you release?
Mr. HALL of New York. Well I think that is a subject for some
discussion. And perhaps somewhere between 30 and 50 million barrels
would be a good starting point.
But the most interesting thing about it is that it's one of the few
investments the American taxpayers made that has more than doubled in
value. In other words, it was bought at less than $50. Most of the oil
there was bought at less than $50 a barrel and then would be sold for
whatever it's going for, $130 or $140, the current value. So there's a
big mark-up. And there is an opportunity not only to provide supply, to
loosen up the supply-and-demand equation, but also to use the proceeds
from that for some important things such as compensating those who are
hurt the most. In the northeast with home heating oil this coming
winter, there are many people very afraid about paying $6 for home
heating oil, truckers who are paying exorbitant amounts for diesel, or
people on low incomes who can't deal with this, or for that matter
investing in some alternatives to provide some competition for oil,
which, by the way, I think we should get to. Because what we're really
faced with here is we're talking about drilling and drilling and where
we're going to drill and what kind of oil and how much sulfur, and is
the diesel going here or is the diesel going there?
But we're still talking about being at the mercy of oil. And I think
ultimately this conversation has to come around to breaking the
monopoly, the energy monopoly, that oil has in this country.
Mr. GINGREY. If the gentleman from Pennsylvania would continue to
yield to me to ask a question of the gentleman from New York. The
gentleman from New York said, well, he wasn't sure, but maybe anywhere
from 30 to 50 million barrels would be released from the SPR, Strategic
Petroleum Reserve.
The purpose of that reserve is if the countries that hate us, and
certainly many in the Middle East and Venezuela do, if they cut off the
supply of oil to us tomorrow, we're talking about about 12 million
barrels a day, about 12 million barrels a day that we would not have of
the 22 million that we need. So releasing 30 to 50 million barrels of
oil from the SPR would do nothing. And the purpose of the SPR, of
course, is if we do get cut off completely from 12 million barrels of
oil a day, we literally have about 60 days to utilize the SPR, and then
that is all gone. And it's during that period of time, of course, that
we would need to negotiate with these countries and bring whatever
power to bear that we need, hopefully diplomatic, to free the flow of
that oil back up. So that is why we say on this side of the aisle we
can ill afford to release any of the SPR because of price manipulations
in the market.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. If it's allowed, could I give a factual
presentation of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve?
We have a little over 700 million barrels in the reserve. I think the
average acquisition price is less than $30 a barrel. They have the
capacity to produce up to 6 million barrels a day at maximum production
from the reserve. That then leaves at least 2 weeks to gear up to do
that. World markets today are about 85 million barrels of supply and
about 84 million barrels per day of demand. To really impact the price
by releasing oil from the Strategic Oil Reserve, most experts think you
would have to release at least 2 million barrels per day. And at that
rate, you could release it for a year approximately, and then you
wouldn't have any oil.
So again, it is worthy of a hearing. But I would be very careful
about changing the law to allow the SPR to be used for price
alleviation. It was a bipartisan agreement in the 1970s. It requires a
Presidential directive of a national emergency because of supply
interruption that is of severe harm to the American economy. That is
the standard for release from the SPR today.
So to have a real price impact, given that the world market in oil is
fungible, you would probably have to release about 2 million barrels a
day. And if you did that for the entire amount of oil, you would have
not quite a year's supply.
Mr. HALL of New York. If the gentleman would yield back.
I would just comment that it's likely should the countries that don't
like us and would theoretically cut us off in a crisis would look
elsewhere to sell their oil, and the oil would probably go on the world
market to other countries, to China, to Asia and so on and would
provide slack in the system overall worldwide which would enable us to
buy similar quantities of oil from other sources. This is all
speculation on our part.
But I would just say that it's not by any means certain that a cut-
off of oil from a certain country to us would mean that we would not be
able to get the same amount of oil elsewhere.
Let me also say, because there was a comment made before, just
continuing on a couple of quick points, there was a comment made
before, many comments about how the American people are hurting, and
one comment about how the oil companies are being squeezed. I just
wanted to show the profits of the oil companies since 2001 climbing
from $30 billion profit to $123.3 billion profit in 2007. And this is
just from 2007 to 2008.
Here is an increase for another record year of oil company profits in
the first quarter of 2008, $36.9 billion. So the curve continues to go
up even as the gentleman from Pennsylvania said I believe it was, or
the gentleman from Connecticut, we've had in the last 6 years I think a
361 percent increase in the number of leases granted and 668 million
acres, which is either in some part of the permitting process or has
not yet been drilled on, but is available for drilling in the lower 48
and adjacent offshore leases. No matter what we do, the oil companies
continue to make record profit among record profit.
So against that backdrop, I think it's really important to consider
such things as the geothermal system. I was personally in the trench
next to a house that was being built, fastening these loops of hose, of
plastic piping, that is going to carry a glycol water mixture 6 feet
underground and enable a 3,500 square foot house in Cold Spring, New
York, to be heated and cooled for the cost of one 75-watt light bulb.
There are four buyers so far that have come to this development and
have been offered a house. I think the base price of the house is
$350,000. In that part of New York, it's expensive. And that is what
they're offering these homes at. Or they can pay the extra $15,000 up
front for geothermal heating and cooling. And all four of the buyers
have come in with today's price of energy and said, we will take the
geothermal.
And the estimates of the company doing the work is that it will pay
off in 3 years. If it's a full-time resident, it will pay off in 3
years. If it's a part-time weekend or summer home, it may take 7 years.
But these are the kinds of things that are here today. And it's not
rocket science. It's plumbing. And it's common sense.
And we need to do this because we're at the moment an oil-based
economy, especially for aircraft. There is no getting around liquid
fuels. You cannot fly a hybrid plane any time soon. But there are many
other places that we can find other fuels and other sources of power,
not only for transportation but for heating and cooling our homes and
our businesses and free up the oil for the purposes that we really need
it for.
I yield back to the gentleman.
Mr. ALTMIRE. I see several of my friends from the other side who
would like to speak.
[[Page 14866]]
I will yield first to Mr. Burton.
Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I won't speak very long. I appreciate the
gentleman yielding. I really appreciate the information that my
Democrat colleagues have been bringing out night after night on
alternative sources of energy. I just learned a little bit more about
geothermal energy than I did, and I would like to have that right next
to my house.
But the problem, as I see it right now, is how do we deal with
bringing the price of gasoline down, and what do we do in the case of a
national emergency?
The former chairman of the Energy Committee, Mr. Barton, was talking
about what would happen if there was an emergency and how we would
utilize this Strategic Oil Reserve. My concern is what would happen if
a major supplier of the United States and the rest of the world could
not supply that oil? Right now, and I spoke about this the other night,
there is a lot of unrest in the Middle East. There is concern about
Iran developing a nuclear weapon. And they have been working on a
program for some time. Israel just flew a mission the other day about 2
weeks ago where they had over 100 planes fly the length down the
Mediterranean that it would be to fly from Israel to Tehran. And so
there is the possibility that none of us want to see occur where there
could be a major confrontation over there.
If you sink two or three ships in the Persian Gulf in the Straits of
Hormuz, you're going to have a terrible problem in getting maybe 20
percent of the world's oil supply to market. And we get a lot of our
oil from there.
And so I think we ought to look at the long-term problems that we
face in this country while we're converting to other forms of energy,
which I agree with you we should be doing. But oil is going to be with
us for a while. And we're going to need that energy, as you said, for
aircraft, transportation, for trucks and other things as we make this
transition. And during that period of time, we need to be thinking
about what we are going to do to protect this country strategically in
the event of a conflict during this transition period.
And that is why I think that this bipartisan group that started
meeting tonight is talking about trying to get everybody together to
come up with a comprehensive plan to deal with the energy problem and
the gas prices, that we look at that. We look at the problems that
occur not only today but what might occur a month from now, 2 months
from now, 1 year from now, or 3 or 4 years from now.
{time} 2130
And during this period of transition when we want to move to cleaner-
burning fuels, we need to have the energy here in America. I appreciate
everything that you are bringing up, but I also am concerned about the
security of this Nation. And right now we are so dependent on foreign
oil, if we have a problem in certain parts of the world, we will have
an even higher price for a gallon of gasoline. That is why I believe we
should expand our drilling opportunities out on the Outer Continental
Shelf and ANWR.
I appreciate this discussion tonight. I think we should be doing this
on a regular basis.
Mr. ALTMIRE. I thank the gentleman, and I know Mr. Westmoreland and
Mr. Price want to speak on this issue. I yield to Mr. Westmoreland.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. I just wanted to ask the gentleman from New York
one question. When he was talking about the profits for these oil
companies, are they making 50 percent profit or are they making 30
percent profit or are they making 25 percent profit? What percentage of
their sales is that profit? I am just curious to understand.
Mr. HALL of New York. I just know they have made the biggest profits
in the history of any corporation in the history of the world, and that
the CEO got a pension of $400 million. There are certain things that to
the American people look excessive. I can't tell you whether they are.
All I can say is what it looks like, and I can say that my sympathy for
the oil companies is not at a very high level. Hence, my likelihood to
pursue use it or lose it. If you are sitting on 68 million acres, some
of which may be in the process of being developed, but my understanding
is that all or most of it has passed the permitting stage and is ready
for the drill bit to go in the ground, and the drill bit is not going
in the ground because they are waiting for the drill rigs, they don't
have enough offshore exploration ships. They have enough money to buy
the company that makes the drill rigs. Most of these oil companies have
more money than most countries have. When you are floating that kind of
money, I think there may be another incentive at work which is where is
the oil worth more? Is the oil worth more left in the ground or pumped
and sold into dollars because the dollar is going down. You can't
invest it in real estate right now because that is going down. If you
put it in the stock market, you are taking your chances. A financial
analyst inside one of these oil companies may look at the choices and
say, let's leave it in the ground. Let's acquire more and more leases
and pump it in 5 years when it is worth more. I want to be sure that is
not the incentive that is driving this.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. I don't think anybody has any sympathy for oil
companies, and I'm not trying to say that they do. I'm trying to ask,
do you know if they are making 50 percent profit, 30 percent profit, 20
percent profit, 10 percent profit? What percent profit are they making
that relates to these high numbers? Is there a percentage of profit on
there that they are making? And what percent of profit is too much?
Mr. HALL of New York. Well, that is a very good question, and a
philosophical one, I might add.
I would say your colleague, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden)
who sits on the Energy Independence and Global Warming Select
Subcommittee, asked the five CEOs of the biggest companies when they
came in, and I am paraphrasing Mr. Walden, he said, I am a small
businessman, I am a capitalist, I believe in making a profit, but at
what point when you have made bigger profits than you have ever
imagined, breaking your own record for 3 years in a row, is there some
point where you would think about lowering your price to your
customers? Is there ever a point where you feel that way?
Mr. WESTMORELAND. If the gentleman would yield, and I don't know if
you have a list or what, but it is a simple question. Do you know what
percent of profit the chart represents?
Mr. HALL of New York. No. What this chart shows is all profit. I
don't know what percentage that is, how much deeper the iceberg goes
below the starting point, but these columns stand for profit.
And I think when national interests conflict with corporate
interests, that is when government needs to step in. The question is,
are we at that point?
Mr. ALTMIRE. I yield to the gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Far be it for me to defend oil companies, but my understanding is
that the profits in oil companies has been about 8 percent for the past
couple of years. I don't know what it ought to be, but I know how you
figure that out in our society, and that is you allow markets to work.
I also know there are some significant increases, there are some major
companies that are making 15 and 20 percent margins.
And the gentleman is right, it is a philosophical question, when
should the government step in. I think the points that have been made
are very good points to talk about the strategic petroleum reserve and
to talk about alternative fuel and conservation and geothermal and the
like.
My point would be that we on this side believe we ought to have a
comprehensive solution, that it ought to include all of these things,
and all of these things means utilizing more of the supply that we
have, American supply, whether it is offshore, whether it is deep-sea
exploration, or whether it is on-shore exploration. Or oil shale.
We haven't talked about oil shale at all, and I think it is a bit of
a transition into the speculation discussion because oil shale has been
taken off the
[[Page 14867]]
table earlier by the new majority. And oil shale is, as many of my
friends know, estimated to have 2 trillion barrels of oil. That's a
hard number to get your arms around. But when you look at in
perspective, 1 trillion barrels of oil is what the entire human
population has used since we began using fossil fuels. And we, America,
have 2 trillion, estimated to be 2 trillion barrels of oil in terms of
reserves.
I do know when you take that kind of supply off the table, the
speculators, those who look at how much reserve, how much supply is out
there in the world, when we as the government take that off the table,
that immediately jacks up the price because that is not even there.
That is not even there to be talked about or utilized.
So I look forward to the comments of my friend from Michigan about
the issue of speculation because I think that we would again give the
message that we are interested in talking about all of these things and
having a comprehensive solution.
I would hope that our friends on the other side of the aisle are also
interested in a comprehensive solution and not a targeted solution that
picks winners and losers and picks friends and punishes enemies from a
governmental standpoint.
Mr. ALTMIRE. I yield to the gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. GINGREY. I think the gentleman from New York had to step off the
floor, but his chart is still up there and it says ``oil companies reap
record profits during the Bush administration.'' Now, my colleague from
Georgia (Mr. Price) pointed out it is about 8 percent per year. Many of
our parents and grandparents have stock in oil companies, and they are
glad that the companies are doing well.
But I wanted to point out during the Clinton years, during the dot-
com years when profits were double digit year after year after year, I
never heard my colleagues call for windfall profits against these dot-
com companies, mostly out in California and Silicon Valley, and then
the bubble burst and the market corrected itself. And it will do the
same thing in regard to this. Oil companies will not continue to make
record profits forever. I want my colleagues to put that in
perspective.
Mr. ALTMIRE. I yield to Mr. Murphy.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. I wasn't here during that time, but I do
clearly think that people can understand the difference. One of the
reasons we are talking about the urgency, as Mr. Stupak will about
affecting the commodities market, when you are talking about a
speculative bubble on a commodity like oil, which is dependent on
whether people can heat their homes in winter and stay alive and get to
work on a daily basis, that the urgency about bringing down that
speculative bubble is imperative on this body.
So I think the reason you hear so much commotion about bursting this
bubble, and I wasn't here during the height of the housing and the
height of the dot-com bubble, but the reason we are talking about the
urgency of pressing government action to bring down the price to
something that resembles the laws of supply and demand is because of
the life-altering nature of the product that we are talking about.
Mr. ALTMIRE. We have approximately half an hour remaining in the
debate.
At this time I yield to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak).
Mr. STUPAK. Before I get into speculation, because we want to address
speculation, but because my friends on your side keep saying it is only
an 8-percent increase in oil company profits. I agree, it might be 8
percent from 2006 to 2007, but when you make $118 billion, the most
ever of any corporation, to top it the next year is pretty darn hard.
But 8 percent on $118 billion is $123 billion, where 5 years ago they
were at $30 billion. They doubled it in 2003 and went to $60 billion.
That is a 50 percent increase. Then you go to $82 billion, and I am no
math major, but that is about a 25 percent increase. And then from $82
billion to $109 billion, that is a 20 percent or 21 percent increase.
And then $118 billion, I guess they had a bad year, they only made $8
billion more than the previous record year. That might be 8 percent.
But look at these numbers, they are staggering. They are absolutely
staggering. That is why we think on this side of the aisle you have to
have a short-term policy and a long-term policy, and how to lower those
excess profits from the $118 billion, or the $36 billion we have seen
already in the first quarter of 2008, there is just no way to justify
the doubling of prices based on supply and demand. Oil company profits
are excessive, and we think speculation is part of the reason.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. If the gentleman would yield, I agree those are
big numbers. What those numbers don't tell us is what kind of money
they used to invest and what those margins were. And I don't know the
answer to that.
Mr. STUPAK. Cut the investment malarkey argument. This is profits.
This is after you deduct your investments. I don't care if it is on
geothermal or wind or solar, after you do all of these and pay your
executive a $400 million pension, they still make $123 billion. I'm
sorry, but I just can't find any sympathy in my heart with those
numbers.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. If there were an investment of $120 billion,
and I don't know what it was, then the margin would be a percentage and
that is what you determine what the actual profits are.
Mr. STUPAK. Of all of the corporations in the history of the world,
these are the biggest after all of their investments.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. In absolute numbers, you are absolutely
correct. I have no doubt about it.
Mr. STUPAK. What I'm saying is why don't you invest more. What I'm
saying in my role as chairman of the Oversight Investigations
Subcommittee, and for 3 years holding hearings in this area, let's end
the excessive speculation in the market that runs up the basic price of
crude that results in these record profits because corporations, not
only do they have a responsibility to their shareholders, they also
have a responsibility to this country to be a corporate citizen.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. And I agree.
Mr. STUPAK. Because high energy costs kill our economy. Every aspect
of our economy is being strangled while they make record profits and
pay obscene pensions to their CEOs.
