A bill for the relief of Alfredo Plascencia Lopez and Maria Del Refugio Plascencia.

Mr. President, I am offering today private relief legislation to provide lawful permanent residence status to Alfredo Plascencia Lopez and his wife, Maria del Refugio Plascencia, Mexican nationals living in San Bruno, CA.

I have decided to offer legislation on their behalf because I believe that, without it, this hardworking couple and their four United States citizen children would endure an immense and unfair hardship. Indeed, without this legislation, this family may not remain a family for much longer.

In the 18 years that the Plascencias have been here, they have worked to adjust their status through the appropriate legal channels, only to have their efforts thwarted by inattentive legal counsel.

Repeatedly, the Plascencia's lawyer refused to return their calls or otherwise communicate with them in any way, thereby leaving them in the dark. He also failed to forward crucial immigration documents, or even notify the Plascencias that he had them.

Because of the poor representation they received, Mr. and Mrs. Plascencia only became aware that they had been ordered to leave the country 15 days prior to their deportation.

Although the family was stunned and devastated by this discovery, they acted quickly to fire their attorney for gross incompetence, secure competent counsel, and file the appropriate paperwork to delay their deportation to determine if any other legal action could be taken.

For several reasons, it would be tragic for this family to be removed from the United States.

First, since arriving in the United States in 1988, Mr. and Mrs. Plascencia have proven themselves to be a responsible and civic-minded couple who share our American values of hard work, dedication to family, and devotion to community.

Second, Mr. Plascencia has been gainfully employed at Vince's Shellfish for the past 14 years, where his dedication and willingness to learn have propelled him from part-time work to a managerial position. He now oversees the market's entire packing operation and several employees. The President of Vince's Shellfish, in one of the several dozen letters I have received in support of Mr. Plascencia, referred to him as ``a valuable and respected employee'' who ``handles himself in a very professional manner'' and serves as ``a role model'' to other employees. Others who have written to me praising Mr. Plascencia's job performance have referred to him as ``gifted,'' ``trusted,'' ``honest,'' and ``reliable.''

Third, like her husband, Mrs. Plascencia has distinguished herself as a medical assistant at a Kaiser Permanente hospital in the Bay Area. Not satisfied with working as a maid at a local hotel, Mrs. Plascencia went to school, earned her high school equivalency degree, improved her skills, and became a medical assistant.

For 5 years, Mrs. Plascencia was working in Kaiser Permanente's Oncology Department, where she attended to cancer patients. Her colleagues, many of whom have written to me in support of her, commend her ``unending enthusiasm'' and have described her work as ``responsible,'' ``efficient,'' and ``compassionate.''

In fact, Kaiser Permanente's Director of Internal Medicine, Nurse Rose Carino, wrote to say that Mrs. Plascencia is ``an asset to the community and exemplifies the virtues we Americans extol: hardworking, devoted to her family, trustworthy and loyal, [and] involved in her community. She and her family are a solid example of the type of immigrant that America should welcome wholeheartedly.'' Nurse Carino went on to write that Mrs. Plascencia is ``an excellent employee and role model for her colleagues. She works in a very demanding unit, Oncology, and is valued and depended on by the physicians she works with.''

The physicians themselves confirm this. For example, Dr. Laurie Weisberg, the Chief of Oncology at Kaiser Permanente, writes that Mrs. Plascencia ``is truly an asset to our unit and is one of the main reasons that it functions effectively.''

Together, Mr. and Mrs. Plascencia have used their professional successes to realize many of the goals dreamed of by all Americans. They saved up and bought a home. They own a car. They have good health care benefits and they each have begun saving for retirement. They want to send their children to college and give them an even better life.

This private relief bill is important because it would preserve these achievements and ensure that Mr. and Mrs. Plascencia will be able to make substantive contributions to the community in the future. It is important, also, because of the positive impact it will have on the couple's children, each of whom is a United States citizen and each of whom is well on their way to becoming productive members of the Bay Area community.

