Internet Non-Discrimination Act of 2006

Mr. President, these have not been easy times for vast numbers of Americans. In many ways, the American dream is in peril for millions of our fellow citizens as global forces have caused the economy to shift against them.

Complacency is not the answer. Few things more affect the way we live than our shrinking and rapidly changing world. Unless we begin to address this immense challenge more effectively, the Nation will pay a high price for years and years to come. Now is the right time to reinvest in America's future, which is why I am today introducing the Right TRACK Act.

American families across the Nation know the problem. It is measured in jobs moving overseas, stagnant or even falling wages and benefits, our schools losing ground compared to other nations, and fewer opportunities to attain the American dream. Indeed, the course we are on today is a course that will make the American dream the impossible dream.

America cannot move forward if we cut back on investments in education, invention, and innovation, as the administration has proposed. We cannot compete in the world if our companies and our workers are saddled with soaring costs for health care. We cannot advance if we fail to invest in our own employees by paying them a decent wage, by taking steps to enable companies to keep jobs here at home, and by investing wisely in our own economic growth.

The 20th century was widely hailed as the American century, but the 21st century is up for grabs. No nation is guaranteed a future of lasting prosperity. We have to work for it. We have to sacrifice for it.

We have a choice. We can continue to be buffeted by the harsh winds of the global economy or we can think anew and guide the currents of globalization with a new progressive vision that strengthens America and equips our citizens to move confidently to the future.

Competing better in a race to the bottom is not the answer. Equality of opportunity--a bedrock principle of our democracy--is suffering already. Today, children born of parents in the bottom 20 percent of income have only a 1 in 15 chance of reaching the top 20 percent in their lifetimes. Also disturbing is the fact that those born in the middle are more likely to sink to the bottom than to rise to the top. And those born at the top are likely to stay at the top.

We cannot and should not compete by lowering wages. Instead, we must open new doors and new avenues for all Americans to make the most of their God-given talents and rekindle the fires of innovation in our society. By doing so, we can turn this era of globalization into a new era of opportunity for America.

As Thomas Jefferson said, ``Every generation needs a new revolution.'' And I believe the revolution for this generation is to master our own destiny in the new global economy.

What is most required is a new vision for America's future in the global community. Our goal is to rekindle the American Dream, so that if people work hard and play by the rules, they can succeed in life, be better off than their parents, live in good neighborhoods, raise strong families in safe surroundings, work in decent jobs with decent pay and decent benefits and a decent retirement.

To do all that, we must make a commitment to lifelong education, to prepare every man, woman, and child for the new world of intensifying competition and increasingly sophisticated technologies.

We must create high-quality jobs for the years ahead by investing in research and development, encouraging innovation, and modernizing all aspects of our infrastructure.

We must level the playing field for American businesses and employees, to ensure fair worldwide competition and preserve good jobs in the United States.

And we must make a fair commitment to assist and care for workers and communities harmed by the forces of globalization.

We can do all that, but only if we make the right choices, and the time to start is now.

I strongly believe that our highest priority must be a world class education for every American. We must seek a future where America competes with other nations, not by reducing our employees' pay and outsourcing their jobs but by raising their skills.

As a Nation, we must invest in Americans by ensuring access to the highest quality educational opportunities. We must make the American worker and manager the best educated, best trained, and most capable in the world. We need to nourish the capacities of every person in the nation.

To do that, we must begin in the earliest years. Research proves conclusively that what we do for children's early education and development does more to ensure their later success in school than any other investment we can make. It is far less costly to society to spend millions to put young children on the right track from the start, instead of spending billions to rescue them from the wrong track later. In fact, one study concludes that in the long run, we save $13 for every dollar invested in the early education of our youngest citizens. Prevention works in health care, and it can work in education too.

For generations, we have treated education as a three-legged stool-- elementary and middle school, high school, and college. To create a solid foundation for the future, we have to add a fourth leg--early childhood education.

In elementary and secondary education, the No Child Left Behind Act was a pioneering reform that held great promise when it was signed into law by President Bush 4 years ago.

No Child Left Behind was not just an abstract goal. It was a moral commitment to every parent and every child and every school in America, and I was proud to stand with President Bush when he signed it. It soon became clear, however, that to the administration, it was more a slogan than a promise. Too many parents, too many children, too many schools are still waiting for the help we pledged.

We can't reform education without the resources needed to pay for the reforms. Promises alone won't provide the qualified teachers, high standards in every classroom, good afterschool activities, and the range of supplemental services that every good school needs if it is to provide the right help for students who need it.

No Child Left Behind was also a promise that every child counts-- Black or White or Brown, rich or poor. It was a promise that disabled children too will have the qualified teachers and individual support they need to succeed in school and in life.

We must also do more to help students prepare for college, afford college, be admitted to college and complete college. In 1950, when I graduated from school, only 15 percent of jobs required some postsecondary training. Today, the number is over 60 percent and rising rapidly.

However, we are witnessing a growing gulf in college attendance between the rich and poor. The gap is shameful. Each year, 400,000 college-ready students don't attend a 4-year college because they can't afford it. Never before has the financial challenge of attending college been greater for young students.

