Floor Statements

Mr. President, I commend Senator Dorgan and the Committee on Indian Affairs for their leadership on the long-overdue Indian Health Care Improvement Act, IHCIA, Amendments of 2007.

The historical treatment of Native Americans is a tarnished mark on American history. Lawmakers must ensure that this Nation fulfills its treaty obligations to Native Americans and address the injustices that continue to be suffered by the first Americans. I am committed to making sure that Native Americans are treated with respect, dignity, and equality both now and in the future and to ensure that promises made by this great Nation are promises kept as well. As such, I believe it is this country's moral imperative to address the significant health disparities between Native Americans and the American population as a whole.

Diabetes is perhaps the most striking example of such health disparities. American Indians have the highest rate of diabetes in the world. The American Diabetes Association reports that American Indians and Alaska Natives are more than twice as likely to be diagnosed with diabetes as non-Hispanic Whites, and the death rate from diabetes is three times higher among American Indians and Alaska Natives than the rate in the general U.S. population. Yet these statistical averages mask the fact that certain tribal populations are experiencing epidemic rates of diabetes. About half of adult Pima Indians, for example, have diabetes. Even worse, on average, Pima Indians are only 36 years old when they develop diabetes, which contrasts to an average age of 60 years for White diabetics.

Unfortunately, diabetes is not the only health condition that disproportionately affects American Indians. Death rates from heart disease and stroke are respectively 20 and 14 percent greater among American Indians compared to the average U.S. population. We know the infant mortality rate is 150 percent higher for Indian infants than White infants. The rate of suicide for Indians is 2\1/2\ times greater than the national rate, and methamphetamine use has ravaged Indian reservations all across the country.

Urban Indians are not exempt from these dire health challenges. In addition to facing higher than average rates of chronic disease and mental health and substance abuse disorders, urban Indians experience serious difficulties accessing needed health care services. Given that over half of the Native American population no longer reside on reservations, our efforts to improve Indian health and health care must include explicit focus on the urban Indian population.

For these reasons, I am proud to be an original cosponsor of the Indian Health Care Improvement Act. Our tribal health care programs must be modernized and prepared to provide preventive and chronic disease health care services and to address other key issues such as access and quality of care concerns. And these activities must be supported while honoring the principle of tribal sovereignty.

The bill before us would enact much needed advancements in the scope and delivery of health care services to Native Americans. In particular, it authorizes a host of new health services, makes crucial organizational improvements, and provides greater funding for facilities construction. Through scholarships, investments in recruitment activities, loan repayment programs, and grants to institutions of higher education, IHCIA also takes steps to help increase the number of Native Americans entering the health services field.

I am especially pleased that the bill addresses well-documented health problems affecting urban Indian communities as well. This proposal provides grants and increased aid for diabetes prevention and treatment, community health programs, behavioral health training, school health education programs, and youth drug abuse programs in urban areas.

I trust my colleagues will agree with me on the critical need to address health disparities facing the Native American community. I urge the Senate to act quickly to pass this bill.

Mr. President, I wrote to Secretary Rice on September 11, 2007, out of concern for Iraq's Christian and other non- Muslim religious minorities who appear to be targeted by Sunni, Shiite, and Kurdish militants. The severe violations of religious freedom faced by members of these indigenous communities, and their potential extinction from their ancient homeland, is deeply alarming in light of our mission to bring freedom to the Iraqi people.

In addition, such violence may be an indicator of greater sectarian violence. Such rising violence and the Iraqi internally displaced people and refugee crises potentially could serve as catalysts for wider regional instability. These crises demand an urgent response from our Government.

On January 11, 2008, I received a response from the Department of State to the questions I posed in my letter. I ask to have my original letter and the response from the Department of State printed in the Congressional Record.

Mr. President, by passing the farm bill today, the Senate took an important step towards renewing our Nation's commitment to helping our farming communities and strengthening Rural America's involvement in our Nation's energy future.

This legislation provides robust new funding for conservation, nutrition, specialty crops, and rural development. It authorizes hundreds of millions of dollars in renewable energy initiatives to be undertaken by family farmers working to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. It maintains a strong safety net for those farmers for the next 5 years. It creates a new permanent disaster assistance program so that farmers need not rely on the unpredictability of Congress to approve emergency funding. And it includes important provisions to increase market transparency for livestock producers in the meat processing industry.