Christina, 14, is the Plascencia's oldest child, and an honor student at Parkside Intermediate School in San Bruno.

Erika, 10, and Alfredo Jr., 8, are enrolled at Belle Air Elementary, where they have worked hard at their studies and received praise and good grades from their teachers. In fact, the principal of Erika's school recognized her as the ``Most Artistic'' student in her class. Erika's teacher, Mrs. Nascon, remarked on a report card, ``Erika is a bright spot in my classroom.''

The Plascencia's youngest child is 3-year-old Daisy.

Removing Mr. and Mrs. Plascencia from the United States would be most tragic for their children. These children were born in the United States and, through no fault of their own, have been thrust into a situation that has the potential to alter their lives dramatically.

It would be especially tragic for the Plascencia's older children-- Christina, Erika, and Alfredo--to have to leave the United States. They are old enough to understand that they are leaving their schools, their teachers, their friends, and their home. They would leave everything that is familiar to them. Their parents would find themselves in Mexico without a job and without a house. The children would have to acclimate to a different culture, language, and way of life.

The only other option would be for Mr. and Mrs. Plascencia to leave their children here with relatives. This separation is a choice which no parents should have to make.

Many of the words I have used to describe Mr. and Mrs. Plascencia are not

my own. They are the words of the Americans who live and work with the Plascencias day in and day out and who find them to embody the American spirit. I have sponsored this private relief bill, and ask my colleagues to support it, because I believe that this is a spirit that we must nurture wherever we can find it. Forcing the Plascencias to leave the United States would extinguish that spirit.

I ask unanimous consent that the text of the private relief bill and the numerous letters of support my office has received from members of the San Bruno community be entered into the Record immediately following this statement.

Mr. President, today, I am pleased to introduce the Unaccompanied Alien Child Protection Act of 2007, along with Senators Hagel, Kennedy, Feingold, Cantwell, and Kerry. This important legislation will govern the way the Federal Government treats undocumented immigrant children who end up or show up all alone at our borders or within the United States.

I first introduced legislation similar to this bill in January 2001. It has now passed twice out of the Senate. Yet, unfortunately, both times it stalled in the House of Representatives.

Despite the passage of time, this bill remains vital to the proper treatment of young undocumented children who get caught within our Federal system. My hope is that this is the year that this bill will become law.

Every year, more than 7,000 undocumented and unaccompanied children are apprehended. Most are from Central America, but others come from Mexico, India, China, Somalia, Sierra Leone, and remote places around the world. Some have parents or other relatives who the child is trying to find in the United States, but many have no one.

These children come to the United States for many reasons: reuniting with family, pursuing education or employment, escaping family violence or abuse, fleeing political or religious persecution, and seeking protection from gang violence or recruitment.

Some children are brought here by adults seeking to exploit them for commercial sex work, domestic servitude, or other forced labor. Sometimes they're too young to understand why they've been sent to the United States at all.

These children are the most vulnerable immigrants who come to this country and I believe we have a special obligation to ensure that they are treated humanely and fairly.

Historically, U.S. immigration law and policies have been developed and implemented without regard to their effect on children. This result has been similar to trying to fit a square peg in a round hole--it just cannot work.

Under current immigration law, these children are forced to struggle through a system designed for adults, even though they lack the capacity to understand nuanced legal principles, let alone courtroom and administrative procedures. Because of this, children who may very well be eligible for relief are often deported back to the very life- threatening situations from which they fled--before they are even able to make their cases before the Department of Homeland Security or an immigration judge.

For example, the New York Times recently reported the story of Young Zheng, who was 14 years old when his parents sent him from China to the United States.

He was first detained for a year at a facility that was later closed due to abysmal conditions. Fortunately, he was then transferred to Chicago, where he was assigned a child advocate who spent time with him and urged his release to his relatives.

Six months later, Young was released to live with his uncle in Akron, OH. Then, immigration authorities suddenly attempted to deport Young in April 2005.