It is time for America to agree that cost must never be a barrier to college education. Every child in America should be offered a contract, when they reach eighth grade, making clear that if they work hard, finish high school, and are accepted for college, we will guarantee them the cost of earning a degree. The Right TRACK Act authorizes Federal grants to States to support the creation of ``Contract for Educational Opportunity'' grants to cover students' unmet need up to the cost of attendance at 2-year and 4-year public colleges in that State.

Perhaps nowhere is it more obvious that we are falling behind than in math and science. For a nation that prides itself on innovation and discovery, the downward slide is shocking. In recent years, we have dropped to 28th in the industrial world in math education. Each year, China graduates three times as many engineers as we do. Other nations are gaining on us because they give higher priority to education.

The last time America was shocked into realizing we were unacceptably behind in math and science was in 1958, when the Soviet Union launched Sputnik. Republican President Eisenhower and a Democratic Congress responded by passing the National Defense Education Act, and almost overnight we doubled the Federal investment in education.

In fact, throughout our history, we have remade American education to conquer the challenges of each time. In the mid-1800s, with the Industrial Revolution in full swing, we created free and mandatory public schools before most other nations did. And to stay ahead, we rapidly established public high schools at the start of the last century to keep pace with a growing economy.

Once again, we did something comparable at the end of World War II. We passed the GI Bill of Rights and gave every returning veteran the chance for a college education. The Nation reaped a $7 return for every dollar it invested in their education. The result was the ``greatest generation,'' and it would never have happened without the GI bill.

That is the kind of initiative we need today, because the need is just as great. We need a new Education Bill of Rights, a new National Defense Education Act, for our own day and generation in science and math.

Let's make college free for students training to become math or science teachers.

Let's make college and graduate school free for low- and middle- income math and science students.

Let's see that our standards are internationally competitive, so that our high school graduates can succeed in this new economy. Let's offer incentives and other support for schools to develop and implement rigorous standards and courses in math and science.

The Right TRACK Act responds to each of these challenges. The legislation provides grants to low- and middle-income students studying in science, technology, engineering, and math fields, as well as critical-need foreign languages. The bill provides larger grants to students studying to become teachers in these fields who agree to work in a high poverty school for at least 4 years. It also provides teachers with tax credits, increased loan forgiveness as additional incentives to continue to teach where they are needed the most and invests in teacher training programs supporting their continuing education.

The Right TRACK Act also provides resources to states to create P-16 Preparedness Councils to help States with their efforts to improve State standards and ensure that they are aligned with the expectations of colleges, employers, and the armed services. The bill also provides funding to States working in collaboration to establish common standards and assessments.

The bill also directs resources to high need schools so they can invest in math, science, engineering, and technology textbooks and laboratories to ensure their students have equal access to a curriculum that will provide them with the skills they need to be successful in the 21st century global economy.

It is becoming increasingly important for students to become exposed to and immersed in other languages and cultures. In recent years, foreign language needs have significantly increased throughout the public and private sector due to the presence of a wider range of security threats, the emergence of new nation states, and the globalization of the U.S. economy. American businesses increasingly need employees experienced in foreign languages and international cultures to manage a culturally diverse workforce. Foreign language proficiency is a consideration in 44 percent of hiring decisions and 66 percent of retention decisions. Currently, the U.S. Government requires 34,000 employees with foreign language skills in 100 languages across more than 80 Federal agencies.

The Right TRACK Act responds to these needs by providing grants for elementary and secondary critical-need language programs, summer institutes to improve teachers' knowledge and instruction of foreign languages and international content, and study abroad and foreign language study opportunities for high school students, undergraduate, and graduate students.

We must also continue to invest in our current workforce. The Right TRACK Act builds on existing formula funds for job training with competitive grants to support innovative strategies to meet emerging labor market needs.

From our earliest days as a nation, education has been the engine of the American dream. Our country is home to the greatest universities in the world, and our education system has produced the world's leading scientists, writers, musicians, and inventors. We cannot let these achievements stall now. Slogans aren't strong enough. We have to put first things first and give children, parents, schools, communities and States the support they need to refuel the amazing engine of education and keep our country great in the years ahead.

Beyond education, we must recognize that the foundation of our prosperity in this global world is to remain on the cutting edge of technology and medical and scientific breakthroughs in the years ahead and translate those advances into reliable products and services. A strong and fully developed infrastructure will provide the backbone for that success.

America has always been a world leader in research and development, but we can no longer take our success for granted. Even in highly skilled industries, where our technology and infrastructure have preserved our competitive advantage we are increasingly at risk today. Rapidly growing economies in Asia, Eastern Europe, and South America are now formidable competitors, developing their economies into engines of growth based not just on low wages but on well-educated citizens, advanced infrastructure, and well-run businesses.

In Bangalore, India, a G.E. center employs more than 2,200 Ph.D.s. These workers are not sewing buttons on

shirts; they are carrying out advanced research on jet engines and developing mathematical models for investment. An Intel research and development center in the same city employs 3,000 engineers designing the next generation of computer chips.