So I believe one of the ways we can in the short term bring down
these prices is take out the excessive speculation.
If you take a look at it, the Government Accountability Office
released its report on the ability of the Commodities Futures Trading
Commission to properly monitor the energy markets, to monitor what they
are making here. What they said, the GAO said they found that the
volume of trading in energy commodities has skyrocketed, exploded,
especially after 2002 when we enacted the Enron loophole.
The GAO also found that while trading has doubled since 2002, notice
that's when the profits start doubling, in 2002, the number of staff to
actually monitor what is going on in the markets has declined.
If you take a look at this chart here, if you will, this is the
evolution of speculation, trading on west Texas intermediate crude,
average open interest on NYMEX long and short positions.
Between September 2003 and May 2008, traders holding crude oil
contracts jumped from 714 to more than 3 million contracts. That is a
425 percent increase in trading oil futures.
{time} 2145
Since 2003, the commodity index speculation has increased 1900
percent. It used to be a $13 billion market, now, today, it's a $260
billion market. By Lehman Brothers estimate, that 1,900 percent
increase in commodity index speculation has inflated the price of crude
oil by $37. Other experts say it could be even more.
So on June 23, as chairman of Oversight Investigations of the Energy
and Commerce Committee, I held my sixth hearing on gas prices over the
past 2
[[Page 14868]]
years, Fadel Gheit, the managing director and senior oil analyst at
Oppenheimer & Company testified, and I quote, he said ``I firmly
believe that the current record oil price in excess of $135 per barrel
is inflated. I believe, based on supply and demand fundamentals, crude
oil should not be above $60 a barrel.
We are at over $136 per barrel today. It should be no more than 60,
says Mr. Gheit. In 2002, here is what is happening. Over here on the
yellow side, these are the commercial hedgers. These are the airline
industries, these are trucking companies, these are the Big Oil users.
They want to hedge.
The blue area, pink area or blue area here, purple area, that's the
nonhedgers. They have no interest in hedging; they are just in to play
the market. Sixty-three percent in 2000 were legitimate hedgers, 22--
about 37 percent--were not. Come fast track April 2008, the legitimate
hedgers are down to 30 percent, the swap dealers and the
noncommercials, if you will, are 70 percent of the market.
So what's happened? By April 2008 the physical hedgers only
controlled 29 percent of the market, those who really do need the
supply. What we now know is that approximately 71 percent of the market
is taken over by swap dealers and speculators, a considerable majority
who have no physical interest in the market. Over the past 8 years,
there has been a dramatic shift of physical hedgers continuing to
represent a smaller and smaller portion of the market.
NYMEX, we have talked about the that tonight, New York Mercantile
Exchange, has granted 117 hedging exemptions since 2006 for the West
Texas intermediate crude oil contracts, many of which are for swap
dealers without any physical hedging position. This excessive
speculation is a significant factor in the price Americans are paying
for gasoline, diesel and home heating oil. Even the executives of major
oil companies recognize this.
At a May 21, 2008, Senate judiciary hearing, Shell Oil President John
Hofmeister agreed that the price of crude oil has been inflated, saying
that the proper range for oil prices should be somewhere between $35
and $65 a barrel.
In May of 2008, the IMF, the International Monetary Fund, compared
the price of crude oil over the past 30 years, crude oil for the past
30 years, to the price of gold. Gold prices are not dependent upon
supply and demand and have been viewed as a highly speculative
commodity. The IMF's analysis shows us that crude oil prices track
increases in gold prices. The big spike right here, that's the oil
embargo.
Look what happened as soon as you had the oil embargo in the late
1970s there, mid 1970s there, gold shot way up. Look at the track, look
at the last 5 years of gold how they go hand in hand one over the
other. What this really means is that oil has been transformed from an
energy source into a financial asset like gold, where much of the
buying and selling is driven by speculators instead of producers and
consumers. Oil has morphed, has morphed from a commodity into a
financial asset traded for its speculative value instead of its energy
value.
Even the Saudi oil minister has argued that high oil prices are due
to excessive speculation in the market. Former Secretary of Labor
Robert Reich noted on National Public Radio a few weeks ago, the
problem is government's failure to curb excessive speculation.
Now, the Commodities Future Trading Commission has the authority to
set position limits and to take other action necessary to curb
excessive speculation. Unfortunately, they have not done it. There are
significant loopholes that exempt trading from these protections
against excessive speculation. You have the Enron loophole, you have
the Foreign Boards of Trade, no action letters, issued by the
Commodities Future Trading Commission.
You have the swaps loophole, you have the bona fide hedging
exemption. While the recently passed farm bill that both Democrats and
Republicans voted for and overrode President Bush's veto addressed the
Enron loophole for electronic trading, only for natural gas, a
significant portion of the energy continues to be exempt from any
commodities future trade action to curb excessive speculation.
As I said earlier, for 3 years I have looked at excessive speculation
in the energy markets. In my latest bill to prevent the unfair
manipulation of prices, the PUMP Act, H.R. 6330, would end or take away
all these exemptions, to ensure that excessive speculation is not
driving these markets beyond the fundamentals of supply and demand.
We would crack down. The PUMP Act is the most comprehensive energy
bill, and we would crack down on energy speculation through a bilateral
trade, we would address that. We would take the Foreign Boards of
Trade, and we would clarify the CFTC's jurisdiction over these Foreign
Boards of Trade. The PUMP Act would give the CFTC the authority over
the exchanges, if they are using computers here in the United States,
or they are trading energy commodities that provide for delivery point
in the United States.
The swaps loophole that we talked about over here, that would be
closed, you see, 32 percent right now, right now our swap dealers would
close that loophole because there is no requirement for position
limits. These swaps have grown exponentially, driving up the price of
crude. By limiting this exemption, swaps would be subject to position
limits to prevent excessive legislation.
Bona fide hedging exemption, those who really need to have supply of
oil, we would make sure that they are, we would limit businesses to
hedge their legitimate anticipated business needs.
I have trouble with the Harvard University needing a legitimate
hedging exemption, which they certainly enjoy right now. What does
Harvard University need to hedge on oil? The PUMP Act would also
clarify that legitimate anticipated business needs does not mean energy
speculators. Strong aggregate position, you have the NYMEX, you have
the Intercontinental Exchange and now you have the Dubai exchange
coming on. If you are going to have a limit, position, limit the
position, it should apply to all three of the, the aggregate of all
three, not just one or two.
So if you see, if we would close these loopholes and set strong
aggregate position limits, the Commodities Future Trading Commission
would be better able to monitor trades to prevent market manipulation
and help eliminate unreasonable inflation of energy prices caused by
excessive speculation to help out the American people.
If you don't believe excessive speculation is causing a problem, look
at today's business news, especially in the New York Times, they are
talking about home heating oil. And at our June 23 hearing that we
held, Oversight Investigation, we had the home heating oil companies
there. On that day home heating oil was $3.98 a gallon.
Three days later, 3 days later I introduced the PUMP Act in the
Senate with Senator Cantwell. Home heating oil then jumped to $4.60 a
gallon. If you want to lock in, or if you want to hedge, you want to
hedge your home heating costs for this winter, it's $5.60 a gallon, a
20 percent increase in about 4 or 5 days. That's excessive speculation
gone wild.
Our PUMP Act has 60 cosponsors, bipartisan piece of legislation,
endorsed by agriculture, airline, labor, industry groups, trucking
industry. So I urge my colleagues in this House, and I have enjoyed
this discussion here tonight, to take seriously a look at excessive
speculation.
When they testified on June 23 in our committee, I know Mr. Barton
was there and some others in this room tonight, Mr. Masters, Professor
Greenberger, Fadel Gheit and others all indicated that if we would pass
the PUMP Act the way it is right now, the most comprehensive
legislation on excessive speculation, we could lower the cost of oil,
of a barrel of oil coming into this country, by 50 percent, they said,
within the next 30 days.
I believe it might be 30 to 50 percent, but the point being, in the
short-term, as we started this discussion, we could do something right
now. I would take
[[Page 14869]]
the excess of speculation, all markets, all commodities, be liquidated,
although they will need some speculation.
But when the physical hedgers are 2-1 being outbid by the swap
dealers and the noncommercial people, the floor traders that manage
money, the nonreportables, then we have a market that has been turned
upside down, and we have turned supply and demand into really a
financial asset and not really looking at the needs of the American
people, or the U.S. economy.
Mr. ALTMIRE. I thank the gentleman. With approximately 15 minutes
remaining, my friends on the other side, to achieve balance, have about
10 of that remaining 15 minutes.
I would yield at this point to the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. I thought we had about 12 minutes, 12 minutes,
so it's about 12-3.
Mr. ALTMIRE. Okay, 12 minutes to the remaining 15. I yield to the
gentleman from Texas.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Let me make a couple of comments about what my
good friend Mr. Stupak just said.
First, in terms of speculation, I think that most Republicans would
agree that there is some speculation in the market. I certainly believe
there is. I held hearings when I was full committee chairman in the
last Congress and you, Mr. Stupak, have done an excellent job in that
hearing that he referred to, I think, on June 23.
Some of the things that are in his PUMP bill and some things that are
in the bill that I have introduced and Chairman Dingell has introduced,
we are going to have a markup in the Energy and Commerce Committee on a
bipartisan basis sometime next week and hopefully come to a bipartisan
agreement about what to do on speculation, putting some position
limits, bringing the foreign exchanges under rules that the U.S.
exchanges have to go by, creating a two-tiered system where physical
traders play by a different set of rules in terms of margin requirement
than people that don't take physical possession or provide for physical
delivery. There are a number of issues we have agreement on, and we
will be working together.
I might also point out that the gentleman's chart that shows the
tracking of oil and gold, that is a, to me, a disconcerting chart,
because what it shows to me--and I am not an economist--but we have
taken oil from a commercial commodity that had value because of the end
use that it could be put to, to a commodity that now has become a value
of storage like gold. I mean, there is not a big commercial demand for
gold in terms of jewelry and dental work.
Gold is basically--has historically been a hedge against inflation,
and what the world financial community has decided with oil, because of
the tightness of the market, since it is almost a necessity in the
modern age, it, too, has now become a store of value, and it has a
value applied to it above and beyond the commercial value of being
used.
If we really want to do something to dampen speculation, and, again,
we are going to work with Mr. Stupak on a speculation bill, we have got
to fundamentally change the supply and demand tightness. Right now,
world available supply is about 85 million barrels a day. World demand
is about 84 million barrels a day. That supply number, that 85 million
barrel a day number hasn't changed significantly in the last 3 years,
because most of our major oil fields are growing older, the war in
Iraq.
I could say corruption in some of the national oil companies, I won't
name names, but even with these high prices, we haven't seen that
supply and demand tightness go away. We have got to get either the
demand down or the supply up, and, so, some of the things that the
Republicans are talking about to increase domestic supply would help on
the speculation side.
My final comment, before I yield back to the majority side for some
time, is that in terms of the oil company profits, apparently the
gentleman from New York, who is no longer on the floor, has made a big
deal about how high these profits are.
Well, let me make a couple of comments. If you can't make money at
$130 a barrel, you don't deserve to be in business. I mean, we would
expect profits to be up when the price is up where it is. Believe it or
not, there are some of these nationalized oil companies whose profits
have not gone up.
Now, one can speculate as to why that is, but in the United States we
have a transparent market-based system and our oil companies are not
price setters, they are price takers. If the world market is $130 a
barrel or $140 a barrel, our national--our private oil companies take
that price. Now, the question is, how do we want them to use those
profits?
Let's unlock these reserves, these domestic resources, 85 percent of
the OCS has been off limits? We can't drill in Alaska where we think
there is a 10 billion barrel oil field in ANWR? Let's allow our private
companies to invest those profits in American-made energy.
{time} 2200
Increase that supply demand balance so that, as the supply goes up,
the price goes down.
Now, having said that, I agree with Chairman Stupak in that we need
to do something on speculation. I don't agree with everything in his
pump bill, but I do agree with probably 75 percent of it.
In the committee markup of the Energy and Commerce Committee that
Chairman Dingell has announced to me--and I, hopefully, will publicly
announce it soon if he has not already--you will see bipartisan
agreement. We have to live within the market structure of the United
States and the regulatory structure through the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission and through the Securities & Exchange Commission.
Certainly, we can do some things to do something on speculation, but if
we don't change the fundamental tightness in the supply and demand
situation, all of the speculation bills in the world are not going to
make that much difference.
With that, I yield back to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Mr. ALTMIRE. I appreciate the gentleman from Texas.
On the point that the gentleman just made, I would yield to the
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Murphy) and then to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Stupak).
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Thank you, Mr. Altmire.
The point is that I think we would all have a slight degree more
comfort with these numbers if we had confidence that those companies
were investing back into capital, into exploration, into drilling a
commensurate amount in comparison to what they're making in pure
profit. I don't have the figures in front of me. I would be happy to
see something that displays this to the contrary, but what I have seen
is that you have not seen a corresponding increase in capital
reinvestment--Mr. Stupak may know this and may want to comment on this
as well--as you have seen in returns back to shareholders.
Now, everybody wants shareholders to do well here. We want there to
be enough excess profit to make some of the people who have invested in
these companies do all right, but I'd like to also see some evidence,
as you have suggested, Mr. Barton, that there's a willingness to take a
piece of that money and to put it into more drilling and into more
exploration and into more supply.
I'd be happy to yield to Mr. Stupak.
Mr. STUPAK. Thank you.
On that point, there is some skepticism on the majority side that
somehow we're going to drill our way out of this or that somehow we'll
just increase supplies, because if you take a look at it right now,
according to government statistics, 82 percent of the Outer Continental
Shelf is available for drilling for gas. Seventy-nine percent of the
Outer Continental Shelf is available for oil exploration and is leased.
The last time was in 2006. We went along with it. We voted to extend in
2006, not even 2 years ago, more of the Outer Continental Shelf for oil
and gas exploration.
What happened between 2006 and 2008? Profits kept going up. Costs
kept
[[Page 14870]]
going up. We didn't see a tangible result.
So, when you have 82 percent of the Outer Continental Shelf already
available for leasing for natural gas and when you have 79 percent of
the Outer Continental Shelf available for oil already available for
leasing and as we had just relaxed the standards in 2006 and you do it
2 years later to get the last--what?--18 percent, 21 percent, how is
that going to change the costs we're paying at the pump? How is that
going to come down? We don't see the investment of these record profits
into getting that oil up.
In fact, we're saying use it or lose it. You have record profits. You
have more of the Outer Continental Shelf than ever in the Nation's
history available for exploration, and you're not doing it. So use it
or lose it. So that's why we look at speculation as, maybe, one way to
bring it down.
I thank Mr. Barton for his willingness to work with us on speculation
legislation. At my June 23rd hearing on excessive speculation in the
market, he was actively engaged in that, and he asked a number of good
questions. I agree that we might not agree on 100 percent of the PUMP
Act, but I think there is enough common ground there, and I've enjoyed
the discussions we've had in recent weeks on the PUMP Act. Hopefully,
we can do something. I've really enjoyed the discussion here tonight.
I thank Mr. Altmire and others for having this discussion because I
think it has been a good discussion. We've had some disagreements, yes,
but I think it's all fair in what we're trying to do and in how we view
things, and we are looking at the short term, what we need in the short
term and in the long term, and I think there is more agreement than
disagreement between the two sides.
Mr. ALTMIRE. I thank the gentleman.
With approximately 6 minutes left, to achieve balance, the
Republicans can control the rest of the time. We will certainly answer
any questions, but I will say to the gentleman from Georgia: Have at
it. The time is yours or it is that of the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. We have 6 minutes. We're going to speak for
about 5 minutes, and then we'll give you a minute to close. I think
there ought to be balance in terms of closing. We don't have to be
exactly right in terms of time.
Before I yield to Mr. Westmoreland, let me say that we've got a
factual disagreement about the Outer Continental Shelf as to what is
available. This chart that's down by Mr. Westmoreland shows that 85
percent of the Outer Continental Shelf is off limits. The entire coast
of the Pacific is off limits. I believe the entire Atlantic coast is
off limits. The western Gulf of Mexico, where we've been drilling for
60 years, is accessible, and I think some of the eastern Gulf may be
accessible. So we have a factual discrepancy that should be resolvable
before we do this again because it looks to me like most of the OCS,
with the exception of the western Gulf of Mexico, is simply not
available because of a congressional moratorium. Now, if we can agree
on a bipartisan basis to change that, then we're going to create some
areas for our oil companies to invest their funds domestically.
With that, I would like to yield to Mr. Westmoreland, who is one of
the godfathers of this experiment this evening.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. Well, I certainly want to thank the gentleman from
Texas for his participation and for his willingness to come here
tonight and to lead it with the expertise that he has had as former
chairman of Energy and Commerce and that he has now as the ranking
member.
I also want to thank Mr. Altmire for his willingness to participate,
and I would like to thank the gentleman from Michigan.