Young so feared being deported that he tried to hurt himself. Young was terrified that he would be subject to torture by the Chinese government or that the traffickers would exact physical revenge. The traffickers had already threatened retribution against his family if they did not repay the trafficking fee of $60,000.

With the help of a team of pro bono attorneys and the child advocate, Young's removal was stayed. In April 2006, Young received his green card and is now a model high school student.

This example dramatically highlights why this legislation is still so critical. It was only because Young was lucky enough that pro bono attorneys and a child advocate happened to intervene in his case that he was not deported. And, they intervened only after he was detained for 1 year in squalid conditions in the United States.

According to an analysis of Department of Justice data in 2000, those children fortunate enough to find representation, usually through a pro bono attorney, are more than four times as likely to be granted asylum.

Sadly, many children never get the help of a child advocate or a pro bono lawyer. Worse, for those children who are victims of human trafficking, their only advice may come from lawyers hired by the traffickers who care nothing for the child's best interest.

The legislation that I am introducing today builds on the Homeland Security Act of 2002, which adopted components of the bill that I first introduced during the 107th Congress.

The Homeland Security Act transferred responsibility for the care and placement of unaccompanied alien children from the now-abolished Immigration and Naturalization Service to the Office of Refugee Resettlement within the Department of Health and Human Services.

This change finally resolved the conflict of interest inherent in the former system that pitted the enforcement side of the Immigration and Naturalization Service against the benefits side of that same agency in the care of unaccompanied alien children.

I am pleased that the provision transferring responsibility for the care and custody of unaccompanied alien children was included in the Homeland Security Act, and that by all accounts, the transition in the care of children between the affected agencies has gone well.

Yet, because the Homeland Security Act was crafted quickly, it left the Department of Homeland Security and the Office of Refugee Resettlement without clearly distinguished mandates and responsibilities in some key areas, including legal custody, age determination procedures, and State court dependency proceedings.

Congress now has a responsibility to go beyond the simple transfer of children from one agency to another to actually laying out the process and steps to ensure that unaccompanied alien children are treated fairly and humanely.

We must provide the Office of Refugee Resettlement, the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice with the tools they will need to succeed in their missions regarding the care of unaccompanied alien children after the transfer of jurisdiction took place.

First of all, I want to stress that this bill is not about benefits, as it provides no new immigration benefit to unaccompanied alien children. Rather, this bill is about the process of how we treat these children under the current system.

The ``Unaccompanied Alien Child Protection Act'' provides guidance and instruction to the Office of Refugee and Resettlement, the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice in the following areas: first, in the custody, release, family reunification and detention of unaccompanied alien children; second, it provides access by unaccompanied alien children to child advocates and pro bono counsel; third, it streamlines the Special Immigrant Juvenile (SIJ) program and provides guidance on the

training of federal government officials and private parties who come into contact with unaccompanied alien children; fourth, it requires the issuance of guidelines specific to children's asylum claims; fifth, it authorizes appropriations for the care of unaccompanied alien children; and, sixth, it amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to provide additional responsibilities and powers to the Office of Refugee Resettlement with respect to unaccompanied alien children.

Central throughout the ``Unaccompanied Alien Child Protection Act'' are two concepts: (1) The United States government has a fundamental responsibility to protect unaccompanied children in its custody; and, (2) In all proceedings and actions, the government should have as a priority protecting the interests of these children who are not criminals or do not pose a risk to our national security.

Imagine the fear of an unaccompanied alien child, in the United States alone, without a parent or guardian. Imagine that child being thrust into a system he or she does not understand, provided no access to pro bono counsel or a child advocate, placed in jail with adults or housed with juveniles with serious criminal convictions.

I find it hard to believe that our country would allow children to be treated in such a manner.

That is why I am introducing this legislation today. The ``Unaccompanied Alien Child Protection Act'' will help our country fulfill the special obligation to these children to treat them fairly and humanely.

I am proud to have the support of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Women's Commission on Refugee Women and Children, the Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, Heartland Alliance, Amnesty International USA and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, and many other organizations with whom I have worked closely to develop this legislation.

