A resolution expressing the deep disappointment of the Senate with respect to the election of Iran to a leadership position in the United Nations Disarmament Commission and requesting the President to withhold funding to the United Nations unless credible reforms are made.

Mr. President, I thank the truly distinguished and able chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Mr. Cochran, for all of his hard work on this bill. He is so diligent, so fair, so honorable. I am proud to serve with him. Mississippi is so well represented in the Senate by this man. As a matter of great pride, I call him my friend, my colleague, my chairman.

The President has asked the Congress to approve over $92 billion of emergency spending, including $72.5 billion

for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and $19.8 billion for the Federal response to the terrible hurricanes that struck the Gulf States in August and September of 2005.

When the committee opened its hearings on the supplemental on March 7, I stated my belief that it is our duty to scrutinize the President's request not only for what is in the bill but also for what is not in the bill. I said to the distinguished chairman and to Senator Landrieu and others that I would help them in every way I could in responding to the terrible storms that hit their States.

My State of West Virginia is often hit by floods and other damaging disasters, such as the recent accidents in West Virginia's coal mines. I am very sensitive to the ability of our Federal Government to prepare for and respond to disasters promptly and with competence, which is what our citizens need and what our citizens deserve. Sadly, many of our Federal agencies are no longer up to these fundamental tasks.

Mr. President, the chairman of the committee has taken the bull by the horns. Under his leadership, the recommendations of the committee fill in some of the gaps in the administration's request for funds required to respond to the hurricanes.

The committee added approximately $7.4 billion to the President's budget request--that is not chickenfeed--$7.4 billion added to the President's budget request for Federal programs to respond to these disasters.

I have to also note that the chairman of the committee included at my request--he would probably have done it, anyhow; perhaps I made it a little easier--and the request of others an amount of $35.6 million for improved mine safety and health programs. In the wake of 18 coal mining deaths in the State of West Virginia this year and another 16 mining deaths in other States this year, it is imperative that the Congress act immediately to ensure that an adequate number of safety inspectors will be provided for our Nation's mines and to expedite the introduction of critical safety equipment.

It is simply, absolutely, positively inexcusable that our miners have oxygen canisters that last only 1 hour--1 hour--when miners may be trapped underground for several days, or that the miners may not have emergency communications equipment. Think of that. Miners may not have emergency communications equipment that can reach the surface in the event of an extended rescue effort. I tell you, this is something to talk about.

The chairman has my genuine appreciation for including these funds in the committee-reported bill. I also thank Senator Specter, Senator Harkin, and Senator Rockefeller for their support of the initiative.

By the way, Senator Rockefeller is recuperating from a very serious operation. He may not get back in the harness here until June. I was talking with him a couple of days ago. He probably won't get back until June. John D. Rockefeller, my colleague from West Virginia.

The bill before the Senate also includes a provision to extend the abandoned mine land authority through fiscal year 2007. The AML program and combined benefits fund are very important programs that are needed by retired coal miners, by their families, and by coalfields communities throughout the country. I thank Chairman Cochran. I thank Senator Specter and Senator Domenici for supporting this effort.

The supplemental appropriations bill includes $67.8 billion for the Department of Defense to prosecute the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Upon passage of this legislation, the total amount appropriated for the war in Iraq, including the cost of reconstruction, will be $320 billion. Mr. President, that is $320 for every minute since Jesus Christ was born 2,000 years ago. That is a lot of money. Man, think of that.

That is a staggering figure, but what is even more unbelievable is that the monthly cost of the war in Iraq has been steadily, steadily, steadily escalating. In May 2004, the Defense Department reported to the Armed Services Committee that the cost of operations in Iraq was averaging $4 billion per month. The Congressional Research Service reported this month that during fiscal year 2005, the cost of the war in Iraq had escalated to $5.6 billion per month. The Congressional Research Service estimates that the cost of operations in Iraq during the current fiscal year will grow to $6.8 billion per month.

I ask the Chair, can you comprehend how much money that is, $6.8 billion? That is $6.80 for every minute since Jesus Christ was born. Contemplate that.