I am especially proud that this legislation contains my proposal to ensure that thousands of African-American farmers will have an opportunity to have their discrimination claims reviewed under the Pigford settlement. For far too long, this country's hardworking black farmers were discriminated against by our own Government, and this legislation offers a chance for us to continue righting those wrongs.

There is a time to debate, and a time to act, and the timely completion of this farm bill is necessary so that farmers have the certainty they need to begin their preparations for the new crop year. Although the farm bill has many provisions to laud, I am disappointed in the failure of the Senate to enact stronger payment caps to ensure that assistance is better targeted to family farmers who need the help and away from big agribusinesses that often use these payments as a superfluous source of revenues. I am disappointed that interests in the crop insurance industry were successful in weakening an optional revenue insurance program authored by my distinguished colleague from Illinois, Senator Durbin, a forward-thinking and innovative pilot program designed to test a new kind of safety net mechanism for farmers.

I thank Senator Harkin for his leadership on this issue, and will continue to work with him to stand up for America's family farmers.

Mr. President, I am very pleased to celebrate today's launch of USAspending.gov. This is an important day, an important milestone on the path to greater openness and transparency in the Federal Government. This site helps us to achieve a very simple and powerful vision: a vision that, in a democracy, the people ought to know what their Government is doing: how the Government is raising and spending money, how it is making and enforcing law, how it is supporting projects, how decisions are being made, and how results are being evaluated.

It is not a Democratic vision or a Republican vision. It is a commonsense vision of Government transparency and accessibility. It is a vision that rejects the idea that Government actions and decisions should be kept secret or classified. It is a vision that believes that information is at the heart of democracy and that we all must resist the dangerous trend of withholding or classifying or burying information that the American people have a right to know and need to know if they are to hold their leaders accountable.

I have been very troubled by the extent to which America has become a nation of government secrets. More and more information is kept secret or made intolerably complicated and inaccessible. More and more decisions are made behind closed doors with access limited to insiders and lobbyists.

USAspending.gov along with watchdog groups will give us all tools to help buck that trend. It will help by opening Government processes up to public view. It will provide a window into the Federal budget so all Americans can see how their tax dollars are being spent--how their Nation's resources are being used and obligated, where money is going as well as where it is not going. We will be able to see which grantees and contractors are receiving

money and the congressional district where the contract's services are performed. We will see which agencies are purchasing what, from whom, and where. Technology makes it possible for every American to know what is happening and to hold elected officials accountable.

If Government spending can't withstand public scrutiny, then the money shouldn't be spent. If a Government agency isn't willing to be held accountable for the grants or contracts it awards, then that agency shouldn't have control over Federal resources. Whether you believe the Government ought to spend more money or spend less, you should certainly be able to agree that the Government ought to spend every penny efficiently and transparently. Democrats and Republicans can all agree that wasteful spending is unacceptable, whether it is by FEMA, HUD, DOD, or any other Federal agency.

Transparency by itself is not enough, but transparency is the first step to holding Government accountable for its actions. Transparency is a prerequisite to oversight and financial control. We can't reduce waste, fraud, and abuse without knowing how, where, and why Federal money is flowing out the door.

USAspending.gov is a very good beginning. The Web site does not yet deliver everything that it is required to under the law, but its limitations and shortcomings are transparent, and it will get better and more complete week after week. I am also confident that people will use the site and will provide feedback directly on the site's community ``Wiki'' function for collecting and sharing public comments. This will raise the expectations of all Americans for greater transparency, access, and accountability. Now it will be up to us elected officials to meet those expectations.

It is important to point out that this site would not have been possible without the grassroots efforts of watchdog groups across the political spectrum who lobbied for passage of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act, which Senator Coburn and I like to call the Transparency Act. The story behind the Transparency Act embodies the best of our democratic traditions--a bipartisan effort fueled by ordinary people who refused to accept that the Government couldn't make public information freely and simply available. Throughout this process, it has been an honor to work with Senator Coburn and to witness the dedicated work of the staff at OMB.

