[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 1]
[Senate]
[Pages 1177-1186]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




    FAA AIR TRANSPORTATION MODERNIZATION AND SAFETY IMPROVEMENT ACT

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the 
Senate will resume consideration of S. 223, which the clerk will report 
by title.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 223) to modernize the air traffic control 
     system, improve the safety, reliability, and availability of 
     transportation by air in the United States, provide for 
     modernization of the air traffic control system, reauthorize 
     the Federal Aviation Administration, and for other purposes.

  Pending:

       Whitehouse amendment No. 8, to amend title 18, United 
     States Code, to provide penalties for aiming laser pointers 
     at airplanes.

  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, we are continuing this morning on this 
important FAA bill, which is a very important jobs bill for America. I 
know my colleagues have been down on the Senate floor--the chairman of 
the full committee, Senator Rockefeller, and the ranking member, 
Senator Hutchison--and they have been doing a good job of explaining 
why it is so important to move ahead on something that can create 
hundreds of thousands of jobs both in construction at our airports 
across America and on the implementation of the NextGen system, which 
is really about making a digital conversion to air transportation so 
our flights can be safer, so they can be more fuel efficient, and so 
there can be coordination on the ground with the flights and all of our 
transportation systems.
  So this morning we want to keep moving through this process to get 
this

[[Page 1178]]

legislation done so we can get it implemented and start creating jobs 
and improving our air transportation safety.
  I think there are amendments to be offered under the agreement. I 
will yield to my colleague from Mississippi.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Mississippi.


                            Amendment No. 14

  Mr. WICKER. I thank the Senator from Washington, and I thank the 
Presiding Officer.
  I ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendment so that I 
may call up my Wicker amendment No. 14, which is at the desk.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Wicker] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 14.

  Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading 
of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

     (Purpose: To exclude employees of the Transportation Security 
    Administration from the collective bargaining rights of Federal 
                               employees)

       At the appropriate place, insert the following:

     SEC. __. EXCLUSION OF EMPLOYEES OF THE TRANSPORTATION 
                   SECURITY ADMINISTRATION FROM THE COLLECTIVE 
                   BARGAINING RIGHTS OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES.

       (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the 
     ``Termination of Collective Bargaining for Transportation 
     Security Administration Employees Act of 2011''.
       (b) In General.--Section 7103(a) of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2)--
       (A) in clause (iv), by striking ``; or'' and inserting a 
     semicolon;
       (B) in clause (v), by striking the semicolon and inserting 
     ``; or''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(vi) an officer or employee of the Transportation 
     Security Administration of the Department of Homeland 
     Security;''; and
       (2) in paragraph (3)--
       (A) in subparagraph (G), by striking ``; or'' and inserting 
     a semicolon;
       (B) in subparagraph (H), by striking the period and 
     inserting ``; or''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(I) the Transportation Security Administration of the 
     Department of Homeland Security;''.
       (c) Amendments to Title 49.--
       (1) Transportation security administration.--Section 114(n) 
     of title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding ``This 
     subsection shall be subject to the amendments made by the 
     Termination of Collective Bargaining for Transportation 
     Security Administration Employees Act of 2011.'' at the end.
       (2) Personnel management system.--Section 40122 of title 
     49, United States Code, is amended--
       (A) by redesignating subsection (j) as subsection (k); and
       (B) by inserting after subsection (i) the following:
       ``(j) Transportation Security Administration.--
     Notwithstanding any other provision of this section 
     (including subsection (g)(2)(C)), this section shall be 
     subject to the amendments made by the Termination of 
     Collective Bargaining for Transportation Security 
     Administration Employees Act of 2011.''.
       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on the date of enactment of this Act and 
     apply to any collective bargaining agreement (as defined 
     under section 7103(a)(8) of title 5, United States Code) 
     entered into on or after that date, including the renewal of 
     any collective bargaining agreement in effect on that date.

  Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, this amendment deals with the notion of 
collective bargaining by TSA employees. The Transportation Security 
Administration was formed approximately 10 years ago by the Aviation 
and Transportation Security Act of 2001, Public Law 107-71. Since that 
time, Transportation Security Administration employees have fared very 
well. They are a familiar sight in our airports. They are familiar to 
any of us who fly and who frequent the airports of the United States. 
It is a good job, and they are well taken care of.
  During that 10-year period, TSA employees have not been allowed to 
collectively bargain. There is a reason for that. First of all, under 
that act which I referenced, as a compromise back in that day, the 
Under Secretary of Transportation for Security, who is now the TSA 
Administrator, was given the ability to fix the compensation and terms 
thereof, and included in that was the determination about whether 
collective bargaining rights would be afforded to these TSA employees.
  In a 2003 memo, the Under Secretary of Transportation for Security at 
that time prohibited TSA security screeners from unionizing with 
collective bargaining rights. The Under Secretary wrote:

       I hereby determine that individuals carrying out the 
     security screening function under section 44901 of Title 49, 
     United States Code, in light of their critical national 
     security responsibilities, shall not, as a term or condition 
     of their employment, be entitled to engage in collective 
     bargaining or be represented for the purpose of engaging in 
     such bargaining by any representative or organization.

  The determination was made by the predecessor of the TSA 
Administrator that in light of their critical national security 
responsibilities, it was not appropriate for collective bargaining 
rights to be included.
  Now we have every reason to believe that under this new 
administration, that decision is about to be reversed. A decade of 
experience and practice will be ended unless this Congress acts, and 
the appropriate vehicle on which to act is this reauthorization bill 
before us. Wicker amendment No. 14 would simply exclude TSA personnel 
from forming a union with collective bargaining rights. I point out to 
my colleagues that the FBI and the CIA and the Secret Service, which 
all have similar critical national security responsibilities, do not 
have collective bargaining rights either. So the spirit of amendment 
No. 14 would be to continue TSA employees in that same vein.
  TSA workers have fared well indeed during the past decade. It is a 
good job. I enjoy seeing them, I enjoy working with them, and we are 
glad to have them. But for good reason, they have been excluded from 
collective bargaining rights.
  The TSA and TSA leadership need the flexibility to innovate and to 
move quickly during times of national emergency on issues involving the 
security of the traveling public, and for that reason I submit that 
adding the burdensome responsibility of union demands and dealing with 
collective bargaining demands could limit the ability of those 
responsible for the very important function of security at some of the 
most high-risk targets and make it harder for our security personnel to 
do their job.
  So I will be urging my colleagues during this day--we will be urging 
the American people to contact their Senators and to let their voices 
be heard. TSA has worked well in this regard, and we do not need to 
burden it with extra responsibilities when they need to be 
concentrating on security.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Oregon is 
recognized.


