Local Control of Education Act of 2005

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, if I understand the chairman's request, it is to get 4 minutes of additional time on their side. I ask unanimous consent, then, for an additional 4 minutes on our side for comment only.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 3677

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 3819

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 3860

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 3592

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 3729

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 3761

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 3805

Mr. President, as we gather this morning, our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan need our support, families on the gulf coast need help rebuilding their lives, and communities all across this country need help moving forward. And now it is down to us. Will we provide that support? Will we provide that critical help? Or will we leave our troops unfunded, our gulf coast in ruins, and our communities stalled? This is the bill that determines whether we move forward as a country or whether we make it harder for our troops, for hurricane victims, and for American families to make progress. That is the choice before us.

I am on the floor this morning--as I have been all week--saying we need to move our country forward by passing this emergency supplemental bill. I do want to address some of the concerns that have been raised about this bill.

For years, this White House has been playing games to hide the cost of war. We know we have tremendous expenses in Iraq and Afghanistan. Everyone knows that. But when it's time to write the budget--suddenly this White House develops amnesia. It somehow ``forgets'' to include the cost of war in the regular budget process. On the day the administration sends us its budget--the ongoing cost of war is somehow unknowable. But a few weeks later--when it sends up an emergency supplemental--suddenly we have got this huge document that lists the costs of war. It is a fiction, a sham, a game. And for too long--this Congress has been going along with it. We don't include the war in the budget. We don't fund the war through the Defense Appropriations bill, we just expect to pay for it through emergency supplementals, and that is not honest. Moreover, it means that real emergencies--unanticipated natural disasters and our own homeland security needs--are pushed aside and rendered ``less important'' than ongoing war costs.

All year I have been on the floor saying that if we are not realistic with our budgets, we are going to have to make up the difference in emergency spending--and that is where we find ourselves today.

Mr. President, I want to walk through how the size of the supplemental has changed to remind my colleagues that it didn't just grow mysteriously. Members of both parties added critical priorities to the supplemental, and members have stood up for those critical investments.

When the Senate Appropriations Committee gathered in early April to mark up this bill, several amendments were adopted that added to the cost of the bill. They included bipartisan amendments to address the agricultural disasters that we have witnessed across the country. That amendment was championed by Senator Dorgan and Senator Burns.

Senator Harkin added an amendment to make sure that there will be adequate funds to finance the administration's preparations to deal with a pandemic flu outbreak.

With the support of Senator Bond, I added an amendment to address the backlog of claims for highway emergency relief that still haven't been paid for recent declared disasters across the country; including: Hurricane Ivan, Hurricane Dennis, the San Simeon Earthquake, Hurricane Ophelia, Tropical Storm Gaston, and the tragic

floods in Hawaii that we debated yesterday evening.

The gulf coast Senators on the committee, including Senators Hutchison, Shelby, Landrieu, and, of course, Chairman Cochran, also presented amendments to better address the needs of the gulf coast region in its efforts to recover from Hurricane Katrina and the other gulf coast hurricanes.

These amendments were all offered to address the real needs of our communities here at home.

The Appropriations Committee reported this bill to the Senate Floor by a vote of 27 to 1. When we brought the bill to the floor, we received a statement of administration policy from the Bush white house. That statement said that the President would veto any bill that exceeded the level of $94.5 billion. Soon after, the Senate was given an opportunity to vote on the President's position.

My friend, Senator Thomas of Wyoming, offered an amendment to delete all of the provisions that were not in the administration's original request--thus bringing the size of the bill down to the level acceptable to the President. That amendment failed overwhelmingly, by a veto-proof margin of 72 to 26.

Just hours later, my friend from Nevada, Senator Ensign, made a motion to recommit the bill back to the Appropriations Committee with instructions that it be cut back to the level President Bush said he would support. That amendment also failed by a veto-proof margin of 68 to 28.

Why did those amendments fail, even in the face of the President's veto threat? Because Senators from across the country on both sides of the aisle recognized that the investments that this bill makes here in America are needed.

Indeed, in the face of those embarrassing votes, the Senate Republican leaders frantically scurried around to get enough signatures on a letter to the President saying they would uphold the President's veto. They were desperate to get that letter out to the media because it was clear from the votes on the Senate floor that the Members of the Senate--Republican and Democrat alike--were not prepared to ignore our needs here at home, even if President Bush is prepared to do so.

That is how this supplemental developed--one amendment at a time-- Senators from both parties voted to address critical needs. Senators have stood by those investments, and now it is time to pass this bill.

Mr. President, we have critical needs in our war effort and here at home that we must address. Those needs have not been addressed through the regular budget, so we must address them through this bill. Let's pass this supplemental and make sure our troops and our communities have the support they need. And as we move forward--let's get real about the budget process--let's get real about the cost of war--or we are going to find ourselves back here time and again passing emergency spending.

We have heard a lot about the size of the bill, and I want to address that. This supplemental is big because the budgets we have passed over the years have been unrealistically small.

Let me say that again: This bill is big because the budgets we have passed have been unrealistically small. Time and again, the White House has proposed budgets that do not come close to meeting our domestic needs--and that completely ignore the costs of war. Those budgets have been works of fiction. And if we are not going to be realistic in the regular budget process--if we are not going to include the cost of war in the regular budget, we are going to have to face reality during this supplemental.

That is where we find ourselves today. So any Member who is troubled by the size of this bill should tell the White House it is time to get real and send us budgets that include the cost of war and that address our domestic needs--or we are going to find ourselves dealing with emergency spending time and time again.