The American people ought to be asking how on Earth has the monthly cost of the war in Iraq grown by 70 percent just in 2 years. Isn't there any way to control the cost of the war while making sure that our troops continue to get the support they need?

The truth is that the administration is out of control when it comes to asking for emergency spending. According to a Congressional Budget Office report, the White House has requested $515 billion in emergency spending between 2001 and 2006. That is more than 3\1/2\ times the combined total of all--all, a-l-l--all of the emergency spending bills in the previous 10 years.

Say that again. Did you hear me? More than 3\1/2\ times the combined total of all of the emergency spending bills in the previous 10 years.

The President refuses to include in his annual budget request a realistic estimate of the cost of the wars. As a result, there is virtually no debate about how our country is going to pay for these massive bills. And what is more, these emergency spending requests mean that Congress has only a limited opportunity to scrutinize the administration's spending proposals. As a result, nobody--nobody--seems to be minding the store when it comes to controlling the escalating cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I tell you, I was in favor of fighting the war in Afghanistan, but I was not in favor of going into Iraq. No, man. No.

The failure of the President to heed the repeated calls by the Senate--by the Senate, that is this body--to budget for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan has resulted in more unnecessary spending that is hidden--hidden--from public view.

For example, the President requested $8.3 billion in military procurement to replace wornout or battle-damaged equipment, but this is essentially forward funding of replacement equipment that should be bought using funds in the regular appropriations bill. Since we do not need to buy the same equipment twice, future Defense spending bills need not appropriate procurement funds that have already been approved in previously enacted emergency appropriations bills.

This forward funding of military procurement accounts should then mean savings in the regular Defense appropriations bill. But when will these savings appear?

With the approval of this bill, the Department of Defense budget for fiscal year 2006 is $534 billion, an increase of 74 percent over fiscal year 2001. Congress has rubberstamped much of this increase without indepth budget justification.

Until the President begins to include a real estimate of the cost of the wars in his annual budget, American taxpayers will continue to see billions more dollars spent without any true measure of accountability. That is why I will again offer an amendment to the supplemental appropriations bill that calls for the President to budget for the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Senate has given its strong support to this amendment four times--four times--and the President continues to look the other way, continues to disregard this direction by the Senate. The Senate must insist on a long overdue and responsible step of budgeting for the cost of the war.

I am also very disappointed that the White House limited the supplemental request to the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and in response to Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma. As the Senate debates immigration and border security, it is rather astonishing, wouldn't you think, that no funding was included for border security. Nor were any funds included for port security. Dubai Ports World is now operating terminals at six of our major ports.

The ``layered defense''--if I may put quotation marks around those two words--the ``layered defense'' that the

administration claims is protecting our ports is, in fact, paper thin-- paper thin. It is just that thin.

Nor did the President seek any supplemental funding for preparing for or preventing the outbreak of the avian flu or to help our farmers who have been devastated by drought and by the hurricanes.

The Appropriations Committee, under the chairmanship of Senator Cochran, has wisely approved funding for port security, wisely approved funding for the avian flu, wisely approved funding for drought relief, and I hope that border security funding will be approved this week on the floor.

I challenge the White House--it is easy to be brave from a distance; I am quite a ways up the avenue from the White House--I challenge the White House--come on--I challenge the White House to get serious about these issues. These are also emergencies. The White House should be leading rather than opposing efforts to improve border security and port security, and it should be preparing for the avian flu and helping our farmers.

The administration has a huge credibility gap when it comes to homeland security. There is a continuing drumbeat that another terrorist attack may occur or is even likely. The President, in his State of the Union Address, told the American people:

The enemy has not lost the desire or capability to attack

us.

That is true. One look at the budget reveals an odd complacency. The administration's speech writers and his policy writers seem to be living in different worlds.