                           Protests In Egypt

  Mr. MERKLEY. Mr. President, over the last week, I have watched the 
affairs in Tahrir Square in Cairo, as millions of Americans have, and I 
was deeply impressed by the peaceful demonstration of Egyptian citizens 
calling for change in their nation--change that would respond to the 
economic plight of ordinary citizens, change that would give ordinary 
citizens the opportunity to be a part of the voice directing the course 
of their nation.
  Until yesterday, those protests were absolutely peaceful. But that 
did change yesterday when pro-Mubarak forces entered the fray. Last 
night, I was watching as Molotov cocktails were being thrown by pro-
Mubarak forces down from adjacent buildings onto the protesters below. 
I watched as organized thugs proceeded to stone those protesters. I 
watched as there was sporadic gunfire in the square. I watched as a 
group of horsemen galloped through the crowd whipping people with their 
whips.
  This thuggery against citizens who were peacefully protesting is 
absolutely unacceptable. The United States has had a long and close 
relationship with Egypt. We channel a tremendous amount of economic 
development aid to Egypt. But let me be very clear.

[[Page 1179]]

What happened yesterday cannot happen again. What happened yesterday, 
with thugs attacking peaceful demonstrators on behalf of the government 
must not happen again.
  In no way can America turn a blind eye to this ruthless assault on 
ordinary citizens. This morning, there were voices from within the 
Egyptian Government calling what happened yesterday a fatal error. 
Prime Minister Shafik called it a fatal error. This morning, there were 
signs that the army, instead of allowing and organizing thugs and 
allowing them on the square to assault the demonstrators, was standing 
in to protect them. This is a right turn of events.
  Let it be noted by all who would care to listen that the citizens of 
the United States of America are not going to stand by and support a 
government that is attacking peaceful demonstrators in a square in 
Cairo. If we see a repeat of this violence, America must send a very 
strong message that there will be no further aid to the Mubarak 
government.
  We do not know what the ultimate outcome of these protests will be, 
but peaceful action against government is a hallmark of democracy, a 
hallmark of freedom. We should ensure that those protests could 
continue--those peaceful protests--calling for a voice for ordinary 
citizens, and that Egypt can move toward free and fair elections.
  I yield the floor.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I 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. BLUNT. 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.


                            Amendment No. 5

  Mr. BLUNT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to temporarily set 
aside the pending amendment so I can call up my amendment, No. 5, which 
is at the desk.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Blunt] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 5.

  Mr. BLUNT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the 
amendment be dispensed with.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To require the Under Secretary of Transportation for Security 
   to approve applications from airports to authorize passenger and 
 property screening to be carried out by a qualified private screening 
                                company)

       On page 311, between lines 11 and 12, insert the following:

     SEC. 733. APPROVAL OF APPLICATIONS FOR THE SECURITY SCREENING 
                   OPT-OUT PROGRAM.

       Section 44920(b) of title 49, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking ``The Under Secretary may approve any 
     application submitted under subsection (a).'' and inserting 
     ``Not later than 30 days after receiving an application 
     submitted under subsection (a), the Under Secretary shall 
     approve the application.''

  Mr. BLUNT. Mr. President, this is an amendment that deals with an 
issue going back to the beginning of the TSA screening program, almost 
10 years ago now, at the end of 2001. We had significant discussion 
between the House and the Senate about how that program would run. In 
fact, the House, which I was a Member of at the time and the occupant 
of the chair was a Member of at the time, passed a bill which said the 
screening would continue to be competitive and private and determined 
by local airports. The Senate's view at the time was this was a new 
responsibility that would be taken over everywhere by the Federal 
Government and the TSA.
  The final determination was that, while the Federal Government would 
take this responsibility, there would be allowed to be pilot airports 
that would be determined and be monitored to determine whether a pilot 
project would verify that another alternative would be a competitive, 
private screening as one of the options available to airports. In fact, 
in 2004, the screening partnership program was created.
  The pilots had worked. The verification was that the private 
screeners were performing at a level that was equal to that of the 
government-paid screeners, that the cost was comparable, and that 
airports in the future would be able to apply to go from the 
government-run program to a competitive program, and about 16 airports 
have done that. I think the biggest one is probably the San Francisco 
airport. The Kansas City airport, which I use and that I represent, may 
be the second biggest of those. Rochester, NY, is also in this program, 
as are a number of smaller airports.
  In fact, as recently as a few months ago, the TSA was still telling 
airports and recommended to four airports in Montana--a State where 
seven of their airports are currently in this program--the TSA 
recommended to four more airports in Montana that they look at this 
program as a potential better alternative for them. Only in recent 
weeks did TSA determine in responses to the Springfield, MO airport, 
the four Montana airports, and perhaps as many as a handful of other 
airports that, no, we think that program is big enough. This is an 
option that is no longer available to local airport boards.
  This amendment would reach the conclusion that the local airport 
board is still an important determiner of which system works best in an 
airport. Essentially, this amendment would tell the TSA that if local 
airports apply, the TSA would allow them to become part of the 
screening partnership program and treat them as they are treating the 
16 airports that have been in that program--some for as long as a 
decade now, since the beginning of screening as we see it in airports 
today.
  I hope we get to where we actually give authority back, or maintain 
authority at the local airport level to determine which system works 
better for them. A competitive system allows flexibility, and 
flexibility allows more adaptability, more innovation and, frankly, I 
think, encourages the government-run systems to be more competitive and 
responsive.
  That is why I am offering this amendment. I hope it becomes part of 
this bill, and I look forward to working with the committee on this 
amendment and over the next few days as we continue to debate FAA. This 
has a real impact on a number of the authorities that are under the 
Federal Aviation Administration. I think this is an important time to 
solve this problem. It is one that was created, in my view, totally by 
TSA deciding on their own something that the law never envisioned. I 
was part of that debate a decade ago. I know what the intention was, 
and it was not the intention of the pilot program, or of the 
determination we made at the end of 2001, that TSA would determine for 
local airport authorities what was best for their airport.
  This amendment would require the TSA to work with local airports and 
implement their desire to change from the system they have at the 
time--totally run by TSA--to a system under the screening partnership 
program. That is the essence of this amendment, and I urge its adoption 
and inclusion in this bill.
  I yield the floor.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Brown of Ohio). The clerk will call the 
roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. KIRK. 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. 8

  Mr. KIRK. Mr. President, today I am pleased to join Senator 
Whitehouse, Senator Boxer and a growing list of my colleagues in 
support of the Whitehouse-Kirk-Boxer amendment that will

