A joint resolution to spur a political solution in Iraq and encourage the people of Iraq to provide for their own security through the redeployment of the United States military forces.

Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation that seeks to meet the mental health needs of children and adolescents.

I believe that the task of ensuring the emotional well-being and resiliency of our young people is one of paramount importance. We all know that mental health is a critical component contributing to a child's general health and ability to grow--both intellectually and physically. Yet, the task of ensuring the mental health of children and adolescents is not an easy one. In fact, it is arguably one of the most difficult and largely unspoken tasks facing our Nation today.

According to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, one in ten children and adolescents suffers from mental health disorders serious enough to cause some level of impairment. Out of these young people, only one in five receives the specialty mental health services they require.

These startling statistics prompted former Surgeon General Dr. David Satcher to convene a conference in 1999 that examined the mental health needs of children. The conference--composed of some of the Nation's leading experts in mental and public health--published a seminal report that concluded that `` . . . the burden of suffering experienced by children with mental illness and their families has created a health crisis in this country.'' The report further concluded that ``. . . there is broad evidence that the Nation lacks a unified infrastructure to help children suffering from mental illness.''

I would like to submit for the Record personal testimony offered by three families in Connecticut. I believe their words and experiences speak most directly to the ``burden of suffering'' described in Surgeon General Satcher's report--a burden endured by millions of children, adolescents, and then families nationwide. I ask unanimous consent that this testimony be printed in the Record.

I thank these families for sharing their personal experiences with me, and for following me to share their experiences publicly. More importantly, I commend their tenacity in facing the challenges they face each and every day in caring for their children. Their stories, along with the stories I have heard from other families in Connecticut and elsewhere in the country, have fueled my belief that child and adolescent mental health needs to be a top priority.

Recognizing the fragmentation of the Nation's mental health delivery system, Surgeon General Satcher's report concluded that one fundamental way to meet the mental--health needs of children and adolescents is to ``. . . move towards a community-based mental health delivery system that balances health promotion, disease prevention, early detection, and universal access to care.'' The report further stated eight goals to ensure the resiliency of children and adolescents. These goals were: first, to promote public awareness of children's mental health issues and reduce stigma associated with mental illness; second, to continue to develop, disseminate, and implement scientifically-proven prevention and treatment services in the field of children's mental health; third, to improve the assessment of and recognition of mental health needs in children; fourth, to eliminate racial, ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in access to mental health care services; fifth, to improve the infrastructure for children's mental health services, including support for scientifically-proven interventions across professions; sixth, to increase access to and coordination of quality mental health care services; seventh, to train frontline providers to recognize and manage mental health issues, and educate mental healthcare providers about scientifically-proven prevention and treatment services, and; finally, to monitor the access to and coordination of quality mental health care services.

In 2002, President Bush established the President's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health to study three obstacles identified by the President that prevent Americans with mental illness from getting the care they require. These obstacles were identified as the stigma that surrounds mental health care, a lack of mental health parity, and the fragmented mental health delivery system. In 2003, the President's New Freedom Commission issued a report that made a series of recommendations on how the Nation's mental health system could be transformed for the better. Like Surgeon General Satcher's report, this publication also set forth a series of goals. They were: first, to ensure Americans understand that mental health is essential to overall health; second, to ensure that mental health care is consumer- and family-driven; third, to eliminate disparities in mental health care services; fourth, to ensure that

early mental health screening, assessment, and referral services are common practices; fifth, to ensure that excellent mental health care is delivered and research is accelerated, and; finally, to ensure that technology is used to access mental health care and information.

I describe these two reports because the legislation I am introducing today seeks to address the recommendations they espouse. My legislation, the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Resiliency Act of 2006, authorizes $210 million in an effort to meet five principal objectives.

The first objective is to increase access to, and improve the quality of, mental health care services delivered to children and adolescents. My legislation seeks to meet this objective in several ways.

First, it authorizes a new grant of $50 million for States to develop and implement a comprehensive mental health plan exclusively for children and adolescents that provides community-based mental health early intervention and prevention services and relevant support services, such as primary health care, education, transportation and housing. The plan would have to meet a set of core operational and evaluative requirements and would have to be developed through extensive outside consultation with children and adolescents, their families, advocates and health professionals.