Mr. President, today is Human Rights Day. Fifty- nine years ago today, thanks in large measure to the tireless leadership of Eleanor Roosevelt, the United Nations General Assembly unanimously adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The principles encompassed in the declaration are uniquely rooted in the American tradition, beginning with our founding documents. Yet the declaration also wove together a remarkable variety of political, religious, and cultural perspectives and traditions. The United States and the United Kingdom championed civil liberties. The French representative on the committee helped devise the structure of the declaration. India added the prohibition on discrimination. China stressed the importance of family and reminded U.N. delegates that every right carried with it companion duties. Today should be a day of celebration, a day when we hail the universality of these core principles, which are both beacons to guide us and the foundations for building a more just and stable world.

The Universal Declaration was a radical document in its time, and its passage required courageous leadership from political leaders. Even though no country could have been said to be in full compliance with its provisions, including the United States where Jim Crow still prevailed, all U.N. member states committed themselves to promoting, protecting, and respecting fundamental human rights. Although Franklin Delano Roosevelt did not live to see the enactment of the historic declaration, it enshrined his ``four freedoms''--freedom from want, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom from fear. Individuals in the United States and everywhere else were entitled, simply by virtue of being human, to physical and economic security. The declaration was born of the recognition, in the words of one human rights scholar, that ``what is pain and humiliation for you is pain and humiliation for me.''

Anniversaries are a good time to examine how faithful we have been to our own aspirations--to ask ourselves how well we are measuring up, to assess whether our practice lives up to our promise. We in the United States enjoy tremendous freedoms, but we also carry a special responsibility--the responsibility of being the country so many people in the world look to, just as they did in Mrs. Roosevelt's day, for human rights leadership.

Today, on this anniversary, we must acknowledge both bad news and good news. The bad news is that for nearly seven years, President Bush has ignored Franklin Roosevelt's wise counsel about the corrosive effects of fear. Indeed, instead of urging us to reject fear, he has stoked false fear and undermined our values.

Wounded by a horrific terrorist attack, we were warned that Saddam Hussein--a man who had nothing to do

with that attack--could unleash mushroom clouds from nuclear bombs. We were told that waterboarding was effective. We were assured that shipping men off to countries that tortured was good for national security. We were led to believe that our military and civilian courts were inadequate, and so we established a network of unaccountable prisons. And the administration launched secret wiretapping initiatives, scoffed at the rule of law, and flaunted the will of the Congress.

Nonetheless, in his second inaugural, President Bush rightly proclaimed, ``America's vital interests and our deepest beliefs are now one.'' But, tragically, he has failed to heed his own words. We have not only vacated the perch of moral leader; we have also compounded the threat we face, spurring more people to take up arms against us.

The further bad news is that other countries have not stepped up to fill the void left by our lack of moral leadership. The hundreds of thousands killed and two million displaced by the genocide in Darfur; the shell-shocked Buddhist monks in Burma; the political opposition in Zimbabwe; the imprisoned independent journalists in Russia; the brave human rights lawyers and judges in Pakistan--they do not know where to turn internationally. Human rights abusers win seats on the U.N. Human Rights Council, the International Criminal Court issues war crimes indictments, but no country steps up to enforce them; the U.N. Department of Peacekeeping Operations begs in vain for troops, helicopters and police to help stave off humanitarian catastrophes. For all these reasons, the world needs renewed, principled U.S. leadership.

There is another critical reason why America must again provide moral leadership on human rights: the fate of women around the world. Whether it is in creating wealth, access to capital, and property rights, or receiving quality education, health care, and social services, women still lag far behind men. And of course the lack of full reproductive rights can be a matter of life and death for too many women. Inequality means insecurity for women, especially those who comprise 70 percent of the world's poorest. There is a clear link between discrimination and violence against women; equality and empowerment of women is the most effective approach to ending violence against women. Today, violent acts against women, in the words of UNICEF, ``are the most pervasive violation of human rights in the world today.''

Women's inequality and the persistent prevalence of honor killings, trafficking, repression, and sexual assault nearly six decades after the Universal Declaration shame us all. One need only look to Saudi Arabia, where a 19-year-old woman, who was raped, instead of receiving treatment and support, was sentenced to 200 lashes and 6 months in prison for riding in a car with a non-related male. In the Democratic Republic of Congo and in Darfur, rape is routinely used as a weapon of war by militia and government forces. In northern Uganda, young girls are given as ``prizes'' to older male soldiers to reward performance.