While we don't necessarily agree on a lot of the facts, I think it
has been a good example of why we need to have committee hearings. I
was glad to hear that the gentleman from Michigan's bill is going to
actually have a markup in the Energy and Commerce Committee, so I think
that's a positive step in that we're finally, hopefully, having the
majority ask for the minority's input.
It does concern me a little bit as to what Speaker Pelosi said today
in her quote, that she is going to continue to do these things under
suspension. Mr. Speaker, I believe that that is out of fear that we
will come back with a motion to recommit.
Let me say this: While we're talking about gas today, we cannot
regulate ourselves out of this crisis. While we came down today to
discuss, I thought, some U.S. oil production and drilling, it's good
that we got into some of the other things that the majority is saying
are causing these gas prices to go so high, but even from listening to
them about this not affecting it immediately, we need to look to the
future for our children and for our grandchildren. So I hope we'll
continue this discussion.
Again, I want to thank all of the parties who participated.
Mr. Altmire, I will yield back to you.
I think the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess) would like to say
something.
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Yes. We'll let Mr. Altmire have about 1 minute,
and we'll let Dr. Burgess have the last minute.
Mr. ALTMIRE. I would yield to Dr. Burgess at this point.
Mr. BURGESS. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
It has been a fascinating discussion tonight.
Of course, as the gentleman from Michigan knows, I was in the hearing
as well on June 23rd. It was a long hearing, but it was a good hearing,
and we heard from a number of witnesses.
When you listened to the discussion of the witnesses, especially on
the concept of the non physical hedger, I think one of the most
striking things to me was that there was a component, just the sheer
volume of dollars, that was going into that, and that clearly had an
effect, so there may be a very immediate return that can be had. There
was a disagreement as to how quickly that could come about, but the
pressure could be put on the price of oil to come down.
What was not lost on me, though, was the concept that these very
tight supply and demand markets are around the world, and I think, man,
those first four witnesses that presented to us that day said that by
the year 2015, world demand would vastly outstrip supply. The message I
took from that is we'd best be looking at the next level of supply
because we had about a 7-year window in which to achieve that, so you
had to be sure that some of these other methods that we've heard today
would be several years down the road before we would actually get the
supply from those areas, but we need to start today to be able to get
that supply.
The other thing that was just absolutely amazing was the number of
dollars going into those markets and where the actual rate of rise
really began to increase. It was in about December of 2006 or in
January of 2007.
I think my time has expired. I yield back to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania.
Mr. ALTMIRE. I thank the gentleman.
I thank the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Westmoreland). I especially
thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton) for these 2 hours.
This, I think, was very productive, very eventful. We had a good
debate. Hopefully, this is not the last time that we will do this. I
thank the Speaker for the time, for both this hour and for the previous
hour.
At this point, I would yield back.
____________________
LEAVE OF ABSENCE
By unanimous consent, leave of absence was granted to:
Mr. Kind (at the request of Mr. Hoyer) for today on account of
business in district.
Mr. Ellison (at the request of Mr. Hoyer) for today on account of
official business.
Ms. Kilpatrick (at the request of Mr. Hoyer) for today on account of
personal reasons.
[[Page 14871]]
Mr. Pearce (at the request of Mr. Boehner) for today and July 15 on
account of business in New Mexico.
Mr. Bonner (at the request of Mr. Boehner) for today and July 15 on
account of official business.
____________________
SPECIAL ORDERS GRANTED
By unanimous consent, permission to address the House, following the
legislative program and any special orders heretofore entered, was
granted to:
(The following Members (at the request of Ms. Woolsey) to revise and
extend their remarks and include extraneous material:)
Mr. Skelton, for 5 minutes, today.
Mr. Scott of Georgia, for 5 minutes, today.
Ms. Woolsey, for 5 minutes, today.
Mr. DeFazio, for 5 minutes, today.
Ms. Kaptur, for 5 minutes, today.
Ms. Solis, for 5 minutes, today.
(The following Members (at the request of Mr. Barton of Texas) to
revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material:)
Mr. Burton of Indiana, for 5 minutes, today, July 15, 16 and 17.
Mr. Flake, for 5 minutes, today, July 15 and 16.
Mr. Gingrey, for 5 minutes, today.
Mrs. Myrick, for 5 minutes, today.
Mr. Burgess, for 5 minutes, today and July 15.
Mr. Campbell of California, for 5 minutes, July 15 and 16.
Mr. Moran of Kansas, for 5 minutes, today, July 15 and 16.
Mr. Kirk, for 5 minutes, today.
Mr. Garrett of New Jersey, for 5 minutes, today, July 15, 16 and 17.
Mr. Wolf, for 5 minutes, July 15.
____________________
SENATE BILL REFERRED
A Bill of the Senate of the following title was taken from the
Speaker's table and, under the rule, referred as follows:
S. 1046. An act to modify pay provisions relating to
certain senior-level positions in the Federal Government, and
for other purposes; to the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform.
____________________
SENATE ENROLLED BILL SIGNED
The Speaker announced her signature to an enrolled bill of the Senate
of the following title:
S. 2967. An act to provide for certain Federal employee
benefits to be continued for certain employees of the Senate
Restaurants after operations of the Senate Restaurants are
contracted to be performed by a private business concern, and
for other purposes.
____________________
BILLS PRESENTED TO THE PRESIDENT
Lorraine C. Miller, Clerk of the House reports that on July 7, 2008
she presented to the President of the United States, for his approval,
the following bills.
H.R. 430. To designate the United States bankruptcy
courthouse located at 271 Cadman Plaza East in Brooklyn, New
York, as the `Conrad B. Duberstein United States Bankruptcy
Courthouse'.
H.R. 634. To require the Secretary of the Treasury to mint
coins in commemoration of veterans who became disabled for
life while serving in the Armed Forces of the United States.
H.R. 781. To redesignate Lock and Dam No. 5 of the
McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System near
Redfield, Arkansas, authorized by the Rivers and Harbors Act
approved July 24, 1946, as the ``Colonel Charles D. Maynard
Lock and Dam''.
H.R. 814. To require the Consumer Product Safety Commission
to issue regulations mandating child-resistant closures on
all portable gasoline containers.
H.R. 1019. To designate the United States customhouse
building located at 31 Gonzalez Clemente Avenue in Mayaguez,
Puerto Rico, as the ``Rafael Martinez Nadal United States
Customhouse Building''.
H.R. 2728. To designate the station of the United States
Border Patrol located at 25762 Madison Avenue in Murrieta,
California, as the ``Theodore L. Newton, Jr. and George F.
Azrak Border Patrol Station''.
H.R. 4140. To designate the Port Angeles Federal Building
in Port Angeles, Washington, as the ``Richard B. Anderson
Federal Building''.
H.R. 5778. To extend agricultural programs beyond March 15,
2008, to suspend permanent price support authorities beyond
that date, and for other purposes.
H.R. 6040. To amend the Water Resources Development Act of
2007 to clarify the authority of the Secretary of the Army to
provide reimbursement for travel expenses incurred by members
of the Committee on Levee Safety.
____________________
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. ALTMIRE. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.
The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 10 o'clock and 10 minutes
p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until tomorrow,
Tuesday, July 15, 2008, at 9 a.m., for morning-hour debate.
____________________
EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, ETC.
Under clause 8 of rule XII, executive communications were taken from
the Speaker's table and referred as follows:
7485. A letter from the Congressional Review Coordinator,
Department of Agriculture, transmitting the Department's
final rule -- Asian Longhorned Beetle; Additions to
Quarantined Areas in New York [Docket No. APHIS-2007-0104]
received July 2, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to
the Committee on Agriculture.
7486. A letter from the Associate General Counsel for
Legislation and Regulations, Department of Housing and Urban
Development, transmitting the Department's final rule --
Manufactured Home Installation Program [Docket No. FR-4812-F-
03] (RIN: 2502-AH97) received July 8, 2008, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Financial Services.
7487. A letter from the Acting Secretary, Securities and
Exchange Commission, transmitting the Commission's final rule
-- Commission Guidance and Amendment to the Rules Relating to
Organization and Program Management Concerning Proposed Rule
Changes Filed by Self-Regulatory Organizations [Release No.
34-58092] received July 7, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Financial Services.
7488. A letter from the Asst. Gen. Counsel for Reg.
Services, Department of Education, transmitting the
Department's final rule -- The Teacher Education Assistance
for College and Higher Education (TEACH) Grant Program and
Other Federal Student Aid Programs [Docket ID ED-2008-OPE-
0001] (RIN: 1840-AC93) received June 31, 2008, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Education and Labor.
7489. A letter from the Deputy Director for Operations,
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, transmitting the
Corporation's final rule -- Benefits Payable in Terminated
Single-Employer Plans; Allocation of Assets in Single-
Employer Plans; Interest Assumptions for Valuing and Paying
Benefits -- received July 8, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Education and Labor.
7490. A letter from the Deputy Director for Operations,
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, transmitting the
Corporation's final rule -- Bylaws of the Pension Benefit
Guaranty Corporation -- received June 11, 2008, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Education and Labor.
7491. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Protection of Stratospheric Ozone:
Revision of Refrigerant Recovery Only Equipment Standards
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0231; FRL-8582-6] (RIN: 2060-AP18) received
June 13, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
7492. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Small Entity Compliance Guide to
Renovate Right; EPA's Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair,
and Painting Program; Notice of Availability [EPA-HQ-OPPT-
2005-0049; FRL-8368-9] (RIN: 2070-AC83) received June 26,
2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Energy and Commerce.
7493. A letter from the General Counsel, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, transmitting the Commission's final
rule -- Promotion of a More Efficient Capacity Release Market
[Docket No. RM08-1-000; Order No. 712] received June 31,
2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Energy and Commerce.
7494. A letter from the Deputy Archivist of the United
States, National Archives and Records Administration,
transmitting the Administration's final rule -- Use of
Meeting Rooms and Public Space [Docket NARA-08-0002] (RIN:
3095-AB33) received June 31, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform.
7495. A letter from the Acting Chair, Federal Subsistence
Board, Department of the Interior, transmitting the
Department's final rule -- Subsistence Management Regulations
for Public Lands in Alaska-2008-09 and 2009-10 Subsistence
Taking of Wildlife Regulations [FWS-R7-SM-2008-0020; 70101-
1261-0000L6] (RIN: 1018-AV69) received July 7, 2008, pursuant
to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Natural
Resources.
[[Page 14872]]
7496. A letter from the Chief, Branch of Listing (End.
Species, WO), Department of the Interior, transmitting the
Department's final rule -- Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Critical Habitat Revised Designation for the
Kootenai River Population of the White Sturgeon (Acipenser
transmontanus) [[FWS-R1-ES-2008-0072] [92210-1117-0000-FY08-
B4] (RIN: 1018-AU47) received July 7, 2008, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Natural Resources.
7497. A letter from the Acting Chair, Federal Subsistence
Board, Department of the Interior, transmitting the
Department's final rule -- Subsistence Management Regulations
for Public Lands in Alaska, Subpart C and Subpart D-2008-09
Subsistence Taking of Fish and Shellfish Regulations [FWS-R7-
SM-2008-0021; 70101-1335-0064L6] (RIN: 1018-AU71) received
July 7, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Natural Resources.
7498. A letter from the Director, Office of Surface Mining,
Department of the Interior, transmitting the Department's
final rule -- Pennsylvania Regulatory Program [PA-151-FOR;
Docket ID: OSM-2008-0013] received July 2, 2008, pursuant to
5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Natural Resources.
7499. A letter from the Acting Director Office of
Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, transmitting the Administration's final rule
-- Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Scup Fishery;
Commercial Quota Harvested for 2008 Summer Period [Docket No.
071030625-7696-02] (RIN: 0648-XI40) received July 8, 2008,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Natural Resources.
7500. A letter from the Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Operations, NMFS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, transmitting the Administration's final rule
-- Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska;
Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Crab Rationalization Program
[Docket No. 080129098-8743-02] (RIN: 0648-AW45) received July
8, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee
on Natural Resources.
7501. A letter from the Acting Director Office of
Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, transmitting the Administration's final rule
-- Fisheries of the Economic Exclusive Zone Off Alaska;
Shallow-Water Species Fishery by Vessels Using Trawl Gear in
the Gulf of Alaska [Docket No. 071106671-8010-02] (RIN: 0648-
XI13) received June 11, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Natural Resources.
7502. A letter from the Acting Director Office of
Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, transmitting the Administration's final rule
-- Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska;
Yellowfin Sole by Vessels Participating in the Amendment 80
Limited Access Fishery in Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands
Management Area [Docket No. 071106673-8011-02] (RIN: 0648-
XI07) received June 11, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Natural Resources.
7503. A letter from the Deputy Assistant Administrator For
Regulatory Programs, NMFS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, transmitting the Administration's final rule
-- Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Recreational
Management Measures for the Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black
Sea bass fisheries; Fishing Year 2008 [Docket No. 070717341-
8549-02] (RIN: 0648-AV41) received June 23, 2008, pursuant to
5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Natural Resources.
7504. A letter from the Acting General Counsel, Department
of Justice, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Board
of Immigration Appeals: Composition of Board and Temporary
Board Members [EOIR Docket No. 158F; AG Order No. 2975-2008]
(RIN: 1125-AA57) received June 26, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on the Judiciary.
7505. A letter from the Program Analyst, Department of
Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule --
Establishment of Class E Airspace; Swans Island, ME [Docket
No. FAA-2008-0060; Airspace Docket No. 08-ANE-91] received
July 8, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
7506. A letter from the Program Analyst, Department of
Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule --
Establishment of Class E Airspace; Fort Kent, ME [Docket No.
FAA-2008-0059; Airspace Docket No. 08-ANE-90] received July
8, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure.
7507. A letter from the Program Analyst, Department of
Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule --
Amendment of Class E Airspace; Gettysburg, PA. [Docket No.
FAA-2007-0309; Airspace Docket No. 07-AEA-20] received July
8, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure.
7508. A letter from the Program Analyst, Department of
Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule --
Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments
[Docket No. 30600; Amdt. No. 3262] received July 8, 2008,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
7509. A letter from the Program Analyst, Department of
Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule --
Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments
[Docket No. 30603 ; Amdt. No. 3265] received July 8, 2008,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
7510. A letter from the Program Analyst, Department of
Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule --
Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments
[Docket No. 30609; Amdt. No 3270 ] received July 8, 2008,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
7511. A letter from the Program Analyst, Department of
Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule --
Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments
[Docket No. 30602; Amdt. No 3264 ] received July 8, 2008,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
7512. A letter from the Program Analyst, Department of
Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule --
Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments
[Docket No. 30611; Amdt. No 3272 ] received July 8, 2008,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
7513. A letter from the Program Analyst, Department of
Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule --
Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments
[Docket No. 30612 ; Amdt. No. 3273 ] received July 8, 2008,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
7514. A letter from the Program Analyst, Department of
Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule --
Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments
[Docket No. 30610; Amdt. No 3271 ] received July 8, 2008,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
7515. A letter from the Senior Trial Attorney, Department
of Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule
-- Railroad Operating Rules: Program of Operational Tests and
Inspections; Railroad Operating Practices: Handling
Equipment, Switches and Fixed Derails [Docket No. FRA-2006-
25267] (RIN: 2130-AB76) received July 8, 2008, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
7516. A letter from the Chairman, Department of
Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule --
DISCLOSURE OF RAIL INTERCHANGE COMMITMENTS [STB Ex Parte No.
575 (Sub-No. 1)] received June 11, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
7517. A letter from the Program Analyst, Department of
Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule --
Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments
[Docket No. 30569; Amdt. No. 3235] received June 20, 2008,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
7518. A letter from the Program Analyst, Department of
Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule --
Amendment of Class E Airspace; Franklin, PA. [Docket No. FAA-
2007-0279; Airspace Docket No. 070-AEA-19] received July 8,
2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
7519. A letter from the Program Analyst, Department of
Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule --
Establishment of Class E Airspace; Swans Island, ME [Docket
No. FAA-2008-0060; Airspace Docket No. 08-ANE-91] received
July 8, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
7520. A letter from the Program Analyst, Department of
Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule --
Establishment of Class E Airspace; Vinalhaven, ME. [Docket
No. FAA-2008-0061; Airspace Docket No. 08-ANE-92] received
July 8, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
7521. A letter from the Program Analyst, Department of
Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule --
Establishment of Class E Airspace; Bridgton, ME. [Docket No.
FAA-2008-0064; Airspace Docket No. 08-ANE-95] received July
8, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure.
[[Page 14873]]
7522. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Water Transfers Rule [EPA-HQ-OW-
2006-0141; FRL-8579-3] (RIN: 2040-AE86) received June 13,
2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
7523. A letter from the Chief, Trade and Commercial
Regulations Branch, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- DOMINICAN
REPUBLIC-CENTRAL AMERICA-UNITED STATES FREE TRADE AGREEMENT
[USCBP-2008-0060 CBP Dec. 08-22] (RIN: 1505-AB84) received
June 9, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Ways and Means.