However, despite increasing international competition, the Federal commitment to research outside the defense arena has declined under the Bush administration. Of particular concern is the drop in funding for basic research. Much of the research conducted by private companies is focused on getting a product quickly to market. That is not the basic research that lays new foundations for new discoveries. Funding for basic research has declined in the past few years at the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy, and other key scientific agencies. And overall the Federal investment in research which once exceeded one percent of our GDP is now less than half a percent.

We cannot allow this trend to continue. The Right TRACK Act will help America maintain its position as the leader in innovation. The Right TRACK Act will not only make the R&D credit permanent but expand it to encourage small businesses, universities, and Federal laboratories to collaborate on research. And it will increase R&D funding for major Federal research agencies by 10 percent that we double it in 7 years.

Innovation is important for its own sake, but it is also what creates jobs. We are currently seeing our investment in R&D paying dividends in high growth, high technology industries such as nanotechnology. We need to help usher these new technologies out of the laboratory and into the marketplace. The Right TRACK Act would encourage investment in nanotechnology businesses and increase support for critical programs at the Department of Commerce that help manufacturers adopt and commercialize new technologies.

We also must invest in innovation and infrastructure--highways, mass transit, new sources of clean energy, health I.T., and more. The Right TRACK Act will authorize funds for capital improvements to Amtrak and expands and increases tax credits for school renovation and construction that will equip schools with 21st century technology.

These investments not only improve the quality of our lives, but they also create the quality jobs that drive our economy forward.

Broadband infrastructure is a perfect example. Two years ago, President Bush declared that every American should have access to affordable broadband technology by the year 2007. But the administration still has no plan to get us there. In the meantime, we have fallen to 16th in the world in broadband access behind countries such as Japan and the Netherlands that have broadband speeds four and five times faster than ours.

Widespread use of basic broadband would add $500 billion to our economy and create 1.2 million jobs. Clearly, this is the kind of infrastructure we should invest in to produce good jobs and economic growth in the future. The Right TRACK Act also puts us on the ``right track'' to take full advantage of that economic opportunity.

We also live in an age exploding with medical miracles. A generation ago, few could possibly have imagined the advances in science and biology that have revolutionized the practice of medicine. No one today can predict how new discoveries in the life sciences will improve our lives and change the world, but we can be certain the effects will be profound.

Thanks to the genius and dedication of scientists, doctors, and business leaders, the potential of medical research is virtually limitless. Diagnosing a faulty heart valve or blocked artery once meant risky and traumatic exploratory surgery. Today, doctors make the diagnosis with a miniature camera and fiber optic cable, and the patient can walk out of the office moments later.

A few years ago, it seemed inconceivable that anyone could decipher the entire genetic code--the very blueprint of life. But today, doctors across the globe can read that sequence on their computer screens and use the information to search for new ways to treat cancer, diabetes, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and other major illnesses.

Continuing at the forefront of the life sciences may well be the most important way for America to retain its leadership in the world economy in the coming years.

Another of the fundamental challenges of the global economy is that our companies are losing business and our people are losing jobs because they are not competing on a level playing field.

Foreign governments manipulate their currencies to give their products an unfair advantage. They refuse to enforce basic labor protections like a minimum wage. They use abhorrent practices like child labor and forced labor. As a result, these countries can produce goods much more cheaply and dominate the global marketplace.

Our own trade deficit is skyrocketing because we are producing less at home and buying more from other nations. Last year, we imported a record $726 billion more than we exported--an alltime high.

We can't continue down this reckless path. It is too damaging to our economy. Over $2.2 trillion of our national debt today is owed to foreign investors and foreign governments. America has always controlled its own destiny but when foreigners are bankrolling our Government, our destiny is no longer in our hands.

It is not just our companies that suffer--our workers are also struggling because the playing field is so uneven. More and more of our companies are shipping U.S. jobs overseas. Fifty-four percent of America's top companies have already done so. Even governments are part of the offshoring bandwagon. In my home State of Massachusetts, the State government has hired contractors that used workers from India to process Medicaid data and answer questions about food stamps.

The Nation as a whole has lost nearly 3 million manufacturing jobs since 2001. The pain is widespread--48 States have lost manufacturing jobs under President Bush. These are not just blue-collar jobs. Millions of high-paying, white-collar jobs are also at risk of being shipped overseas, especially in the fields of medicine and computers.

The disappearance of these good jobs is reducing our standard of living and threatening the very existence of the American middle class. President Bush's so-called economic recovery has the worst job creation record of any recovery since World War II.

Those fortunate enough to have jobs are finding that their wages are stagnant even though other costs are soaring. College tuition is up 46 percent since 2001. Housing costs are up 49 percent. Health insurance is up 58 percent. Gasoline is $2.33 a gallon--40 percent higher than it was 5 years ago.

The foundation of the America dream is weakening. That is because more of what our economy produces in this recovery now goes to business profits and executive suite salaries, and less to employees, than at any time since such records began in 1929. Wages are down, but profits are up by more than 60 percent.

There is a better way. We need policies that reject the Walmart- ization of the American workforce.

