Belated Thank You to the Merchant Mariners of World War II Act of 2005

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill to support the Nation's finest: our police, fire fighters and other emergency response personnel. The ``Spectrum Availability for Emergency-response and Law-enforcement to Improve Vital Emergency Services Act,'' otherwise known as ``The SAVE LIVES Act of 2005.'' This bill is drafted in response to the 9/11 Commission's Final Report, which recommended the ``expedited and increased assignment of radio spectrum for public safety purposes.''

To meet this recommendation, the SAVE LIVES Act would set a date certain for the allocation of spectrum to public safety agencies, specifically the 24 MHz of spectrum in the 700 MHz band that Congress promised public safety agencies in 1997. This is a promise Congress has yet to deliver to our Nation's first responders. Access to this specific spectrum is essential to our Nation's safety and welfare as emergency communications sent over these frequencies are able to penetrate walls and travel great distances, and can assist multiple jurisdictions in deploying interoperable communications systems.

In addition to setting a date certain, this bill would authorize funds for public safety agencies to purchase emergency communications equipment and ensure that Congress has the ability to consider whether additional spectrum should be provided for public safety communications prior to the recovered spectrum being auctioned. The bill contains significant language concerning consumer education in anticipation of the digital television transition. The bill would mandate that warning labels be displayed on analog television sets sold prior to the transition, require warning language to be displayed at television retailers, command the distribution at retailers of brochures describing the television set options available to consumers, and call on broadcasters to air informational programs to better prepare consumers for the digital transition.

The bill would ensure that no television viewer's set would go ``dark'' by providing digital-to-analog converter boxes to over-the-air viewers with a household income at or below 200 percent of the poverty line and by allowing cable companies to down convert digital signal signals if necessary. I continue to believe that broadcast television is a powerful communications tool and important information source for citizens. I know that on 9/11, I learned about the attack on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon by watching television like most Americans. Therefore, this bill seeks to not only protect citizens' safety, but also the distribution of broadcast television.

Lastly, the bill would require the Environmental Protection Agency to report to Congress on the need for a national electronic waste recycling program.

The 9/11 Commission's final report contained harrowing tales about police officers and fire fighters who were inside the twin towers and unable to receive evacuation orders over their radios from commanders. In fact, the report found that this inability to communicate was not only a problem for public safety organizations responding at the World Trade Center, but also for those responding at the Pentagon and Somerset County, Pennsylvania crash sites where multiple organizations and multiple jurisdictions responded. Therefore, the Commission recommended that Congress accelerate the availability of additional spectrum for public safety.

The SAVE LIVES Act would implement that important recommendation and ensure that WHEN our Nation experiences another attack, or other critical emergencies occur, our police, fire fighters and other emergency response personnel will have the ability to communicate with each other and their commanders to prevent another catastrophic loss of life. Now is the time for Congressional action before another national emergency or crisis takes place.

Several lawmakers attempted to act last year during the debate on the Intelligence reform bill, but our efforts were thwarted by the powerful National Association of Broadcasters. This year, I hope we can all work together and pass a bill that ensures the country is not only better prepared in case of another attack, but also protects the vital communications outlet of broadcast television. I believe the SAVE LIVES Act achieves both goals.

In an effort to expeditiously retrieve the spectrum for the Nation's first responders, to preserve over-the-air television accessibility to consumers and to ensure the adequate funding of both, I urge the enactment of The SAVE LIVES Act. Additionally, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, today I rise on behalf of myself and Senator Ensign to offer legislation that will give greater protections to our Nation's wild horses and make needed improvements to the Bureau of Land Management's wild horse and burro adoption program.

Right now there are an estimated 32,000 wild horses on our Nation's public lands. This is 4,000 more horses than our rangeland can sustain. The Bureau of Land Management has established that nationwide, the Appropriate Management Level for wild horses and burros is 28,000. Unfortunately, after many years of trying, the BLM has been unable to reach this benchmark, even after many significant budget increases for the wild horse and burro program. This situation is compounded by the fact that wild horses naturally reproduce at a rate of 20 percent per annum, adding to management difficulties and placing greater strain on our public rangelands.

In Nevada, we feel the failures of the wild horse and burro program most acutely. Of the 32,000 horses on America's public lands, roughly half are in Nevada. So when the program fails, it hits us hard. In recent years, the program's shortcomings have been amplified by an ongoing drought in the Southwest that has, in places, seriously jeopardized the health and well-being of wild horses and burros and has devastated the rangeland upon which they depend for their survival.