7524. A letter from the Chief, Trade and Commercial
Regulations Branch, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- ARTICLES
ASSEMBLED ABROAD: OPERATIONS INCIDENTAL TO THE ASSEMBLY
PROCESS [CBP Dec. 08-21] (RIN: 1505-AB90) received June 9,
2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Ways and Means.
7525. A letter from the Chief, Publications and
Regulations, Internal Revenue Service, transmitting the
Service's final rule -- 26 CFR 601.204: Changes in accounting
periods and in methods of accounting. (Also, Part 1, 471,
472; 1.471-2, 1.471-8, 1.472-1) (Rev. Proc. 2008-43) received
June 26, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Ways and Means.
7526. A letter from the Chief, Publications and Regulations
Branch, Internal Revenue Service, transmitting the Service's
final rule -- Auction Rate Preferred Stock-Effect of
Liquidity Facilities on Equity Character [Notice 2008-55]
received June 26, 2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to
the Committee on Ways and Means.
7527. A letter from the Chief, Publications and
Regulations, Internal Revenue Service, transmitting the
Service's final rule -- Alternative Simplified Credit under
Section 41(c)(5) [TD 9401] (RIN: 1545-BH33) received June 24,
2008, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Ways and Means.
____________________
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS
Under clause 2 of rule XIII, reports of committees were delivered to
the Clerk for printing and reference to the proper calendar, as
follows:
[The following action occurred on July 11, 2008]
Mr. GORDON of Tennessee: Committee on Science and
Technology. H.R. 5618. A bill to reauthorize and amend the
National Sea Grant College Program Act, and for other
purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 110-701 Pt. 2). Referred
to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the
Union.
[Omitted from the Record of July 10, 2008]
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi: Committee on Homeland
Security. H.R. 5170. A bill to amend the Homeland Security
Act of 2002 to provide for a privacy official within each
component of the Department of Homeland Security, and for
other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 110-755). Referred
to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the
Union.
Mr. RAHALL: Committee on Natural Resources. H.R. 3227. A
bill to direct the Secretary of the Interior to continue
stocking fish in certain lakes in the North Cascades National
Park, Ross Lake National Recreation Area, and Lake Chelan
National Recreation Area; with amendments (Rept. 110-756).
Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of
the Union.
Mr. CONYERS: Committee on the Judiciary. H.R. 5057. a bill
to reauthorize the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program;
with amendments (Rept. 110-757). Referred to the Committee of
the Whole House on the State of the Union.
Mr. McGOVERN: Committee on Rules. House Resolution 1339.
Resolution providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 415)
to amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to designate segments
of the Taunton River in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts as
a component of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System
(Rept. 110-758). Referred to the House Calendar.
____________________
PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS
Under clause 2 of rule XII, public bills and resolutions were
introduced and severally referred, as follows:
By Mr. BERMAN (for himself and Ms. Zoe Lofgren of
California):
H.R. 6481. A bill to create a civil action to provide
judicial remedies to carry out certain treaty obligations of
the United States under the Vienna Convention on Consular
Relations and the Optional Protocol to the Vienna Convention
on Consular Relations; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. ACKERMAN (for himself and Mr. Castle):
H.R. 6482. A bill to direct the Securities and Exchange
Commission to establish both a process by which asset-backed
instruments can be deemed eligible for NRSRO ratings and an
initial list of such eligible asset-backed instruments; to
the Committee on Financial Services.
By Mr. BLUMENAUER (for himself and Mr. Matheson):
H.R. 6483. A bill to provide for duty free treatment of
certain recreational performance outerwear, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition
to the Committee on Science and Technology, for a period to
be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for
consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. CAPUANO:
H.R. 6484. A bill to provide for a study of measures to
achieve energy independence for the United States without
adversely affecting the environment; to the Committee on
Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on
Science and Technology, for a period to be subsequently
determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of
such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the
committee concerned.
By Ms. CASTOR:
H.R. 6485. A bill to amend title II of the Social Security
Act to provide that disability determinations under such
title on the basis of hearings by the Commissioner of Social
Security are made on a timely basis and to require the
Commissioner to establish a program for monitoring each year
the number of disability determinations which are in
reconsideration; to the Committee on Ways and Means.
By Mr. ENGEL (for himself, Mrs. Schmidt, and Mr.
Terry):
H.R. 6486. A bill to prohibit the manufacture, marketing,
sale, or shipment in interstate commerce of products designed
to assist in defrauding a drug test; to the Committee on
Energy and Commerce.
By Ms. GIFFORDS:
H.R. 6487. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to provide for a temporary reduction in the tax imposed
on diesel fuel; to the Committee on Ways and Means.
By Ms. HOOLEY (for herself and Mr. Blumenauer):
H.R. 6488. A bill to direct the Consumer Product Safety
Commission to promulgate a final consumer product safety rule
banning novelty lighters; to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
By Ms. HOOLEY:
H.R. 6489. A bill to designate the facility of the United
States Postal Service located at 501 4th Street in Lake
Oswego, Oregon, as the ``Judie Hammerstad Post Office
Building''; to the Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform.
By Mr. KUHL of New York:
H.R. 6490. A bill to amend the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 to promote the safe use of the Internet
by students, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Education and Labor.
By Mr. SOUDER:
H. Res. 1340. A resolution recognizing the 358th Fighter
Group for its outstanding service and bravery during World
War II and commending its successor, the 122nd Fighter Wing,
for continuing its legacy of excellence in service; to the
Committee on Armed Services.
____________________
ADDITIONAL SPONSORS
Under clause 7 of rule XII, sponsors were added to public
bills and resolutions as follows:
H.R. 160: Mr. Gary G. Miller of California, Mr. Brady of
Pennsylvania, and Mr. Kildee.
H.R. 303: Mrs. Miller of Michigan and Mr. Gohmert.
H.R. 471: Mr. Shays.
H.R. 690: Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart of Florida and Mrs. Miller
of Michigan.
H.R. 699: Mr. Coble and Mr. Aderholt.
H.R. 772: Mr. Latham, Mr. Frank of Massachusetts, and Mr.
Cummings.
H.R. 777: Ms. Castor.
H.R. 981: Ms. Kaptur.
H.R. 996: Mr. McDermott, Ms. Tsongas, Mr. Holt, and Mr.
Farr.
H.R. 997: Mr. Brown of South Carolina, Mr. Porter, and Mr.
Kingston.
H.R. 1050: Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania.
H.R. 1073: Mr. Carney.
H.R. 1108: Mr. McCaul of Texas.
H.R. 1157: Mr. Wilson of Ohio.
H.R. 1176: Mr. Rothman.
H.R. 1428: Mr. Michaud.
H.R. 1436: Mr. Gohmert.
H.R. 1524: Mr. Cazayoux.
H.R. 1527: Mr. Brady of Texas, Mrs. Boyda of Kansas, Mr.
Walden of Oregon, and Mr. Rodriguez.
H.R. 1589: Mr. Delahunt and Mrs. Miller of Michigan.
H.R. 1621: Mr. Lipinski.
H.R. 1746: Mr. Lynch.
H.R. 1755: Mr. Filner and Mr. Doggett.
H.R. 1770: Ms. Sutton.
H.R. 1827: Mr. Kuhl of New York.
H.R. 2020: Mr. Grijalva.
H.R. 2092: Mr. Langevin, Mr. Jefferson, and Mr. Lampson.
H.R. 2116: Mrs. Miller of Michigan, Mr. Carney, and Mr.
Cuellar.
H.R. 2169: Mr. Meek of Florida.
H.R. 2205: Mr. Bilbray.
[[Page 14874]]
H.R. 2208: Mr. McCotter, Mrs. Blackburn, Mr. Deal of
Georgia, Mr. Wilson of Ohio, Mr. Wilson of South Carolina,
Ms. Fallin, and Mr. Porter.
H.R. 2289: Mr. Langevin and Mr. Capuano.
H.R. 2325: Mr. Carney.
H.R. 2472: Mr. Space.
H.R. 2495: Mr. Shadegg.
H.R. 2677: Mrs. Boyda of Kansas.
H.R. 2958: Ms. Fallin.
H.R. 3202: Mr. Sires and Mr. Ackerman.
H.R. 3212: Mr. Sestak and Mr. Oberstar.
H.R. 3257: Ms. Giffords.
H.R. 3289: Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania.
H.R. 3366: Mr. Farr.
H.R. 3407: Mr. Jackson of Illinois.
H.R. 3485: Ms. Wasserman Schultz.
H.R. 3634: Mr. Sestak.
H.R. 3679: Mrs. Emerson.
H.R. 3689: Mrs. Gillibrand and Mr. Bishop of Georgia.
H.R. 3820: Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite of Florida.
H.R. 4021: Mr. Grijalva.
H.R. 4544: Mr. Latta, Mr. Young of Florida, Mr. Gerlach,
Ms. Roybal-Allard, Mrs. Gillibrand, Mr. Shays, Ms. Jackson-
Lee of Texas, and Mr. McIntyre.
H.R. 4651: Mr. Hinojosa.
H.R. 4930: Mr. Gohmert and Mr. Michaud.
H.R. 5161: Mrs. Tauscher.
H.R. 5235: Mr. Turner, Mrs. Capito, Mr. Johnson of
Illinois, and Mr. Ruppersberger.
H.R. 5265: Mr. Cardoza, Mr. Wamp, and Mr. Aderholt.
H.R. 5425: Mr. Gerlach.
H.R. 5446: Mr. Doggett.
H.R. 5488: Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania.
H.R. 5635: Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania.
H.R. 5652: Mr. Souder.
H.R. 5684: Mr. Goode.
H.R. 5709: Ms. DeGette.
H.R. 5734: Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Rahall.
H.R. 5752: Mr. Goode.
H.R. 5762: Mr. Grijalva.
H.R. 5782: Mr. McHenry.
H.R. 5785: Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania.
H.R. 5797: Mr. Paul.
H.R. 5798: Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania.
H.R. 5812: Mrs. Myrick and Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson of
Texas.
H.R. 5833: Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas, Mr. Courtney, and Ms.
Schakowsky.
H.R. 5836: Mr. Blunt.
H.R. 5892: Ms. McCollum of Minnesota.
H.R. 5898: Mr. Cohen.
H.R. 5901: Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania.
H.R. 5914: Mr. Boswell.
H.R. 5950: Mr. Meek of Florida and Mr. Sestak.
H.R. 5954: Mr. Mitchell and Mr. McNerney.
H.R. 5965: Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania.
H.R. 6029: Mr. George Miller of California.
H.R. 6045: Mr. Cummings, Mr. Forbes, and Mr. Cohen.
H.R. 6076: Mr. Braley of Iowa.
H.R. 6078: Mr. Faleomavaega and Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania.
H.R. 6107: Ms. Ros-Lehtinen and Mr. Buchanan.
H.R. 6108: Mrs. Miller of Michigan.
H.R. 6122: Mr. Rogers of Michigan, Mr. Kuhl of New York,
Mr. Etheridge, and Mr. Salazar.
H.R. 6140: Mr. Cohen.
H.R. 6143: Mr. Tierney and Mr. Wu.
H.R. 6163: Mr. Wittman of Virginia.
H.R. 6210: Mr. Pitts, Mr. Wilson of Ohio, Mr. Mahoney of
Florida, and Mr. Cohen.
H.R. 6217: Mrs. Emerson and Mr. Towns.
H.R. 6228: Ms. Schakowsky and Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania.
H.R. 6239: Mr. Ross and Mr. Thornberry.
H.R. 6248: Mr. Davis of Illinois.
H.R. 6258: Mr. Rogers of Kentucky, Mr. Brady of
Pennsylvania, Mr. Berry, Mr. Barrow, and Mr. Souder.
H.R. 6282: Mrs. Gillibrand and Mr. Grijalva.
H.R. 6288: Mr. Paul and Mr. Burton of Indiana.
H.R. 6292: Mrs. Emerson and Mr. Platts.
H.R. 6293: Mr. Jones of North Carolina, Mr. Rogers of
Alabama, Mrs. Emerson, Mr. Bishop of Utah, and Mr. Herger.
H.R. 6298: Ms. Schakowsky and Mr. Holt.
H.R. 6310: Mrs. Gillibrand.
H.R. 6339: Mr. Capuano.
H.R. 6365: Ms. Roybal-Allard.
H.R. 6368: Ms. Granger.
H.R. 6371: Mr. Braley of Iowa and Mr. Hill.
H.R. 6387: Mr. Smith of Washington.
H.R. 6391: Mr. Shays.
H.R. 6393: Ms. Harman.
H.R. 6399: Mr. Doggett.
H.R. 6403: Mr. Grijalva.
H.R. 6407: Mr. Grijalva, Ms. DeGette, Mr. Farr, and Mr.
Welch of Vermont.
H.R. 6411: Ms. Schakowsky and Mr. Klein of Florida.
H.R. 6418: Mr. Souder.
H.R. 6439: Mr. Grijalva and Mr. Hinchey.
H.R. 6445: Mr. Salazar.
H.R. 6446: Mr. Doyle.
H.R. 6452: Mr. Lewis of Georgia.
H.R. 6465: Mr. Mitchell.
H.R. 6473: Mr. Hall of New York.
H.R. 6476: Ms. Bean and Mr. Foster.
H.J. Res. 12: Mr. Donnelly.
H.J. Res. 39: Mr. Gerlach and Mrs. Biggert.
H.J. Res. 84: Ms. Giffords, Mr. Burton of Indiana, Mrs.
Lowey, and Mr. McCotter.
H.J. Res. 93: Mr. Sires.
H. Con. Res. 70: Mr. Platts and Mr. Souder.
H. Con. Res. 214: Mr. Hinchey and Mr. McNulty.
H. Con. Res. 223: Mr. Aderholt.
H. Con. Res. 296: Mr. Gene Green of Texas and Mrs. Emerson.
H. Con. Res. 360: Ms. Matsui, Mr. Filner, Mr. Skelton, and
Mr. Lincoln Davis of Tennessee.
H. Con. Res. 361: Ms. Foxx.
H. Con. Res. 369: Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania.
H. Con. Res. 371: Ms. Bordallo.
H. Con. Res. 376: Mr. Honda, Mr. Shuler, Mr. Baca, Mr.
Brady of Pennsylvania, Mr. Hall of Texas, Mr. Courtney, Mr.
Langevin, Mr. Allen, Mr. Michaud, Mr. Hodes, Mr. Cummings,
Mr. Murphy of Connecticut, Mr. Boswell, Ms. Corrine Brown of
Florida, Ms. Fallin, Ms. Hirono, Mr. Jackson of Illinois, and
Ms. McCollum of Minnesota.
H. Con. Res. 378: Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania and Ms.
Baldwin.
H. Con. Res. 380: Mr. Payne.
H. Con. Res. 381: Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania.
H. Con. Res. 385: Mr. Ackerman and Ms. Berkley.
H. Con. Res. 386: Mr. Alexander.
H. Con. Res. 388: Ms. Fallin.
H. Res. 671: Mr. LoBiondo, Mr. Gerlach, Mr. Ferguson, Mr.
Baird, Mr. Fossella, Mr. Snyder, Mr. Spratt, and Mr. Altmire.
H. Res. 758: Mr. Wilson of South Carolina and Mr. Shays.
H. Res. 883: Mr. McGovern and Ms. Schakowsky.
H. Res. 1008: Mr. Smith of New Jersey and Mr. Wu.
H. Res. 1019: Mr. Filner.
H. Res. 1078: Mr. Stark and Ms. Schakowsky.
H. Res. 1177: Mr. Holt.
H. Res. 1179: Mr. Wamp.
H. Res. 1200: Mr. Souder, Mr. Filner, Ms. Schakowsky, Mr.
Kennedy, Mr. Jefferson, Mr. Johnson of Georgia, Ms. McCollum
of Minnesota, Mr. Delahunt, Ms. Castor, Mr. Arcuri, Mr.
Hastings of Florida, Mr. Walz of Minnesota, Mr. Courtney, Ms.
Hirono, Mr. Snyder, Mrs. Tauscher, Mr. Loebsack, Mr. Spratt,
and Ms. Kaptur.
H. Res. 1227: Mr. Jackson of Illinois, Mr. Rush, and Mr.
Sires.
H. Res. 1245: Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania.
H. Res. 1261: Mr. Udall of Colorado, Mr. Hall of Texas, Ms.
Baldwin, Mr. Shadegg, Mr. Burton of Indiana, Mr. Smith of
Washington, Mr. Farr, Mr. Ellsworth, Mr. Watt, Mr. McNerney,
Mr. Hinojosa, Mr. Salazar, Mr. Lamborn, Mr. Mitchell, Ms.
Jackson-Lee of Texas, Mr. McGovern, Mrs. Boyda of Kansas, Ms.
Sutton, Mr. Gene Green of Texas, Mr. Crowley, Mrs. Musgrave,
Mr. Hare, Mr. Tancredo, Mr. Perlmutter, and Mr. Matheson.