We must level the playing field in the competition for good jobs and demonstrate leadership in promoting fair wages for workers around the world. This is not just an economic issue--it is a moral issue. The Right TRACK Act will help raise living standards worldwide by prioritizing the elimination of forced labor and child labor in U.S. trade agreements and providing incentives for multinational corporations to treat their foreign workers with respect. It will also level the playing field for American businesses by ensuring that countries cannot manipulate their currencies to give their goods an unfair advantage in the global market.

Rejecting the race to the bottom also means reaffirming our commitment to workers here at home. We must stop rewarding companies by giving them favorable tax breaks for shipping jobs overseas. The Right TRACK Act corrects this nonsensical policy by eliminating the tax loophole that allows companies to avoid paying taxes on money they have earned overseas. The act also addresses the offshoring epidemic by requiring companies to give workers better notice when their jobs could be offshored to other countries

and ensuring that the Government does not use hard-earned tax dollars to ship jobs overseas.

Our commitment to workers at home also demands that we give them their fair share of the economic growth that globalization brings. In this century, just as in the last, we must ensure that workers can organize and have a voice at work. The Right TRACK Act preserves the basic rights of American workers by protecting employees who try to organize from employer intimidation, supporting the democratic right of a majority of workers to choose a representative through fair and neutral card-check procedures, and requiring employers to come to the table and negotiate a first contract.

We owe a particular duty to those Americans who lose their jobs due to the effects of trade or economic downturns. When workers lose their jobs in the global economy, we should help in the difficult and painful transition to new employment with top-notch job training and income assistance for their families until they get another paycheck. The Right TRACK Act gives workers and communities harmed by trade the support they deserve. It expands the Trade Adjustment Assistance Program to include service workers and workers who lose their jobs due to increased trade with countries like China and India. It also improves funding levels for training programs, provides wage insurance for older workers who lose their jobs, and helps workers to retain their health care coverage during times of transition.

And it is a scandal that the minimum wage has been stuck at $5.15 an hour for the past 9 years, below the poverty line for a family of three. It is the lowest the minimum wage has been in real value in more than 50 years. How can so many Republicans in Congress keep voting against any increase? Why can't we all at least agree that no one who works for a living in America should have to live in poverty? The Right TRACK Act gives these hardworking Americans a long overdue raise by increasing the minimum wage to $7.25 an hour in three steps.

America has to rise to each and every dimension of this challenge. We can do it by creating a new culture of innovation and creativity that keeps our Nation in the lead in the global market place--by equipping every American to compete and win in the new global economy. Only then will our economy continue to grow and prosper. Only then will the good jobs of the future be made in the U.S.A.

The same can-do spirit of innovation, invention, and progress that brought us the automobile, the airplane, and the computer can do it again. Those advances brought the American dream closer for all, and we can't afford to let it slip away now.

The essence of the American dream is the ability to provide a better life for yourself and your family. At its very heart are a good job, first-class education, good health care, and a secure retirement. Some say the dream is out of reach in today's global economy. But I am here today to tell you it doesn't have to be that way. We can revitalize the American dream.

I have full confidence in our ability to meet these challenges and reach new heights of discovery prosperity, and progress. Passing the Right TRACK Act that I've introduced today is an important step towards ensuring that the American dream remains attainable for generations to come, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. President, before the Presidents Day recess, I spoke about recent egregious examples of domestic surveillance by the executive branch, and I announced my intention to introduce legislation to establish a commission to investigate the instances of warrantless wiretapping and spying on U.S. citizens by the National Security Agency and other departments of Government.

I am not the lone voice raising questions about the legality of this program and its effect on the rights of law-abiding American citizens. I am only one--only one--in a growing chorus--a growing chorus--of concerned individuals. Since the New York Times broke the story of the NSA's wiretapping program, many in this Chamber on both sides of the aisle have questioned the legality of the warrantless wiretapping and have called for investigations into possible violations of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, as well as other transgressions against the spirit or the letter of our revered Constitution.

Many of our country's foremost constitutional scholars and professors of law have expressed their categorical opposition to the NSA's program, citing possible violations of both the Constitution and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. They agree that ``the program appears on its face''--on its face--``to violate existing law.''

These concerns have, of course, been dismissed by the same branch of Government that hatched the domestic spying program. Did you hear that? I will say it again. These concerns have been dismissed by the same branch of Government that hatched the domestic spying program. But this stonewalling--yes, that is stonewalling--this stonewalling is only part of the story. Important questions about NSA's program have been answered with strained and tenuous justifications or claims of the dire need for secrecy and, as a result, Congress's access to information has been severely--severely, severely--curtailed, by whom? By whom? Guess what, by the administration; by the administration.

There are some things we do know. We know that top officials in the Department of Justice who were concerned about questions of legality and lack of oversight of the program refused to endorse continued use of the NSA's wiretapping. That isn't all. We also know because of these concerns this secret program was suspended. Do you get that? This secret program was suspended temporarily due to questions about its legality.