[[Page 1180]]

improve airline safety throughout the Nation.
  Most individuals are familiar with laser pointers that are often used 
in presentations. What you may not know is the growing danger these 
devices pose to pilots.
  Last month, the FAA released nationwide data on lasers pointed at 
aircraft. From 2009 to 2010, incidents nearly doubled from 1,527, to 
2,836. To show how quickly this has become a problem, when the FAA 
first began to track this problem in 2005, incidents were under 300.
  Transportation Secretary LaHood has acknowledged this is a serious 
safety issue. Lasers can temporarily blind pilots, which is incredibly 
dangerous, but even more so during the critical time of takeoff and 
landing. Advancements in laser technology also are making the problem 
worse. Certain color variations, such as green lasers, are 35 times 
brighter than comparable red lasers.
  This is a particular worry for me and for my State's busiest 
airport--O'Hare. According to the FAA, last year O'Hare had the second-
highest number of laser events in the Nation at 98.
  The Whitehouse-Kirk-Boxer amendment creates new penalties for 
knowingly pointing a laser pointer at an aircraft, or at the flight 
path of an airplane. Commonsense exemptions are provided to allow 
further research and testing activities.
  Current law has not kept up to date with this new threat. It is time 
we give law enforcement and prosecutors additional tools to reduce the 
likelihood of a tragedy.
  The amendment is supported by the Air Line Pilots Association and the 
National Association of Police Organizations which includes the Federal 
Flight Deck Officers Association.
  I thank Senator Whitehouse and his staff for their leadership on this 
issue, and I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan proposal to 
help make our Nation's pilots, and especially their passengers, safer.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
order for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, we are sitting here, and what is good 
is we are not doing health care amendments. What is bad is we are not 
doing any amendments.
  The Republicans have proffered a number of amendments. We need to do 
them by pairs so we can work them out. Some of them will be able to be 
accepted by voice vote. I expect that Senator Whitehouse's on laser use 
into pilots' eyes will probably be accepted by voice vote. But he may 
want a vote. If I were he, I would want a vote because it is so 
important to emphasize the issue.
  But we need to have Democrats--I know we have some amendments that 
Democrats want to offer. But they are not coming to the floor to offer 
those amendments. So this is my plea, through the distinguished 
Presiding Officer, for Democrats please to come to the floor and do 
their amendments.
  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. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. INHOFE. First of all, let me say that the manager has been very 
kind to me in offering to allow me to come up at some point. I do not 
care so much when it is, but I do have two amendments I have already 
discussed on the floor. I would like to get them in the queue so at 
some time we will be able to do that. So I would wait until such time 
as the majority feels it would be appropriate, and then I would be 
asking them if I can do that.
  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I understand the Senator from 
Oklahoma has a particularly difficult scheduling problem right now and 
for most of the afternoon. So putting his amendments in and talking 
about them, whatever he wishes to do, is important to him and also is 
hard to do in terms of the schedule. So that renews my offer, my 
request, my prayer, that Democrats who have amendments will come down 
and offer them.
  It is called the Federal aviation bill. It reauthorizes it. It is 
monumental, and we are kind of sitting here. So the Republicans are 
sort of doing their part, but the Democrats are not doing our part. So 
please come down, if you have amendments, because I wish to accommodate 
not just Senator Inhofe but all others who have amendments, many of 
which we can probably work out.
  Some will be accepted by voice, others may have to be voted on. But 
we have to have amendments before we can get to any of that. So that is 
my request.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, reclaiming my time. First of all, I thank 
you very much. The one set of amendments I have, I would hope to get 
into the managers' amendment or somehow have them come up and even be 
voice voted. But they are issues I have talked about in the past quite 
often. I think we all understand--or most of us do--that when our good 
friend Senator Glenn retired, that left me as the last active 
commercial pilot, on a regular basis, in the Senate. So I have these 
two amendments I am very interested in. I will yield the floor. When 
such time comes--what the Senator from West Virginia said is true. 
Right now, because of the Prayer Breakfast that is taking place, I 
happen to be hosting the African dinner tonight, so I have groups 
coming by every 30 minutes throughout the day.
  At some time today, I wish to be able to get two amendments, Nos. 6 
and 7, in the queue.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas.


                         Remembering Don Tyson

  Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I come to the floor to honor a great man, a 
great Arkansan and a great American, Donald John Tyson.
  Don Tyson was one of the three iconic Arkansans who helped move our 
State forward. Don Tyson, Sam Walton, and J.B. Hunt transformed the 
northwest part of our State and made Arkansas a mecca for business.
  When I think of Don, one of his favorite phrases comes to mind. He 
would say: ``I don't have time to have a bad time.'' Don lived life to 
the fullest and enjoyed every minute of it. Don came to Arkansas in 
very humble circumstances. He was born in Kansas but moved to 
Springdale as an infant when, as Don liked to tell it, his father's 
truck ran out of gas.
  There in Springdale, Don took over the family business when his 
father passed away. Don's hard work helped turn his father's small 
poultry business into the most successful meat processor in the world. 
As chairman of the board and CEO of Tyson Foods, Don revolutionized the 
poultry industry and made protein more accessible to Americans, helping 
create Chicken McNuggets, chicken tenders, chicken sandwiches, and much 
more.
  He was responsible for developing the Rock Cornish game hen, smaller 
birds that weigh only a few pounds that were more profitable but also 
immensely popular. Under Don's leadership, the company's revenue 
increased from $51 million to more than $10 billion.
  As the Washington Post said: ``For many Americans, Tyson products 
became the answer to a daily question: What's for dinner?''
  Even as he rose to great heights, Don remained true to his roots--his 
trademark khaki Tyson uniform with ``Don'' embroidered on the front 
pocket. He referred to all staff members as coworkers, never employees. 
Don understood that the truck drivers and plant workers were as 
essential to Tyson's success as the executives in the corner offices.
  Don was also committed to giving back to his community. A noted 
philanthropist, Don created the Tyson Family Foundation, which provides

[[Page 1181]]

scholarships for students from communities where Tyson Foods operates, 
including many communities in Arkansas.
  Don was a huge supporter of the University of Arkansas, helping fund 
many of the school's educational and athletic programs. He also was a 
great friend to veterans. One of his most recent projects was helping 
preserve the Fayetteville National Cemetery. An avid fisherman and 
devoted conservationist, Don created the Billfish Foundation, which 
promotes catch-and-release practices for billfish to conserve their 
populations. Don's charitable work had a real impact on Arkansas and 
communities across the country.
  Finally, Don understood the importance of family. Tyson Foods has 
always been and remains a family-run business, starting with Don's 
father John Tyson and continuing with his son John. Don's emphasis on 
family, from his father-son collaborations to the way he treated all 
his coworkers as extended family, is what made Tyson Foods great.
  In looking back on Don Tyson's life, I see a man who loved his 
business, who loved his community, who loved his family, and who lived 
life. Today, I join all Arkansans in celebrating a life well lived.
  Don, you will be missed.
  Mr. INHOFE. Will the Senator yield?
  One of the things that is interesting about northwest Arkansas is 
that you were just talking about Don Tyson. You could just as well have 
been talking about Sam Walton, Hunt, and many others.
  I do not know what it is about northwest Arkansas, that these great 
entrepreneurs who changed the world seem to all come from that area, as 
the Senator from Arkansas knows. I am very familiar with that area, 
since my daughter Molly is a professor at the University of Arkansas.
  I have been over there many times. I was just listening to you 
describe the life of Don Tyson and how consistent that is with many of 
the other entrepreneurs. I salute all those guys up there and you for 
bringing that to the floor.
  Mr. PRYOR. I thank the Senator from Oklahoma.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.
  Mr. DURBIN. I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                  REMEMBERING PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN

  Mr. DURBIN. Sunday is the 100th anniversary of the birth of President 
Ronald Reagan.
  When Ronald Reagan was born, his father Jack looked at his new son 
and exclaimed, ``He looks like a fat little Dutchman but who knows, he 
might grow up to be President some day.''
  In fact, Ronald Reagan grew up to become not just a President but one 
of America's most memorable Presidents.
  As we mark the 100th anniversary of his birth, much is being said and 
written about Ronald Reagan's White House years, and understandably so. 
But in my State of Illinois, people are also remembering an earlier 
time in the life of this iconic American.
  Ronald Wilson Reagan is the only American President born in Illinois.
  He entered this world on Feb. 6, 1911, in the little town of Tampico, 
IL, in an apartment above a bakery on Main Street.
  His father Jack sold shoes to support his wife and two sons.
  Over the first 9 years of his life, the Reagan family moved four 
times, from Tampico to Galesburg, to Monmouth, and the south side of 
Chicago before finally settling in Dixon, IL, population 10,000.
  Today, the white frame house at 810 South Hennepin Street in Dixon, 
the Ronald Reagan Boyhood Home, draws visitors from around the world.
  It was in Dixon that the shy boy would begin to discover self-
confidence and the talents that would serve him so well in life. He 
acted in his first play in Dixon, and he was elected student body 
president during his senior year at Dixon High School.
  From Dixon, Ronald Reagan went to Eureka College, a small college 
near Peoria. The tuition was $180 a year, twice that much with room and 
board, more than the Reagan family could afford. But Ronald Reagan did 
not let that discourage him. He received a ``needy student 
scholarship'' and waited tables and washed dishes at his fraternity 
house to help pay his way.
  Once again, he was elected president of his senior class.
  1935, Ronald Reagan was working as a radio sports announcer. He 
followed the Chicago Cubs to spring training in California and slipped 
away one day to visit Hollywood and explore whether there might be a 
future for him in movies.
  Two years later, Ronald Reagan packed his possessions into a Nash 
convertible and moved to California, where he would become a successful 
actor and later Governor. But he never forgot his Illinois roots.
  In his first inaugural parade in 1981, Ronald Reagan included the 
Dixon High School band.
  On a visit to Eureka College in 1992, President Reagan told students, 
``Everything good that happened to me, everything, started here on this 
campus.''
  In 1990, 2 years after he left the White House, President Reagan 
travelled to Abilene, KS, for a ceremony marking the 100th anniversary 
of President Eisenhower's birth.
  He said that day:

       I learned long ago that in order to find the heart of 
     America you need only visit the heartland of America.

  It was a lesson he had learned years earlier in those small towns in 
Illinois.
  Both the State of Illinois and the town of Dixon have created Ronald 
Reagan Centennial Commissions to celebrate the 100th anniversary of his 
birth. If you want to see the places that helped shape America's 40th 
President, come to Illinois this year, where it all began.
  Ronald Reagan was President when I was first elected to the House of 
Representatives in 1982. While our views of government differed 
remarkably, I admired his optimism and his unshakable faith that 
America's best days were ahead of us. He restored a sense of confidence 
in many Americans at a time when we really needed it.
  He told us:

       America is too great to dream small dreams.

  And he was right.
  In 1992, 2 years before he announced he had Alzheimer's disease, 
Ronald Reagan addressed his party's nominating convention for the last 
time.
  He said then:

       Whatever else history may say about me when I'm gone, I 
     hope it will recall that I appealed to your best hopes, not 
     your worst fears, to your confidence rather than your doubts.

  In 1983, in one of the most important accomplishments of his 
Presidency, Ronald Reagan brought together Democrats and Republicans to 
head off a funding crisis in Social Security. That bipartisan agreement 
helped add years of solvency to one of the most successful programs 
this government has ever created. It brought 50 years of solvency to 
Social Security and is one of the crowning jewels of his leadership.
  In 1986, he signed America's last major tax reform act to simplify 
the Income Tax Code, broaden the tax base and eliminate loopholes that 
allowed some to avoid their obligations while unfairly increasing the 
tax burden on others.
  Today we face a far greater challenge. Not only do we have to protect 
Social Security for the long run, we also have to simplify our Tax Code 
again, and put in place a responsible plan to reduce our deficits even 
as we invest in a stronger economic future.
  In this centennial year of his birth, it would be a fitting tribute 
to President Reagan if Democrats and Republicans could work together to 
solve our challenges in the same spirit of patriotic pragmatism that 
President Reagan and others brought to protecting Social Security a 
generation ago. I hope we can work together to help get Americans back 
to work today and to lay the foundation for a strong economic future so 
that our children can continue to say, as President Reagan said so 
often, that America's best days are still ahead.
  After Ronald Reagan clinched the delegates needed to win his party's 
1980 Presidential nomination, a newspaper

[[Page 1182]]

reporter asked him what he thought he needed to do next. He replied 
that he wanted to dispel the notion that he was a hard-nosed radical 
who would oppose compromise on principle.
  These are his words. He said:

       You know, there are some people so imbued with their 
     ideology that if they can't get everything they want, they'll 
     jump off the cliff with the flag flying. As Governor, I found 
     out that if I could get half a loaf, instead of stalking off 
     angrily, I'd take it.

  Ronald Reagan was a man who believed deeply in his core principles. 
He would not want any of us to compromise our own core principles in 
his memory.
  But there is such a thing as principled compromise. President Reagan 
understood that. He knew that accommodation was needed to make the 
system work. We would honor his memory by remembering that lesson and 
working to restore to our politics the same civility that we associate 
with him. Let's remember that there is no dishonor in accepting half a 
loaf. That is how democracy works.
  Finally, I wish to express my admiration for Mrs. Reagan. Her love 
and steadfast devotion to her husband during his illness moved us all, 
and her courageous work in support of new treatments for Alzheimer's 
disease will surely help other families. Our thoughts are with her and 
the rest of President Reagan's family as we mark this historic 
centennial.
  (Mrs. HAGAN assumed the chair.)
  Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, the FAA authorization expired in October 
of 2007. For more than 3 years we have been operating on short-term 
extensions--17 total short-term extensions. The Federal Aviation 
Administration, airlines, and the flying public, all deserve a long-
term authorization to provide certainty to our national aviation 
system. The bill before us will improve the safety of air travel, 
modernize our air traffic control system, boost the economy, and create 
thousands of jobs. This is a jobs bill.
  The FAA estimates commercial aviation is responsible for over 5 
percent of our gross domestic product and generates $1.2 trillion a 
year in economic activity. The aviation industry provides $346 billion 
in earnings and 11 million jobs. This bill will help grow those 
numbers. The funding provided in this bill will support over 280,000 
jobs.
  Economist Mark Zandi said:

       Aviation is the glue that keeps the global economy 
     together.

