Medicaid Advanced Practice Nurses and Physician Assistants Access Act of 2005

Mr. President, once again, I am proud to join my friend Senator Feingold as a co-sponsor of legislation that will require Senate candidates to file campaign finance reports in electronic form. This bill will finally remove the exemption the Senate has given itself from an important requirement of campaign finance disclosure laws that apply to everyone else, including candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives and Political Action Committees (PACs).

Political committees active in Federal elections must submit their quarterly financial reports for disclosure by the Federal Election Commission (FEC). Anyone interested can nearly instantaneously download the reports from the FEC website and conduct computer searches to learn about the contributions and expenditures of individual candidates for the House, non-Senate national party committees and PACs. The current problem is that they cannot do the same for Senate candidates and parties because of the Senate's insistence on paper rather than electronic filing. The FEC must do more processing of Senate paper reports than of House electronic ones. This involves printing or copying the Senate reports, up to 10,000 pages a day at times, hand- coding transactions that cannot be automatically processed, the keypunching the data into the electronic database. House electronic reports do not need the same treatment. The end result is that in contrast to the House, information from the Senate paper reports are often not available until well after the election has occurred.

Because of this problem, it is impossible for voters to be well- informed about the campaign finance information of their Senators and Senate candidates. If a voter wants to consider the nature of the campaign finance support received by a Senate candidate and compare that support to Senate legislative votes as a factor in deciding for whom they will cast a vote, they simply cannot do so due to the antiquated nature of the reporting system.

To address this problem, our legislation requires Senate candidates to file their campaign finance reports electronically with the Secretary of the Senate. Within 24 hours of receipt of those reports, the Secretary is required to forward those reports to the FEC. The FEC, in turn is required to make those reports available on the Internet within 24 hours as they do other reports. Therefore, electronic versions of Senate reports will be available to the public within 48 hours of their filing.

Electronic reports are not only transmitted instantly but are more accurate than paper submissions because software can easily correct mistakes. On the other hand, hand entering of data is always prone to error. Furthermore, the data in electronic reports can be rapidly searched via the Internet for answers to specific questions. Voters will no longer have to go through the time consuming process of reading pages and pages filed by Senate candidates or Senate party committees to figure out the major donors and their employers, and the major recipients of campaign spending. Instead, they can downlown a filed report from the FEC website onto their personal computers and quickly locate the information they need. This creates effective public disclosure.

The Senate's current failure to provide its constituents with electronically disclosed, timely information is unconscionable. Senate filings should follow the same criteria as other campaign finance reports. There must not be a separate standard for the Senate. Ironically, while they do not currently file electronically, Senators and Senate candidates already use electronic software in compiling their paper reports. If Senators and Senate candidates can use technology to run their offices and websites, why can't they use it to better inform their own constituents about how their campaigns are funded? Our constituents have a right to that information.

Mr. President, today I am once again introducing legislation together with Senators Mikulski, Biden, Clinton, Murkowski, Murray, Wyden, Lautenberg, Schumer, and Durbin which would grant a Federal charter to the Korean War Veterans Association, Incorporated. This legislation, which has passed the Senate in each of the past three Congresses, recognizes the 5.7 million Americans who fought and served during the Korean War and honors their sacrifices on behalf of freedom and the principles and ideals of our Nation.

Today marks the 52nd Anniversary of the signing of the Military Armistice Agreement which officially ended armed hostilities on the Korean Peninsula. By the time the fighting ended, 8,177 Americans were listed as missing or prisoners of war some of whom are still missing and more than 36,000 Americans had died. One hundred and thirty-one Korean War Veterans were awarded the Nation's highest commendation for combat bravery, the Medal of Honor. Ninety-four of these soldiers gave their lives in the process.

When the North Korea People's Army swept across the 38th Parallel to occupy Seoul, South Korea in June of 1950, members of our Armed Forces including many from the State of Maryland immediately answered the call of the U.N. to repel this forceful invasion. Without hesitation, these soldiers traveled to an unfamiliar corner of the world to join an unprecedented multi-national force comprised of 22 countries, and risked their lives to protect freedom. The Americans who led this international effort were true patriots who fought with remarkable courage. In battles such as Pork Chop Hill, the Inchon Landing, and the frozen Chosin Reservoir, which was fought in temperatures as low as fifty-seven degrees below zero, they faced some of the most brutal combat in history.