What most Americans don't know is that FBI agents complained about the utility of the wiretapping program. Voluminous amounts of information and records that were gleaned from this secret eavesdropping program were sent from the National Security Agency to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and FBI officials repeatedly complained that they were being drowned by a river of useless information that

diverted their resources from pursuing important counterterrorism work. Such complaints raise the question of whether the domestic wiretapping program may have backfired by sending our top counterterrorism agencies on wild-goose chases, thus making our country less secure instead of making our country more secure.

We know that one member of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, Judge James Robertson, resigned--yes, resigned--4 days after the New York Times first detailed the NSA's warrantless--warrantless-- domestic surveillance. We know that only the chief judge of the FISA Court, the secret court charged with approving requests to conduct domestic surveillance, had any knowledge of this clandestine wiretapping program. The other judges, who are sworn to strict secrecy, learned of the program just as many of our citizens did--through reports in the press. Yes, thank God for a free press.

We know that although most of the judges of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court were kept in the dark about the program, at least one of the judges was tipped off by an attorney within the Department of Justice that some of the information being presented to the court to secure warrants was improperly obtained, meaning the Government had apparently circumvented a court-ordered screening process to eliminate tainted evidence.

We know that in a February 28 letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, Attorney General Gonzales admitted that the Justice Department's legal justification for the wiretaps has ``evolved over time.''

What does that mean? Does it mean that there actually was no legal basis for the NSA to spy on American citizens when it first began the surveillance? Does it mean the Department had to gin up some legal basis for the spying once the program became public? Does it mean the administration's reliance on the use-of-force resolution to justify its snooping was simply a ploy--just a ploy--an ``after the fact'' face- saving device meant to give the administration cover for having violated the civil liberties of Americans?

We know that earlier this week, 18 Members of the House of Representatives sent a letter to President Bush requesting that he appoint a special counsel to investigate the NSA's warrantless surveillance of our citizens. In their letter, the House Members noted that with no clear information coming from the administration, they and all of America have been forced to rely primarily on press reports to determine the scope of the NSA's activities.

With so many questions unanswered by the administration, it is absolutely imperative that there be an objective investigation of this program and any violations of law that may have occurred.

We are in a supercharged political year--we know that, you know that, everybody knows that--an election year for one-third of the Senate, including this Senator from West Virginia, and for the entire House of Representatives. And the Senate Intelligence Committee as of today has refused to initiate a serious investigation into this matter. But an investigation has to go forward. The efficacy of our laws and our Constitution is at stake. That is why I am proposing legislation to establish a nonpartisan commission to review and investigate domestic surveillance in America, along with serious allegations of abuse. In this way, we will be sure to safeguard our first and fourth amendment rights as enumerated in this Constitution, as well as evaluate the actual effectiveness of such programs in combating terrorist threats.

James Madison wrote in his essay, ``Political Reflections,'' that ``[t]he fetters''--the fetters, f-e-t-t-e-r-s--``[t]he fetters imposed on liberty at home have ever been forged out of the weapons provided for defense against real, pretended, or imaginary dangers from abroad.

No one is suggesting that the threat of terrorist attacks is anything but a real threat, and one that must be of the Congress's utmost priority. But the suggestion that the American people would be safer in their homes if they just forego their constitutionally protected rights is a deliberately deceptive assertion that may forge the fetters that bind law-abiding citizens. Make no mistake about it: It is these ill- conceived strictures that may ultimately destroy precious liberties.

In fact, it is because our forefathers were fearful of re-creating the same tyrannous form of government from which many of them had fled, that the Bill of Rights--the Bill of Rights, those first 10 amendments--the Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution to better secure for all time--all time--the freedom from oppression that ever looms from an overly powerful executive. Get that. Get that. Let me say that again. It was because our forefathers, thank God, were fearful of re-creating the same tyrannous, the same tyrannical form of government from which many of them had fled that the Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution to better secure, for all time, the freedom from oppression that ever looms from an overly powerful executive. And you better believe it. You better believe it. Hear me. Hear me now. I will always speak out against an all-powerful executive, under either party.

In a climate of fear, liberties have been sacrificed time and again under the guise of keeping the Nation from harm. Fear. Yes, fear is a powerful tool for manipulation; useful for easing the American people out of their liberties and into submission. Fear. When the public is confronted with a situation, real or imagined, that inspires fear, the public rightfully look to their leaders--look to their leaders, Mr. President--for protection from foreboding consequences. The claim of wartime necessity always strengthens the hands of a President. Let me say that again. The claim of wartime necessity always strengthens a President, any President, Republican or Democrat. And often facts are sealed from the prying eyes of Congress by a purported need for secrecy.

But Senators, and that includes this Senator from West Virginia, Senators have a sworn duty--a sworn duty, a sworn duty--sworn right up there at that desk with their hand on the Bible--the holy Bible, the holy Bible, the holy Bible--with their hand on the Bible to check executive power. We have to be on guard every moment of every day. The executive branch, whether it be Democratic or Republican, is always reaching--always reaching, always reaching--always grabbing more power, more power, more power, and we have to be on guard. We have a sworn duty to check executive power and, as long as I live, I am going to stand for the checking of the executive power; I don't care whether it is a Democrat or Republican in the White House or an Independent. It makes no difference. We have a sworn duty. We swear. We put our hand on the Bible before God and man, and we swear to check executive power at all times--at all times--in times of crisis or otherwise. Each of us here, and there are 100 here, and each of this 100, 100 Senators, we are each bound to defend the Constitution and each bound to defend the liberties that the Constitution gives to all Americans, at all times, in times of peace and in times of war.