  We know that in Illinois. We know it because of that great airport 
called O'Hare, which we are currently in the process of modernizing. 
This bill will boost our economy now and keep the United States 
competitive in the global marketplace. The Senate Commerce Committee, 
chaired by Senator Rockefeller, with ranking member Senator Inhofe, has 
held dozens of hearings over the past few years on aviation. Each was 
different. All of them focused on safety. Last year we passed into law 
many safety provisions the committee recommended, but we need to do 
more.
  This bill will improve safety by preventing runway incursions. 
Improving runway safety, according to the NTSB, is the highest 
priority. There were 988 runway incursions last year. This year there 
have already been 66. This bill will require the FAA to review all 
commercial service airports in the United States and initiate action to 
improve lighting, signage, and runway and taxiway markings.
  Another key component of this bill is NextGen. NextGen is the term we 
use to describe our transition to a more modern satellite-based air 
traffic control system. I mentioned on the Senate floor before that I 
recently read a book by Steve Johnson about innovation. He told a 
fascinating story that on October 4, 1957, when the Soviets launched 
sputnik, America was caught by surprise. Here our adversaries in the 
Cold War had the capacity, with a missile, to launch a satellite that 
circled the Earth. It was the first manmade satellite. We knew they had 
the bomb. Now they had these missiles and the capacity to launch a 
satellite.
  The Russians, to prove to the world they had launched the satellite, 
had this basketball-sized sputnik satellite emitting a signal. There 
were two scientists near Baltimore working for the Federal Government 
who decided they would try to track this signal. They found it. As they 
tracked it, they used their scientific expertise and the Doppler effect 
to determine not only the trajectory of this satellite but its speed. 
They reported their findings to the Department of Defense. They could 
tell the Department of Defense where sputnik was and how fast it was 
moving.
  The Department of Defense challenged them and said: If you can tell 
us where that satellite is and how fast it is moving, could you tell 
where that signal is being received on Earth? They went to work. It 
took them several weeks. They came up with the means to determine from 
a satellite where the signal was being received on Earth. We know it as 
GPS.
  GPS is in our pockets. We carry it with our cell phones. People can 
locate us based on the cell phone we carry in our pockets. The problem 
is, airplanes don't have GPS. They still rely on aging technology, 
radar and the like, to locate the planes and to move them safely. This 
bill is going to move us into this new generation of technology. It is 
about time.
  NextGen will give pilots and air traffic controllers the ability to 
accurately pinpoint aircraft in the sky, to avoid problems, to move 
things more smoothly, safely, and efficiently. The FAA has called for 
action on implementing NextGen.
  Last year U.S. airlines carried 704 million passengers, including a 
lot of Senators and Congressmen. Soon those numbers will increase. The 
FAA reports that U.S. airlines will carry more than 1 billion 
passengers by 2023 and more than 1.2 billion by 2030. Our outdated air 
traffic control system cannot handle this increase in traffic. But with 
NextGen we hope to triple the capacity of our national aviation system 
and not compromise at all when it comes to safety. This technology will 
allow planes to fly the straightest, quickest route from point A to 
point B. With more precise information and better communication, we can 
fit more planes safely in our airspace. Doing so will save airlines 
fuel and money. It will reduce airport delays significantly.
  Chicago's Midway Airport was ranked dead last over the past few 
months for ontime departures. Chicago's O'Hare has won that dubious 
distinction more than once. The main reason is the lack of capacity in 
our aviation control system. Fully implementing NextGen could reduce 
these delays dramatically. It will also save a lot of fuel and money 
for the airlines. This is a great investment.
  Illinois is in the middle of the largest airport expansion project in 
American history at O'Hare. The $6.6 billion project will completely 
reconfigure the runways and make sure traffic moves in and out of 
O'Hare more efficiently. Moving this project along means a lot to the 
people of Chicago and Illinois. O'Hare already generates 450,000 jobs 
and $38 billion in economic activity for Chicago and my State. This 
modernization project will create 195,000 more jobs and another $18 
billion in annual economic activity. We need to move forward as a 
nation, with the FAA, to make certain O'Hare is modern and safe and can 
accommodate the increased capacity in air service.
  I hope we can take up this bill and the amendments that have been 
offered to it in a timely fashion and pass the legislation soon. This 
bill will help airports the size of O'Hare, but also smaller airports 
around the United States. It has already helped us in many ways.
  The Essential Air Service Program has been critical for a lot of 
small airports, and certainly that is true in Illinois. We need to make 
sure that communities large and small across America have access to 
passenger air service.
  There is a provision in this bill that tries to coordinate some of 
the bookings between Amtrak and airlines. During floor consideration of 
this bill in the previous Congress, my amendment was adopted that I 
hope can help travelers better coordinate and use both passenger rail 
and air travel. Particularly for travel to and from less urbanized 
areas, this option will help move people more efficiently. We can do 
offer

[[Page 1183]]

this in more communities. And we can do so at less expense to the 
Federal Government.
  I thank both Senator Inhofe and Senator Rockefeller for their 
leadership on this bill.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, let me say that most everything the 
Senator from Illinois has talked about I agree with. We have been 
talking about this bill for a long time.
  I join Senator Rockefeller in encouraging anyone, Democrats 
particularly, to bring any amendment down they want. Procedurally, I 
don't think I can get my two amendments in the queue until that 
happens.
  For the moment, I ask unanimous consent that I be recognized as in 
morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                  REMEMBERING PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN

  Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, the Senator from Illinois was talking 
about our friend, our beloved Ronald Reagan. I thought I would make a 
couple of comments that might surprise a few people.
  I was not from Oklahoma originally. I was actually born in Iowa. When 
I was a very small child, Ronald Reagan was the sports announcer for 
WHO radio.
  My father was a claims adjuster. They officed in the same room--not 
the same building but the same room. They played the pinball machine 
together. I can remember at that time they never said Ronald Reagan; 
they said Dutch Reagan. That was his name. That was his name as a 
sports announcer too. He would actually come by and we referred to him 
as Uncle Dutch. That was in Des Moines. That was back during the 
Depression and shortly after.
  When my family moved to Oklahoma, we didn't have a lot of money. So 
we never went to movies. At that time they didn't have TV. The only 
time we would ever see a movie is if Dutch Reagan had a movie. I went 
down once to Atoka, OK, which was probably roundtrip driving about 4 
hours. We went down to see a Dutch Reagan movie.
  Later on, I became the mayor of Tulsa. During that time Reagan was in 
his first term. He had me do all of his domestic work. I was debating 
Democratic mayors from all over the country on the policies that Ronald 
Reagan had initiated and tried to perpetuate, and they were all very 
successful, I might add. Now, in retrospect, a lot of people on the 
other side of the fence realize they were.
  Saying this was a personal relationship, I look beyond what everyone 
knows about Ronald Reagan, what his persona was, and I can say he was 
such a warm and personable person. It never occurred to me--I thought 
of him as one of the family until the time he started running for 
political office.
  It is kind of interesting because his first election, of course, was 
running for office out in California. At that time, we still did not 
have a lot of money, but my father--I think that was the first race he 
got involved with financially, and Ronald Reagan never forgot it. I can 
remember when I came to Congress he was in his second term, and he 
would always comment: There is young Congressman Inhofe. His daddy was 
one of my first financial contributors.
  So anyway, I will just say this: When you lose somebody like him, you 
do not just lose a leader that in retrospect looks good to everyone, 
but you lose someone who is very warm and loving. Here is a guy who, in 
the Oval Office, would never ever walk in without a coat and tie on. 
This is the way he distinguished the office, and this is the way the 
office distinguished him.
  So we dearly miss him on this, his 100th birthday anniversary.
  Madam President, let me make one comment about the two amendments I 
have on the bill. I think it is important we address both of them, but 
one of them is, in particular, very significant. We have a subpart S 
version of the FARs that affects scheduled and nonscheduled airlines. A 
scheduled airline can live with the flight crew rest and duty time 
because they can adjust their schedules to do that. The unscheduled 
cannot. So the subpart S in the FARs today allows a subpart S to work 
longer hours, but they also have longer rest hours in between. They 
average out actually with longer rest hours per active hours than under 
the law that affects the scheduled airlines.
  Let me give you a couple examples why it is important. Ninety-five 
percent of our troop movement over in theater, where the Presiding 
Officer and I just came back from, after having spent New Year's Eve 
with our troops over in Kabul and Afghanistan--during that time, there 
were several times when they had to bring blood in.
  If a nonscheduled airline has to bring the blood in, they cannot do 
it because that is too far. They would have to leave the plane there 
and have crew rest in Kabul and come back. Well, they cannot do that 
because we have rules against it.
  Ninety-five percent of the troop activity, movement, comes from 
nonscheduled airlines. Forty percent of the material comes in and out. 
That is what we are talking about. We are talking about getting blood 
over to our troops in the AOR.
  So it has worked well. There has not been, in 15 years, one case 
where an accident on a nonscheduled airline has taken place due to the 
fatigue of anyone. So it is a problem that does not exist, and I have 
always had this hangup about fixing things that are not broken. So, 
consequently, I am hoping we will be able to keep that.
  What is happening today is there is a comment period and a rule that 
would do away with that subpart S, and I would like to have this 
amendment in here. It would keep that from happening. So I think it is 
very important, and I think it means a lot to our troops over there. 
The only alternative--if you take the blood example--is, you would have 
to find, from maybe Qatar or some other place, a military plane, a C-
130 or a C-17, to take them in. As you know, right now the OPTEMPO of 
our lift capacity is to the point we cannot take on anything more. So I 
think this is a life-and-death type of thing.
  The other amendment I feel strongly about--I mentioned a minute ago 
when Senator Glenn retired, that left me as the last active commercial 
pilot in the Senate and I still am and have been flying for 50 years. 
Many times in the past I have, at my own expense and in my own 
aircraft, done things where we are helping out people because there is 
no one else to do it, either taking people for medical treatment or 
taking, in one case, a limb that had been amputated back to be 
reattached, this type of thing.
  So for people to do it--the pilots and the equipment, such as my 
equipment--it costs us money to do it. But we feel, in order to 
encourage them to do it, they should be exempt from liability should 
something happen so they do not have frivolous lawsuits. If you do, 
then it discourages people from being generous. So this is kind of a 
Good Samaritan type of amendment.
  These are amendments Nos. 7 and 6. I am hoping to get them in the 
queue. I cannot do that at this time. I want to cooperate with Senator 
Rockefeller, but as soon as we can, I want to get these in.
  With that, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that 
the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. I am waiting just momentarily to receive the 
documentation on offering an amendment. But in the meantime, I would 
like to speak as in morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                                 Egypt

  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Madam President, it is very apparent that 
President Mubarak must step down. The longer he waits to realize he has 
to step down, the more difficult it is going to be in order to have an 
orderly transition and to keep the peace in Egypt.

[[Page 1184]]

The longer he waits to announce he is stepping down immediately, the 
more difficult it is to transfer power to his Vice President, General 
Omar Suleiman.
  If he had done this several days ago, then that transition would have 
been so much easier because General Suleiman is well respected in 
Egypt, certainly by the military. He is well respected by the Arab 
neighbors in the region, and he is well respected in Israel, as well as 
the United States.
  But every day there is violence and bloodshed in these clashes, it 
makes the Arab street much more difficult to accept any semblance of 
authority that would come from Mubarak, even though, under the Egyptian 
Constitution, there is a Vice President, albeit that Vice Presidency 
has been vacant for years and years and years. But, nevertheless, there 
is a Vice President who is in the constitutional line of succession to 
become President.
  Again, I say what I said several days ago: President Mubarak needs to 
recognize, despite his long years of great service in keeping Egypt 
stable, especially in the aftermath of the assassination of President 
Anwar Sadat, that it is time for him to step down, that there is a new 
nation of Egypt out there and they want reform and they want free and 
fair elections and most of them want a peaceful and orderly transition 
of power.
  I would again call on the President of Egypt to step down and step 
down immediately and let the Presidency be assumed by his Vice 
President, with the guarantee of free and fair elections in September 
and the guarantee that President Mubarak is not going to run for 
reelection.
  Madam President, 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.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Madam 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. 34

  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that 
the pending amendment be set aside in order to call up amendment No. 
34.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Florida [Mr. Nelson] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 34.

  Mr. NELSON of Florida. 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 strike section 605)

       Beginning with line 1 on page 236, strike through line 14 
     on page 237.