In response to the administration's decision to allow Dubai Ports World to operate terminals in six major U.S. ports, it is asserted by the administration that it has a robust, layered security system for our ports. And yet for the second straight year, the White House proposes to eliminate the Port Security Grant Program. Of the $816 million the Congress has appropriated since September 11 for port security, only $46 million was requested by the President. There is nothing ``robust'' about that.

How serious are we about port security, when the President, the Vice President, the Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of Homeland Security don't even know about the decision to sell the operation of six U.S. ports to a State-owned foreign company?

How serious are we about port security when Customs and Border Protection inspects only 5 percent of the 11 million containers that come into the country each year?

How serious are we when the Coast Guard Deepwater budget for replacing its ships, planes, and helicopters will not be completed until 2026?

The administration has not requested one thin dime for port security in this $92 billion supplemental.

The committee-reported bill includes my amendment to provide $648 million to fill critical gaps in our paper-thin port security program. The bill now provides resources for more radiation portal monitors, more container inspections, more port inspections, and would fund port security grants at the levels anticipated in the Collins-Lieberman and Stevens-Inouye port security authorization bills.

The American people--our people, your people--yes, our people, the American people--expect more than just a paper-thin--you can almost see through that--the American people expect more than just a paper-thin security plan for our ports. The bill, as reported by the Senate Appropriations Committee, begins--and Senator Cochran, the chairman of that committee, can take a lot of credit--begins to address this paper- thin port security program by including a total of $648 million to fill critical gaps in our port security program. I thank Senators Dan Inouye, Herb Kohl, and Tom Harkin for their support of my initiative in committee. Whose initiative? Mine, my initiative. Dizzy Dean says it is all right to brag if you have done it. Well, I have done it.

The White House should step to the plate and support this effort.

While the committee-reported bill has made some progress to address the gaps in the Nation's port security defenses, it virtually ignores border security. The Senate has recently been debating immigration and border security legislation to authorize a whole host of items intended to secure our borders. The legislation would authorize the hiring of additional Border Patrol agents. It would authorize the hiring of additional immigration enforcement agents and detention officers. It would authorize border surveillance, technology, and unmanned aerial vehicles, and fences.

I am very concerned--very concerned--about lax border security. In fact, together with our colleague, Senator Larry Craig, and with the support of my Homeland Security Subcommittee chairman, Senator Judd Gregg, I led the effort in the Senate last year to appropriate hard dollars to begin to put real teeth--see these teeth? These are real teeth. They are just 88 years old. These are real teeth. Well, that is what we did. We put real teeth in our border security agenda. We did not merely authorize the hiring of more Border Patrol agents; we appropriated hard dollars to hire 500 more Border Patrol agents, as well as more immigration enforcement agents and detention officers. Don't you feel better about that? I do. I can sleep a little better. I will bet Senator Harkin sleeps better at night because of it. Those 500 Border Patrol agents have been hired and trained and are deployed on our borders. They are out there defending our borders while we are sleeping. Think about that.

As we hire more Border Patrol agents and other immigration enforcement officials, they must have the tools they need to do their job. We need to start paying for those tools now so that they will be available as more and more Border Patrol and immigration enforcement officials are hired and trained.

I will be talking again about this matter as the Senate proceeds to consider this supplemental appropriations bill. Securing our borders requires more than just hot air. Hot air is cheap. We must put real dollars to work for border security.

Mr. President, I am pleased to report to the Senate that the committee-reported bill, under the strong leadership of Chairman Cochran--hey, you people down there in Mississippi better hold on to this man. He does a terrific job on this committee. This bill includes several other initiatives to deal with gaps in funding in the budget request.

I would suggest that principal among these gaps is an amount of $2.3 billion required to prepare for and to respond to a potential influenza pandemic such as the avian flu. My mother died during the great influenza epidemic of 1917 and 1918; the great influenza epidemic. So there is money here to prepare for and to respond to a potential influenza pandemic. The World Health Organization recommends that countries stockpile enough antiviral medications to cover 25 percent of the population or 80 million Americans.

According to the Department of Health and Human Services, there is a shortfall of 30 million courses. HHS will not receive the antivirals it has ordered until the end of this year.