The sacrifices made by these brave individuals are well described by an engraving on the Korean War Veterans Memorial, which reads: ``Freedom is not Free.'' Yet, as a Nation, we have done little more than establish this memorial to publicly acknowledge the bravery of those who fought in the Korean War. The Korean War has been termed by many as the ``Forgotten War.'' Freedom is not free. We owe our Korean War Veterans a debt of gratitude. Granting this Federal charter--at no cost to the government--is a small expression of appreciation that we as a Nation can offer to these men and women, one which will enable them to work as a unified front to ensure that the ``Forgotten War'' is forgotten no more.

The Korean War Veterans Association was originally incorporated on June 25, 1985. Since its first annual reunion and memorial service in Arlington, VA, where its members decided to develop a national focus and strong commitment to service, the association has grown substantially to a membership of over 17,000. A Federal charter would allow the Association to continue to grow its mission and further its charitable and benevolent causes. Specifically, it will afford the Korean War Veterans' Association the same status as other major veterans' organizations and allow it to participate as part of select committees with other congressionally chartered veterans and military groups. A Federal charter will also accelerate the Association's ``accreditation'' with the Department of Veterans Affairs which will enable its members to assist in processing veterans' claims.

The Korean War Veterans have asked for very little in return for their service and sacrifice. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation and ask that the text of the measure be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation with Senator DeWine which will close a loophole in the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA). By clarifying this statute, a State's right to prevent unwanted forms of gambling in the State will be protected.

The current laws governing Indian gambling are ambiguous when outlining which types of gambling are allowed. The provision in the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, IGRA, that determines permitted gambling activities defines casino-style gambling as Class III, including slot machines, blackjack, craps, roulette, some lotteries and pari-mutuel racing. This class of gambling activity on Indian lands can only be, and I quote, ``located in a State that permits such gaming for any purpose by any person, organization or entity.''

It is unclear whether this means that the statutory language should be read and applied in a class-wide or categorical sense or whether it should be read and applied on an activity-by-activity basis.

District and circuit Federal courts have both considered this question. In 1991, a District Court in Wisconsin ruled that if a State permits one type of class III gaming, then all other types of class III gaming can be conducted in that State under the IGRA.

On the other hand, in 1993 and 1994, the Eighth and Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeals construed the language of the

IGRA to mean that class III gaming in a particular State is limited under the Federal law to the specific activities that are permitted under that State's laws.

In July 2005, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals revealed that these uncertainties continue when it ruled in favor of the Northern Arapaho tribe in their efforts to build a casino, with ``Vegas Style'' gambling in Wyoming. In this instance, the tribe argued that it is entitled to offer full Class III gambling because the State allows casino style activities for social or nonprofit purposes.

In Ohio, gambling for commercial purposes is prohibited by the State Constitution. However, pari-mutuel racing and lottery are both permitted as well as charitable gambling on a very limited and controlled basis.

The bill I am introducing today will clarify that Class III gambling under IGRA applies only on an activity-by-activity basis, rather than in a class-wide sense.

I have been a long time supporter of a ban on casino gambling and have taken steps to keep casino gambling out of Ohio. As Mayor of Cleveland and as Governor of Ohio, I worked to inform Ohioans of the negative impact casino gambling has on our families and our economy, leading to gambling's defeat at the polls. These initiatives proved to be successful and have kept legalized gambling under control in Ohio.

My introduction of this legislation comes at a time when the progress we've made is in danger of being compromised. Across the country, Indian tribes are looking to expand gambling and even looking at a State like Ohio where gambling is illegal. The distinction in my bill is necessary to help control the explosive growth of tribal casinos nationwide.

I call on my colleagues to join us in cosponsoring this bill.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the ``Captive Primate Safety Act of 2005''. I am joined by Senators Chafee, Lieberman and Lautenburg.

Non-human primates in homes and communities pose serious risks to public health and safety. An attack in March of this year on a California man by chimpanzees who escaped their confinement is only one example of how dangerous these animals can be. A 13-year-old girl was attacked in West Virginia in May and on July 12th a 20-year-old man was attacked by two monkeys in Ohio.