In Pakistan, international observers report that one of the largest challenges facing its next election is guaranteeing women enough security so they can leave their homes to vote. In Iraq the militarization and rise of radical Islam has eroded women's rights. In Afghanistan, while nothing can compare to the day when the Taliban ruled the entire country, women throughout that country complain that their freedoms have been woefully curtailed. The United States alone cannot solve the problem of women's suffering and gender inequality around the world, but with new, principled leadership, the United States can elevate women's economic, political and social development to the top of our international agenda and ensure that women around the world know that they have a reliable friend and partner in America.

Let me close by saying that the very depth of the anti-Americanism felt around the world today is a testament not to hatred but to disappointment, acute disappointment. The global public expects more from America. They expect our government to embody what they have seen in our people: industriousness, humanity, generosity, and a commitment to equality. We can become that country again.

Mr. President, I wish to express my serious concern over the Central Intelligence Agency's confirmation that videotapes depicting brutal interrogation techniques were destroyed.

First, it is important that we note the broader context of this debate. The United States of America is a nation born out of a struggle against tyranny, and our founding legal document asserts that the rule of law applies to all men and women, and all branches and agencies of government. We are not a perfect Nation, but our national greatness is marked by our ability to rise above our imperfections through our allegiance to our values and to the rule of law. Time and again, America has triumphed because of the contrast we draw to tyranny. We are a nation that set captives free, shut down torture chambers, and extended freedom and international law to more of humanity.

Now, we are engaged in a new kind of conflict. And the question that we have faced since September 11, 2001, is how we are going to respond to the shadowy, stateless, terrorist enemies of the 21st century.

Tragically, the Bush administration has too often chosen to respond to this enemy by abandoning our values and ignoring laws that it deems inconvenient. So we have seen excessive secrecy, indefinite detention, warrantless wire-tapping, and `enhanced interrogation techniques' like simulated drowning that qualify as torture through any careful measure of the law or appeal to human decency. For each of these new policies, we have seen dubious legal reasoning that does not stand up to the harsh light of review or the sound judgment of our Constitution.

Yesterday, we learned that in November 2005, the CIA destroyed videotapes of its interrogations of two prominent al-Qaida suspects, including a close Osama bin Laden associate Abu Zubayadah. Media reports suggest that these videotapes depict brutal interrogation techniques, and could certainly be relevant to ongoing investigations and inquiries. Furthermore, these videotapes were not provided to the 9/11 Commission, which made a broad set of requests for classified documents--including interrogation tapes and transcripts--that would have included information about the 9/11 attacks.

The CIA has argued that these tapes needed to be destroyed to protect the identities of the interrogators. Our government must go to any length necessary to protect the identities of those

who serve in a covert capacity. But the CIA keeps scores of classified material--including videotapes--while protecting the identities of its agents. This raises serious questions about whether the tapes were destroyed to protect the nature of the interrogation, rather than the identity of the interrogator.

This incident deserves further congressional oversight and inquiry-- neither the CIA nor this interrogation program is immune to our laws. This is yet another chapter in a dark period in our constitutional history. Now, it is time to turn the page. That is why I was heartened to learn that the House and Senate Intelligence Committees have reached agreement on including a requirement in the Intelligence authorization bill that subjects CIA interrogators to the guidelines on interrogation included in the U.S. Army Field Manual. It would be a grave disappointment--though not surprising--if this important step forward were subject to a veto threat from the President. That must not deter the Congress from moving forward. We have a responsibility to act.

We should not have a separate interrogation program whose methods are so abhorrent that they cannot stand up to scrutiny. We should not have to find ways of ignoring or averting our own laws to defend our country. Torture does not work. Torture violates our laws. And torture sets back the standing and moral leadership that America needs to triumph in this global struggle. Our values and laws are not inconvenient obstacles to the defense of our national security--they can and must be a guiding force in our response to terrorism.

Today is Pearl Harbor day--a date when our Nation was subjected to a terrible surprise attack, and when a generation of Americans answered the call to defend our security and extend the cause of freedom. More than 6 years after 9/11, we are still struggling to define our own response to our generation's terrible surprise attack. As we defend America, let us learn the painful lessons of these last few years, and enlist our values and our Constitution in this first great struggle of the 21st century.