At present, the wild horse program is failing on both ends. The BLM is struggling to remove sufficient numbers of horses from the range and many of the horses that are removed are placed into an adoption program that is not locating a sufficient number of willing adopters. This means that more horses stay in Government hands, driving the cost of this troubled program ever higher. As a result, today we have nearly 22,000 wild horses sitting in long-term holding facilities in the Midwest, costing the U.S. taxpayer approximately $465 per horse, per year. And this is only part of the roughly $40 million we are spending this year to manage our Nation's wild horses and burros. Add this to the fact that the cost of running this program has doubled in the last five years and it becomes clear that reform is needed.

Last year, Congress passed language that allowed the BLM to sell a limited number of the horses that are held in long-term holding facilities. Unfortunately, this additional management tool has been abused by a handful of people and a small number of horses ended up at slaughter. These unfortunate events have led to calls for greater protections for wild horses that are being offered to the public under the sale program.

Mr. President, the legislation that we offer today provides that greater protection for wild horses, while also giving the BLM greater leverage to put more horses into the hands of good, caring owners.

Currently, wild horses that are acquired through the BLM's adoption program are federally protected for 1 year. This is the strongest protection available to wild horses that are placed into private ownership and our bill extends this protection to horses that are acquired under sale authority.

Our legislation also gives the BLM more flexibility in finding good homes for wild horses. We do this by giving the BLM the authority to make all horses that are not suitable for the adoption program available for purchase by caring owners.

We also lift the limit on the number of horses that an approved adopter can take title to in a single year, and we lower the minimum adoption fee from $125 to $25. It is our firm belief that when good people want to adopt horses and meet the requirements set forth by the BLM, they should have as few barriers to overcome as possible. By increasing the number of horses that can be adopted and lowering the adoption fee, we believe that we can put more horses into the hands of more quality owners.

Our goal is to give all wild horses the maximum protection available under our current system and to provide the BLM with the management tools they need to get tens of thousands of wild horses and burros into safe and caring homes. We believe that this is the right thing to do. I look forward to working with the Energy Committee and the Senate to move this legislation expeditiously.

I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Pest Management and Fire Suppression Flexibility Act. I am proud to be joined by ten of my colleagues, Senators Lincoln, Crapo, Bond, Isakson, Craig, Chambliss, Cochran, Thomas, Hagel and Roberts. This legislation codifies long-standing Democratic and Republican Administration policy of not requiring a Clean Water Act permit for pesticides in full compliance with their EPA-approved label. It will further affirm historic a Federal practices with regard to the Clean Water Act and fire suppression and other foreset management activities.

In 1972, Congress enacted both the Clean Water Act and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act. CWA authorized the Environmental Protection Agency to protect the Nation's waterways by regulating discharges of large industrial operations and wastewater facilities through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. FIFRA proyided the EPA with the authority to regulate the sale and use of pesticides through a comprehensive registration and labeling protocol.

Until some recent court decisions, the application of agricultural and other pesticides in full compliance with labeling requirements did not require NPDES permits. Because pesticides undergo lengthy testing under FIFRA including tests to ensure water quality and aquatic species preservation, a NPDES permit was considered unnecessary and duplicative. These court decisions commonly known as Talent and Forsgren contradict years of Federal policy and undermine the manner in which the Federal Government regulates farmers, foresters, irrigators, mosquito abatement officials, and other pesticide applicators.

Similar cases are pending. Groups are now using the notice of intent to sue to intimidate farmers, mosquito abatement districts and Federal and State agencies into stopping or reducing West Nile virus prevention and crop loss rangeland protection operations. While EPA has proposed a rule to ensure that pesticides sprayed to, near, or over waters do not need a permit, the rule needs to be codified in statute. Environmentalists who filed notices of intent to sue Maine's two largest blueberry farmers have indicated that they plan on threatening others with lawsuits including more farmers and foresters.

Our legislation fills this regulatory gap left by EPA. While the agency's rule is a step in the right direction, our legislation codifies the agency's longstanding policy that the application of agricultural and other pesticides, in accordance with their label, does not require an NPDES permit. Moreover, the rule does not protect farmers, irrigators, mosquito abatement districts, fire fighters, Federal and State agencies, pest control operators or foresters vulnerable to citizen's suits, simply for performing long-practiced, expressly approved and already heavily regulated pest management and public health protection activities. Without such protection, those who protet us from mosquito borne illnesses and other pest outbreaks or combat destructive and potentially deadly forest fires will continue to be potential victims of mischievous citizen's suits.