I urge my colleagues to join with me by cosponsoring this important measure and ensuring that these reforms are finally enacted.

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

Mr. President, I am offering today private relief legislation to provide lawful permanent residence status to Alfredo Plascencia Lopez and his wife, Maria del Refugio Plascencia, Mexican nationals living in San Bruno, CA.

I have decided to offer legislation on their behalf because I believe that, without it, this hardworking couple and their four United States citizen children would endure an immense and unfair hardship. Indeed, without this legislation, this family may not remain a family for much longer.

In the 18 years that the Plascencias have been here, they have worked to adjust their status through the appropriate legal channels, only to have their efforts thwarted by inattentive legal counsel.

Repeatedly, the Plascencia's lawyer refused to return their calls or otherwise communicate with them in any way, thereby leaving them in the dark. He also failed to forward crucial immigration documents, or even notify the Plascencias that he had them.

Because of the poor representation they received, Mr. and Mrs. Plascencia only became aware that they had been ordered to leave the country 15 days prior to their deportation.

Although the family was stunned and devastated by this discovery, they acted quickly to fire their attorney for gross incompetence, secure competent counsel, and file the appropriate paperwork to delay their deportation to determine if any other legal action could be taken.

For several reasons, it would be tragic for this family to be removed from the United States.

First, since arriving in the United States in 1988, Mr. and Mrs. Plascencia have proven themselves to be a responsible and civic-minded couple who share our American values of hard work, dedication to family, and devotion to community.

Second, Mr. Plascencia has been gainfully employed at Vince's Shellfish for the past 14 years, where his dedication and willingness to learn have propelled him from part-time work to a managerial position. He now oversees the market's entire packing operation and several employees. The President of Vince's Shellfish, in one of the several dozen letters I have received in support of Mr. Plascencia, referred to him as ``a valuable and respected employee'' who ``handles himself in a very professional manner'' and serves as ``a role model'' to other employees. Others who have written to me praising Mr. Plascencia's job performance have referred to him as ``gifted,'' ``trusted,'' ``honest,'' and ``reliable.''

Third, like her husband, Mrs. Plascencia has distinguished herself as a medical assistant at a Kaiser Permanente hospital in the Bay Area. Not satisfied with working as a maid at a local hotel, Mrs. Plascencia went to school, earned her high school equivalency degree, improved her skills, and became a medical assistant.

For 5 years, Mrs. Plascencia was working in Kaiser Permanente's Oncology Department, where she attended to cancer patients. Her colleagues, many of whom have written to me in support of her, commend her ``unending enthusiasm'' and have described her work as ``responsible,'' ``efficient,'' and ``compassionate.''

In fact, Kaiser Permanente's Director of Internal Medicine, Nurse Rose Carino, wrote to say that Mrs. Plascencia is ``an asset to the community and exemplifies the virtues we Americans extol: hardworking, devoted to her family, trustworthy and loyal, [and] involved in her community. She and her family are a solid example of the type of immigrant that America should welcome wholeheartedly.'' Nurse Carino went on to write that Mrs. Plascencia is ``an excellent employee and role model for her colleagues. She works in a very demanding unit, Oncology, and is valued and depended on by the physicians she works with.''

The physicians themselves confirm this. For example, Dr. Laurie Weisberg, the Chief of Oncology at Kaiser Permanente, writes that Mrs. Plascencia ``is truly an asset to our unit and is one of the main reasons that it functions effectively.''

Together, Mr. and Mrs. Plascencia have used their professional successes to realize many of the goals dreamed of by all Americans. They saved up and bought a home. They own a car. They have good health care benefits and they each have begun saving for retirement. They want to send their children to college and give them an even better life.

This private relief bill is important because it would preserve these achievements and ensure that Mr. and Mrs. Plascencia will be able to make substantive contributions to the community in the future. It is important, also, because of the positive impact it will have on the couple's children, each of whom is a United States citizen and each of whom is well on their way to becoming productive members of the Bay Area community.