H. Res. 1266: Mr. Rohrabacher and Mrs. McCarthy of New
York.
H. Res. 1273: Mr. Kagen.
H. Res. 1282: Mr. Duncan.
H. Res. 1287: Mrs. Boyda of Kansas, Mr. Poe, and Ms.
Kaptur.
H. Res. 1289: Mr. Ellison.
H. Res. 1290: Mr. Hastings of Florida, Ms. DeLauro, Mr.
Capuano, Mr. Hinojosa, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. Levin, Mr. Lewis of
Georgia, Mr. Jackson of Illinois, Mr. Waxman, Ms. Sutton, Mr.
Rush, Mr. Langevin, Mr. Moran of Virginia, Mr. Pitts, Mr.
Honda, Mr. Doyle, Mr. McGovern, Mr. Welch of Vermont, Ms.
Tsongas, and Mr. Meek of Florida.
H. Res. 1296: Mr. Issa, Mr. Wolf, Mr. Peterson of
Minnesota, and Mrs. Emerson.
H. Res. 1301: Mr. Conyers and Ms. Schakowsky.
H. Res. 1306: Mr. Jordan, Mr. Calvert, Mr. Space, Mr.
Sullivan, Mr. Sensenbrenner, Mr. Herger, Mr. Poe, and Mr.
Tanner.
H. Res. 1310: Ms. Bordallo.
H. Res. 1311: Ms. Schakowsky, Mr. Fortuno, Mr. Hall of
Texas, and Mrs. Wilson of New Mexico.
H. Res. 1316: Mr. Wolf, Ms. Schakowsky, Mr. Thornberry, Mr.
Cole of Oklahoma, Mr. LoBiondo, Mr. Shuster, and Mr. Davis of
Kentucky.
H. Res. 1319: Mr. Wolf and Mr. Hinchey.
H. Res. 1324: Mr. Davis of Illinois, Mr. Scott of Virginia,
and Mr. Boswell.
H. Res. 1328: Mr. McDermott, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. Waxman, Mr.
Spratt, Mrs. Drake, Mr. Hinchey, Mr. Gonzalez, Mr. McGovern,
Ms. Bordallo, Mr. Engel, Mr. Burton of Indiana, Mr. Paul, and
Mr. Ferguson.
H. Res. 1329: Mr. Moran of Virginia, Mr. Grijalva, Mr.
Welch of Vermont, and Mr. Capuano.
H. Res. 1330: Mr. Price of Georgia, Mr. Herger, and Mr.
Hastings of Washington.
H. Res. 1337: Mr. Jackson of Illinois, Ms. McCollum of
Minnesota, and Mr. Markey.
____________________
CONGRESSIONAL EARMARKS, LIMITED TAX BENEFITS, OR LIMITED TARIFF
BENEFITS
Under clause 9 of rule XXI, lists or statements on congressional
earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits were
submitted as follows:
[[Page 14875]]
The amendment to be offered by Representative Silvestre
Reyes, or a designee, to H.R. 5959, the Intelligence
authorization for Fiscal year 2009, does not contain any
congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited
tariff benefits, as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e), or 9(f) of
rule XXI.
[[Page 14876]]
EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS
HONORING THE PEOPLE'S MUJAHIDEEN ORGANIZATION OF IRAN
______
HON. THOMAS G. TANCREDO
of colorado
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Mr. TANCREDO. Madam Speaker, in the 1980's the United States
supported and helped arm the Afghan resistance to Soviet occupation of
their country, a policy later portrayed in the award-winning Tom Hanks
movie, ``Charlie Wilson's War.'' Today we need to show support for
dissidents fighting to overthrow the terrorist regime in Tehran. It
will come as a surprise to most Americans that we are not doing so.
In that struggle to push the Soviets out of Afghanistan, not all of
those Afghan freedom-fighters were fighting for democracy. It was a
coalition of forces who had one thing in common: they wanted the
Soviets out of their country. We supported them, and they won. Not only
did the Soviets leave Afghanistan, within four years the Soviet Union
imploded.
One of the main groups fighting to overthrow the Ahmadinejad regime
is the People's Mujahideen Organization of Iran (PMOI)--also called the
MEK--and its political arm, the National Council of Resistance in Iran
(NCRI). Strangely, instead of assisting these dissidents, our
Department of State decided to label them terrorists in 1997.
In the decade since, a debate has raged about whether the
designation of the MEK as a terrorist group was driven less by the
facts than it was a desire on the part of State Department bureaucrats
to curry favor with ``moderates'' in the government of then-Iranian
President Mohammad Khatami. Either way, it is has become clear that
this ``good will gesture'' on the part of the State Department failed
to yield any progress with Tehran.
The MEK advocates a secular democratic government for Iran, one that
that respects human rights and basic freedoms (including freedom of the
press and freedom of religion) and has provided intelligence and
assistance about the activities of the Iranian regime in Iraq, and
Tehran's covert nuclear program. Moreover, a number of the group's
members are under the protection of Coalition troops in Iraq.
Unfortunately, the group was recently the victim of a missile attack
at Camp Ashraf in Iraq. This is a testament to how much Tehran fears
the group.
I hope the Iranian regime will refrain from future attacks of this
nature, as Ashraf's residents are protected under the Fourth Geneva
Convention. Their well being is and continues to be the obligation of
the Coalition troops in Iraq, and the Iraqi government.
This raises another interesting point. Not only does the MEK not
behave like a terrorist group, in many respects the U.S. government
does not treat them like one.
The MEK is a group that the United States and the west should
cultivate as we seek an organic, democratic change agent in Iran.
Fortunately, the United Kingdom has already come to this conclusion
in removing the MEK from the British terrorist list earlier this year.
Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill were willing to enter into
an alliance with Joseph Stalin and the Soviet Union in 1941 in order to
defeat Hitler. We used every ally and every resource to defeat the Axis
Powers. Yet today, in dealing with the terrorist regime of Iran, a
regime that daily threatens to destroy Israel and the U.S. (the ``Great
Satan'') and is actively seeking the means of fulfilling that threat,
we cannot find it in our interest to render aid to the People's
Mujahideen of Iran because of its checkered past.
It is time for the western world to re-examine our treatment of the
MEK in the wake of the UK court decision.
For starters, the political goals behind designating the MEK as a
terrorist organization here in the U.S. have failed to materialize. If
anything, the Iranian government has become more aggressive and
repressive in the years since the MEK designation. Iran is supporting
violence and terrorism from Baghdad to Beirut, has defied U.N. demands
to end its nuclear enrichment program, and shows no signs of moderating
its behavior--test firing missiles yesterday in violation of UN
Security Council resolutions.
What better way to send a message to Tehran than to free the MEK
from the international stigma that comes with the `terrorist' label.
This year's U.S. State Department Country Reports on Terrorism
rightly brands the Iranian government as the number one state sponsor
of global terrorism. Iran has also been the principal supplier of IEDs
to terrorists in Iraq who are killing American soldiers and Iraqi
civilians.
Despite continued efforts at diplomacy, financial sanctions, and--in
the case of placing the MEK on various terrorist lists--outright
appeasement by many western countries, Iranian President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad has declared that his country will never yield its
``dignity'' by suspending its uranium enrichment program.
U.S., EU and UN negotiators have been talking with Tehran about its
nuclear program for many years, but Tehran has shown no sign of
changing course. And why should they when we keep handcuffs on Iranian
dissidents who might cause the Iranian regime real problems?
If western efforts at ``dialogue'' and ``diplomacy'' are to be
successful, they must be more than opportunities for Iran to stall for
time while moving forward with their nuclear program. A willingness to
negotiate with carrots doesn't work unless one is willing to use a few
sticks as well.
Today, there no longer remain any legal or political justifications
for maintaining the MEK on the terror list. I therefore urge our
government to seriously reconsider its stance on the democratic
opposition of Iran and remove the group from our list of terrorist
organizations.
It's time to take the handcuffs off of the MEK.
____________________
IN RECOGNITION OF CHRIS MURZIN, UNIVERSITY PARK'S 2008 CITIZEN OF THE
YEAR
______
HON. PETE SESSIONS
of texas
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Chris
Murzin who was named University Park's 2008 Citizen of the Year.
Chris and his family moved to University Park in 2006 and have been
active members of our local community. As a father of a child with
special needs, he was quick to identify local accessibility issues and
has dedicated himself to improving the lives of the disabled. He is
constantly on the forefront of our community--educating the public,
meeting with officials from Highland Park Independent School District
and PTA members, and coordinating a citizen-based fund drive to build a
barrier-free playground. I know he will continue to strive for a better
life for the disabled by serving as a vocal advocate. His vision and
commitment to this cause has already led to greater awareness in
University Park and will soon be evidenced by a barrier-free playground
at Coffee Park.
Madam Speaker, I ask my esteemed colleagues to join me in expressing
our sincerest congratulations to him and our heartfelt gratitude for
his dedicated efforts to better the lives of the disabled.
____________________
DR. JOSHUA CULBREATH
______
HON. JOE SESTAK
of pennsylvania
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Mr. SESTAK. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the career of a
remarkable individual on the occasion of his induction into the United
States Marine Corps Hall of Fame: Dr. Joshua ``Josh'' Culbreath, a
native of Norristown, PA and an Olympic athlete, who distinguished
himself as a community leader.
Dr. Culbreath was a bronze medalist as a member of the United
States' 400 meter hurdling team in the 1956 Melbourne Olympics,
[[Page 14877]]
part of an American clean sweep of the medals in that race. As a star
track and field athlete, he was a state high school champion and was a
three time national 440 yard hurdles champion, setting a world record
in that event.
Dr. Culbreath recognized that ``sport determined his destiny.'' A
confident and self-motivated individual, he set seemingly
insurmountable goals for himself. In addition to his brilliant racing
career, Dr. Culbreath dedicated more than 60 years of his life as an
educator and high school, college, and university track and field
coach, sharing his knowledge, expertise, and love for track and field
with aspiring athletes. The athletic accomplishments of his students
are astonishing, as they won ten collegiate national titles. As the
Director of Athletics at Morehouse College, Dr. Culbreath developed an
athletic program that received national acclaim and Central State
University named a new track, the Josh Culbreath Track, in his honor.
Dr. Culbreath also took pride in tutoring his athletes, with more than
90 percent of them graduating from college.
The Honorary Doctor of Humane Letters awarded to Dr. Culbreath by
Edward Waters College is clearly deserved. On the international stage,
he represented the United States as a lecturer, coach and sports
ambassador in Iraq and India. In particular, he must be commended for
his humanitarian work with the International Cultural Exchange Program,
which resulted in a groundbreaking integrated competition in Africa
between Black and White athletes, who raced in Northern and Southern
Rhodesia and Nysaland. In the United States he led integration efforts
in Hollywood, Florida, using his stature as a record-setting athlete
and talent as a communicator to unite people in that community. His
work produced integration in housing complexes and at sporting events.
Dr. Culbreath also served as a community leader by helping in the
development and implementation of Plans for Progress in Philadelphia, a
forerunner of the national Affirmative Action Program. He also assisted
in the development of an affirmative action and equal employment
opportunity program for the Sperry/Unisys Corporation. Through his work
as a motivational speaker and lecturer, Dr. Culbreath has touched the
lives of a diverse audience, appearing before corporate, governmental,
and collegiate groups to discuss motivation and education, Olympic
sports, and international athletics issues.
Madam Speaker, I ask that we pause and salute Dr. Culbreath, father
of Sandra Allen Penn, Khaliq T. Culbreath (deceased), Maliq R.
Culbreath, Jahan L. Culbreath, and Camille A.M. Culbreath, for his
amazing athletics achievements, his extraordinary accomplishments as a
community leader and his commitment to improving the lives of others.
____________________
IN REMEMBRANCE OF AL STERN
______
HON. DENNIS J. KUCINICH
of ohio
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I rise today in remembrance of Al Stern,
a man who lived his life by the principal of Tikkun Olam, the healing
of the world. He dedicated himself to the cause of free speech and to
cultivating the seeds of Middle East peace and understanding in the
Cleveland community.
The roots of his activism began during the Civil Rights Era, when he
marched along side Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. He was an activist for
the Congress on Racial Equality, the Committee for Sane Nuclear Policy,
and was an activist against the Vietnam War and for women's
reproductive rights. In 1974 when helped found the Cleveland chapter of
Americans for Peace Now, a solidarity organization aligned with the
Shalom Achshav movement in Israel formed out of the conviction that
Israel's democratic character and future security were intertwined with
achieving a just and peaceful solution to the Palestinian-Israeli
conflict.
Al Stern advocated for mutual understanding and a two state solution
long before it was widely accepted. For twenty years he engaged with
and educated the Cleveland community about the costs of the current
conflict and the opportunities for peaceful solutions. His work took
him all over the world, where he met with the people and leaders in
Israel, Syria, Egypt and Gaza. He led by example through his own
commitment to educating himself and reaching out to concerned members
of the community.
After stepping down from his position on the board of Americans for
Peace Now in 1993, he became a full time volunteer for the American
Civil Liberties Union. I have had the privilege of hearing Mr. Stern
speak on free speech and civil liberties issues. He and I have worked
closely together in an effort to build bridges across the gaps that
divide people in the Middle East and in Cleveland.
Madam Speaker and colleagues, please join me in remembrance of Al
Stern, who has served as an inspiration for engaged, global
citizenship. May his legacy of advocating for civil liberties and
cultivating Middle East Peace be an example for all of us to follow.
____________________
CONGRATULATING THE STUDENTS OF LIBERTY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL IN ARGYLE,
TEXAS FOR THEIR PARTICIPATION IN THE DELL-WINSTON SCHOOL SOLAR CAR
CHALLENGE
______
HON. MICHAEL C. BURGESS
of texas
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the students
from Liberty Christian School in Argyle, Texas for building a one-of-a-
kind solar-powered vehicle to compete in the Dell-Winston School Solar
Car Challenge. Their solar powered vehicle passed inspection and was
tested this weekend at Texas Motor Speedway.
The Dell-Winston School Solar Car Challenge began in 1993 in Dallas,
Texas. The competition now attracts students from 19 high schools
across Texas, in addition to teams from other states. Each team must
build its own solar-powered car, and the car that completes the most
laps at the Speedway during three-hour periods wins the competition.
The Liberty Christian students used scrap parts, as well as some parts
bought on the Internet, to build their vehicle, at a total cost of only
$8000.
The team members have varying interests, some planning on pursuing
engineering or science in college, while others plan to study non-
scientific fields, such as dance. Nonetheless, each member is dedicated
to completing this very challenging project, which tests their
attention to detail, mechanical ability, and creativity.
The four-day competition took place this weekend. The students'
vehicle, named ``Racing for the Sun,'' was successful in completing
eighteen laps. Now that the competition is over, the students' next
step will be to travel across the country to display their work.
The six students from Liberty Christian have displayed team work,
and they've shown how dedication and persistence can lead to success. I
am proud to represent these students in the 26th District of Texas, and
I wish them all the best in their future endeavors.
____________________
ORGANIZATIONS THAT SUPPORT H.R. 3195, THE ADA AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2008
______
HON. GEORGE MILLER
of california
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, I respectfully submit
the following for inclusion in the Congressional Record. The first is a
letter of support for H.R. 3195, the ADA Amendments Act of 2008, and
the second is a list of organizations that support this important
legislation.
June 17, 2008.
Help Secure the Promise of the ADA: Support the ADA Amendments Act of
2008
Chairman Miller and Ranking Member McKeon. As you are
aware, the Committee today is poised to consider legislation
to secure the promise of the original Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA). The ADA has as its
fundamental goal the inclusion of people with disabilities in
all aspects of society, including employment for people who
are willing and able to work despite their disabilities.
Unfortunately, court decisions over the last decade have
excluded individuals who should have been covered under the
current ADA law. These narrow court interpretations have
restricted ADA coverage for people with diabetes, epilepsy,
serious heart conditions, mental disabilities and even
cancer. As representatives of a broad cross-section of both
the employer and disability communities, we believe the
proposal before the Committee strikes an appropriate balance
between the needs of individuals with disabilities and those
of employers. The proposal includes the following key
provisions:
Coverage under the ADA--The proposal clarifies that
Congress intended the ADA's coverage to be broad, to cover
anyone who faces unfair discrimination because of a
disability.
Definition of Disability--The proposal retains the
requirement that an individual's impairment substantially
limits a major life activity in order to be considered a
disability
[[Page 14878]]
and an individual must demonstrate that he or she is
qualified for the job.
Protection for Mitigating Measures--The proposal would
overturn several court decisions to provide that people with
disabilities not lose their coverage under the ADA simply
because their condition is treatable with medication or can
be addressed with the help of assistive technology.