Second, my legislation authorizes two matching grants of $22.5 million each for community health centers--many of which primarily serve low-income populations and primary health care facilities, such as a pediatrician's office, to provide community-based mental health services in coordination with community mental health centers and/or trained mental health professionals.

Third, my legislation authorizes a new grant of $22.5 million for States, localities and private nonprofit organizations--e.g., school districts--to provide community-based mental health services in schools appropriate mental health training activities to relevant school and health professionals.

Fourth, my legislation authorizes a new grant of $20 million for States, localities and private nonprofit organizations to provide community-based mental health services specifically for at-risk mothers and their children.

Fifth, my legislation authorizes a new grant of $10 million for States, localities and private nonprofit organizations to provide community-based mental health services for children and adolescents in juvenile justice systems.

Sixth, my legislation authorizes $10 million for the Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish, run and evaluate a demonstration project that improves the ability of local case managers to work across the mental health, public health, substance abuse, child welfare, education, juvenile justice and social services systems in a State.

Finally, my legislation requires States to meet their statutory obligations to fund fully mental health screening services under the Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnostic and Treatment Services Program. It also requires current successful initiatives, such as the Comprehensive Community Mental Health Services for Children with Serious Emotional Disturbance Program, the Community Mental Health Services Performance Partnership Block Grant, the Community Mental Health Services Block Grant, and the Jail Diversion Program, to expand their scope with respect to certain reporting, evaluative, and service activities.

The second objective my legislation seeks to meet is ensuring greater public awareness and greater family participation in mental health services decision-making. Towards this end, my legislation does the following:

First, it authorizes a new grant of $10 million for States, localities and private nonprofit organizations to develop policies that enable families of children and adolescents with mental health disorders to have increased control and choice over mental health services provided and received through a publicly-funded mental health system.

Second, it authorizes a new grant of $10 million for private nonprofit organizations to provide information on child and adolescent mental health disorders, services, support services and respite care to families of children and adolescents with or who are at risk for mental health disorders.

Third, it authorizes a new grant of $10 million for private nonprofit organizations to develop community coalitions and public education activities that promote child and adolescent resiliency.

In addition, my legislation authorizes $10 million to establish two new technical assistance centers. These centers are designed to collect and disseminate information on mental health disorders, mental health disorder risk factors, mental health services, mental health service access, relevant support services, reducing seclusion and restraints, and family participation in mental health service decision-making-- exclusively for children and adolescents with or at risk of mental health disorders.

The third objective that this legislation seeks to meet is for the Federal Government to develop a policy specifically designed to meet the unique mental health needs of children and adolescents. The legislation authorizes $10 million for the establishment of an interagency coordinating committee consisting of all Federal officials whose departments or agencies oversee mental health activities for children and adolescents. Modeled after language in the Garrett Lee Smith Memorial Act, my legislation requires the coordinating committee to consult with outside parties, develop a Federal policy exclusively pertaining to child and adolescent mental health, and report annually to Congress on specific challenges and solutions associated with comprehensively addressing the mental health needs of children and adolescents.

The fourth and final objective that this legislation seeks to meet is increasing the amount of research into child and adolescent mental health. Only through intensive research can we develop evidence-based best practices that allow us to develop services that fully meet the mental health needs of our children. Towards that end, my legislation authorizes a new grant of $12.5 million for States, localities, institutions of higher education and private nonprofit organizations to identify and research current service, training and information awareness gaps in mental health delivery systems for children and adolescents. My legislation also authorizes $12.5 million to enhance comprehensive Federal research and evaluation of promising best practices, existing disparities, psychotropic medications, trauma, recovery and rehabilitation, and co-occurring disorders as they relate to child and adolescent mental health.

My colleague on the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, Chairman Enzi, has indicated a desire to bring up the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration reauthorization measure soon. It is my hope that this legislation can contribute to that reauthorization effort.

I would like to conclude by saying that this legislation, while comprehensive, is a first step--not a complete solution--towards fully meeting the challenge of ensuring the resiliency of our children and adolescents. We need to continue working together--young people, families, doctors, counselors, nurses, teachers, advocates, and policymakers--since we all have a stake, either professional or personal--in this issue. Only by working together can we develop effective and compassionate ways through which every young person in this nation is given a solid foundation upon which to reach his or her dreams in life.