Christina, 14, is the Plascencia's oldest child, and an honor student at Parkside Intermediate School in San Bruno.

Erika, 10, and Alfredo Jr., 8, are enrolled at Belle Air Elementary, where they have worked hard at their studies and received praise and good grades from their teachers. In fact, the principal of Erika's school recognized her as the ``Most Artistic'' student in her class. Erika's teacher, Mrs. Nascon, remarked on a report card, ``Erika is a bright spot in my classroom.''

The Plascencia's youngest child is 3-year-old Daisy.

Removing Mr. and Mrs. Plascencia from the United States would be most tragic for their children. These children were born in the United States and, through no fault of their own, have been thrust into a situation that has the potential to alter their lives dramatically.

It would be especially tragic for the Plascencia's older children-- Christina, Erika, and Alfredo--to have to leave the United States. They are old enough to understand that they are leaving their schools, their teachers, their friends, and their home. They would leave everything that is familiar to them. Their parents would find themselves in Mexico without a job and without a house. The children would have to acclimate to a different culture, language, and way of life.

The only other option would be for Mr. and Mrs. Plascencia to leave their children here with relatives. This separation is a choice which no parents should have to make.

Many of the words I have used to describe Mr. and Mrs. Plascencia are not

my own. They are the words of the Americans who live and work with the Plascencias day in and day out and who find them to embody the American spirit. I have sponsored this private relief bill, and ask my colleagues to support it, because I believe that this is a spirit that we must nurture wherever we can find it. Forcing the Plascencias to leave the United States would extinguish that spirit.

I ask unanimous consent that the text of the private relief bill and the numerous letters of support my office has received from members of the San Bruno community be entered into the Record immediately following this statement.

Mr. President, today, I introduce the Longshore and Harbor

Workers' Compensation Act Amendments of 2007. The Longshore Act provides medical, physical rehabilitation and lost wage replacement benefits to thousands of workers nationwide for work-related injuries, illnesses and deaths. The Act is long overdue for attention from Congress, and I am eager to engage with my colleagues from both sides as to how we can improve the system for our workers, their employers, taxpayers and our economy as a whole.

We all can agree that the workers covered under this program play a key role in our national security and in our vital international trade. Longshore and harbor workers labor on the piers of Portland, ME, in the dead of winter, just as they toil in the hot Southern sun in Savannah, GA. Their work is undoubtedly difficult and often dangerous. It is impossible to underestimate the extent to which Americans rely on the myriad of products these workers move in and out of our nations' ports. Every year, over 15 billion tons of freight moves through our ports, with a total value of $9 trillion.

These workers deserve a fair and effective workers' compensation program. Since 1927, longshore and harbor workers have had a unique program all their own. Congress enacted the Act in response to Southern Pacific Company v. Jensen, a ruling by the Supreme Court in 1917. The Court held that the Maritime Clause in the Constitution forbids states from covering shore-based maritime workers who may become injured while working on vessels anchored in navigable waters. Now, nearly 90 years later, not only are private stevedoring companies covered by the Act, but so are virtually all maritime construction folks, builders and repairers of U.S. Naval and Coast Guard vessels, Federal contractors with overseas employees, oil rig workers, and even civilian employees at the Post Exchanges on U.S. military bases.

As many of us have learned if we ever spent time in our State legislatures, States nationwide regularly amend their programs to incorporate the most modern and best workers' compensation practices. However, unlike these responsible state legislatures, Congress has not addressed the Longshore Act in over two decades.

Since the last amendments to the Act, States from California to Rhode Island have found numerous methods of improving their workers' compensation programs, saving taxpayers' dollars, and eliminating waste, fraud and abuse, while always ensuring that workers have appropriate medical care. We must bring these State-level innovations in workers' compensation to the Longshore Act system.