Regarded As--The proposal includes a ``regarded as'' prong
as part of the definition of disability which covers
situations where an employee is discriminated against because
of his or her actual or perceived impairment. Moreover, the
proposal makes it clear that accommodations do not need to be
made to someone who is disabled solely because he or she is
``regarded as'' disabled.
Chairman Miller and Ranking Member McKeon, we firmly
support this legislation and we stand ready to work with you
to enact this legislation this year. We thank you for
addressing the important issue and look forward to working
with the House of Representatives to secure its passage.
Sincerely,
American Association of People with Disabilities; American
Diabetes Association; Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law;
Epilepsy Foundation; HR Policy Association; International
Franchise Association; Leadership Conference on Civil Rights;
National Association of Manufacturers; National Disability
Rights Network; National Council on Independent Living;
National Restaurant Association; Society for Human Resource
Management; U.S Chamber of Commerce.
____
Supporters of H.R. 3195--ADA Amendments Act of 2008
193 NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
June 25, 2008
AARP; AARP Foundation; ADA Watch/National Coalition for
Disability Rights; Air Force Association; Air Force Sergeants
Association; Air Force Womens Officers Association; Alexander
Graham Bell Association for the Deaf; Alpha-1 Association;
Alpha-1 Foundation; ALS Association; Alzheimer's Foundation;
American Academy of Nursing; American Association for
Respiratory Care; American Association of Diabetes Educators;
American Association of People with Disabilities, AAPD;
American Autoimmune Related Diseases Association; American
Cancer Society Network; American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU;
American Council of the Blind; American Diabetes Association.
American Federation of Government Employees; American
Foundation for the Blind; American GI Forum of the U.S.;
American Islamic Congress; American Jewish Committee;
American Kidney Fund; American Liver Foundation; American
Lung Association; American Mental Health Counselors
Association; American Network of Community Options and
Resources; American Psychological Association; Americans for
Democratic Action; AMVETS; Anti-Defamation League; APSE: The
Network on Employment; Arthritis Foundation; Asian American
Justice Center; Association of Assistive Technology Act
Programs, ATAP; Association of Jewish Family & Children's
Agencies; Association of Jewish Family & Children's Agencies.
Association of Programs for Rural Independent Living,
APRIL; Association of University Centers on Disabilities,
AUCD; Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America; Autism
Society of America; Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law;
Blind Veterans Association; Brain Injury Association of
America; Breast Cancer Network of Strength; Care4Dystonia,
Inc.; Catholic Charities Disabilities Services; Central
Conference of American Rabbis; Children and Adults with
Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder; Common Cause;
Community Action Partnership; Community Health Charities of
America; Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities, CCD; COPD
Foundation; Council for Learning Disabilities; Council of
State Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation, CSAVR.
Disabled American Veterans; Disciples Justice Action
Network, Disciples of Christ; Division on Developmental
Disabilities; Easter Seals; Enlisted Association of the
National Guard of the United States; Epilepsy Foundation;
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America; Federally Employed
Women, FEW; Friends Committee on National Legislation;
Friends Committee on National Legislation; Friends of the
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research; Guide
Dog Foundation for the Blind, Inc.; Hearing Loss Association
of America; Hindu American Foundation; HR Policy Association;
Human Rights Campaign; Huntington's Disease Society of
America; Hydrocephalus Association; International Franchise
Association; International Union, United Auto Workers;
International Ventilator Users Network; Iraq & Afghanistan
Veterans of America.
Islamic Society of North America; Jewish Council for Public
Affairs; Jewish Labor Committee;p Jewish Reconstructionist
Federation; Jewish War Veterans of the USA; Lambda Legal;
Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, LCCR; Learning
Disabilities Association of America, LDA; Learning
Disabilities of the Council for Exceptional Children; Legal
Momentum; Lupus Foundation of America; March of Dimes; Mental
Health America; Military Officers Association of America;
Military Order of the Purple Heart; Muslim Public Affairs
Council; Myasthenia Gravis Foundation for the Blind, Inc.
NAACP; NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc.;
National Advocacy Center of the Sisters of the Good Shepherd;
National Alliance on Mental Illness, NAMI; National Alopecia
Areata Foundation; National Association for Black Veterans;
National Association for Employment of People who are Blind,
NAEPB; National Association for Uniformed Services; National
Association of Community Health Charities; National
Association of Councils on Developmental Disabilities;
National Association of Governors' Committees on People with
Disabilities, NAGC; National Association of Law Students with
Disabilities; National Association of Manufacturers; National
Association of State Head Injury Administrators; National
Association of the Deaf; National Center for Environmental
Health Strategies, Inc.; National Center for Learning
Disabilities, NCLD; National Coalition of Mental Health
Consumer Survivor Organizations; National Congress of Black
Women, Inc.; National Council for Community Behavioral
Healthcare; National Council for Support of Disability
Issues; National Council of Churches.
National Council of Jewish Women; National Council of
Jewish Women; National Council of La Raza, NCLR; National
Council on Disability; National Council on Independent
Living, NCIL; National Disability Rights Network, NDRN;
National Down Syndrome Congress; National Down Syndrome
Society; National Education Association; National Employment
Lawyers Association; National Fair Housing Alliance; National
Family Caregivers Association; National Federation of
Filipino American Associations, NaFFAA; National Health
Council, National Industries for the Blind, NIB; National
Kidney Foundation, National Legal Aid and Defender
Association; National Marfan Foundation; National Multiple
Sclerosis; Society National Organization for Women.
National Organization on Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, NOFAS;
National Partnership for Women and Families; National
Psoriasis Foundation; National Rehabilitation Association;
National Respite Coalition; National Restaurant Association;
National Spinal Cord Injury Association; National Vocational
Evaluation and Career Assessment Professionals, VECAP;
National Women's Law Center; National Youth Leadership
Network; Naval Reserve Association; NETWORK: A National
Catholic Social Justice Lobby; Non-Commissioned Officers
Association; Osteogenesis Imperfecta Foundation; Paralyzed
Veterans of America; Parent Project Muscular Dystrophy;
People For the American Way; Post-Polio Health International;
Presbyterian Church, U.S.A., Washington Office; Prevent
Blindness America.
RESOLVE: The National Infertility Association; Self
Advocates Becoming Empowered; Sikh American Legal Defense and
Education Fund, SALDEF; Sjogren's Syndrome Foundation;
Society for Human Resource Management; Spina Bifida
Association; TASH: The Arc of the United States; The Autistic
Self-Advocacy Network; The Council of Parent Attorneys and
Advocates, Inc.; The Episcopal Church; The International Post
Polio Support Organization; The International Post-Polio Task
Force; The LAM Foundation; The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society;
The National Foundation for Ectodermal Dysplasias; The Paget
Foundation; The Salvation Army, United States; The Workmen's
Circle/Arbeter Ring.
U.S. Chamber of Commerce; Union for Reform Judaism;
Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations; United
Cerebral Palsy; United Church of Christ, Justice and Witness
Ministries; United Jewish Communities; United Methodist
Church, General Board of Church and Society; United Spinal
Association; United States Conference of Catholic Bishops;
United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism; US Psychiatric
Rehabilitation Association; Us TOO International; Veterans of
Modern Warfare; Vietnam Veterans of America.
____________________
HONORING THE ESSEXVILLE-HAMPTON BOARDS OF EDUCATION
______
HON. DALE E. KILDEE
of michigan
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Mr. KILDEE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the men and
women of the Essexville-Hampton School District for their service on
the district's boards of education. For over 50 years these men and
women have been instrumental in shaping the minds and lives of
Essexville-Hampton students. A reception will be held at Garber High
School on July 14 to honor all the board of education members that
served between 1957 and 2008.
Garber High School was named in honor of the Garber family. The
family has a tradition of promoting education in the Essexville area
and donated land to the school district. In
[[Page 14879]]
keeping with this tradition, Melissa Garber, a family member, was the
first female board of education member serving on the Essexville Board
of Education in the 1890s.
The board members, past and present, that will be honored on July 14
are: Marilyn S. Abbs, Terrence R. Adcock, Bryan L. Augustine, Wilford
D. Barber, Gary O. Bartow, Harold I. Blumenstein, Michael J. Brancheau,
Richard D. Colony, Lowell R. Cuthbert, Frank H. Davenport, John
Debbink, Jennifer T. Duncan, John K. Duncan, Oscar Duyck, Reese Evans,
E. Heric Fehrenbach, Victor A. Gansser, Lawrence R. Gordon, John W.
Grigg, William F. Gross, Margaret A. Hanson, Mark M. Jaffe, Eugene H.
Kramer, Bradford T. Light, Vagn A. Littrup, David A. Lovely, Clifford
F. Mader, Ronald P. Maes, William R. Mahoney, John A. Martin, Donald J.
Massnick, Margaret F. Morand, Karl D. Newingham, Austin P. Nickel,
Frank C. Niemann, George L. Oliver, Gerald W. Pergande, Joseph E.
Pergande, Charles C. Rochow, Michael D. Rowley, Daniel L. Santistevan,
Jack A. Shaw, Robert N. Shuster, Richard J. Somalski, Melvin E.
Steggall, Edward P. Trahan, Jill M. Urban, Gregory S. Wagner, Louis W.
Westover, Dena J. Wirt, Gary Young, Eric W. Zimostrad, Gary N. Zube.
Madam Speaker, I ask the House of Representatives to rise with me and
applaud the wonderful service provided by these board members since
1957. As a former teacher, I know first hand the impact boards of
education have on shaping the curriculum, culture, and structure of our
schools. I congratulate the Essexville-Hampton Board of Education for
the work they have accomplished over the years.
____________________
CONGRATULATING SALLYANNE AND HAROLD ROSENN, 2008 RECIPIENTS OF THE
MONSIGNOR McGOWAN CORNERSTONE AWARD
______
HON. PAUL E. KANJORSKI
of pennsylvania
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Mr. KANJORSKI. Madam Speaker, I rise today to ask you and my esteemed
colleagues in the House of Representatives to pay tribute to Sallyanne
and Harold Rosenn, the recipients of the Monsignor McGowan Cornerstone
Award for their years of service to Northeastern Pennsylvania.
This prestigious award was created by the collaborative efforts of
various nonprofit organizations in northeast Pennsylvania as well as
the mid-Atlantic region that prospered from Monsignor McGowan's aid.
The Monsignor McGowan Cornerstone Award is presented annually to an
individual whose tireless efforts in the areas of service, leadership,
humanitarianism, and philanthropy make them an invaluable resource to
their community.
Sallyanne and Harold Rosenn are textbook examples of kindness and
dedication. Harold Rosenn received his law degree from the University
of Michigan in 1941 and enlisted in the United States Air Force shortly
after, earning three medals for his service.
Mrs. Sallyanne Rosenn met her husband when she was the executive
director of the Girl Scouts while he was chairman to the Community
Chest, predecessor of the United Way. This is the first of many
positions she held that were dedicated to helping the area's youth. She
was employed as field and camp director of the Wyoming Valley Council
of Girl Scouts and served as president of the Penn's Woods Girl Scout
Council; the Council on Juvenile Justice and Youth Service Commission
of Luzerne County.
Mrs. Rosenn was the recipient of the Woman of the Year Award from the
National Council of Jewish Women in 1961. She received the Hannah G.
Solomon Award in 1966, and the Woman of the Year Award from the Seekers
of Mercy. She was also the first woman to run for the office of
councilwoman in Kingston, in which she served a full term.
Harold Rosenn has held the position of commander of the Kingston
American Legion Post No. 395 where he started a blood donor program
which would eventually be adopted as the American Legion Blood Donor
Program for Pennsylvania. He has chaired the United Way Campaign of the
Wyoming Valley, twice chaired the United Jewish Campaign and served as
chairman and president of Temple Israel. He also served on the boards
of United Penn Bank, Franklin First Savings Bank, and Governor George
Leader's nursing homes.
His community bonds extend to not only public service, but
appreciation for the education of the region's youth. He has been
extensively involved with his wife's alma mater, Misericordia
University. He served as a member of Misericordia's board of trustees
for almost 25 years and became a Director Emeritus in 1985. The plaza
in the center of campus has been named ``Rosenn Plaza'' in their honor
and they were the first recipients of the Trustees Award for their
dedication. Atty. Rosenn was awarded an honorary doctorate of law
degree and the McAuley Medal in 1991.
Madam Speaker, please join me in congratulating Sallyanne and Harold
Rosenn on this auspicious occasion. Their inexhaustible efforts and
dedication to community service is an inspiration to all.
____________________
A TRIBUTE TO LIEUTENANT VIRGIL BROWN
______
HON. DORIS O. MATSUI
of california
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Ms. MATSUI. Madam Speaker, I rise today in recognition of Virgil
Brown's 30 years of service to the Sacramento Police Department.
Lieutenant Brown leaves a lasting legacy in Sacramento and his
leadership and expertise will be deeply missed. I ask all my colleagues
to join me in honoring one of Sacramento's finest public servants.
Lieutenant Brown began his career with the Sacramento Police
Department as a community service officer in June 1978. By December of
that year Lieutenant Brown was promoted to the rank of police officer
in the Patrol Division. During his time on patrol his work ethic
distinguished himself from others and in 1983 he tested for and was
assigned to the Crime Suppression Unit where he had a 92 percent
conviction rate. In 1989 he was promoted to detective in the Special
Investigation Division During his time as detective he conducted major
multi-jurisdictional narcotic investigations, resulting in the arrest
of many suspects and the recovery of thousands of pounds of cocaine and
hundreds of thousands of dollars.
In 1995 Lieutenant Brown was assigned to the Office of the Chief
Criminal Intelligence Unit where he worked with the Secret Service and
sat on the Greater Sacramento Area Taskforce on Hate Crimes. Over the
next few years Lieutenant Brown continued to distinguish himself on all
of his assignments and was promoted to the rank of sergeant. In 1999 he
was assigned to the North Area Patrol Division, and was promoted to his
current rank of lieutenant, assigned to the Office of Operation in 2006
where he currently works as a watch commander for the south and east
areas of Sacramento.
During his tenure with the Sacramento Police Department Lieutenant
Brown has been honored for his hard work and dedication to Sacramento's
safety. In 1991 he was named Narcotic Officer of the Year by H.I.P.,
the Joint Narcotic Investigation Taskforce of the Sacramento Police
Department and the Sacramento Sheriff's Department. That same year he
was awarded a Certificate of Appreciation in recognition for the
narcotic investigation of Oscar Garcia Escobar, Cali Cartel cocaine
trafficker. In 1994 Lieutenant Brown was honored with a Special Award
of Honor in recognition of his outstanding accomplishments in the field
of Narcotic Law Enforcement by the International Narcotic Enforcement
Officers Association in New York and was named the Narcotics Officer of
the Year by the California Narcotic Officers Association.
Madam Speaker, I am honored to pay tribute to Lieutenant Virgil
Brown's distinguished commitment to law enforcement and Sacramento's
safety. Lieutenant Brown's outstanding leadership and dedication to the
Sacramento Police Department, has reduced crime and made Sacramento a
better and safer place for us to live and work. We all are thankful for
his efforts. As Lieutenant Brown's colleagues, family and friends
gather to honor his service, I ask all my colleagues to join me in
wishing him continued good fortune in his future endeavors.
____________________
H.R. 6304, FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE AMENDMENTS ACT
______
HON. BETTY McCOLLUM
of minnesota
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Madam Speaker I rise in opposition to H.R.
6304, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Amendments Act (FISA).
There is no question that we need to modernize the laws that govern
U.S. intelligence to protect our national security, but we must also
rigorously defend civil liberties and ensure accountability.
That is why I am strongly opposed to any retroactive immunity for
those telecommunications companies that are charged with violating
those fundamental rights.
[[Page 14880]]
Legal experts concur that President Bush's wiretapping program was,
and is, in violation of the Constitution and applicable federal law.
Congress as a whole was kept in the dark for years about these
activities.
It is our responsibility to protect innocent Americans who expect
that their communications will remain private, except in circumstances
provided under the law. Corporations that handed over their customers'
records, without a valid court order or other legal instrument
authorized by statute, undermined fundamental civil protections and
privacy rights of Americans.
The courts should not be prevented from ruling on the legality of the
actions taken by these corporations. And Congress should not meddle in
the pending lawsuits.
Yes, we need to replace the outdated and controversial Protect
America Act (S. 1927) and enable timely intelligence gathering against
terrorists. But we must also ensure that power cannot be abused to
violate our most precious freedoms.
Since the tragedy of September 11, the Bush administration has abused
its intelligence gathering powers. In 2005, we learned that the
government had circumvented intelligence laws to spy on Americans'
phone conversations. Last year, an investigation found that the FBI had
misused tools intended to fight terrorism to conduct unrelated domestic
surveillance. And earlier this year, reports have surfaced that the FBI
requested thousands of phone records to cover up its previous abuses,
and that this and other questionably obtained data is being compiled by
the National Security Agency in a massive data-mining operation about
which we know almost nothing.
I cannot in good conscience vote for this bill, which gives the Bush
administration even broader spying powers.