Mr. President, I commend Russian citizens for turning out in large numbers to vote in yesterday's parliamentary elections. For 16 years, Russia's citizens have exercised their right to vote, which is so essential to democracy.

Unfortunately, Russia's leaders have been working to make that vote more and more meaningless by creating an imitation democracy instead of a real one.

Well before the campaign even began, several Russian political parties and politicians were banned from participating in the election. During the campaign, President Putin and his party, United Russia, enjoyed virtually unlimited positive television air-time on Kremlin- controlled networks, while opposition parties had their ads removed and their campaign materials confiscated. The Russian authorities have prevented opposition parties from campaigning fairly, imprisoning opposition leaders, intimidating activists, and preventing them from making their case to Russia's voters. Russian voters have reported that they have been pressured to vote for the Kremlin's party, United Russia, by employers and local officials. In Chechnya, 99.2 percent of voters allegedly turned out to vote and 99.3 percent of these voters allegedly cast their ballot for United Russia. Several other regions have reported similar results for Putin's party, making a mockery of this vote as a free and fair election. Yesterday's elections were the least free and fair in the 16 years of Russia's modern history as an independent country.

We have to work with the Russian leadership in the coming years to deal with vital foreign policy issues, including securing nuclear materials and preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons security is a high priority, and the United States and Russia need to work together to prevent proliferation of nuclear weapons or materials.

But in doing so, we do not have to turn a blind eye to the erosion of Russian democracy. We must be clear-eyed on Russia's political direction, which in the long run is not favorable for Russia's own political stability or economic prosperity. By engaging Russia honestly, we will remain friends of the Russian people as they continue to try to build for themselves a better country and future.

Mr. President, I rise to extend my welcome to Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda of Japan, who is visiting Washington today.

Japan is a critical ally and friend of the United States. I believe our alliance is fundamental to a peaceful and prosperous Asia-Pacific region.

The Prime Minister's visit comes at an important time. It is crucial that our two countries maintain the positive momentum in our relationship and work closely together to accomplish shared goals, such as denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, stability in South Asia, nonproliferation in Iran, and political reform in Burma. As a long- standing ally, we must consult closely and respect Japan's perspectives, even as we contemplate next steps in our negotiations with nations like North Korea.

Thousands of miles away from the Korean peninsula, we face the resurgence of the Taliban and al-Qaida in Afghanistan and in the border regions of Pakistan. We are all too familiar with the reports that suggest the Taliban and al-Qaida are gaining strength. We were reminded of this fact in an unsettling report in Tuesday's Washington Post, but the most troubling report of all was last July, when the declassified National Intelligence Estimate warned of a persistent and growing threat from a reconstituted al-Qaida sanctuary in northwest Pakistan.

It is therefore critical that the U.S. and its partners in the international community, including Japan, maintain our focus and operations in this region.

In particular, I wanted to extend to the Prime Minister my appreciation for the support that Japan's Self Defense Forces have offered U.S. operations in Afghanistan, and hope Japan's deployment of refueling tankers will quickly be reauthorized and be extended.

Our half century alliance with Japan remains vital, based on common values and shared interests. There is ample room for improved efforts to forge an even stronger and enduring global security partnership. I hope that Prime Minister Fukuda's visit will continue the progress toward that goal.

Mr. President, I rise to express my support for the confirmation of Robert M. Dow, Jr. to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.

I am very pleased that this nomination has continued the bipartisan approach to filling judgeships in the Federal district courts--an approach that has served Illinois well.

Mr. Dow has an impressive record of professional achievement and an admirable commitment to public service. He has demonstrated fairness, decency, integrity, and a strong personal character that I expect will benefit the people of Illinois and all those with cases before the Northern District.

Most recently, Mr. Dow was a partner at the Chicago law firm of Mayer Brown. He earned his B.A. from Yale University where he graduated Phi Beta Kappa in 1987, and his J.D. from Harvard Law School, where he graduated cum laude in 1993. Mr. Dow was also a Rhodes Scholar who received degrees in international relations from Oxford University.