Technology, events, and even Congressional interventions have continued to dramatically change our nations' seaports and shipyards. Indeed, since 2002, per Congress's instruction, U.S. Customs has begun locating so-called ``VACIS machines'' at U.S. terminals. These machines are truck-mounted gamma ray imaging systems that produce radiographic images of the contents of containers and other cargo to determine the possible presence of many types of contraband. Eventually, EVERY port in the country will have the machines on sight. Will maritime workers be exposed to radiation? If so, will they file claims against their employers when the machines are owned and operated by the Federal Government?

The bill I introduce today will foster a sound and fair workers' compensation system for maritime workers with a clear, exclusive remedy for their workplace injuries and illnesses. It will guarantee fairness for workers, and in the event of death, their survivors. It will make our ports and shipbuilders more competitive. It will ensure fair compensability, in that it will hold employers responsible for only that which is caused by employment under the Longshore Act system. It will fix, once and for all, the so-called ``Special Fund,'' an archaic and problematic vestige of early 20th Century public policy.

In May 2006, I chaired a hearing of the Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace Safety, at which we heard about many different problems with the implementation of this 80-year-old Act. I have incorporated suggestions from both sides in crafting the bill I introduce today.

Since I began dealing with this issue last year, I have talked with more and more workers, port operators, and administrators from the Port of Savannah in my home State of Georgia. Savannah is the Nation's eleventh busiest waterborne freight gateway for international trade. Every year, over $20 billion of international freight move through it and its neighboring port of Brunswick. The folks I talk to at Savannah and Brunswick tell me that they can't emphasize enough the importance of revising the Longshore Act to make it more efficient.

I hope we can move on this bill, for the sake of taxpayers, for workers in Savannah and Brunswick and at ports and ship building facilities nationwide, and for the international commerce that is vital to our Nation's economy and way of life.

Mr. President, today I am introducing the United States- Israel Energy Cooperation Act, which is cosponsored by Senators Bingaman and Landrieu. This bill will help foster cooperation on renewable energy projects between the United States and our democratic ally in the Middle East.

Israel has some of the most advanced facilities in the world for concentrated solar. Israel is developing technology to use unsorted municipal waste to produce biogas, an alternative ``green''

energy for transportation and power plants. Israel has also developed rooftop systems for electricity and hot water supplies.

This bill will help implement an existing agreement between the two nations entitled, ``Agreement between the Department of Energy of the United States of America and the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure of Israel Concerning Energy Cooperation,'' dated February 1, 1996. The Secretary of Energy, acting through the Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, will establish a grant program to support research development and commercialization of alternative renewable energy sources.

Eligible projects must be joint ventures between an entity in the U.S. and an entity in Israel, or between the U.S. government and the government of Israel. Eligible projects include those projects for the research, development or commercialization of alternative energy facilities, improved energy efficiency or renewable energy sources. Under certain circumstances, the Secretary may require repayment of the grant.

The bill also establishes an advisory board to provide the Secretary with advice on the criteria for grant recipients and on the appropriate amount of total grant money to be awarded. Finally the bill authorizes $20 million annually for fiscal years 2008 through 2014 to carry out this program.

At this time when issues related to energy security and to greenhouse gas emissions are receiving so much attention by the Congress, I hope that my colleagues will join me in cosponsoring this bill. This will enable the United States and Israel to build upon the important work being done in both countries to reduce our dependence on imported oil that too often comes from politically unstable or hostile nations.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation authorizing new construction at Cannon Air Force Base, NM.

I am proud to offer this bill because Cannon has a variety of military construction needs because of a June 2006 decision by the Secretary of Defense to use Cannon Air Force Base as an Air Force Special Operations base.

Two of these needs are an MC-130 Flight Simulator facility and renovations to an existing Hangar to accommodate C-130 aircraft. The Department of Defense budgeted for both of these items in its fiscal year 2008 Defense budget request, and in keeping with that request my legislation authorizes $7.5 million for the MC-130 Flight Simulator facility and $1.7 million for hangar renovations.

Our special operations forces are a part of some of the most important missions in the Global War on Terror, and we have more special operations warfighters deployed now than ever before. I am proud to support those soldiers, and I look forward to working on this bill and taking other actions to support our special operations forces.

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