We are also well short of the 20 million goal that has been set by HHS for purchasing prepandemic vaccine. Experts have said that a vaccine is the only effective way to stop the spread of a pandemic.

The availability of the vaccine and medicine is limited. The availability is limited. We should not wait to place our orders. The White House should support this effort.

The committee-reported bill also includes approximately $3.9 billion for emergency agricultural disaster assistance for farmers and ranchers in States affected by recent hurricanes in the gulf, drought in the southern plains and throughout the western corn belt, and excessive rainfall in North Dakota--North Dakota: Do you know where that is? That is north of South Dakota. North Dakota--and the upper Midwest flood. Nearly 80 percent of all U.S. counties were designated as primary or contiguous disaster areas by the Secretary of Agriculture or the President in 2005.

So, Mr. President, the chairman and I look forward to a good debate on this supplemental appropriations bill. It is a good bill, and it is truly responsive--truly responsive--to the needs of the American people.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise to submit a sense-of-the Senate resolution expressing the deepest disappointment of the Senate with respect to the election of Iran to a leadership position on the United Nations Disarmament Commission and request the President to withhold funding to the United Nations unless credible reforms are made.

A couple of observations, Mr. President. In light of the Oil-For-Food scandal, it was my great hope that we would see a movement toward reform in the United Nations. The Secretary General had put forth some proposed reforms. There was some discussion about whether the U.N. Commission on Human Rights was going to be reformed. Unfortunately, the energy was there, the hope was there, and we seemed to be moving in the wrong direction.

On May 9, for the new Human Rights Council, elections will be held. It appears that Cuba may be appointed to the new Human Rights Council.

The recommendations from the Secretary General for minimum reform are now coming under attack by something called the G-77, the underlying nations, which may dismantle those. A little tremor occurred just about a week ago, and to some people it may be a little thing, but it is not. It is symbolic of some of the things we face with the United Nations.

Just recently, Iran was elected to the U.N. Disarmament Commission. Some may say that this is a very minor commission; it is an inactive forum; it only meets 3 weeks a year, the U.N. Commission on Disarmament. We have Iran out there thumbing its nose at the international community hell-bent on getting a nuclear weapon. And by the way, they said what they are going to do with it. They said they want to destroy Israel. That is what they said they are going to do. Hitler told us what he wanted to do and the world didn't listen. God forbid there is an explosion of an atomic weapon in Tel Aviv or Haifa. They have already said where it is going to come from, this is what we are going to do.

So Iran gets elected to the U.N. Commission on Disarmament. In some ways it doesn't make sense. In some ways it is absurd, but it does require comment. It does require a response. It does require folks to say: I don't care whether it meets 3 weeks a year or 1 week a year or 50 weeks a year. This is something that highlights the absurdity of what is happening today in this international body.

It is interesting that, as expected, Iran is already making efforts to convert the Disarmament Commission into yet another forum for antisemitism. Last week, at a working group meeting, Iran's representative to

the Disarmament Commission stated that the suggestion that Iran had a nuclear weapons program was Jewish propaganda fabricated by the Jewish lobby in the United States. These brazenly antisemitic comments were objected to by our American representative, but other members, including the chair of the working group, remained silent.

I am disturbed by the moral indifference that the U.N. has reached where you have a member state seeking nuclear weapons with the expressed intention of destroying another member state, and that member state, Iran, is allowed to serve as the Vice Chair of the Disarmament Commission. That is completely unacceptable, to say the least. I am disappointed that the Asian member states did not step up to contest the candidacy of Iran.

This is what is happening: You have regional groupings, so each state, regional groupings, pick their members. The United States doesn't get involved in this. It is up to the member states, the Asian members. But somebody has to be thinking this doesn't make sense. This is going to cast a negative pall over the international community's reflection about what the United Nations community is all about. It is another step back at a time when we need to be moving forward.