Mr. Dow has also distinguished himself in his professional career, where he has received a number of honors and accolades. Mr. Dow has been named a ``leading lawyer'' 5 years in a row by Chambers USA Guide to America's Leading Business Lawyers. He has been listed the past 2 years as an Illinois Super Lawyer in appellate law, and by the Best Lawyers in America in communications law. Mr. Dow also received an award for excellence in undergraduate teaching when he served as a teaching fellow at Harvard University.

Importantly, Mr. Dow has also been an engaged member of the Chicago community. In 2003, he served as a fellow for Leadership Greater Chicago, which stresses the development of community awareness and partnerships among leaders in the city. He is also an active member in a number of legal and academic associations as well as in his church.

Finally, Mr. Dow has a track record of personal commitment to pro bono service. Early in his career, he provided aid and advice to nonprofit organizations and a local court. Over the years, Mr. Dow has volunteered hundreds of hours to pro bono service, and continues to do so. He recently earned his firm's annual pro bono award. This kind of public service is essential to our legal system. When legal professionals provide voluntary expert legal counsel to those who cannot afford it, it shores up the integrity of our Nation's justice system.

It is good news for Illinois that Robert Dow will be joining the district court. I thank him in advance for his service and congratulate him on his confirmation today.

Mr. President, today President Bush is scheduled to meet with Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni. These heads of state have met before, but today's meeting comes at a pivotal time in Uganda's history.

After more than 20 years of conflict in northern Uganda in which well over a million people have been displaced and tens of thousands of children abducted and terrorized, peace appears to be within reach. Talks between the Government of Uganda and the Lord's Resistance Army, LRA, have led to genuine improvements on the ground. However, there is still much more work to be done to ensure a lasting peace. The United States must become a more active peace partner with Uganda as it negotiates with the Lord's Resistance Army.

The constructive mediation efforts of U.N. Special Envoy and former Mozambican President Joaquim Chissano deserve sustained, high-level U.S. diplomatic support. Two issues will be particularly difficult. First, Ugandans themselves will have to balance the imperative to make peace with the clear need to hold accountable those responsible for the horrifying abuses of the past. Second, leaders need to keep a spotlight on the vast development needs of the traumatized north. Paper plans and grand announcements will not be enough--the Government of Uganda must be committed to the north's development, and the donor community, including the United States, must be prepared to offer real resources to help.

Sadly, as negotiations to end the threat posed by the LRA continue, a different source of instability--- that of lawless militias in Karamoja, and the Ugandan military's often counter-productive, abusive response to them has prevented a more complete consolidation of security in the country. The Ugandan people can never achieve their full potential when they feel targeted by both their own military and marauding criminals.

This visit to the White House follows by days a meeting between President Bush and President Kabila of the Democratic Republic of Congo. I hope President Bush uses both meetings to reassert U.S. support for regional dialogue and stabilization efforts. Uganda has an important part to play in ongoing efforts to bring lasting stability to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, particularly through participation in the Tripartite Plus mechanism. The U.S. should continue to foster dialogue through that process.

Uganda is a major contributor to the African Union's peacekeeping efforts in Somalia. But the undermanned AU peacekeeping contingent cannot succeed in the absence of a broader political and economic strategy to stabilize Somalia. Right now, the Ugandan peacekeepers are in the hot seat, and the rest of the world is failing to advance the peace process and deliver the support that they need. The United States has a responsibility to lead effectively on this issue. I hope that the two Presidents have a frank discussion about what needs to be done to advance peace in Somalia.

Of course, Uganda is deservedly admired around the world for its early efforts to speak frankly and act effectively to fight HIV/AIDS, and I have no doubt that the ongoing fight against the pandemic as well as global efforts to combat malaria will be on the agenda for President Museveni's meeting. Recent reports have found that a disturbingly high percentage of Uganda's young people do not have accurate information about AIDS and about how to protect themselves. Because of its renown, Uganda has a special leadership role to play in this struggle. Frank talk is needed today more than ever.

Finally, I hope that President Bush will convey to President Museveni the sincere sympathies of the people of the United States for those affected by the recent severe floods in Uganda. As Americans cope with the terrible wildfires in California, we are all especially sensitive to the devastating human consequences of natural disasters wherever they occur.

Mr. President, today, President Bush is meeting with President Joseph Kabila of the Democratic Republic of the Congo,

Mr. President, I wish to engage in a colloquy with the distinguished Senator from Iowa, Mr. Harkin. I appreciate his efforts, as chairman of the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, on the appropriations bill before us today. I commend his continual

efforts over the years to expand educational opportunities and to provide adequate funding and resources for all students.