  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Madam President, the NASA bill we passed last 
fall strongly reaffirmed that aeronautics research is an integral part 
of the agency and made the point in that bill of increasing a focus on 
NASA's aeronautics research programs. As a matter of fact, what does 
NASA stand for? It has become a noun, but it actually stands for the 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The first A in NASA 
stands for ``aeronautics.'' It is vital to our research programs in 
both air and space, the research that is going on.
  We have existing aeronautics research facilities that are national 
assets, and they are in places such as the Ames Research Center in 
California; the Glenn Research Center named after our former colleague, 
Senator John Glenn, which is in Cleveland; Langley Research Center in 
Virginia; the Dryden Flight Research Center, and that is at Edwards Air 
Force Base in California.
  These NASA centers are unique in their ability to leverage the 
complementary and ever-increasing synergies between space and aviation 
systems through these incredibly experienced technical researchers, and 
they make remarkable advances in aerospace-related disciplines such as 
materials and structures, flight controls, aerospace systems health 
management, and high speed aerothermal analysis tools. We take for 
granted when we get on commercial airliners some of the improvements 
that have been made. Well, where do we think a lot of that came from? 
It came from NASA and the research there. These advances not only 
accelerate space and aviation systems but also other very complex 
systems such as the smart grid, remote medicine and medical robotics, 
smart cars, a whole bunch of things.
  NASA's fundamental aeronautics research capability happens to be also 
integrated with enabling the future space missions of NASA. The 
Nation's aeronautics research and development investment currently is 
planned and well coordinated through the National Aeronautics Research 
and Development Policy as well as in Executive Order 13419 in which the 
roles and responsibilities of executive departments and agencies in 
Federal aeronautics R&D are clearly defined and delineated all the way 
through the rest of this decade, until 2020.
  What happened when this FAA bill was put together years ago is that 
it had a transfer to some committee of NASA's successful aeronautics 
R&D investment leadership and this competitiveness, this investment has 
supported springing forth key technologies that directly contradict a 
national policy of doing this in a committee instead of doing it in 
NASA. The unnecessary reassignment, when this bill was crafted some 
time ago, of those responsibilities to other agencies of government 
would clearly jeopardize the success of this extraordinary R&D program.
  The amendment, to which we have no objection, is to take this part 
out of the bill with the new NASA bill that was passed, with the robust 
aeronautics research and development that is within NASA, be the 
operative policy.
  If it is appropriate, if this is the proper parliamentary procedure, 
I ask for the yeas and nays--or I would ask for a voice vote. I am told 
we are not in the proper venue for that. So I have offered the 
amendment, it is laid down, and we will deal with it appropriately.
  I yield the floor, and I note the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
order for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                  Remembering President Ronald Reagan

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Madam President, as a native Californian, I come to 
the floor now to honor the 100th birthday of President Ronald Reagan.
  Former First Lady Nancy Reagan asked that I serve on the Ronald 
Reagan Centennial Commission and I was very honored to accept. Today, I 
join Senator Jim Webb, also a member, and Orrin Hatch, to continue 
President Reagan's spirit of bipartisanship. We have invited Senators 
on both sides of the aisle to join us here on the floor.
  From Simi Valley, in his beloved California, to our Nation's capital, 
Americans this month are honoring President Ronald Reagan. These 
centennial events are intended to reach all Americans, including many 
born after President Reagan left office. Those who remember Ronald 
Reagan as Governor or as President know how he impacted history. But 
there are some who may not realize that the society we live in today 
is, in part, due to the policies of President Reagan. Young adults 
today grow up without the fear of nuclear war in the back of their 
mind, and students of tomorrow will work to achieve President Reagan's 
dream of a world without nuclear weapons.
  It can be said that every great President can be remembered in just 
one sentence. Some examples: ``He freed the slaves;'' ``He made the 
Louisiana Purchase.'' Yet, 22 years after he left office and 7 years 
after his death, the name Ronald Wilson Reagan can still provoke a 
complex debate. There is no one phrase that can describe his legacy. 
Some come to mind: ``The great

[[Page 1185]]

 communicator.'' Or: ``Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.'' That is 
the one that does it for me.
  There is much debate over President Reagan because we all think of 
him differently, and over time, history sweetens our memories. But no 
matter what policy disagreements one may have had with him, one has to 
admire his style of politics. He was a conservative Republican, but he 
understood that in order to get anything done, he had to work across 
the aisle, which he did.
  In his 1983 State of the Union Address, President Reagan said:

       Let us, in these next 2 years--men and women of both 
     parties, every political shade--concentrate on the long-
     range, bipartisan responsibilities of government, not the 
     short-range or short-term temptations of partisan politics.

  Also, Ronald Reagan had commonsense conviction that helped his 
achievements.
  He was a true gentleman in American politics. You would not have seen 
him giving a speech--like some do today--calling his opponents names or 
giving out generalized insults. Dignity and wit were his weapons of 
choice.
  Also, President Reagan served during times of divided government, 
when one party had the White House and the other controlled at least 
one Chamber of Congress, giving each side some governing responsibility 
to find solutions.
  It was a time when a financial and fiscal crisis brought the two 
parties together to compromise on tough choices about taxes and 
spending. In 1983, President Reagan and Speaker Tip O'Neill came 
together to compromise on Social Security, based on proposals from a 
commission led by Alan Greenspan. President Reagan is credited with 
creating the conditions that led to the end of the Cold War, reviving 
the economy, and returning a sense of optimism to our country.
  One of the things I most admired was his work to reduce the number of 
nuclear weapons in the world and his dream of a world one day free of 
these awful weapons.
  President Reagan expressed this vision during his second inaugural 
address on January 21, 1985. He declared:

       We seek the total elimination one day of nuclear weapons 
     from the face of the Earth.

  It was a remarkable statement from a President who had deployed 
tactical nuclear missiles in Europe to counter the Soviet Union's 
fearsome SS-20 missile fleet. But President Reagan understood the grave 
threat that nuclear weapons pose to humanity, and he boldly set himself 
to achieve their eventual elimination.
  My good friend, George Shultz, who was Secretary of State under 
President Reagan, remembers that many at that time thought the 
President's initial negotiations to reduce strategic arms were not 
serious--even quite ridiculous. A classified report released recently 
showed that President Reagan asked the Joint Chiefs of Staff about the 
cost of an all-out Soviet attack and plans for retaliation. He asked 
Secretary Shultz:

       What's so good about keeping the peace after wiping each 
     other out?