History has shown us many times that a climate of fear can take a hefty toll on our freedoms. That is your freedoms. That is your freedoms. That is your freedoms. Worse still are liberties surrendered in vain, resulting in little added security.

There is no doubt that constitutional freedoms will never be abolished in one fell swoop--never--for the American people cherish their freedoms, and they would not tolerate such a loss if they could perceive it; if they could see it coming, if they could hear it, if they could feel it, if they could perceive it. But the erosion of freedom rarely comes as an all-out frontal assault; rather, it is gradual, noxious, creeping, cloaked in secrecy and glossed over by reassurances of greater security.

The American people are a people born of sacrifice, and the sacrifices that the American people are willing to endure speak well of the tenacity and the strength that makes the United States of America what it is. Some may be tempted to accept on blind faith the administration's--any administration's, any administration's--promise of increased security, and they may see it as a duty to capitulate their rights for that flimsy promise. May we all pause to reflect on the hard-won liberties--the hard-won liberties--for which earlier generations fought and

died. Remember Nathan Hale. He died. He regretted that he had but one life to give, to lose, one life to lose for his country. Remember Patrick Henry: ``Give me liberty or give me death,'' he said. John Paul Jones: ``We have only begun to fight.''

So may we all pause to reflect, as we have just done, on the hard-won liberties for which earlier generations fought and died before we easily accept convincing rhetoric. Rhetoric is cheap. Talk is cheap. To suggest that innocent Americans surrender rights to preserve freedom is a false choice. It is also a slippery slope, one that is fraught with ever more secrecy and the certainty of egregious abuses of our Bill of Rights and of our laws over time.

The commission that I propose would determine how to best protect the homeland, as well as the most effective ways of gathering needed intelligence. It will examine the procedures for the NSA's use and retention of intelligence obtained without warrants, and the method and scope of dissemination of such information to other agencies. It will investigate any questions raised by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court concerning the legality of the domestic spying program. It will examine the obligation of the President--do you get that? Do you hear that, Mr. President? Republican or Democrat. It will examine the obligation of the President to brief Members of Congress-- not just one or two or three or four--on warrantless surveillance of American citizens. It will lift the fog--lift the fog--of secrecy and clandestine government activity misaimed at law-abiding citizens and perhaps, most importantly, it will shed much needed sunshine--let the sunshine in--much needed sunshine on any unlawful or unconstitutional executive--executive, executive intrusions into the lives of ordinary Americans.

Mr. President, today I am introducing the ``War Profiteering Prevention Act of 2006.'' This bill creates criminal penalties for war profiteers and cheats who, for ill-gotten gain, would exploit the United States Government's taxpayer-funded war and reconstruction efforts in Iraq and elsewhere around the world. I am pleased that Senator Dorgan has also included this legislation in the ``Honest Leadership and Accountability in Contracting Act of 2006'' that is also being introduced today.

I previously introduced this legislation in 2003. It came to be cosponsored by 21 Senators, including Senators Clinton, Dodd, Feinstein, Johnson, Kerry, Landrieu, Bill Nelson, Wyden, Dayton, Durbin, Feingold, Harkin, Jeffords, Kennedy, Kohl, Lieberman and Reid. The Senate Appropriations Committee unanimously accepted these provisions during a Senate Appropriations Committee markup of the $87 billion appropriations bill for Iraq and Afghanistan for Fiscal Year 2004, and it passed the Senate. It was the right thing to do then, and it is the right thing to do now.

Regrettably, the Republican leadership in the House stripped this legislation out of that appropriations bill, and we regrettably have been witnessing the results in the meantime. Billions appropriated for the continuing war efforts and for reconstruction are unaccounted for, and fraud has been rampant. The recent report of the special inspector general confirms that U.S. taxpayer funds appropriated for reconstruction have been lost and diverted.

There are, of course, anti-fraud laws to protect against waste of tax dollars at home. But none expressly prohibits war profiteering, and none expressly confers jurisdiction for fraud overseas. This bill would criminalize ``war profiteering''--overcharging taxpayers in order to defraud and to profit excessively from a war, military action, or reconstruction efforts. It would prohibit any fraud against the United States involving a contract for the provision of goods or services in connection with a war, military action, or for relief or reconstruction activities. This new crime would be a felony, subject to criminal penalties of up to 20 years in prison and fines of up to $1 million or twice the illegal gross profits of the crime.

The bill also prohibits false statements connected with the provision of goods or services in connection with a war or reconstruction effort. This crime would also be a felony, subject to criminal penalties of up to 10 years in prison and fines of up to $1 million or twice the illegal gross profits of the crime. These are strong and focused sanctions that are narrowly tailored to punish and deter fraud or excessive profiteering in contracts, here and abroad, related to the United States Government's war or reconstruction efforts.