It is the responsibility of member states at the U.N. to step up and prevent the system from being manipulated by pariah states such as Iran that are looking to pursue their destructive agendas. Iran is probably the major state sponsor of terrorism in the world today. Iran says they want to destroy Israel. Iran supports terrorism and Iran is intent on getting a nuclear weapon.

We do not control what other member states do, but we should make the position of the United States clear. The United States should not be funding institutions that not only undermine the very principles they claim to promote but directly harm U.S. interests. A disarmament commission with Iran in a leadership position should be condemned by the United States and we should make a statement. I have been very hesitant to talk about holding back funding, but we are going in the wrong direction. I will be back on the floor if Cuba gets appointed, gets elected to this new human rights council. I will be back on the floor. At a certain point in time you have to expect something. Much is given, much is received. We have given the U.N. a lot of money. We have given a lot of support. There are expectations then and they are not being met.

Lest someone has failed to be aware of Iran's deeds, let me review some of the credentials for being excluded from the commission. Iran has repeatedly deceived the IAEA about a variety of nuclear-related activities, failed to provide IAEA inspectors access to various nuclear sites, and refused to answer outstanding questions that led to its nuclear program. It reneged on its commitments under the Paris Accord of 2004, which included the suspension of uranium enrichment activities.

Again, I talked about the actions and rhetoric of the Iranian regime to perpetuate a record of terror and tyranny which also warrants isolation from the international community at the U.N., including calls for the annihilation of Israel, active sponsorship of terrorism through groups including Hezbollah, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad, meddling in the affairs of neighboring countries such as Iraq and Israel and Lebanon.

The overall conduct of Iran is a direct threat to world security. It violates numerous fundamental principles on which the United Nations is based. Yet it continues to enjoy full participatory rights and privileges as a member state of the U.N. In fact, it gets rewarded by a leadership position on the disarmament commission. Such a situation is beyond comprehension.

The resolution I plan to submit does the following. It expresses deep disappointment in the failure of the Asian group members of the disarmament commission to stop Iran's election as the vice chair of the body. It asserts the disarmament commission has no credibility on disarmament issues due to Iran's participation, particularly in the light of Iran's defiance of the IAEA resolutions and the Security Council presidential statement regarding its nuclear program. It calls on the U.S. to reject all resolutions passed by the discredited disarmament commission, condemns Iran's continued intransigence with regard to the treatment of Israel and sponsorship of terror and, finally, works to ensure that U.S. funding is withheld from the U.N. in the amount that is directed toward the disarmament commission's activities from its regular budget.

We are not talking about a lot of money here. What we are talking about is making a statement--making a statement. We call upon the President to closely monitor U.N. progress on reform and to exercise his option to withhold funding unless credible reforms are made prior to the discussions of the biannual budget in June.

What do you do? In the U.S. we ask the question, What shall we do when those who enforce the law break the law? In the international context we are asking, What do we do when a key voice in disarmament is given to one of the world's most willful sponsors of terrorism at a time when they are ignoring the international community in their quest for nuclear weapons?

The response is just to say no. Civilized nations must speak with one voice. That statement should begin right here with the passage of my resolution.

I urge my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring this resolution. The error of the United Nations is serious. To be silent in the face of it would be far worse.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, it is my pleasure and honor to describe for the Senate the supplemental appropriations bill that has been reported by our committee. The President has requested supplemental appropriations for this fiscal year, which the committee has reviewed. The House has passed a bill reporting and referring to the Senate this bill that is described as an emergency. The funds are needed primarily for the global war on terror, which is included in title I of the bill.

The total committee substitute would provide $106,474,107,000 in supplemental appropriations for this fiscal year, 2006. It is above the President's request by $14,253,522,000. It is also above the House- passed bill, and we have broken this down and presented it to the Senate in titles.

The first title provides money primarily for defense-related activities, as I said, to carry out the global war on terror. It provides funding for ongoing operations and reconstruction efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In title II, we have included funds above the President's request for recovery from the damages caused by the hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico in 2005. The President requested $19.7 billion for this purpose. The committee, in consideration of amendments offered by Senators during the markup session, approved an additional $7.4 billion for this purpose. So the total of title II is $27,126,662,000.