But we can't miss the big picture--either we pass this bill and help our troops an our country, or we make it harder for America to move forward. Let's have the wisdom to make the right choice.

Before I go any further, I want to acknowledge the tremendous leadership that Senator Byrd has provided throughput this process. He knows this body better than anyone. And, more importantly, he brings with him a deep commitment to doing the right things not only for the Senate, but for the country, and for the families we all represent.

I also want to thank Chairman Cochran for his leadership and hard work on this bill. He has shown extraordinary patience throughout this debate, and I appreciate how he has worked with all of us to keep this bill on track.

Mr. President, I yield back the remainder of our time.

Mr. President, we have no objections on this side.

I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, is the amendment that has been sent to the desk the modified amendment?

Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Change of Vote

Mr. President, I wanted to take a minute to express my deep gratitude to Chairman Cochran who, as I stated earlier, has demonstrated extraordinary patience over the past 2 weeks we have been debating this supplemental bill.

I also want to express my thanks to the ranking member, Senator Byrd, who has continued to demonstrate his strong and resolute leadership on this bill.

I also want to thank the many members of our Appropriations Committee staff who have worked very hard.

First and foremost, I thank our staff director and deputy staff director on our side, Terry Sauvain and Chuck Kieffer.

I also thank the majority staff director, Keith Kennedy, and his staff, Clayton Heil and Les Spivey.

I want to make special mention of the extraordinary hard work of B.G. Wright, Kate Fitzpatrick, and Rachael Taylor. They have been keeping us all on track on this side as to which of the hundreds of filed amendments have been cleared and which have not.

Finally, I thank Peter Rogoff who has dedicated his life on the Senate floor for the last 2 weeks above and beyond the call.

I thank all our staff and floor staff for being here many long hours for the completion of this bill.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise in opposition to Senator Thune's amendment and to set the record straight on my ongoing and passionate support for AmeriCorps and the National Civilian Community Corps, NCCC. The Senator from South Dakota said that I described the overall AmeriCorps program as, ``It's like Enron's gone nonprofit.'' Senator Thune was absolutely wrong to say that is the way I describe AmeriCorps. I love AmeriCorps. I love what they do for communities. I love what they do for America.

Senator Thune took that quote totally out of context. I made that statement back in 2002 when a bureaucratic boondoggle led to the overenrollment of 20,000 volunteers. When that happened, I led the efforts to organize the national service groups and to strengthen AmeriCorps. Along with Senator Bond, I introduced and passed the ``Strengthen AmeriCorps Program Act of 2003'' which established new accounting procedures for AmeriCorps. I urged the President to appoint a new CEO for the Corporation of National Service--a CEO with the management skills necessary to restore confidence in the Corporation's abilities to make a real difference to our volunteers--and in our communities. I also asked for a reinvigorated Board of Directors that would take greater oversight and responsibility and I have consistently called for increased funding so that AmeriCorps could support 75,000 volunteers each year.

AmeriCorps is stronger than ever. Since its creation, over 300,000 volunteers have served in communities and earned education awards to go to college or to pay off student debt. To date, 7,500 Maryland residents have earned education awards. The NCCC program, which has a campus in Perry Point, MD, is a full-time residential program for 18 to 24 year olds designed to strengthen communities and develop leaders through team-based service projects. Each year, approximately 1,100 participants reside in its five campuses nationwide. The Perry Point campus houses 200 AmeriCorps members every year, and since 1994 its residents have logged more than 350,000 service hours. Most recently, NCCC members have provided more than 250,000 service hours valued at $3.8 million to projects in the Gulf Coast region, which reflects their critical service during every American natural disaster since the program started.

The funds that Senator Thune wants to cut are specifically dedicated to support volunteer recovery activities in the gulf and would pay for 800 NCCC members who will provide more than 1.2 million hours of service in the gulf coast hurricane recovery effort. These teams will rebuild schools and community centers, remove debris, and help senior citizens rebuild their homes and lives. This funding demonstrates the Senate's commitment to keeping this valuable program alive, despite President Bush's efforts to cut the Federal funds it needs to survive.

I fought to create AmeriCorps, I fought to strengthen AmeriCorps, and I will fight to save AmeriCorps. Today's Federal investment, like these fine volunteers, are needed now more than ever. I strongly encourage my Senate colleagues to make sure this money is included as a part of this emergency spending package, and I urge them to oppose Senator Thune's amendment which would divert these critical funds away from NCCC.

Mr. President, I support our troops and their families. I am behind them 100 percent. They deserve our gratitude, not just with words but with deeds. We must do right by our troops and their families. This strong emergency supplemental appropriations bill helps us do just that. This supplemental also provides needed funds to the victims of the devastating hurricanes that hit our gulf coast last summer.

In this bill we have provided $15.6 billion to fix or replace equipment that has been damaged during combat operations and to buy additional force protection equipment desperately needed by our brave men and women on the battlefield.

To help protect our troops from deadly improvised explosive devices, IEDs, this bill creates the joint improvised explosive device defeat fund and provides the fund with nearly $2 billion to develop and field the necessary tactics, equipment, and training to defeat these deadly weapons.

Another way we can support our troops is to make our intentions in Iraq clear to the Iraqis and the international community. To this end, I supported the amendment introduced by Senator Biden that prohibits the building of any permanent military bases in Iraq. This will send a clear message to the Iraqi people--we are committed to withdrawing our troops once their mission is accomplished.