My bill codifies EPA's rulemaking, as well as affirms Congressional intent and the long-held positions of Republican and Democratic administrations with regard to the CWA and pesticide applications generally, as well as fire suppression and other forest management activities. I am pleased to be joined by so many of my colleagues in this effort and encourage others to cosponsor our proposal.

Mr. Speaker, my bill, H.R. 23, the ``Belated Thank You to the Merchant Mariners of World War II Act'' will correct the injustice that has been inflicted on a group of World War II veterans, the World War II United States Merchant Marines.

Senator Larry Craig has posted on his Web site his views of S. 1272, the Senate companion bill to H.R. 23. His views have been addressed by the co-chairs of the Just Compensation Committee of the U.S. Merchant Marine Combat Veterans. They have requested that the Senator's views and their letter be placed into the Congressional Record.

What is Senator Craig's position on S. 1272?

Without question, the service provided by members of the

U.S. Merchant Marine was invaluable to America's victory over

the Axis powers during World War II. Merchant Mariners in

oceangoing missions served alongside active components of the

Armed Forces as they braved the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans

to deliver vital supplies and manpower to the warfront.

Undaunted by their difficult missions, Merchant Mariners

suffered heavy casualties from enemy naval forces and land-

to-sea artillery fire. To all members of the U.S. Merchant

Marine who put themselves in harm's way, I say ``thank you''

for your service.

Civilian groups like the U.S. Merchant Marine have

frequently performed the equivalent of military service

throughout our nation's history. In recognition of that fact,

Congress, through the enactment of Public Law 95-202

(established in 1977), a process by which civilian groups

could be recognized for their service and be classified as

``veterans'' for purposes of all benefits administered by the

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The Secretary of the Air

Force was chosen to be the Executive Agent of the Defense

Department in making decisions about granting that status.

And the Air Force Secretary's decisions are informed by a

review process conducted by the Civilian Military Service

Review Board. Since 1977, 30 groups have been recognized as

having attained veteran status. In 1988, members of the U.S.

Merchant Marine who served between December 7, 1941 and

August 15, 1945 were recognized.

The criteria for having civilian service equated with

military service are necessarily stringent. That is as it

should be; we should never water down what it means to be a

veteran of the United States Armed Forces.

With that perspective in mind, I turn now to the merits of

S. 1272. S. 1272, among other things, would entitle certain

members of the U.S. Merchant Marine (or, if deceased, their

surviving spouses) who served between December 7, 1941 and

December 31, 1946, to a $1,000 monthly payment. The $1,000

monthly payment would be in addition to any other VA

benefits. The following are the reasons why I do not support

Mr. President, today I join my colleagues, Senators Nelson, Mikulski, Landrieu, Murkowski, Boxer, Snowe, Reed, Roberts, Lautenberg, DeWine, Smith, Jeffords, Corzine, Stevens, Sarbanes, Kerry, Lincoln, Murray, Durbin, Coleman, Feinstein, Johnson, Collins, Schumer, Baucus, Cochran, Brownback, Cantwell, Clinton, Dodd, Lieberman, and Stabenow in cosponsoring S. 1272, Belated Thank You to the Merchant Mariners of World War II Act of 2005.

The contribution Merchant Mariners made during WWII have gone unheralded for far too long. The Merchant Marine is the forgotten service of World War II.

Although their numbers were small, they suffered the highest casualties of any service in World War II. Merchant mariners were responsible for transporting troops, tanks, food, fuel, airplanes and other supplies and, as a result, their likelihood of combat was extremely high. In fact, enemy forces sank over 800 of their ships between 1941 and 1944.

For more than 40 years, Merchant Mariners were denied any G.I. bill of rights benefits. In 1988, they were granted a ``watered down'' version of the G.I. bill of rights, but some portions of those benefits were never made available to them. In addition, they still have not received proper recognition as veterans for Social Security purposes.

This legislation would rectify that inequity by recognizing these American heroes with the status of ``veteran,'' and it would grant a small monthly stipend to these veterans or their widows in order to offset their lost benefits.

As a veteran, I will always seek to protect the honored place of our military heroes. I cherish their service, and I will do everything in my power to support their interests. I look forward to working with my Senate colleagues to pass this important piece of legislation.