Title III reflects the provision of an amendment that was offered in committee by Senators Dorgan of North Dakota and Burns of Montana relating to agricultural disaster assistance for farmers and ranchers in States that are affected either by the hurricanes of 2005 or drought, flood, wildfires, and other natural disasters that have occurred. That amendment provides exactly $3,944 million for emergency agricultural disaster assistance.

Title IV reflects an amendment that was approved by the committee for emergency drought assistance, more broadly defined, and is an amendment offered by the Senator from New Mexico, Mr. Domenici, and agreed to by the committee, with $12,500,000 for that purpose.

Title V is an appropriation of $648,050,000 for port security enhancements. This was requested by--and the committee approved the request--the distinguished Senator from West Virginia, Mr. Byrd.

Title VI includes funds for influenza pandemic preparation and response activities. The administration asked for this amendment. It was included by the committee. It provides $2,300 million for that purpose.

Title VII is the part of the bill that has general provisions and technical provisions.

Overall, the bill can be described as having two major points of focus. First, it provides needed funding for our military to continue to carry out operations overseas. It also includes the commitment to rebuild the gulf coast to permit inhabitants there to recover from the devastation caused by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

It is my opinion--and I think this reflects the action taken by our committee--that it is critical that these funds be provided expeditiously, and we need the cooperation and support of all Senators to accomplish this goal. The committee recommendation has been available to Senators for several weeks. I hope we can consider amendments in an orderly fashion, that they can be brought up as early as possible so they can be considered without prolonged and unnecessary delay.

I have to say that the individual subcommittee chairmen worked hard to identify the needs in the areas under their jurisdiction. Those who serve as ranking minority members of the subcommittees have had opportunities to participate. It has been a bipartisan effort made by our committee to bring to the bill a recommended appropriation amount that would serve our national security interests as well as our economic interests and other problems that were caused by natural disasters.

At the appropriate time, I will move that the committee substitute be adopted and be treated as original text for the purpose of further amendments. I have to say at this point that the work of this committee reflects bipartisan cooperation and mutual respect between the Members on both sides of the aisle. It carries out a tradition that I believe has been one of the hallmarks of the activity of the Senate. It has reflected credit, therefore, on the Senate.

I hope Members will understand that we are not addressing issues on the basis of partisanship but on the basis of need to address problems that confront our country and those which were unanticipated when the President submitted his initial budget request for this fiscal year. We have had other events that have caused us to have to proceed to adopt emergency appropriations bills, and here again that is something we have to deal with. We are presenting this bill as a good-faith effort to meet the needs of the country as we see them and as requested by the President.

I am happy to yield to my friend, the distinguished Senator from West Virginia, Mr. Byrd, who has provided very important assistance to me personally and, through his service in the Senate, to the work of this committee for a long time. We appreciate his valuable assistance. All members of the committee have worked to be sure that this is a good bill and deserves the support of the Senate. I think it does.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I want to express my genuine heartfelt appreciation for the remarks of the distinguished Senator from West Virginia

about me and about the work of our committee. He has been a very valuable tutor, friend, and companion during the work of our Committee on Appropriations since I have been on the committee, since January of 1981. I have learned a lot from him. I have learned to respect him in terms of the conscientious way he goes about carrying out his responsibilities to the people of West Virginia and also to the people of the United States as a U.S. Senator. We can all study his career and his dedication to public service with great profit for our own interests. We can be guided by his example and be very proud of our work product if we do.

Mr. President, at the appropriate time, I will ask unanimous consent that the committee amendment be agreed to and the bill as thus amended be considered as original text for the purpose of further amendment, and that no points of order be waived by the request. I give the Senate notice that I will make that unanimous consent request in due course, and it probably will occur immediately after our break for the policy luncheons of the respective parties of the Senate. I am happy to yield to any other Senator who wishes to make any comments. I understand the Senator from Minnesota would like to speak as if in morning business, and I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business for up to 10 minutes.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.