Congress has sent more than a quarter of a trillion dollars to Iraq with too little accountability and too few financial controls. Disturbingly, there are widespread reports of waste, fraud and war profiteering in Iraq, and the special inspector general examining the use of reconstruction funds in Iraq recently found that billions of taxpayer dollars remain unaccounted for.

For example, a recent report on 60 Minutes revealed that more than $50 billion of U.S. taxpayer funds have gone to private contractors hired to guard bases, drive trucks, feed and shelter the troops and rebuild in Iraq. This is more than the entire annual budget of the Department of Homeland Security.

In addition, just this week, the New York Times, reported that the Army has decided to reimburse a Halliburton subsidiary--Kellogg Brown & Root--for nearly all of its disputed costs on a $2.41 billion no-bid contract to deliver fuel and repair oil equipment in Iraq, even though the Pentagon's own auditors had identified more than $250 million in charges as potentially excessive or unjustified. That article further notes that the Army's decision to pay all but 3.8 percent of these questionable charges lies well outside the normal practice of the military.

The recent revelations about contract fraud and abuse in Iraq make clear that the approach to reconstruction in Iraq has been a formula for mischief. We need strong disincentives for those who would take advantage of the chaos of war to defraud American taxpayers.

We also need to strengthen the tools available to federal prosecutors to combat war profiteering. Despite well-publicized allegations of fraud and war profiteering in Iraq, so far the Government has brought only one case to recover these funds--a civil lawsuit brought under the False Claims Act. That case involves a contractor accused of overcharging the Government millions of dollars under a contract to help distribute new Iraqi currency during the first months after the collapse of the Hussein government. The Government's ability to recover funds in that case is being questioned by the defendant, however, who argues that legal technicalities may constrain current law from reaching all of the conduct of contractors working in Iraq or elsewhere overseas. This bill would address this problem by providing clear authority for the Government to seek criminal penalties and to recover excessive profits for war profiteering overseas. It should already be law, but three years ago the House Republican leadership rejected it.

Every penny of our taxpayers' money must be expended carefully and purposefully and protected from waste. The message sent by this bill is that any act taken to financially exploit the crisis situation in Iraq or elsewhere overseas for exorbitant financial gain is unacceptable, reprehensible--and criminal. Such deceit demeans and exploits the sacrifices that our military personnel and National Guard are making in Iraq and Afghanistan.

When U.S. taxpayers have been called upon to bear the burden of reconstruction contracts--where contracts are awarded in a system that offers little competition and even less accountability--concerns about wartime profiteering are a grave matter. Historical efforts to stem such profiteering have been successful: Congress implemented excessive- profits taxes and contract renegotiation laws after both World Wars, and again after the Korean War. Advocating exactly such an approach, President Roosevelt once declared it our duty to ensure that ``ar few do not gain from the sacrifices of the many.'' Then, as now, our Government cannot in good faith ask its people to sacrifice for reconstruction efforts that allow so many others to profit unfairly.

There is urgency to this important measure because criminal statutes cannot be applied retroactively. These controls should have been put in place at least three years ago; they need to be in place now. I urge that the Senate make prompt passage of this legislation a high priority. I hope that this time the House Republican leadership will have learned the hard lessons of the last three years and that, this time, they will allow this bill's enactment, on behalf of the Nation's taxpayers. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise along with Senators Bingaman, Harkin, Lautenberg, Boxer, Lieberman, Clinton, Menendez, Akaka, Dodd and Kerry to introduce the Roadless Conservation Act of 2006.

Since Teddy Roosevelt established the national forest system 100 years ago, we have cherished these amazing public lands. They have provided both timber for our economy, and quiet solace for our souls. However, only a fraction of the vast natural forests that once covered our nation remain. I believe it is our duty to protect these lands before we have no natural forest legacy to pass on to our children.

Simply put, the Roadless Area Conservation Act of 2006 represents a balanced and reasoned approach to forest management on untouched public lands. This legislation reasserts safeguards in place in 2001 to protect our nation's the last remaining pristine forest lands, 58.5 million acres, from logging, road-building, and other environmentally damaging development. In Washington State alone there are 2,015,000 acres of National Forest system lands that qualify for protection as Roadless areas under the legislation.

The bill would prohibit new road construction or reconstruction in inventoried roadless areas while maintaining opportunities for hunting, fishing, hiking, mountain-biking, snowmobiling, cross-country skiing and other forms of outdoor recreation in our National Forests.

The legislation also includes a number of important exemptions to allow new road construction for human health and safety, oil and gas development, and other previously approved economic activities, such as ski trails.

What is more, it allows for hazardous fuels reduction, forest stewardship projects, and targeted economic activities. This legislation also helps address the serious fiscal challenge presented by the more than $8.6 billion dollar maintenance and reconstruction backlog on the 386,000 miles of existing U.S. Forest Service roads.

Of course, this might not sound new. And you'd be right. In many ways, we've travelled these roads before. The Clinton Administration finalized the Roadless Area Conservation Rule in January 2001, following three years of official review and public participation, over 600 public meetings--45 public meetings in Washington state alone--and hearings on each National Forest and in each Forest Service region.