To ensure that we do all we can to care for soldiers when they are injured, this bill includes an additional $1.15 billion for the defense health program. This money ensures that we can continue to provide world-class services including rapid aero-medical evacuation to our most severely wounded soldiers.

The veterans health care system is stretched to the limit at a time when more and more veterans are turning to VA. That is why I cosponsored an amendment by Senator Akaka to increase veterans funding by $430 million to meet the health care needs of soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan and other war veterans.

The rank-and-file employees of the Federal Government are the unsung heroes of this country. Unfortunately, they are often required to work in substandard or often hazardous conditions. It was recently reported that employees within this very building are forced to enter tunnels full of asbestos and on the verge of collapse. That is why I cosponsored an amendment by Senator Allard that provides over $27 million for critical emergency structural repairs to the Capitol Complex utilities tunnels. I will continue to fight for our Federal workforce to ensure they have safe working environments and proper safety equipment.

We know that nearly 40 percent of the soldiers deployed today in Iraq and Afghanistan are citizen soldiers who come from the National Guard and Reserves. More than half of these will suffer a loss of income when they are mobilized, because their military pay is less than the pay from their civilian job.

Many patriotic employers and State governments eliminate this pay gap by continuing to pay them the difference between their civilian and military pay. The reservist pay security amendment, which I worked on with Senator Durbin, will ensure that the U.S. Government also makes up for this pay gap for Federal employees who are activated in the Guard and Reserves.

Mr. President, last year, we provided emergency relief for the victims of the horrible tsunami in Asia. Today with this bill, we are providing over $27 billion in support to our own citizens so badly hurt by the devastating hurricanes that hit the gulf coast last year. This money will not only help with the rebuilding of New Orleans, but will provide a host of economic incentives and subsidies to help the people of Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas, and Alabama get back to work and rebuild their lives following the destruction of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Additionally, this bill provides emergency funding to help immediately rebuild the levees and install flood control equipment that will help prevent another terrible tragedy from occurring when this year's hurricane season arrives in less than 4 weeks.

After 9/11 we realized that our borders were not secure. Since then, we have waged the war on terror and made great strides at protecting our homeland. We have made significant investments in law enforcement and security; however, the infrastructure that supports our border security has been allowed to crumble. To counter this, I supported an amendment proposed by Senator Gregg which adds $2 billion for border security initiatives to include buying additional vehicles, airplanes, helicopters, and ships. It also builds state of the art facilities for use in ensuring the security of our borders.

We have all seen the devastating effects of natural disasters and terrorism and are working hard to prevent future occurrences from affecting our Nation and the world. We have recently learned of another potential threat: a worldwide flu epidemic that could cost millions of lives if we are unprepared. In response to this threat, this bill provides $2.3 billion to prepare for and respond to an influenza pandemic. Making this money available now will help expand the domestic production capacity of influenza vaccine, and will help develop and stockpile the right vaccines, antivirals, and other medical supplies necessary to protect and preserve lives in the event of an outbreak.

Because it is just as important to support our communities at home as it is to support our troops in the field, I will continue to fight for responsible military budgets. For that reason, I joined Senator Byrd's call for the President to fund our operations in Iraq and Afghanistan through the regular budget and appropriations process. After 4 years in Afghanistan and 3 years in Iraq, we should not be funding these operations as if they were surprise emergencies.

Mr. President, this bill is a Federal investment in supporting our troops and their families and providing relief for those impacted by the devastating hurricanes.

We support our troops by getting them the best equipment and the best protection we can provide. We support them by making it easier for our citizen soldiers in the National Guard and Reserves to serve their country. And we support them by ensuring they are cared for with the best possible medical system when they are injured or ill.

With this bill, we are also helping our neighbors rebuild their homes, their communities, and their lives, and I am proud to give it my support.

Mr. President, over the March recess, I joined the leaders of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator John Warner of Virginia and Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, on a trip to Iraq to hear the on-the-ground perspective of our military leaders, our troops in the field, and Iraqi officials. I returned to the United States as always overwhelmed by my pride and admiration for our service men and women, who continue to work with commitment and professionalism even in the most difficult circumstances. I cast my vote in support of this supplemental package before us because I am completely committed to providing our men and women in uniform with the support they need to continue their excellent work. Toward that end, I am very pleased that an amendment I authored calling for regular reports on the Pentagon's efforts to train our troops in methods of detecting and defeating improvised explosive devices has been added to this bill.

I also cast this vote today because when it comes to funding our service men and women, right now this supplemental is the only game in town. And because the administration refuses, year after year, to incorporate the costs of ongoing operations in Iraq into the regular budget, we have no choice but to fund these efforts through these emergency supplementals--essentially putting hundreds of billions on our national tab. The Senate voted overwhelmingly in support of Senator Byrd's amendment urging the administration to stop these irresponsible budget games. I hope the President heeds that message.

In addition to reaffirming my admiration for our military, my recent trip to Iraq also gave me a deeper understanding of the importance of success in Iraq and the truly daunting nature of the challenges ahead.

In addition to the extremely serious fiscal issues confronting us, we have the even more serious policy issue to consider--how should U.S. policy proceed in Iraq?

A failed Iraqi state would threaten our national interests, destabilizing an already volatile region and creating a lasting haven for terrorists. Our national security imperatives mandate our commitment to Iraq's success.

Success in Iraq is dependent on several factors: controlling violence, creating a stable government of national unity, delivering basic services and the promise of economic development to the Iraqi people, and establishing strong and supportive relations between Iraq and its neighbors in the region. If any of these pillars are missing, Iraq's future becomes uncertain and unstable.