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Amendments Act implicitly gives
retroactive immunity to telecommunication companies that facilitated
warrantless wiretapping over the last 7 years and ensures the dismissal
of all cases pending against telecommunication companies.
Furthermore, H.R. 6304 permits the government to conduct mass,
untargeted surveillance of all communication coming into and out of the
United States, without any individualized review, and without any
finding of wronging doing.
This act permits only minimal court oversight and court review is
further trivialized by authorizing the Government to continue a
surveillance program even after an application is denied by the court.
The legislation also contains a loophole that permits the Government
to start spying and wait for up to 7 days to go to court and obtain a
warrant.
Congress should not allow for the warrantless wiretapping of American
citizens. Ensuring our national security must not come at the expense
of our basic civil liberties. We can protect our Nation and our rights.
____________________
EXPRESSING CONDOLENCES ON THE PASSING OF ONESEPHOR PETER (O.P.)
BROUSSARD
______
HON. GENE GREEN
of texas
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today to extend my
deepest sympathies to the family of Onesephor Peter Broussard, a
constituent and citizen of Pleasantville, Texas, and a tireless civil
rights advocate, who passed away June 25, 2008, at the age of 81.
Born in Louisiana to sharecropper parents, Mr. Broussard served in a
segregated Army unit during World War II, in the battalion known as the
Black Panthers. After returning to the States, Mr. Broussard served as
a union organizer at Armco Steel, where he worked for 35 years.
But what truly distinguished Mr. Broussard, was his endless fight for
civil rights, specifically for the integration of the Houston
Independent School District. In 1966, Mr. Broussard and his wife filed
a lawsuit against HISD to stop a project that would encourage de facto
segregation. The suit eventually went to the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of
Appeals, where the judges unfortunately refused to halt the program.
Despite this, Mr. Broussard's eldest son, Richard Broussard, became the
first African-American freshman at McReynolds High School in the Fifth
Ward of Houston, TX. It was only thanks to his father's tireless
struggle that Richard, and his siblings, were able to gain the good
education that their father had never had.
In addition to this civil rights work, Mr. Broussard served as an
officer in the Pleasantville Civic League, and as director of the Gulf
Coast Community Action Board and the Community Development Commission.
He dedicated his life to helping others, and this made him a true
leader in every way. O.P. was a civil rights pioneer and a good friend.
He will be greatly missed by the Pleasantville community and by all
those who knew him, and I ask that you remember the Broussard family in
your thoughts and prayers.
____________________
SUPREME COURT'S DECISION IN BOUMEDIENE ET AL. v. BUSH
______
HON. GWEN MOORE
of wisconsin
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin. Madam Speaker, the Supreme Court's recent
decision in Boumediene et al. v. Bush has again shown a spotlight on
this administration's misguided attempts to rewrite the Constitution to
suit its own ends. Once again, the Court has spoken up for the
Constitution and against attempts to do an end run around the venerable
document.
In this important decision, the Court found that those at Guantanamo
Bay ``have the constitutional privilege of habeas corpus'' and are
``not barred from seeking the writ . . . because they have been
designated as enemy combatants or because of their presence at
Guantanamo'' and struck down attempts by the 109th Congress and the
President to prevent detainees from using this historic writ to
challenge their detention in court.
In its ruling, the Court again reminds us ``that the Framers
considered the writ a vital instrument for the protection of individual
liberty'' as well as a safeguard of the separation of powers provided
in the Constitution.
This decision marks at least the third time in which the Supreme
Court has acted to overturn disastrous and controversial Bush
Administration policies regarding the treatment of enemy combatants.
These policies have helped to make Guantanamo a negative symbol of
America around the world.
While I strongly believe that dangerous terrorists should and must be
detained, the confusing, conflicting, and sometimes illegal policies at
Guantanamo and the actions of the Supreme Court time and again clearly
indicate a need for change. These changes must include the closing of
the detention facilities at Guantanamo and an end to the torture and
detention policies that have tarnished America's image, drawn
condemnation from our allies, and done little to help bring to justice
those responsible for acts of terrorism against our country.
Prolonged indefinite imprisonment without charges and torture are out
of line with the traditions and values of the U.S. While the Supreme
Court decision will now ensure that Habeas Corpus will be available so
that an independent court can review the facts and make a determination
of whether individuals should be detained, the administration's other
policies also need to be reformed.
Last year, in the FY 2008 Defense Authorization bill, Congress urged
the administration to ensure that detainees at Guantanamo Bay, to the
maximum extent possible, are charged and expeditiously prosecuted for
crimes committed against the U.S. The bill also urged the
administration to carry out operations at Guantanamo Bay ``in a way
that upholds the national interest and core values of the American
people'' and called for the Defense Department to provide Congress with
its plan for each detainee--whether they have or will be charged,
whether they will be released or transferred, or whether they will be
detained.
In light of the recent ruling and continuing controversy regarding
this facility, Congress can and must go further to ensure that this
facility is closed.
Closing Guantanamo won't immediately repair the damage done by the
detention and other policies that have undermined America's image even
among some of our allies. Such a move may open up a host of new
questions of what to do about those detained there. However, rather
than putting that important question to an administration which our
courts have repeatedly had to check, the Court's ruling creates another
opportunity for Congress to Act.
And one of its first steps should be putting Guantanamo out of
business while holding accountable those prisoners at Guantanamo who
represent real danger to the U.S. We can and should do so in a way that
does not require us to switch off the Constitution, our values, or
[[Page 14881]]
our Nation's strong tradition of ensuring access to the courts and
justice.
In the decision, Justice Kennedy, writing for the majority, warned of
the dangers of allowing either the legislative or executive branch to
``switch the Constitution on or off at will.''
In pursuing terrorists, we cannot undermine the very freedoms and
rights that are the basis for our democracy. Our national security
interests are best served when we interrogate and try terrorist
suspects in a manner that comports with our values, produces
convictions that will withstand appeals, and honors longstanding
international commitments.
____________________
THE ``MICHAEL BILIRAKIS DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS SPINAL CORD
INJURY CENTER''
______
HON. CLIFF STEARNS
of florida
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Mr. STEARNS. Madam Speaker, I am proud to stand before my colleagues
today as we pass legislation that will designate the Department of
Veterans Affairs spinal cord injury center in Tampa, Florida, as the
``Michael Bilirakis Department of Veterans Affairs Spinal Cord Injury
Center.''
Michael Bilirakis served the Ninth Congressional District of Florida
from 1983-2006. Michael was a standout member of the United States
House of Representatives, and his presence is surely missed on Capitol
Hill. A native of my home State of Florida, Michael worked steadfastly
for his constituents for 23 years, and his lifetime of civic-minded
public service has not gone unnoticed.
I had the pleasure of serving on the House Veterans' Affairs
Committee with Michael, and his leadership as chairman of the VA
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations was unparalleled. A
veteran of the United States Air Force, Michael spent his career
working hard to serve the best interests of our Nation's veterans.
Michael's strong traditional values and service-oriented spirit were
always visible in his everyday work on Capitol Hill.
It is truly appropriate and deserving then, for Congress to name the
VA spinal cord injury center in Tampa, Florida after Michael Bilirakis,
and I thank my colleague and fellow Florida delegation member Jeff
Miller for sponsoring this legislation.
____________________
RECOGNIZING THE LAND OF LAKES BOYS CHOIR FOR A SILVER AT THE WORLD
CHOIR GAMES
______
HON. MICHELE BACHMANN
of minnesota
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Mrs. BACHMANN. Madam Speaker, I rise to honor the Land of Lakes Boys
Choir, headquartered in Elk River, Minnesota, for their exemplary
musical achievements and the pride and inspiration they instill in our
community.
The Land of Lakes Boys Choir is an extremely talented group of boys
who have brought global recognition to the great State of Minnesota.
These children have worked tirelessly to perfect their skills and
talents, participating in many prestigious competitions. They attended
the World Choir Games in Germany, France, and Austria and recently
received a silver medal there. And they will also be going to the 2008
Olympics in Beijing, China.
Since 1976, this choir program has helped many boys pursue their
passion for music. In 2004, the Land of Lakes Boys Choir received the
International Trebby Award for ``Best Boys' Choir Album'' with its CD
``Steal Away.'' And most recently, in 2006, it was awarded the Grand
Champion of Cruise Festivals Music Festivals, for their outstanding
performance.
This organization has been a helpful extracurricular program for many
young boys, teaching them self-discipline, character and leadership.
The individuals who have sacrificed their time to train and work with
these boys should also be recognized for their continued efforts to
mentor these children.
Madam Speaker, it is my honor to recognize and congratulate the Land
of Lakes Boys Choir for its tremendous achievements in music and
community service. I know that I join so many in Minnesota when I say
that I am proud to have these boys as American ambassadors at this
year's Olympic Games.
____________________
IN RECOGNITION OF JOHN M. HAIRSTON
______
HON. DENNIS J. KUCINICH
of ohio
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor of John M.
Hairston and in recognition of his outstanding leadership, vision and
dedication to empowering those around him at the NASA Glenn Research
Center in Cleveland, Ohio.
Mr. Hairston earned his first degree in English from Bluefield State
College and later went on to earn his master's degree in Education
Administration from Cleveland State University. He also attended the
John F. Kennedy School of Public Policy at Harvard University. Prior to
working at NASA, Mr. Hairston worked in the Cleveland Metropolitan
School District for almost thirty years, where he served as an English
teacher, Staff Development Director and Chief of the Community
Relations Department.
Mr. Hairston's leadership has been vital in the success of the NASA
Glenn Research Center. He worked tirelessly to promote scientific
literacy and to develop outreach programs that help economically
disadvantaged communities and businesses. Mr. Hairston worked within
NASA as the Acting Assistant Administrator for the Office of Education.
His guidance helped to ensure that NASA's educational programs were
effective. Mr. Hairston has worked to make manifest NASA's vision of
educating the next generation of explorers by developing criteria to
ensure that their programs are effective and that they attract students
from all of Cleveland's diverse communities. He succeeded in developing
strong partnerships between the NASA Glenn Research Center and Greater
Cleveland Community.
Mr. Hairston has been the recipient of numerous awards for his
outstanding work at the NASA Glenn Research Center. NASA honored him
several times by awarding him with the Exceptional Achievement Medal,
the Medal for Outstanding Leadership, and their Education Distinguished
Service Award. He has also been the recipient of the Presidential Rank
Award and the Leadership Cleveland Civic Volunteer of the Year award.
Madam Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honor of John M.
Hairston and in recognition of his outstanding leadership and vision.
May his dedication to his work and to the community serve as an example
for us all.
____________________
HONORING THE LIFE OF DR. JAMES ROBERT ``BOB'' WOOLSEY, JR.
______
HON. TRAVIS W. CHILDERS
of mississippi
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Mr. CHILDERS. Madam Speaker, I rise to pay respect to the life and
accomplishments of a fellow Mississippian who was tragically taken from
us Wednesday, July 9th, 2008. Dr. James Robert ``Bob'' Woolsey, Jr.,
72, was a man of great accomplishment. He is survived by his wife, five
sons, two daughters, and his four grandchildren. Dr. Woolsey was
involved in community and civic activity throughout his life. He was a
member of the United States Navy as well as an Eagle Scout, a Mason,
and a member Oxford University United Methodist Church. He was
dedicated to his chosen field and went on to become the Director of the
Center for Marine Resources and Environmental Technology and the Seabed
Technology Research Center at The University of Mississippi. Throughout
his life, Dr. Woolsey served his country, his state, and even the
international community during his tenure with the United Nations as a
consulting geologist. I thank my colleagues for remembering Dr. Woolsey
and his family at this time.
____________________
TRIBUTE TO AMBASSADOR ROY HUFFINGTON
______
HON. DAVID DREIER
of california
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, last Friday marked the passing of a
tremendous life. Ambassador Roy Huffington lived 90 very full years. He
was larger than life. Roy was an entrepreneur, a veteran, a
philanthropist, a husband and father, and a patriot. To me, he was a
dear friend.
He first served his country in the Navy in World War II. When he
returned, he struck out on his own in the energy business and pioneered
the development of the industry in Indonesia. He was enormously
successful in everything he did, and he used his success to
[[Page 14882]]
give back to society. The charities he founded and supported raised
millions for good causes.
President George H.W. Bush appointed Roy as Ambassador to Austria in
the early 1990s, a critical time for the region. His tenure saw the
fall of the Berlin Wall and the beginnings of real democracy in Eastern
and Central Europe. Roy used his position to forge relationships
between Eastern and Western Europe and to encourage the investment that
was necessary to build up former Soviet states and create new
opportunities for the people who had lived so long under tyranny. He
continued this work until his passing. I have fond memories of times we
spent together in Davos at the World Economic Forum. He never missed
one of those annual meetings.
I had the privilege of getting to know Roy and his wonderful wife
Phyllis as we campaigned for their son, our former colleague Michael,
as he was running for the United States Senate. Roy and Phyllis were
incredibly warm, boisterous, funny and down-to-earth. When Phyllis
passed away 5 years ago, everyone who knew her felt the terrible loss.
Roy's unexpected passing on Friday was a tragic loss for the family and
friends who loved him. We take comfort in the fact that he lived every
day with a tremendous zeal for life.
____________________
THE INTRODUCTION OF THE TIMELY DUE PROCESS FOR THE DISABLED ACT
______
HON. KATHY CASTOR
of florida
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Ms. CASTOR. Madam Speaker, today I rise to begin to address an
overwhelming problem currently faced by far too many of our most
vulnerable neighbors by introducing the Timely Due Process for the
Disabled Act.
Every year, thousands of Americans lose the ability to work due to
illness or injury. But as paychecks stop coming in, bills do not. For
many of these people, the only thing that can prevent them from having
to share their time between medical treatment and phone calls from
collection agencies and attempts to avoid foreclosure is Social
Security Disability Insurance (SSDI).
But, today, the system of enrolling in SSDI is broken. The average
wait for an Administrative Law Judge hearing to contest a faulty
disability determination has climbed in the past 8 years from an
already outrageous 275 days to 481 days, with 28% of claims taking over
600 days to receive a hearing. This figure does not even include the
initial determination, and reconsideration phases, which together push
the average wait time for an Appeals Hearing case to well over 2 years.
One of my constituents called my office in Tampa, frantic that his
home was in foreclosure proceedings, and though he knew he was eligible
for Disability, he simply had not been given a hearing. Facing the
prospect of homelessness with a young daughter, he still was not able
to break through the crushing bureaucracy that has taken over the
Disability appeals process.
One woman I worked with had had multiple surgeries due to
debilitating problems with her spine. She was in excruciating pain, and
was completely unable to work, but was denied disability payments. The
Social Security Administration eventually conceded that she was, in
fact, eligible for disability payments. But before that happened, she
had to endure three long years of financial uncertainty, near
bankruptcy, and the near repossession of her home.
Another constituent of mine was diagnosed with Parkinson's disease.
She started to have balance problems. At one point she lost her balance
and was injured in a bad fall. Still, she was denied disability. Her
husband had to come out of retirement to take a part-time job in order
to avoid financial ruin while they waited, and waited, and waited for
their appeals hearing. Finally, the Social Security Administration came
back and said that yes, she should have been receiving payments for
years.
A system that leaves our neighbors in limbo while their financial
problems continue to mount is not a system that is working. The Timely
Due Process for the Disabled Act will begin to move us in the right
direction by setting a standard of treatment for disability patients.
It instructs the Social Security Administration to, within 5 days of
receiving an appeal, set a date for a hearing. After a 60-day time
period for claimants to prepare and gather evidence, the hearing must
be held within 15 days. A final determination will be required in
another 15 days. These benchmarks are ambitious, but they are not out
of line with timeliness requirements in other agencies.
The Timely Due Process for the Disabled Act will also allow a more
complete picture of the magnitude of the problems inherent in the
system. It requires local offices to share more data about the first
phase of the appeals process, the reconsideration phase. While SSA
already reports data about the initial claims phase, the Administrative
Law Judge hearing phase, and the appeals council, which is the last
level of appeals, there is far less data available about the
reconsideration phase that takes place at the State disability offices.
This is the first level of appeal, and in many cases, is a formality
where the same office that denied the claim looks at the same material
again, eating up an additional average of about 2 months time. This
bill will give a clearer idea of how long these reconsiderations are
taking, and how we can speed them up.
Ultimately, the way we treat people with disabilities reflects the
values we have as a nation. Over the past 8 years, that treatment has
gone from bad to worse, leaving thousands of Americans who need help to
struggle on without it. I urge my colleagues to support the Timely Due
Process for the Disabled Act and begin to place a priority on doing
right by our neighbors who need us the most.
____________________
INTRODUCTION OF THE RECREATIONAL PERFORMANCE OUTERWEAR APPAREL ACT OF
2008
______
HON. EARL BLUMENAUER
of oregon
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, today I am introducing the
Recreational Performance Outerwear Apparel Act of 2008. This bill
eliminates import duties on recreational-use performance outerwear
apparel while simultaneously enhancing an established, U.S.-based
training and education program for American textile and apparel
workers. The legislation is the result of a successful partnership
between importers of performance outerwear and the U.S. domestic
textile and apparel industry.