Not only can non-human primates cause serious injury, they can spread potentially life-threatening illnesses. Since 1975, Federal regulations have forbidden the import of monkeys and other non-human primates as pets due to Centers for Disease Control (CDC) concerns about diseases such as

monkeypox, yellow fever, Marburg/Ebola disease, tuberculosis, and other diseases not yet known or recognized.

Nevertheless, there is still a vigorous trade in these animals, with as many as 15,000 primates held in private hands across America according to some estimates. State laws that seek to regulate primates as pets are undermined by the interstate commerce of these animals. Federal legislation is needed to better support safety regulations of the CDC and the states.

Infant primates may seem cute and cooperative, but they inevitably grow larger, stronger, and more aggressive. They may become many times stronger than humans and extremely difficult to handle. They can inflict serious harm by biting and scratching. Removing their teeth, as many pet owners do, is cruel and not a safeguard against injury. About 100 people reportedly have been injured by non-human primates over the past ten years, including 29 children.

This legislation amends the Lacey Act to prohibit transporting monkeys, great apes, (including chimpanzees and orangutans), marmosets, lemurs, and other non-human primates across State lines for the pet trade, much like the Captive Wildlife Safety Act, which passed unanimously in 2003, did for tigers and other big cats.

The legislation is narrowly crafted to get at the heart of the dangerous problem of keeping primates as pets. It has no impact on the trade or transportation of animals for federally licensed facilities, universities or accredited wildlife sanctuaries. It will not affect zoos or research facilities. Federal licenses or registration are required for all commercial activity, such as breeders, dealers, research institutions, exhibitors, and transporters, therefore, they are exempt. The prohibitions in the Lacey Act only apply in other situations, that is, in the pet trade.

This legislation is supported by more than 40 groups, including the Humane Society of the United States, the American Zoo and Aquarium Association, the American Veterinary Medical Association, Defenders of Wildlife and the International Fund for Animal Welfare.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and will work our partners in the House to enact the Captives Primate Safety Act.

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

Mr. President, today I will once again introduce with the Senator from Arizona, Mr. McCain, a bill to bring Senate campaigns into the 21st century by requiring that Senate candidates file their campaign finance disclosure reports electronically and that those reports be promptly made available to the public. We are very pleased to be joined in our effort in this Congress by the distinguished senior Senator from Mississippi, Mr. Cochran. This step is long overdue, and I hope the Senate will act quickly on this legislation.

A series of reports by the Campaign Finance Institute have highlighted the anomaly in the election laws that makes it nearly impossible for the public to get access to Senate campaign finance reports while most other reports are available on the Internet within 24 hours of their filing with the Federal Election Commission (FEC). The Campaign Finance Institute asks a rhetorical question: ``What makes the Senate so special that it exempts itself from a key requirement of campaign finance disclosure that applies to everyone else, including candidates for the House of Representatives and Political Action Committees?''

The answer, of course, is nothing. The United States Senate is special in many ways. I am proud to serve here. But there is no justification for not making our campaign finance information as readily accessible to the public as the information filed by House candidates or others.

My bill amends the section of the election laws dealing with electronic filing to require reports filed with the Secretary of the Senate to be filed electronically and forwarded to the FEC within 24 hours. The FEC is required to make available on the Internet within 24 hours any filing it receives electronically. So if this bill is enacted, electronic versions of Senate reports should be available to the public within 48 hours of their filing. That will be a vast improvement over the current situation, which, according to CFI, requires journalists and interested members of the public to review computer images of paper-filed copies of reports, and involves a completely wasteful expenditure of hundreds of thousands of dollars to re-enter information into databases that almost every campaign has available in electronic format.

The current filing system also means that the detailed coding that the FEC does, which allows for more sophisticated searches and analysis, is completed over a week later for Senate reports than for House reports. This means that the final disclosure reports covering the first two weeks of October are often not susceptible to detailed scrutiny before the election.

It is time for the Senate to relinquish its backward attitude toward campaign finance disclosure. I urge the enactment of this simple bill that will make

our reports subject to the same prompt, public scrutiny as those filed by PACs and candidates for the other body.

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