America can help, but ultimately the Iraqis must achieve these goals on their own. The Iraqi people and Iraqi security forces have made significant strides, but much more remains before Iraq can govern and protect Iraqis. And Iraq's neighbors, who know the region best and will suffer most from a failed state in their midst, must step up to the plate to help end the political deadlock in Iraq.

We all recognize that U.S. forces cannot and should not remain in Iraq indefinitely. The U.S. military presence in Iraq should depend upon Iraqi leaders promptly making the compromises necessary to achieve the broad-based, sustainable, political settlement necessary to form a government of national unity and defeat the insurgency. We need partners within Iraq and outside its borders who are committed to stability and sharing power in order to achieve the mission of a truly democratic Iraq, and to share in that success with Iraq's people.

We also need to ensure that the magnitude of the challenge before us in Iraq does not distract all our attention from the vitally important, ongoing mission in Afghanistan. This bill also provides much needed support for that mission. We have made tremendous progress, working with the Afghan people, in helping to turn Afghanistan from a state sponsor of terrorism to a stable, responsible member of the international community. But our work is by no means complete, and the American troops and Afghani leaders I met with in Kabul just weeks ago underscored how important it is that we continue our strong support for the stabilizing mission.

This bill also provides support for the communities devastated by last year's hurricane season. I am afraid that, thus far, the story of the Government's response to Katrina has been a story of failure not only in the preparations for the storm and in the midst of the crisis but also in the recovery effort. Too many promises have not been kept, and too many American families continue to live in an atmosphere of uncertainty. The provisions in this bill will help, but our commitment does not end here. Congress needs to make sure that the gulf region has the necessary resources to recover from last year's hurricanes and respond to future storms, but it must also make sure that the administration has fixed the incompetence at FEMA and DHS which disturbed so many Americans. I look forward to continuing to work on these important issues in the upcoming months.

Over the past 6 years, Colorado has suffered from ongoing natural disasters including drought. Unfortunately,

many areas in Colorado continue to suffer from ongoing extreme weather conditions including drought, hail, and frost. In particular, Colorado wheat producers are estimating that this will be the fifth below- average wheat crop in 6 years.

In addition, many Colorado farmers and ranchers are suffering from economic losses due to continually rising gas prices. And what is true in Colorado is true in many other States across the country. That is why I am an original cosponsor of Senator Conrad's emergency agriculture disaster assistance package, and I am so pleased that it was included as part of this supplemental bill. Toward that end, I especially thank Senators Conrad and Cochran, who worked very hard on these important provisions. I am so pleased that the Senate has voted to provide immediate assistance to producers across the country who have been devastated by a variety of natural disasters.

While, overall, we are lucky in Colorado that this has been a better year for many of our farmers and ranchers who have suffered from continuing natural disasters over the past several years, many producers in southern and eastern Colorado have been hit by drought conditions once again.

It has been downhill for the 2005 Colorado winter wheat crop since last May. In fact, estimates show that it will be the fifth below- average winter wheat crop in 6 years--with potential losses to producers of over $60 million.

In addition, increasing gas prices have hit our rural communities hard, making it virtually impossible for many producers to cover the unexpected additional costs. During harvest, agricultural producers are some of the largest fuel consumers in the United States and producers are facing enormous fuel costs. Farm fuel has increased by 79 percent from $1.40 per gallon in September of 2004 to around $2.60 per gallon in September 2005. Colorado wheat producers have told me that it would take a 40-bushel average yield per acre and an average price of $4.00 per bushel to cover all of these additional costs and break even. Unfortunately, the average yield in 2005 was 24 bushels per acre, and the average price is projected at $3.34 per bushel.

Finally, Mr. President, I wish to express again how pleased I am that the Senate adopted my amendment to provide an additional $30 million to reduce the risk of catastrophic fires and mitigate the effects of widespread insect infestations throughout the entire National Forest System. In the West, the seasonal wildfire potential outlook map shows above-normal fire danger across the Western United States and several Southern States, too, have increased fire dangers. One of the most alarming factors in the wildfire outlook this year is insect infestation. For example, my State of Colorado has over 1.5 million acres that have been infested by bark beetles. After these infestations come through a forest, they leave behind entire stands of trees-- sometimes thousands of acres--that are more susceptible to fire due to the dried-out conditions and increased fuel loads in those forests. Just today, I learned from the U.S. Forest Service that Colorado has 280,000 acres of approved hazardous fuel reduction projects that are awaiting treatment, with Forest Service funding only sufficient to conduct about a quarter of those projects under the best circumstances. This situation represents a true emergency, and I am relieved that we were able to address it in this bill.

Mr. President, in the past week, the Senate has voted to reduce the overall cost of H.R. 4939, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Hurricane Recovery, 2006, now totaling nearly $110 billion by a mere $15 million. I am delighted that President Bush has pledged to veto this bill because Congress has, once again, been unable to resist the temptation to load up a must-pass bill with pork.

I offered several amendments to eliminate nonemergency items in this bill. I appreciate the patience of my colleagues. I am very pleased and encouraged that this body is increasingly willing to depart from our business-as-usual practices.

That is good because the American people are paying attention to this process. In a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, the American people said that ending earmarks should be the No. 1 priority for Congress this session. Thirty-nine percent said that members should be prohibited from ``directing federal funds to specific projects benefiting only certain constituents.'' It is interesting to note that ending earmarks was ranked ahead of immigration reform, which was cited as the No. 1 priority by 32 percent of Americans.