I ask unanimous consent that the text of this legislation be printed in the Congressional Record.

Mr. President, first, I congratulate my colleagues in the House, Representatives Shays and Maloney, for their hard work on this legislation and for introducing H.R. 5017, the companion legislation to the bill I am introducing today.

Almost 5 years ago, our country was attacked by terrorists on September 11, 2001. This attack on our cities, on our symbols, on our democracy, and on our way of life killed nearly 3,000 Americans and over 700 people from my home State of New Jersey. But this attack could not kill our determination to preserve our freedom, our values, and our democratic system.

Almost 2 years ago, the 9/11 Commission published their riveting account of what happened on that terrible day and made 41 unanimous and bipartisan recommendations to make our country safer from future terrorist attacks.

Six months ago, the 9/11 Public Discourse Project published a disturbing report card giving more F's than A's on the implementation of those 41 recommendations.

Today, I am introducing legislation to finally and fully implement the 41 bipartisan and unanimous recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. The former Chairman of the 9/11 Commission, Thomas Kean, and the former Vice Chairman, Lee Hamilton, endorsed this same legislation in the House, H.R. 5017 Shays-Maloney. In a letter, Mr. Kean and Mr. Hamilton said that the legislation ``represents a comprehensive approach to carry out each of the recommendations of the Commission . . . [and] focuses on urgent unfinished business before the Nation . . .''

It is the responsibility of the Congress to carry out this urgent unfinished business. We certainly need this comprehensive legislation at a time when the disastrous Dubai Ports World deal made it clear that our ports are not safe and those who live and work near them are not secure; the Department of Homeland Security is increasing homeland security funding for small cities while cutting it to New York and Washington, DC; first responders still don't have the ability to communicate with each other during a disaster; nuclear weapons in the hands of a terrorist remain one of the greatest threats to our Nation, yet the 9/11 Public Discourse Project gave the administration a D on progress towards fixing this problem; and hundreds of Afghans have been killed in the recent violent resurgence of the Taliban.

Since immediately after September 11, many of us in Congress have been working to learn the hard lessons from those attacks so we can prepare for and prevent future terrorist acts. Shortly after the attacks, I introduced comprehensive homeland security legislation and served on the first ad-hoc Homeland Security Committee in the House.

I was a strong supporter of the creation of the 9/11 Commission and introduced a proposal on the House floor to fully implement the 9/11 Commission recommendation in 2004 during the initial debate on the recommendations. I then served as a House negotiator on and helped secure passage of the final landmark intelligence reform bill that was the first step in implementing the 9/11 Commission recommendations. Introducing this legislation today is the next important step in protecting our country against terrorism. I certainly agree with the former heads of the 9/11 Commission that passing this bill should be a top priority for this Congress.

I think all of us were shocked last week when the Department of Homeland Security actually slashed overall homeland security grant funding for New York, Washington, DC, and New Jersey, while increasing funding for much smaller areas with fewer terrorist targets.

DHS slashed these funds in spite of the 9/11 Commission recommendation which said that ``Homeland Security assistance should be based strictly--strictly--on an assessment of risks and vulnerabilities.''

And that is exactly what I fought for when I introduced the Menendez substitute to the intelligence reform bill in 2004. That is exactly what I fought for in the conference report on that legislation and what I sought to accomplish in the House when I introduced the Risk-Based Homeland Security Funding Act with Senators Corzine and Lautenberg. And that is exactly what the legislation I am introducing today would do.

As many of you know, New Jersey faces unique terrorism threats that require a greater portion of homeland security aid due to its proximity to New York City and to its vast number of potential targets of terror, such as the largest container seaport on the east coast, one of the busiest airports in the country, an area known as the ``chemical coastway,'' our four nuclear power plants, and the six tunnels and bridges that connect New Jersey to New York City.

And if that were not enough, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has placed more than a dozen New Jersey sites on the National Critical Infrastructure List and has called the area in my former congressional district between Port Elizabeth and Newark International Airport the ``most dangerous two miles in the United States when it comes to terrorism.'' An article in The New York Times pointed out that this 2- mile area provides ``a convenient way to cripple the economy by disrupting major portions of the country's rail lines, oil storage tanks and refineries, pipelines, air traffic, communications networks and highway system.''