  Mr. Shultz believes if he were around today, President Reagan would 
have been in favor of the New START treaty. At the famous Reykjavik 
Summit with Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev in October 1980, 
President Reagan went far beyond Gorbachev's proposal to slash 
strategic arms by 50 percent. He truly believed we should go to zero. 
The Reykjavik talks may not have worked out, but the idea that we 
should create a world free of nuclear weapons endures to this day.
  Secretary Shultz thinks President Reagan would want to be remembered 
for his complete faith in freedom and his conviction that you had to be 
strong to defend that freedom. And that is certainly true.
  Ronald Reagan came into office with character and charisma, traits 
that take other elected officials years to develop. It was that 
charisma that impressed California's Republicans and led to his 
nomination as Governor of my great State.
  Ronald Reagan was elected Governor of California in 1966 by nearly a 
1 million-vote margin. He was elected to a second term in 1970. He did 
not seem to mind that people underappreciated him at the time.
  Decades later, as volumes of his handwritten essays were released to 
the public, Americans saw just what a thoughtful and visionary man he 
was. If we remember Ronald Reagan with one sentence, let's remember him 
as one who took big ideas, a crafting of words, and a conviction of 
freedom to change the entire world.
  On the 100th anniversary of the birth of ``The Great Communicator,'' 
I hope we can embody his spirit of bipartisanship to keep our country 
strong and united today.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas is recognized.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Madam President, I rise to speak also on the 100th 
anniversary of the birth of Ronald Reagan, and I am so pleased to 
follow my colleague from California who has been under the weather for 
a little while. We are very glad she is back.
  I think all of us will have an opportunity to talk about one of the 
great Presidents of the last century and to mark the 30 years since 
Ronald Reagan's inauguration.
  When Ronald Reagan was elected in 1980, America faced an anemic 
economy, high unemployment, and a sense of malaise emanated from 
Washington. But President Reagan never doubted that America's potential 
was unlimited. During his second inaugural address, he said America 
``can out-produce, out-compete and out-sell anybody, anywhere in the 
world.'' The Reagan Revolution was fueled by the understanding that, 
given the opportunity, Americans would dream, create, and build. He 
also knew the road to greatness was through an individual's effort, not 
through expanded government. So President Reagan set about 
reinvigorating the stagnant economy.
  He cut government spending. He reduced government regulation. He 
ended the practice of wage and price controls. He passed tax cuts for 
all Americans. He famously noted that ``Government's first duty is to 
protect the people, not run their lives.'' The American economy 
responded with sustained growth, and a new era of economic prosperity 
had been ushered in.
  Reagan's vision of the greater good also extended beyond our shores. 
He was a fierce advocate for freedom. With our Cold War adversary, the 
Soviet Union, imposing the tight grip of communism on much of the 
world, President Reagan launched a resurgence of American military 
might through the Strategic Defense Initiative. As he said:

       Of the four wars in my lifetime, none came about because 
     the United States was too strong.

  It was his firm resolve to negotiate from a position of strength that 
led to successful arms talks with the Soviets and ultimately to the 
downfall of the Soviet Empire. During his first inaugural address, he 
clearly stated where America stood:

       As for the enemies of freedom, those who are potential 
     adversaries, they will be reminded that peace is the highest 
     aspiration of the American people. We will negotiate for it, 
     sacrifice for it; we will not surrender for it--now or ever.

  President Reagan understood that all people, regardless of where they 
live, long for liberty and freedom. He believed that America was a 
beacon of hope to all of the oppressed people of the world, a ``shining 
city on the hill,'' as he described it. As Jeffrey Bell wrote in the 
Weekly Standard, Ronald Reagan ``believed that people all over the 
world craved self-government just as much as Americans did.'' Even 
today, he is still being proven right. He said:

       Concentrated power has always been the enemy of liberty.

  These words still echo in today's tumultuous times. We witnessed the 
poignant photographs of women in Iraq voting and joyously holding up 
their purple-stained thumbs. We are now seeing the marches of people in 
Egypt who long to be able to vote in a real election for the first time 
in 30 years. He also understood the importance of information in 
promoting freedom, calling it the ``oxygen of the modern age. It seeps 
through the walls topped by

[[Page 1186]]

barbed wire; it wafts across the electrified borders.''
  His words are as true today as when he uttered them. Freedom and 
individual liberty are America's greatest assets. They are the core of 
our national identity. They are the foundation of our economic 
prosperity, and these precious assets have been protected by the 
service and sacrifice of patriots in every generation from the 
beginning of America's history to today. Ronald Reagan understood and 
appreciated the duty we all have to preserve these American ideals.
  As he said:

       Democracy is worth dying for, because it is the most deeply 
     honorable form of government devised by man.

  When President Reagan died in 2004, there was a spontaneous, 
worldwide outpouring of grief and tribute that caught some seasoned 
political pundits by surprise. Throughout his political career, Ronald 
Reagan was underestimated by ``establishment'' political intellectuals 
of the day. He was dismissed sometimes by the media. But when he spoke, 
the American people listened, they understood, and they agreed with 
this down-to-Earth but very profound man. And so did the world.
  We all remember him fondly, with great respect, and are honored to 
have known him.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon is recognized.
  Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, I want to take a quick minute or two to 
talk about an amendment that will be called up later in the afternoon 
on my behalf to expand and improve the unmanned aerial systems--known 
as UAS programs--that are part of the Federal Aviation Administration 
reauthorization bill. My amendment is No. 27.
  I thank Chairman Rockefeller and his staff because they have worked 
closely with me on this and several other amendments.
  Growth in the unmanned aerial systems sector of the aviation business 
has been extraordinary in the last few years. I think it is well known 
that these systems are proven critical to military operations in Iraq 
and Afghanistan. But they also have tremendous potential in the 
civilian sector whether it is for firefighting, law enforcement, border 
control, search and rescue, or environmental monitoring.
  Law enforcement uses for this technology would be especially helpful 
in rural areas like much of my home State of Oregon. Unfortunately, the 
FAA has not yet been able to come up with a real plan for how to 
integrate these unmanned aerial systems vehicles into our airspace. 
That is why I am pleased the Rockefeller bill before us includes 
requirements for the FAA to get to work on a plan in this area and to 
establish test sites for unmanned aerial systems research.
  The bill, however, includes only four of these sites. I would like to 
see us be bolder, particularly in an area where I think there is so 
much opportunity for innovation, development, and job creation.
  This amendment would expand the number of sites to 10, which would 
require the FAA to explore the most useful and safest way for unmanned 
aerial systems to be integrated into the airspace.
  The amendment would require at least one of these test sites to 
investigate how unmanned aerial systems can be useful in monitoring 
public land. As the chairman of the Subcommittee on Public Lands and 
Forests, I have heard repeatedly from law enforcement officials that 
remote public lands are too often being used as a place for criminals 
to grow drugs without detection. The Bureau of Land Management and the 
Forest Service, two agencies that work in this field, simply don't have 
the resources to use expensive helicopters and do all the necessary 
work to root out these illegal operations.
  I will conclude by saying that I believe unmanned aerial systems 
could be a cost-saving way to address this problem. By getting the ball 
rolling with my amendment, I believe it will be possible to more 
significantly fight these reprehensible drug operations that are taking 
place on public lands.
  I hope this amendment, No. 27, will be accepted as part of the 
Rockefeller legislation, and I look forward to working with the bill's 
managers to encourage the development in this sector, which I think is 
right at the heart of what we need to do to promote innovation in the 
aviation field. I thank Chairman Rockefeller.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________