I hope that these results, combined with polls showing a 22-percent approval rating for Congress, will encourage conferees to avoid a confrontation with President Bush over spending. I would hope that when conferees look for items to remove from this bill they take a close look at my amendments that lost by a narrow margin as well as those I withdrew.

I believe that in this time of war and disaster recovery the American people expect us to make hard choices about spending. Taxpayers want us to be serving in a spirit of service and sacrifice, not searching for new ways to raid the public Treasury.

Congress is raiding the Treasury in two ways with this bill. First, many of the items in this bill should be considered in the regular appropriations process and through the regular order. The war on terror is no longer a surprise. We are entering our fifth year of this war. It shouldn't come as a surprise to Congress that we have needs related to this effort. We have also developed a good understanding about many of the priorities in the gulf coast that could have been addressed in the regular budget process.

Congress has also added billions of dollars for items that have no connection to the war on terror and the gulf coast recovery. Again, few of these items are true emergencies. The American people deserve to understand what defines a true emergency. According to the budget resolution for fiscal year 2006 all of the following five criteria must be met to be considered an emergency: necessary, essential, or vital; sudden, quickly coming into being, and not building up over time; an urgent, pressing, and compelling need requiring immediate action; unforeseen, unpredictable, and unanticipated; and not permanent, temporary in nature.

Designating a project as an ``emergency'' excuses Congress from paying for a project. The result of abusing the ``emergency'' designation is an even greater emergency. Our Nation's debt is nearly $8.4 trillion. Each American's share of this debt is $27,964.86. Our national debt is increasing by an average of $1.95 billion per day. Social Security, Medicare and the standard of living of future generations of Americans are in jeopardy as a result of decades of fiscal irresponsibility and rationalizations for spending more money today without considering the consequences tomorrow.

The Social Security trustees reported this week the program will exhaust its trust fund and begin running annual cash deficits in 2040. A year ago, that prediction was 2041, effectively meaning 2 years have been lost by a refusal to act. The trustees reported Social Security's unfunded liability is $13.4 trillion.

Of course, the real problem with Social Security and Medicare is much worse because the Federal Government uses an Enron-style accounting scheme. We habitually borrow or, more accurately, steal money from these trust funds to pay for more spending today.

When the 77 million baby boomers begin to retire in 2011, our Nation will be faced with the greatest economic challenge in our history. If we continue to indulge in earmarks, the gateway drug to spending addictions, we will never address these complex challenges, particularly if we can't resist the urge to abuse the earmark process on a bill designed to address the emergency needs of our troops and displaced people in the gulf coast.

Another reason we must act today to rein in wasteful spending is because our ability to influence world events is diminished by our debt to other nations. We now have the distinction of being the world's largest debtor nation, and this bill will add to that debt. Many serious economists are warning that our excessive borrowing from foreign sources could cause the value of the dollar to collapse, which would lead to a disaster for our economy. It is incredibly shortsighted for this body to sell Treasury bills to countries such as China so we can finance economic development programs and other pet projects while, at the same time, we hope to encourage China to be more aggressive in terms of discouraging Iran from developing nuclear weapons. This is not just a numbers game. The future

vitality of our nation is at stake. We are slowly but surely whittling away our national power and ability to leverage other nations away by our refusal to make hard choices about spending.

Many of the items in this bill are obviously not emergencies, which is why this bill will be vetoed by President Bush if it is sent to him in its current form. Again, I hope conferees do not force the President to take this step. I am confident the President will veto this bill. He understands that it is more important to secure the next generation rather than the next election.

Past Presidents and Congresses have made hard choices during difficult times. Between 1939 and 1942, Congress and FDR cut spending for nondefense programs by 22 percent. In 1950, President Truman and Congress cut nonmilitary spending by 28 percent. I suggest to my colleagues that if we want to be here past 2006, we better do the same.

Still, I agree with my colleagues who say that the President's priorities don't come down from heaven. I suggest, however, that we are all subject to the judgment that comes down from the taxpayers. If we flippantly disregard the President's insistence that we make hard choices, the judgment of the taxpayers will not be kind to any of us.

Families across this country are faced with hard choices every day in order to live within their budget. They have elected us to make hard choices. Our refusal to do this only reinforces the perception that we are disconnected from the priority-setting reality that governs the rest of the country.

It is wrong, for example, for this body to fund pork projects such as grape research in the State of California force the taxpayers in my State and every other State to pay for a so-called emergency project that has been ongoing for the last 46 years and has already received more than $130 million from the American taxpayer. Where this body sees an emergency the taxpayers often see a series of misplaced priorities.

The State of California received 549 Federal earmarks this year totaling $733 million. That included $10 million in Federal resources alone for museums. Is it more important to protect the residents at risk from flooding by the Sacramento River or to fund grape research? Congress is spending over $3.6 million on a grape research center in California this year. We are spending another $1 million on a pedestrian walkway project in Calimesa and a half million on pedestrian/bike improvements on Tower Bridge in Sacramento? What is more important for Sacramento? Why can't we prioritize today so future generations are not forced to make even tougher choices between massive tax hikes, drastic cuts to Medicare and Social Security, or the defense of our Nation?

Martin Luther King Jr. once said, ``Cowardice asks the question--is it safe? Expediency asks the question--is it popular? Vanity asks the question--is it popular? But conscience asks the question--is it right?''

I plead with my colleagues. Do what is right. Our Nation is on an unsustainable course, and that course correction must begin today, not when it is too late.