The bottom line is that States and municipalities, like New Jersey, which are under the greatest risk should receive homeland security dollars based solely on that risk. The funding awarded to Newark and Jersey City clearly proves that New Jersey is well served when Federal homeland security dollars are awarded based on risk. Yet I

cannot understand why the Department of Homeland Security would not use a risk-based formula when awarding all of their grants. So long as Homeland Security grants are awarded based on factors other than risk, those States most at risk will continue to lack the necessary resources to protect the people they serve.

I know that many Americans would also be shocked to learn that almost 5 years after 9/11 and almost 1 year after Hurricane Katrina, many first responders still cannot communicate with each other during a disaster.

In fact, when I speak to firefighters in my home State of New Jersey, they consistently tell me that this remains a serious impediment to their work. In our port in New Jersey, the largest container port in the east coast, firefighters, Coast Guard, police, and other law enforcement officials often still cannot communicate with each other. When Hurricane Katrina hit, emergency personnel were on at least five different channels and were hampered in communicating with one another. As the Washington Post reported on September 2, 2005, ``Police officers and National Guard members, along with law officers imported from around the State, rarely knew more than what they could see with their own eyes.''

It is astonishing that our firefighters, police, and paramedics still do not have the ability to communicate in an emergency. How is it possible that almost 5 years after September 11, our local first responders still do not have interoperable communications systems that can talk with each other as they carry out their lifesaving work?

That is why my legislation would provide adequate radio spectrum for first responders and a status report on creating a unified incident command system during disasters.

In its final report card, the 9/11 Public Discourse Project gave the administration a D for its efforts to secure WMDs. The former Commissioners then recommended that the U.S. Government make this issue the top national security priority to counter what it called ``the greatest threat to America's security.''

I certainly believe that a nuclear weapon in the hands of a terrorist is one of the greatest threats to our national security. Osama Bin Laden himself has said that it is al-Qaida's ``religious duty'' to acquire weapons of mass destruction.

According to CNN, in January 2002, documents found in a house in Kabul, Afghanistan, reportedly used by al-Qaida operatives included a 25-page document filled with information about nuclear weapons. That document included a design for a nuclear weapon that would require hard-to-obtain materials like plutonium to create a nuclear explosion.

One document appeared to be plans to create a nuclear device. Although experts contended that the design in this document labeled ``superbombs'' is unworkable, the author, noted CNN, was clearly knowledgeable of various ways to set off a nuclear bomb.

In combination with the discovery of AQ Khan's clandestine nuclear supermarket, the potential of al-Qaida building a nuclear weapon is not a fairytale. In fact, according to CNN, al-Qaida may have had some help in its efforts to develop a nuclear device from two Pakistani nuclear scientists.

This bill works to ensure that the fairytale does not become a cataclysmic reality.

The bill specifically implements the 9/11 Commission's recommendation to expand programs to stop shipments of weapons of mass destruction. With this legislation, the United States would also be able to extend our assistance to help countries control, protect, and dismantle their nuclear programs to countries outside of the former Soviet Union. It would also create an Office of Nonproliferation Programs in the Executive Office of the President to prevent terrorist access to WMDs. Finally, the bill includes a provision to enhance the Global Threat Reduction Initiative and would require the President to establish a Department of Energy task force on nuclear materials removal.

I believe we all want to make sure that a nuclearized al-Qaida never becomes a reality. And we should spare absolutely no effort in pursuing this goal.

Many of us have been horrified as we have watched the resurgence of the Taliban and strong anti-American sentiment in Afghanistan. Over just the past few weeks, over 250 people have been killed in the upsurge in violence, and we see techniques borrowed from Iraq, like the use of improvised explosive devices, in Afghanistan. According to the New York Times, Pentagon officials say that 32 suicide bombs were exploded in 2006, which is already 6 more than exploded in all of 2005. Roadside bombs are up 30 percent over last year, and the Taliban are fighting in groups triple the size of last year. And after a deadly traffic accident involving the U.S. military, an anti-American riot exploded in Kabul last week.