During his confirmation hearing I asked Attorney General John Ashcroft if the administration would uphold the Roadless regulation. He pledged that he would. In May 2001, then-USDA Secretary Ann Venemen also pledged that the administration would stand by the Rule.

But that's not what happened. Through a series of subtle yet unmistakable steps the administration has allowed these protections to be undermined steadily. They've rolled over for logging companies and developers. They've cooked up loopholes for State-based petitions or settlements that could weaken or eliminate the protections afforded to these unique lands. And finally, in May of 2005, they dropped the pretense altogether when the U.S.D.A. Forest Service repealed the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule, eliminating these vital roadless forest land protections.

The need for action today is more urgent than ever. These are national forest lands that provide unmatched outdoor recreation opportunities, critical fish and wildlife habitats, and promote clean drinking water for millions of Americans. This bill would not apply or effect state, tribal, county, municipal, or private lands and does not impact existing U.S. Forest Service roads, trails, or activities on those roads and trails.

The 2001 Roadless Rule has received unprecedented public support, including over four million comments submitted to the U.S. Forest Service asking that it not be overturned. Most recently, over 250,000 Americans, including over 100 current and former Olympic athletes, have filed a formal petition under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) to reverse the Bush Administration's decision to eliminate the 2001 Rule. This legislation enjoys the support and endorsement of such groups as National Wildlife Federation, Trout Unlimited, the Heritage Forests Campaign, the Wilderness Society, and the Sierra Club.

I've worked to protect these pristine forest lands since the day I came into office, and I'll keep fighting to make sure this bill gets signed into law. We've heard it loud and clear: Americans don't want to see their hunting, fishing, and hiking areas turned into a reckless patchwork of road-building, logging, and mining.

Let's act today and pass the Roadless Conservation Act of 2006. The American people and future Americans deserve nothing less.

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

Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation that would expand and improve quality reporting for our Nation's hospitals through the establishment of a national Hospital Quality Report Card Initiative.

Study after study has documented that health care quality in the United States is inconsistent and inadequate. The landmark 2003 RAND report by Beth McGlynn found that the chance of Americans getting recommended care is not much greater than the flip of coin. For many conditions, the chances are even worse--only about a third of diabetics and a quarter of patients with atrial fibrillation and hip fractures receive the right treatment, as do only about 10 percent of patients with alcohol dependence. Patients are suffering, and the financial costs of poor care are staggering. We can and must do more to ensure that every patient gets the right care, at the right time, in the right way.

One way to help improve health care quality is to measure and report the quality of care in our nation's hospitals. Hospital quality reports can help patients and consumers choose the hospital that will best serve their health needs. Purchasers and payers can use hospital quality information to help their decision-making about where employees and members can go for care. Hospitals and health care professionals would similarly benefit from identification of areas of need, and opportunities for quality improvement and cost containment. And finally, with greater quality reporting and transparency, we can begin to have an honest dialogue about health care quality and how to reform our health care system.

Several States have already developed and implemented hospital report card initiatives, and I am proud to say that Illinois began its own report card initiative in January of this year--an initiative that I spearheaded when I served in the Illinois State Senate.

On the national level, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Hospital Quality Alliance have partnered to identify and encourage submission of quality measures for several health conditions, on a voluntary basis, in exchange for greater federal reimbursement. The Deficit Reduction Act codified this initiative earlier this year.

The Hospital Report Card Act, which I am introducing today, takes quality measurement one step further, by mandating that the Secretary expand and improve upon current quality reporting for hospitals. Within 18 months, the Secretary would establish a formal Hospital Report Card Initiative, and publish reports on individual hospital quality using data submitted for the value based purchasing program at CMS, but also including other data available to the Secretary. The report cards would report quality measures that align with those used in the National Healthcare Quality Report, including measures of effectiveness, safety, timeliness, efficiency, patient-centeredness, and equity. In addition, the report cards would provide information on other quality priorities for patients, such as staffing levels of nurses, rates of infections acquired in hospitals, volume of procedures performed, and availability of specialized care. The Secretary would also report measures of relevance to a number of priority populations, including women, children and minorities.

The bill requires the Secretary to take steps to ensure that all reported data is accurate and fairly represents hospital quality, and that hospitals have an opportunity to participate in the development of the report card initiative. I also want to make sure that sick patients have full access to the best hospitals, and so the report cards will risk-adjust quality data, so that hospitals are not inadvertently penalized for caring for more challenging patient populations.

We are hearing a lot of rhetoric about patient empowerment and consumer-driven health plans. However, we can't expect patients to make the best choices for their health care in the absence of accurate information on quality and costs. Similarly, we can't expect hospitals to recognize their areas of deficiencies or strengths without a critical look inwards. Finally, we can't expect the Nation at large to support and embrace healthcare reform without greater awareness of quality problems.

The Hospital Quality Report Card Act will help the Nation take one step closer to improving health care quality and containing costs, and I hope my colleagues will join me in passing this critical legislation.