Mr. President, today I will cast my vote in favor of H.R. 4939, the fiscal year 2006 supplemental appropriations bill. This bill takes the important step of supporting disaster relief efforts and helps fund our ongoing military and intelligence operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. I support the intent of this bill, but I have some significant reservations regarding the growing cost of the war and how it is being funded.

In supporting our troops, I believe we must do what is necessary to ensure that the men and women risking their lives for our country have everything they need to carry out their mission. I do not support the administration's policy of funding the war in Iraq through emergency supplemental bills. According to a Congressional Budget Office report, in 2005 the Department of Defense obligated $83.6 billion--nearly $7 billion per month--for the global war on terror, much of which was appropriated through emergency supplemental funding. This is a fiscally irresponsible approach that masks the true magnitude of the war's costs. Therefore, I voted in favor of an amendment offered by my colleagues, Senators Byrd and Carper, which expresses the sense of the Senate that any request for funds after fiscal year 2007 for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan should be included in the President's annual budget. I was encouraged that the amendment passed with a vote of 94 to 0. I urge the administration to heed the Senate's resolution and commit to making the costs of the Iraq war more transparent.

I also believe that the administration must be held accountable for progress in the Iraq war. As a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and ranking minority member of the Readiness Subcommittee, I am committed to finding a way to bring our soldiers home as soon as possible. I do not believe that we should leave before the Iraqi people are equipped with the tools necessary to support a stable democratic society, but we must ensure that progress is being made. Toward that end, I support the plan outlined in the amendment submitted by my colleague Senator Carl Levin, ranking member of the Senate Committee on Armed Services, which establishes clear reporting requirements regarding the political situation in Iraq. According to this plan, the President is required to submit a report to Congress every 30 days outlining Iraq's progress toward the formation of a national unity government. The plan also requires the administration to inform Iraqi political, religious and tribal leaders that meeting their own deadlines with regards to amending the Iraqi Constitution is a condition for the continued presence of a U.S. military force in Iraq. While the Senate did not consider Senator Levin's amendment due to germaneness, this is an important issue that Congress must address.

Notwithstanding my concerns regarding the continued use of emergency supplementals to fund the conflict in Iraq, there are a number of provisions in this bill that I wholeheartedly support. In particular, I was pleased to see that we did not forget our Nation's veterans during consideration of the emergency supplemental. Our returning soldiers and sailors have earned the right to the best health care that this Nation can provide, and I believe we should strive to carry out this obligation to our servicemembers. With the backing of my Senate colleagues, I successfully passed an amendment to the emergency supplemental adding $430 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs, VA. These funds will be specifically used to supplement direct health care, mental health care, and prosthetics services at VA. As the ranking member on the Veterans Affairs Committee, I am pleased that the Senate took this important step of supporting our Nation's veterans.

Another appropriate use of the emergency supplemental was appropriations for disaster relief. Our Nation has been hit hard by many significant natural disasters that could not have been planned for in advance. I believe that we, as Government leaders, should continue to provide assistance to help those devastated by natural disasters including the severe flooding that deluged Hawaii earlier this year.

On May 2, 2006, President George W. Bush declared that a major disaster exists in the State of Hawaii that Federal funds to help the people and communities recover. I am pleased that the Senate Appropriations Committee included $33.5 million in the emergency supplemental for disaster assistance in Kauai and Windward Oahu, and $6 million for sugarcane growers in the State whose crops were destroyed by the floods earlier this spring.

In March, I introduced S. 2444, the Dam Rehabilitation and Repair Act of 2006. This bill would amend the National Dam Safety Program Act to establish a program to provide grant assistance to States for the rehabilitation and repair of deficient dams. I also supported Senator Inouye's efforts to include an amendment to H.R. 3499 to provide $1.4 million to assess the security and safety of critical reservoirs and dams in Hawaii, including monitoring dam structures. I am extremely disappointed that this amendment did not pass because the failure of Kaloko Dam on Kauai led to the severe flooding and loss of life. I am hopeful that my colleagues will recognize the importance of addressing the dam problem for the sake of Hawaii and our Nation and that my bill will receive floor consideration.

Senator Inouye also introduced a timely amendment that provides $1 million for environmental monitoring of waters in and around Hawaii. In March of this year, I had the opportunity to visit the hardest hit areas of our State and meet victims, emergency responders, and State officials. To date, the situation for many of our residents remains very grave. With hundreds of homes and businesses damaged or destroyed, critical infrastructure crippled, and many hours spent engaged in search and rescue activities, the resources of our State have been severely strained. I supported this amendment, and I am encouraged that this amendment passed. It is clear that Hawaii will not be able to fully recover without substantial Federal assistance.

Mr. President, I wish to reiterate that a clear distinction needs to be made for true emergencies and natural disasters such as Hurricane Katrina and the floods in Hawaii, which could not have been anticipated.

It is fiscally irresponsible for the current administration to continue to treat this war as an emergency in order to hide the true cost of the war and circumvent the normal budgeting and oversight process. If the current administration continues to refuse to make hard choices and insist on a policy of funding the war through emergency appropriations, succeeding generations of Americans will face even more difficult choices.

Mr. President, I rise to speak in favor of the bipartisan amendment that Finance Committee Chairman Grassley has just offered. As ranking Democrat on the Finance Committee, I have worked with Chairman Grassley to develop this amendment. The amendment provides $38 million to the Social Security Administration, SSA--fully paid for--to reimburse the costs SSA incurred as a result of Hurricane Katrina and other hurricanes of the 2005 season.