The 9/11 Commission made it clear in their recommendations that Afghanistan must be a priority stating that the ``United States and the international community should make a long-term commitment to a secure and stable Afghanistan to improve life and make sure it is not a terrorist sanctuary.'' Unfortunately, we are clearly a long way from achieving that goal.

The administration never finished the job in Afghanistan, the birthplace of the Taliban, the home to al-Qaida, the land of Osama bin Laden, and the place where the attacks of 9/11 were planned.

That is why this legislation is an important step to help us move in the right direction in Afghanistan. My bill urges a new commitment to a long-term economic plan to ensure Afghanistan's stability as well as a report on progress towards achieving the goals in the Afghanistan Freedom Support Act.

This bipartisan, bicameral legislation is the next step to finally implementing all of the 41 recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. Their report was a call to action. Their report card was a reminder of what still needed to be done. Their work cannot be left unfinished.

We must all heed advice of the 9/11 Commission and learn from the hard lessons of 9/11. We cannot wait any longer to take action, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.

Mr. President, over the past few years, we have heard the tragic stories of how sexual predators have targeted children in our states. We have seen troubling headlines from Pennsylvania and across the country, and the frequency seems to be increasing rather than decreasing. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children in partnership with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Secret Service, U.S. Postal Inspection Service, state and local law enforcement, and Internet Crimes Against Children Task Forces operates the CyberTipline. The number of referrals to the ICAC task forces has increased from 2,002 referrals in January-March 2005 to 3,392 referrals in January-March 2006. Additionally, the prosecutions in child pornography and child abuse cases have increased nearly every year since 1995.

Recently Congress has heard disturbing and saddening accounts of how these predators have used the Internet to exploit our children. As a father of six, I am keenly aware of the dangers

to our children and the concerns of parents across Pennsylvania and the Nation. In February, the Department of Justice launched Project Safe Childhood, a initiative to ``combat the proliferation of technology- facilitated sexual exploitation crimes against children.''

``Project Safe Childhood'' has five main purposes. First, it seeks to integrate Federal, State, and local efforts to investigate and prosecute child exploitation cases including partnerships by each U.S. Attorney with each Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force in their district, other Federal, State, and local law enforcement, and community and faith-based organizations to develop district-specific strategic plans to combat and prosecute child exploitation crimes. Second, the Project allows major case coordination by the Department of Justice or other appropriate Federal agency. Third, it increases Federal involvement in child exploitation cases by providing additional investigative tools and increased penalties available under Federal law. Fourth, the Project provides increased training of Federal, State, and local law enforcement regarding the investigation and prosecution of computer-facilitated crimes against children. Finally, it promotes community awareness and educational programs to raise national awareness about the threat of online sexual predators and to provide information to families on how to report possible violations.

According to recent Congressional testimony from Alice S. Fisher, Assistant U.S. Attorney in charge of the Criminal Division, and from William W. Mercer, Principle Associate Deputy Attorney General noted, this initiative is working.

On May 17, 2006, the Department of Justice released a document that outlines the need for this project, an overview of the program and guides for how law enforcement, parents, teachers, and communities can come together to implement this program effectively. While I am encouraged by the DOJ actions to raise the profile and enforcement through Project Safe Childhood--and appreciate all that many at the Department of Justice and the State and local levels are doing to catch and prosecute these predators--I am concerned that this program does not have the legislative authorization or dedicated funding that it needs to accomplish its goal of protecting our children.

I intend to work to help the Department of Justice fully implement and expand this initiative, therefore, I am introducing the Project Safe Childhood Authorization Act. Specifically, the bill will authorize and expand Project Safe Childhood; add new elements regarding child exploitation crimes that have been requested by the Department of Justice to strengthen the requirements to effectively report child pornography, require warning labels on commercial Websites that contain sexually explicit material, and prohibit the embedding of words or images on a Website in order to deceive individuals into viewing obscenity or material harmful to minors; increase penalties for registered sex offenders, child sex trafficking and sexual abuse, and other child exploitation crimes; create Children's Safety Online Awareness Campaigns; and authorize grants for online child safety programs.

The bill authorizes $18 million for fiscal year 2007 for the initial implementation of Project Safe Childhood, and up to $29 million for the expansion of the program for fiscal year 2007, and such sums as may be necessary for each of the 5 succeeding fiscal years.