In a recent report, the U.S. International Trade Commission recently
found that there was no commercially viable U.S. production of
performance outerwear used for skiing and snowboarding, hunting and
other outdoor activities. This legislation reflects the findings of
that report, while also investing in U.S. jobs. It provides duty free
treatment for qualifying recreational-use performance outerwear and it
establishes the Sustainable Textile and Apparel Research, STAR, fund.
The STAR fund invests in a training program that specializes in lean
manufacturing technologies and supply chain analysis, including helping
companies work towards minimizing energy and water use, reducing waste
and carbon emissions and incorporating sustainable practices into a
product's entire life cycle.
By reducing tariffs, my legislation reduces costs for American
consumers and for American companies importing these goods; by
investing in the textile industry, my legislation supports American
jobs and competitiveness; and by researching environmental aspects of
textile manufacture and supply, my legislation improves environmental
outcomes.
____________________
UPHOLDING THE KEMP-KASTEN AMENDMENT
______
HON. ROBERT B. ADERHOLT
of alabama
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from New
Jersey, the Honorable Chris Smith for his work on this important issue.
It is a privilege to work alongside him in the fight for the lives of
the unborn children in our country and around the world.
I want to remind this body and the American public about the need to
spend taxpayer funds in a responsible manner by upholding the
provisions of the Kemp-Kasten Amendment.
According to the Congressional Research Service, ``In 13 of the past
22 years the United States has not contributed to the [United Nations
Population Fund] as a result of executive branch determinations that
UNFPA's program in China was in violation of the Kemp-Kasten amendment
banning U.S. aid to organizations involved in the management of
coercive family planning programs.''
On June 26, 2008, President Bush issued a determination that because
China continues its policy of coercive abortions and forced
sterilizations, the provisions of the Kemp-Kasten Amendment continue to
prohibit the funding of UNFPA. Nearly $7 million of the $39.6 million
appropriated for this organization in the Fiscal Year 2008 State and
Foreign Operations Appropriations Act will now be transferred to the
Global Health and Child Survival account.
[[Page 14883]]
U.S. foreign aid is meant to help those in less fortunate
circumstances with the generosity and goodwill of America; it must not
be tainted with coerced abortion, forced sterilizations, and draconian
family-limiting policies. We seek to eliminate human rights abuses, not
promote them under the guise of our aid.
Since China initiated its one-child policy in 1980, countless women
have been traumatized and terrorized by their government. A 2005
article in Time magazine by Hannah Beech, detailed one family's
situation: ``When family-planning officials came to fetch [Hu] in May
for a forced sterilization, [she] escaped with her two daughters to her
parents' home in another village. Several days later, seven officials
showed up, she says, grabbed her younger child and shoved the girl into
a car. Afraid that her daughter would be abducted, Hu jumped into the
vehicle with them. The car drove to the local family-planning clinic,
where, Hu says, nurses threw her onto an operating table. `Other people
were fine after their operations, but it hurt me so much, I could
barely stand up,' says Hu, 33. Two weeks later, doctors operated again
and promised things would heal better. But even today, Hu doubles over
in pain after just a few steps. `They told me they were doing this for
my own good,' says Hu. `But they have ruined my life.' ''
In April 2007, National Public Radio (NPR) uncovered evidence of
dozens of forced abortions in southwest China, even as late as 9 months
into the pregnancy. According to the NPR report, one family had one
child and believed that--like many other couples--they could pay a fine
and keep their second baby. The wife was 7 months pregnant when 10
family planning officials visited her at home. The husband says they
were threatened and told that if the wife did not go to the hospital
for an abortion that the officials would take her themselves. ``I was
scared,'' the wife told NPR. ``The hospital was full of women who'd
been brought in forcibly. There wasn't a single spare bed. The family
planning people said forced abortions and forced sterilizations were
both being carried out. We saw women being pulled in one by one.''
Madam Speaker, U.S. policy must remain in place that protects women
and their children. We cannot morally participate in and fund programs
that ruin the lives of these women and unborn children. As a member of
the House Committee on Appropriations, I will continue to fight to
maintain the protections offered by the Kemp-Kasten Amendment, and I
look forward to working with my colleagues such as Representative Smith
on these issues.
____________________
DEMOCRACY IN IRAN
______
HON. BOB FILNER
of california
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Mr. FILNER. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of democracy in
Iran and stability in Iraq. We in the United States Congress must work
together for a stable and democratic Iraq. Today, there is undisputable
evidence that Iran is the main contributor to the violence in Iraq
which causes American and Iraqi casualties.
On July 4, Iran fired yet another GRAD missile at Ashraf City, the
residence compound of the Iranian resistance--the People's Mujahadeen
Organization of Iran. Iran's mercenaries in Iraq have also been busy
calling for arrest, trial, and expulsion of these ``protected persons''
living in Ashraf. Our soldiers are protecting Ashraf in accordance with
the Fourth Geneva Convention. Iranian action has therefore endangered
them as well.
I have said many times that the mullahs in Tehran do not hold all the
cards. The Iranian regime's aggressive policies are rooted in the
weakness of their regime. The unrelenting assault on the civil and
human rights of the Iranian people is a direct response to the
illegitimacy of the extremist theocratic government. A military attack
on Iran would be a tragic mistake. Yet, it is an error almost as grave
to think that continued appeasement of the Iranian regime is the only
alternative to war.
Reasonably, Western democracies, with the support of the peace
activist community, should use all peaceful means possible to isolate
the Iranian regime and to avoid war. However, the desire for a peaceful
resolution of this crisis has led into policy choices which provide
Iran with the legitimacy it craves and a strengthened diplomatic hand.
The most notable remnant of the West's unsuccessful attempt at
``engagement'' with Iran is the designation of the People's Mujahedeen
Organization of Iran, also known as the MEK, as a foreign terrorist
organization. The MEK provided significant intelligence that helped
blow the whistle on Iran's clandestine nuclear weapon and missile
development programs.
The MEK has already been removed from the United Kingdom list of
terrorist organizations. Late last month, the British parliament
approved the order put before it by that country's home secretary and
removed the MEK from the UK blacklist. In light of the recent
developments, the United States must seriously consider the court's
findings as well as the present political environment and also remove
the limitations it has placed on the MEK.
We must stop appeasing Iran and shift our support to the Iranian
people. They are our best allies against Iran's aggression. Iranian
people have an unwavering longing for freedom and democracy. We must
work together to acknowledge their resounding rejection of extremism
and move to support their efforts for democracy in Iran.
____________________
SUNSET MEMORIAL
______
HON. TRENT FRANKS
of arizona
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Madam Speaker, I stand once again before this
House with yet other Sunset Memorial.
It is July 14, 2008, in the land of the free and the home of the
brave, and before the sun set today in America, almost 4,000 more
defenseless unborn children were killed by abortion on demand. That's
just today, Madam Speaker. That's more than the number of innocent
lives lost on September 11 in this country, only it happens every day.
It has now been exactly 12,957 days since the tragedy called Roe v.
Wade was first handed down. Since then, the very foundation of this
Nation has been stained by the blood of almost 50 million of its own
children. Some of them, Madam Speaker, cried and screamed as they died,
but because it was amniotic fluid passing over the vocal cords instead
of air, we couldn't hear them.
All of them had at least four things in common. First, they were each
just little babies who had done nothing wrong to anyone, and each one
of them died a nameless and lonely death. And each one of their
mothers, whether she realizes it or not, will never be quite the same.
And all the gifts that these children might have brought to humanity
are now lost forever. Yet even in the glare of such tragedy, this
generation still clings to a blind, invincible ignorance while history
repeats itself and our own silent genocide mercilessly annihilates the
most helpless of all victims, those yet unborn.
Madam Speaker, perhaps it's time for those of us in this Chamber to
remind ourselves of why we are really all here. Thomas Jefferson said,
``The care of human life and its happiness and not its destruction is
the chief and only object of good government.'' The phrase in the 14th
Amendment capsulizes our entire Constitution. It says, ``No State shall
deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of
law.'' Madam Speaker, protecting the lives of our innocent citizens and
their constitutional rights is why we are all here.
The bedrock foundation of this Republic is the clarion declaration of
the self-evident truth that all human beings are created equal and
endowed by their Creator with the unalienable rights of life, liberty
and the pursuit of happiness. Every conflict and battle our Nation has
ever faced can be traced to our commitment to this core, self-evident
truth.
It has made us the beacon of hope for the entire world. Madam
Speaker, it is who we are.
And yet today another day has passed, and we in this body have failed
again to honor that foundational commitment. We have failed our sworn
oath and our God-given responsibility as we broke faith with nearly
4,000 more innocent American babies who died today without the
protection we should have given them.
So Madam Speaker, let me conclude this Sunset Memorial in the hope
that perhaps someone new who heard it tonight will finally embrace the
truth that abortion really does kill little babies; that it hurts
mothers in ways that we can never express; and that 12,957 days spent
killing nearly 50 million unborn children in America is enough; and
that it is time that we stood up together again, and remembered that we
are the same America that rejected human slavery and marched into
Europe to arrest the Nazi Holocaust; and we are still courageous and
compassionate enough to find a better way for mothers and their unborn
babies than abortion on demand.
Madam Speaker, as we consider the plight of unborn America tonight,
may we each remind ourselves that our own days in this sunshine of life
are also numbered and that all too soon each one of us will walk from
these Chambers for the very last time.
And if it should be that this Congress is allowed to convene on yet
another day to come,
[[Page 14884]]
may that be the day when we finally hear the cries of innocent unborn
children. May that be the day when we find the humanity, the courage,
and the will to embrace together our human and our constitutional duty
to protect these, the least of our tiny, little American brothers and
sisters from this murderous scourge upon our Nation called ``abortion
on demand.''
It is July 14, 2008, 12,957 days since Roe versus Wade first stained
the foundation of this Nation with the blood of its own children; this
in the land of the free and the home of the brave.
____________________
SENATE COMMITTEE MEETINGS
Title IV of Senate Resolution 4, agreed to by the Senate on February
4, 1977, calls for establishment of a system for a computerized
schedule of all meetings and hearings of Senate committees,
subcommittees, joint committees, and committees of conference. This
title requires all such committees to notify the Office of the Senate
Daily Digest--designated by the Rules committee--of the time, place,
and purpose of the meetings, when scheduled, and any cancellations or
changes in the meetings as they occur.
As an additional procedure along with the computerization of this
information, the Office of the Senate Daily Digest will prepare this
information for printing in the Extensions of Remarks section of the
Congressional Record on Monday and Wednesday of each week.
Meetings scheduled for Tuesday, July 15, 2008 may be found in the
Daily Digest of today's Record.
MEETINGS SCHEDULED
JULY 16
10 a.m.
Environment and Public Works
Clean Air and Nuclear Safety Subcommittee
To hold hearings to examine the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission's licensing and relicensing processes for
nuclear power plants.
SD-406
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
To hold hearings to examine global nuclear detection
architecture, focusing on ways to build domestic
defenses to combat a possible future attack.
SD-342
Judiciary
To hold hearings to examine the Administration's detainee
policies and the fight against terrorism, focusing on
sound legal foundations.
SD-226
Rules and Administration
To hold hearings to examine administrative and management
operations of the United States Capitol Police.
SR-301
10:30 a.m.
Aging
To hold hearings to examine smart ways Americans can save
for their retirement.
SD-562
11 a.m.
Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe
To hold hearings to examine racism in the 21st century,
focusing on understanding global challenges and
implementing solutions.
B318, Rayburn Building
2 p.m.
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce,
and the District of Columbia Subcommittee
To hold hearings to examine the human capital crisis at
the Department of State, focusing on its global
implications.
SD-342
2:30 p.m.
Armed Services
To receive a closed briefing on the status of
negotiations with Iraq on a strategic framework
agreement and a status of forces agreement.
SR-222
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
Children and Families Subcommittee
To hold hearings to examine childhood obesity, focusing
on declining health of America's next generation (Part
I).
SD-430
Foreign Relations
To hold closed hearings to examine North Korea's
declaration of the Six-Party Talks.
S-407, Capitol
Energy and Natural Resources
Public Lands and Forests Subcommittee
To hold hearings to examine S. 2354, to direct the
Secretary of the Interior to convey 4 parcels of land
from the Bureau of Land Management to the city of Twin
Falls, Idaho, S. 3065, to establish the Dominguez-
Escalante National Conservation Area and the Dominguez
Canyon Wilderness Area, S. 3069, to designate certain
land as wilderness in the State of California, S. 3085,
to require the Secretary of the Interior to establish a
cooperative watershed management program, H.R. 3473, to
provide for a land exchange with the City of Bountiful,
Utah, involving National Forest System land in the
Wasatch-Cache National Forest and to further land
ownership consolidation in that national forest, H.R.
3490, to transfer administrative jurisdiction of
certain Federal lands from the Bureau of Land
Management to the Bureau of Indian Affairs, to take
such lands into trust for Tuolumne Band of Me-Wuk
Indians of the Tuolumne Rancheria, H.R. 3651, to
require the conveyance of certain public land within
the boundaries of Camp Williams, Utah, to support the
training and readiness of the Utah National Guard, H.R.
2632, to establish the Sabinoso Wilderness Area in San
Miguel County, New Mexico, and S. 2448, to amend the
Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 to
make certain technical corrections.
SD-366
JULY 17
9:30 a.m.
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
Investigations Subcommittee
To hold hearings to examine financial institutions
located in offshore tax havens, focusing on ways to
strengthen United States domestic and international tax
enforcement efforts.
SD-106
10 a.m.
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs
Business meeting to markup an original bill entitled,
``The Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability and
Divestment Act of 2008.''.
SD-538
Finance
To hold hearings to examine leveraging innovation to
improve health care quality for all Americans.
SD-215
Indian Affairs
To hold an oversight hearing to examine tracking sex
offenders in Indian country, focusing on tribal
implementation of the Adam Walsh Act (Public Law 109-
248).
SD-562
10:30 a.m.
Environment and Public Works
To hold hearings to examine ways to make the nation's
highways safer for travelers.
SD-408
11:30 a.m.
Judiciary
Business meeting to consider S. 3155, to reauthorize and
improve the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
Act of 1974, S. 2746, to amend section 552(b)(3) of
title 5, United States Code (commonly referred to as
the Freedom of Information Act) to provide that
statutory exemptions to the disclosure requirements of
that Act shall specifically cite to the provision of
that Act authorizing such exemptions, to ensure an open
and deliberative process in Congress by providing for
related legislative proposals to explicitly state such
required citations, S. 3061, to authorize
appropriations for fiscal years 2008 through 2011 for
the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, to
enhance measures to combat trafficking in persons, S.
2838, to amend chapter 1 of title 9 of United States
Code with respect to arbitration, S. 3136, to encourage
the entry of felony warrants into the NCIC database by
States and provide additional resources for
extradition, S. 1276, to establish a grant program to
facilitate the creation of methamphetamine precursor
electronic logbook systems, and S. 3197, to amend title
11, United States Code, to exempt for a limited period,
from the application of the means-test presumption of
abuse under chapter 7, qualifying members of reserve
components of the Armed Forces and members of the
National Guard who, after September 11, 2001, are
called to active duty or to perform a homeland defense
activity for not less than 90 days.
SD-226
2 p.m.
Appropriations
Business meeting to markup proposed legislation making
appropriations for the Departments of State, Foreign
Operations and Related Programs, Agriculture, Rural
Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related
Agencies, and Military Construction and Veterans
Affairs, and Related Agencies for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2009.
SR-325
[[Page 14885]]
2:30 p.m.
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
Disaster Recovery Subcommittee
To hold hearings to examine major disaster recovery
assessing the performance of the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) since October 2007.
SD-342
Foreign Relations
To hold hearings to examine the nominations of Mimi
Alemayehou, of the District of Columbia, to be United
States Director of the African Development Bank,
Kenneth L. Peel, of Maryland, to be United States
Director of the European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development, and Miguel R. San Juan, of Texas, to be
United States Executive Director of the Inter-American
Development Bank.
SD-419
JULY 22
9:30 a.m.
Armed Services
To hold hearings to examine the nominations of Michael
Bruce Donley, of Virginia, to be Secretary, General
Norton A. Schwartz, for reappointment to the grade of
general and to be Chief of Staff, and General Duncan J.
McNabb, for reappointment to the grade of general and
to be Commander, United States Transportation Command,
all of the United States Air Force.
SR-325
10 a.m.
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
To hold hearings to examine ways for America to gain
energy security.
SD-342
JULY 23
9:30 a.m.
Veterans' Affairs
To hold an oversight hearing to examine the Department of
Veterans Affairs, focusing on responding to the needs
of returning United States Guard and Reserve members.
SR-418