The supplemental appropriations bill, as reported by the Senate Appropriations Committee, would appropriate $106.5 billion, including $ 67.7 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, $4.5 billion for foreign assistance programs, and $27.1 billion for relief needed because of last season's hurricanes. In contrast, no funding for SSA to make up for its costs from Katrina and the other hurricanes is currently provided in the supplemental.

The Social Security Administration performed superbly in the aftermath of these hurricanes. SSA assisted more than 528,000 persons in FEMA Disaster Recovery Centers and shelters and helped many others who came to its field offices. To provide such assistance, SSA urgently invoked emergency procedures and issued approximately 85,000 immediate payments for displaced beneficiaries and those who could not access their bank or other financial accounts. In addition, SSA changed the addresses of displaced beneficiaries, provided individuals who had lost their identification documents with confirmation of their Social Security numbers, and took applications from many people from the affected areas who had become newly eligible for Social Security disability or survivors benefits or benefits from the Supplemental Security Income program. SSA even passed along messages to beneficiaries from worried family members. Finally, some SSA employees drove hours to provide relief to overstretched field offices, sometimes sleeping on air mattresses set up in the offices because there were no other places to stay.

Together, these activities caused SSA to redirect $38 million from funding for its normal tasks and obligations. There were costs to SSA of $6 million to acquire and outfit temporary space and renovate offices damaged by the storm, including costs for computers, furniture and supplies. SSA estimates that there were $12 million in costs for new workloads, including processing immediate payments, changing addresses, confirming Social Security numbers, and taking new claims that resulted from the hurricanes. It cost SSA $7 million to pay for the travel and per diem expenses for employees who came to the affected areas from other regions to help, as well as for employees who were forced to relocate because of damaged or destroyed homes and offices and who continued to work in other offices. Costs related to unprocessed work include $12 million for SSA workloads, such as claims, hearings, that were not processed as a result of the storms' disruptions. Nearly $1 million was spent to pay the salaries of those SSA workers who volunteered to work for FEMA in the affected areas, and thus were not doing their regular SSA work.

Unfortunately for SSA, it had already had its funding cut by a total of $300 million below the President's request for fiscal year 2006. Rather than being able to absorb the $38 million caused by the hurricanes, SSA found its $300 million shortfall being exacerbated by these additional $38 million of costs.

The Social Security Administration could make very good use of an additional $38 million of funding for fiscal year 2006 at this time by increasing overtime hours. This would allow SSA to make up for a small piece of the reductions and delays of service to its normal applicants and beneficiaries.

In the Senate-passed supplemental, many Federal agencies are reimbursed for costs arising from these hurricanes. Surprisingly, that is not the case for the Social Security Administration. This is especially ironic in view of the efforts of the Social Security Administration and its employees to help the gulf coast and its citizens, including some efforts that were above and beyond the call of duty.

This bipartisan amendment will address this funding shortfall for the Social Security Administration by providing it with an additional $38 million for the current fiscal year. The amendment is fully paid for. As reported by the Appropriations Committee, the supplemental appropriations bill provides $10.6 billion to FEMA for disaster relief from Hurricane Katrina and other hurricanes of the 2005 season. Of this amount, according to the committee report, $2.4 billion is provided for ``other needs.'' Although the report provides some examples of such ``other needs,'' there is no list of specific projects and activities whose costs total $2.4 billion. This amendment increases SSA's funding for fiscal year 2006 by $38 million and reduces the $10.6 billion appropriated for the FEMA Disaster Relief account in this bill. The $2.4 billion provided by this bill for ``other needs'' is part of the $10.6 billion appropriated for the FEMA Disaster Relief account in the bill. This amendment will not result in the loss of any specific project or activity provided for by this bill. Nor will it cause

this bill to result in any additional costs to the Federal Government.

This amendment will restore the loss of resources for the Social Security Administration that has resulted from the 2005 season's hurricanes. I believe this is the right thing to do. I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to follow my good friend from Utah and join with my colleagues from New Jersey and North Carolina tonight to speak in support of Federal legislation to restore the single most important part of our Constitution, the 10th amendment.

We all know from English class the beginning and the end of a document are the most important, and why our Constitution begins with, ``We, the People,'' and why the Founders wrote at the very end of the Constitution a declaration that they believed was as self-evident as saying the sky is blue: That all power not specifically delegated to the Federal Government in the Constitution was reserved to the People and the States.

The 10th amendment has been forgotten largely, and all of us as Republicans are committed to doing everything that we can to try to preserve and protect the power of the States and individuals. The way I often express it to my constituents is, I am a Republican because I want to get the Federal Government out of our lives and free us from the income tax, the most intrusive possible tax, to go to a national consumption tax to restore local control over public education, which is what we are here to talk about tonight, legislation that I filed with my colleague from Utah (Mr. Bishop), with other colleagues here tonight from New Jersey and North Carolina.

H.R. 3499 will return control over public education to the States using a very simple concept that I can really actually best illustrate by using these three glasses of water.

If you imagine that this first glass represents we the people and the water within it all the rights, powers, and privileges given to us as individuals directly from the hand of God, the way our constitutional system works is that we the people, and I will use Texas as the example. When we the people of Texas created the Republic of Texas, we only agreed in the creation of the Republic of Texas in our constitution to give the Republic of Texas maybe that much power and reserve the rest to we the people.

When the Republic of Texas became a State at midnight December 29, 1845, and this is true of every other State in the Union, when Texas joined the Union in 1845, the State of Texas only agreed to give the Federal Government maybe about that much power. Very limited and specific.