I know all of us--particularly those of us with children--want to know how to keep our children safe, and want to know that anyone that endangers or harms our children will be punished. I am glad to be here to take this important step in protecting our children. I hope my colleagues will agree with me and we will pass the Project Safe Childhood Authorization Act this year.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill which is intended to ensure that more surplus government computers are put to good use in our schools and by families of deployed service members.

Each year, it is becoming more and more evident that, especially for our youth, computer knowledge is essential for success. While many Americans have computers at home, there are still many Americans who do not have that easy access to computer technology. In addition, not all of our schools have or can afford up-to-date computer technology to aid their students in their learning. This bill is intended to bridge this gap.

It has been estimated that each week, the Federal Government disposes of 10,000 computers. Thanks in part to Executive Order 12999, which was issued in 1996, some of these computers are placed in schools that would otherwise not have access to this technology. The Executive order directs that federal agencies shall safeguard and identify potentially educationally useful federal equipment that is no longer needed or declared surplus. This equipment shall then be transferred directly or through the Government Services Administration Computers for Learning program to public and private schools and nonprofit organizations, including community-based educational organizations. Schools and nonprofits in enterprise communities or empowerment zones are prioritized in receiving these computers.

I have been pleased to be able to work through the related program in the Senate to place excess computers in several Pennsylvania schools where

they are being put to good use. Unfortunately, I have heard from those working in Pennsylvania to obtain such computers that not enough of them are getting through to schools. They are experiencing increased difficulty in maintaining the number and quality of computers they were previously able to get from the government for refurbishment and donation. In some cases, hard drives are being needlessly destroyed before they are turned over.

One of the problems that has prevented schools from getting and using these computers is that many times they are not able to be immediately put into use by the school. Schools may not have the technical ability or storage space to take computers directly from the government if they need maintenance before they can be placed into service. It has been estimated that if schools get the computers directly from the government, only 10 percent can be put into use. However, if they are first refurbished, 40 percent can be used.

The hope is that this legislation would result in federal agencies making more surplus computers available for schools by codifying the previous Executive order. The bill would also allow computers to go directly to nonprofits for refurbishing before going to the school, making is easier for more schools to participate in the program. Currently, a school has to take title to the computer and then can transfer it to a nonprofit refurbisher to be fixed up, an additional step for them. This bill would allow nonprofit organizations like Computers for Schools that can refurbish computers at low-cost to participate in the process, getting computers ready to use and sending them out to schools where they last three more years, enabling more children to learn and profit by them. To prevent the needless destruction of hard drives, the bill also references federal standards on how to completely and securely erase hard drives without destroying them.

Lastly, this bill includes language that would make it possible to distribute these computers to the families of deployed service men and women who do not have a computer in their homes so that they can stay in better touch with their family members while they are fighting for our country.

I believe this legislation is an important step to help ensure that surplus federal computers are put to good use by allowing more of our youth to have access to computers in school. I am hopeful that this legislation will be enacted into law.

Mr. President, I seek recognition today to introduce legislation to authorize major medical facility projects and major medical facility leases for the Department of Veterans Affairs, VA. Most VA hospitals, clinics, nursing homes, and research facilities have ongoing needs for maintenance, repair, and modernization to promote patient and employee safety and provide a higher standard of care for our Nation's veterans. Earlier this month, I held a hearing of the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs on these needs, at which VA and a service organization representative delivered testimony about what is required in the next phase of addressing the needs of health care facilities for our Nation's veterans. In addition, several committee members and noncommittee colleagues remarked about the significance of these projects to their States. It is my belief that this bill will expand VA's ability to provide health care services to this group of deserving Americans. I will take a few moments now to explain the provisions of this legislation.

First, the bill authorizes three major medical facility projects in immediate need of fiscal year 2006 authorization; the restoration of VA's health care infrastructure in the Biloxi and New Orleans areas following Hurricane Katrina, and the cost of land acquisition for replacement of the current Denver VA Medical Center with a new facility at the former Fitzsimons Army Medical Center. The Denver facility was constructed over a half-century ago and many of the core facilities have been deemed to be past or near the end of their useful life.

Second, this legislation reauthorizes 18 major medical facility construction projects that were authorized under Public Law 108-170, but for which it is unlikely that contract awards will be accomplished by September 30, 2006, as required by that law. Therefore, for each of these projects, the draft bill extends the date by which contracts must be awarded, from September 30, 2006, September 20, 2009. These projects were identified and prioritized under the capital asset realignment for enhanced services process. CARES, as it has become known, is a market- based national assessment of infrastructure needs that VA has developed into a schedule for completion. These projects represent the most pressing CARES-identified needs that VA has undertaken in order to improve access-to-care and provide services in areas of recent, current, and projected growth in veterans population, such as Las Vegas and Orlando. To allow a lapse in VA's authority to move forward on these projects would result in tremendous setbacks, and conceivably, additional taxpayer expense.

Third, the legislation authorizes major medical facility leases that did not receive. authorization in the current fiscal for outpatient clinics in Baltimore, MD, Marion, IL, and the Dallas, TX, area. In addition, five major medical facility leases fiscal year 2007 are included for outpatient clinics in Austin, TX, Lowell, MA, Grand Rapids, MI, Las Vegas, NV, and Parma, OH.

This legislation represents the administration's request of the Veterans' Affairs Committee and the Congress, with a significant exception. I have chosen not to authorize the six requested fiscal year 2007 major medical facility construction projects at this time. I want to make it clear to my colleagues that my intent is not to micromanage VA's construction budget or to delay the Department's capital plan. And no one in the Senate is more committed to seeing that we are not diverting important resources away from facilities that are extremely important to our veterans. But as chairman of this committee, my approach

puts Congress on record as expecting progress with the 18 CARES projects on which we are extending authorizations, attaching a reasonable amount of money to those efforts, and then monitoring the progress closely from the Veterans' Committee. As we have seen with the need for significant and expensive Katrina-related construction, VA's capital plan requires consistent monitoring, frequent review and, at times, significant modification. But VA must finish some of what it has started before taking on new major projects.

Over the next several weeks, the Committee on Veterans' Affairs will be taking up this bill and other legislation introduced to improve the range of services and benefits available to our Nation's veterans. I look forward to working with my colleagues throughout the rest of this Congress on these and other important efforts.

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

Mr. President, I rise to introduce a bill that will help the commercial fishermen and others whose livelihoods were negatively impacted by the Exxon Valdez oilspill.

As all of us know, the Exxon Valdez ran aground on March 23, 1989, spilling 11 million gallons of oil into Prince William Sound in Alaska. A class action jury trial was held in Federal court in Anchorage, AK, in 1994. The plaintiffs included 32,000 fishermen among others whose livelihoods were gravely affected by this disaster. The jury awarded $5 billion in punitive

damages to the plaintiff class. The punitive damage award has been on repeated appeal by the Exxon Corporation since 1994. Many of the original plaintiffs, possibly more than 1,000 people, have already died.

Once the punitive damage award of the Exxon Valdez litigation is settled, many fishermen will receive payments to reimburse them for fishing income lost due to the environmental consequences of the Exxon Valdez oilspill. It is estimated that the eventual settlement could be $6.75 billion or more.

My bill gives the affected fishermen, as well as other plaintiffs in this case, a fair shake when it comes to contributions to retirement plans and averaging of income for tax purposes.

With respect to retirement plan contributions, my bill increases the caps on both deductions and income for traditional IRAs to the extent of the income a plaintiff receives from the settlement or judgment. Also, it allows the plaintiffs to make contributions to Roth IRAs and other retirement plans to the extent of the income received from the settlement or judgment.

Fishermen are currently allowed to average their income over a several year period due to the often inconsistent nature of the fishing business. The litigation stemming from the Exxon Valdez oilspill poses an even more unique situation since fishermen and other plaintiffs have been waiting to receive lost income--in the form of a settlement or judgment--for 12 years. My bill allows plaintiffs to average their income for the period of time between December 31 of the year they receive the settlement or judgment payment and January 1, 1994--the year of the original jury award in Federal court.

It is imperative that we address this important issue soon. The Exxon Corporation has appealed this case and a decision is expected later this year.

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

There being no objection the text of the bill was ordered to be