But as a result of the war between the States, the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, the Radical Reconstruction Congress, the concentration of power in Washington, Congressmen who love to pass bills that are tough on crime and who want to protect the schools and the little children, and FDR and the New Deal, and judges like William Wayne Justice in Texas, who took over our prison system, all power today is concentrated in Washington. There is really very little, if anything, left in the States; and certainly we wonder how much individual freedom we have left.

However, what Congress can take away by statute we can restore by statute. And there is so much Federal law governing the way our public schools work that these two books, Mr. Speaker, represent the two public education titles, Title XX of the U.S. Code, and that is the other half of Title XX. Those Federal statutes that send about $13 billion out to the States in Federal education grants are sent to the States primarily through the education bureaucracies.

I, like Mr. Bishop, came to the State legislature. We would meet in Texas every other year. And when we would return, we would discover that the Texas Education Agency had signed us up for some new Federal education grant program that we knew nothing about. But we now, as State legislators, had the responsibility to pay for that program. And often it was an underfunded or completely unfunded Federal mandate which we then had to come up with new money, like Mr. Bishop mentioned for the computer.

I have been looking for a way to design a Federal law that operated automatically, like a computer virus, transferring authority over public education over these Federal grant programs automatically back to the States, transferring, and using the water glasses again, the Federal glass, by statute, control back to the States over public education automatically.

H.R. 3499 does that. It states very simply that all Federal education grant programs, other than IDEA, the Individuals with Disability Education Act, and Federal grants, for example, to Indian nations or military bases, that all other Federal education grant programs, about $13 billion worth, go away in your State unless the State legislature passes a law and says, yes, we want the money with all the strings attached and we surrender State sovereignty or State control over public education to the extent that State law is inconsistent with Federal law.

This would do several things: First of all, obviously, it would save a lot of money, for the money that the States walk away from saying that there are too many strings. But H.R. 3499 is in the Education Committee, and I deeply appreciate the support of my colleagues in helping to bring it to the floor for a vote to restore 10th amendment control over our schools.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Rockefeller) is necessarily absent.

Mr. President, I rise today to speak in support of the provisions in the supplemental spending bill to assist agricultural producers suffering from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, drought, wildfires, and other natural disasters. I would like to thank Chairman Cochran and Senator Byrd for their work on this bill, as well as my colleagues who have worked with me on this matter since last summer's Midwest drought.

This has not been an easy year for our Nation's farmers and ranchers. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita wreaked havoc on producers throughout the gulf coast. Losses to livestock and crop production in the gulf coast total in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Many farmers in that part of the country will not even have the opportunity to plant their crops this season due to saltwater intrusion on their lands.

In addition, for farmers outside the gulf coast, the hurricane brought about higher fuel prices and increased the cost of shipping as the Port of New Orleans was temporarily closed. In my home State of Illinois, producers have suffered one of the worst droughts since 1895. The period from March 2005 to February 2006 was the third driest March to February period since 1895. Even with some very fortunate late rains, these drought conditions significantly lowered both yields and the value of the year's harvest.

According to the USDA's National Agricultural Statistics Service, NASS, the value of Illinois' corn crop decreased by more than $1.1 billion, or about 25 percent, from 2004 to 2005 even as corn acreage increased. At least 10 counties in northeast and western Illinois sustained greater than 20 percent losses in corn yields. Unfortunately, farmers and ranchers are not expecting this crop year to reverse last year's trend. USDA's Economic Research Service, ERS, expects net farm income to drop 23.2 percent this year, from $72.7 billion to $56.2 billion, due in large part to stagnant crop prices and rising energy costs.

To make matters more difficult, the price of diesel fuel has doubled since the summer of 2004. Fertilizer prices have taken off as well, increasing by more than 30 percent per acre since 2001. Even with increased efficiency, these rising prices are hurting our Nation's farming families.

Because farmers use so much energy running their tractors and combines, applying fertilizers, and hauling their products by truck to buyers and markets, these prices are squeezing the already thin profit margins of our Nation's producers. Especially when we keep in mind that commodity prices have stayed fairly level over the past 2 years we can see why these natural disasters and high energy costs may be putting our farmers at risk of losing their farms.

The provisions that some of my colleagues and the Bush administration seek to strike would provide assistance to producers who suffered crop losses due to natural disasters such as the drought in the Corn Belt and flooding in various parts of the country, and to those who lost livestock, such as Texas ranchers in this year's wildfires. The measures that are under attack here would also provide a direct payment to producers who are struggling to keep their heads above water due to the rapidly increasing cost of fuel and other inputs.

This is what surprises me most--at this trying time for our Nation's farmers and ranchers, Members of Congress are actively working to prevent this much needed assistance from reaching our farmers and ranchers. The Bush administration has even gone so far as to say that there has been no disaster at all, even though the Secretary of Agriculture designated 101 of 102 counties in Illinois as disaster areas. Well, the Bush administration budget crunchers aren't talking to their own disaster experts, let alone farmers in western Illinois or ranchers in Texas or anyone who is trying to pay rising energy costs while growing the wheat, corn, and soybeans that keep our people fed.

Now is not the time to turn away from the thousands of farmers who will depend on this assistance to purchase equipment and stay in business this season. I ask my colleagues to join me in expressing their support for these important provisions that will provide some much needed relief for our nation's agricultural producers. I hope the Senate will insist that agricultural assistance be included in the final supplemental spending bill, notwithstanding the misguided positions of the White House and House on this important matter.