The most important resource a school can offer is good teaching, which necessitates bringing more quality teachers into our classrooms, and making certain that when we recruit and prepare good teachers, we do so in a way that best ensures their success. This means providing them adequate preparation and ongoing support, especially in those pivotal first years in the classroom.

And so, I am grateful for the work of Senator Harkin in our collaborative and bipartisan efforts on the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, to strengthen provisions to realign the teacher enhancement partnership grants in the Higher Education Amendments with what we know works best in preparing teachers. We must recruit the best talents to become teachers, and we must work to provide adequate preparation and support, so that when talented individuals become teachers, they are successful and want to stay in the classroom. Research shows that new teachers are often less effective than teachers with even a few years of experience. But recent experience also shows that good preparation programs can accelerate the rate at which novice teachers become effective.

We must help new teachers get the preparation and mentoring they need. Teacher preparation too seldom provides the opportunity to learn under the guidance of expert mentors working in schools that effectively serve high-need students. Most new teachers lack this type of support, and so leave the profession before they experience the rewards of the profession. One effective way to provide such preparation is through teaching residency programs, which are established in partnerships among colleges or universities, school districts, and other community partners. It is essential that we provide support for such partnerships.

Even as colleges realize the effectiveness of mentoring and induction in preparing teachers, and in working with high-needs school districts to tailor programs to prepare prospective teachers for the challenges they will face, it is regrettable that the President proposed eliminating support for the partnership grants that fund these needed and innovative approaches. I commend the Senator from Iowa for working to safeguard funding at $28.5 million, a level that ensures at least that current partnership grants can continue. But this level of funding is less than half of what was available last year, and $11.5 million below what our colleagues in the House proposed. It is clearly inadequate for encouraging the types of partnerships, such as residencies, that are developing at several sites across the country. So I hope the Senator from Iowa can continue his efforts to make sure that teachers get the training they need, and can meet the funding level proposed by our colleagues in the House.

I commend the work of the Senator from Iowa, and the Senator from Pennsylvania, in working to ensure that funding for education continues to be a priority. I look forward to continuing to work with them on this important issue.

Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention

Mr. President, I wish to engage in a colloquy with the distinguished chairman from Iowa, Mr. Harkin, and ranking member Mr. Specter from Pennsylvania. I appreciate their continued efforts to ensure fair allocation of funding for the health programs outlined in the bill before us. I also understand the difficulties in making these determinations. However, the recent recalls of child products have highlighted the continued threat of lead poisoning to children, and I believe that child lead poisoning prevention activities at the Centers for Disease Control would benefit dramatically from increased funding.

Lead is highly toxic, especially to young children. It can harm a child's brain, kidneys, bone marrow, and other organs. At high levels, lead can cause coma, convulsions, and death. The National Academy of Sciences has reported that comparatively low levels of lead exposure are harmful. Even low levels of lead found in blood of infants, children, and pregnant women have been associated with impaired cognitive function, behavior difficulties, fetal organ development, and other problems. In addition, low levels of lead in children's blood can cause reduced intelligence, impaired hearing and reduced stature.

In the past 6 months, millions of products, primarily children's toys, have been recalled due to potentially harmful levels of lead. These sources of lead exposure are in addition to dangers of lead poisoning that already exist in the home from lead-based paints and lead plumbing. It is my belief that we should do more to support programs that target reduction of lead exposure and toxicity.

Towards that end, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention through the National Center for Environmental Health has created the Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program. The CLPPP plays a major role in the Federal interagency mission to eliminate childhood lead poisoning by 2010. The efforts put forth by the CLPPP include assistance in completing and implementing a Federal strategic plan to eliminate nonessential uses of lead in consumer items and to support State and local efforts to identify and treat children exposed to lead.

I thank the chairman for the increased funding this bill provides for the National Center for Environmental Health, and I hope he will work in conference to provide an increase for the CLPPP.

I commend the chairman and ranking member on their work and congratulate them on passage of this bill. We all agree that every child with lead poisoning is a preventable and needless tragedy, and I look forward to working with both of them to identify additional funds for the CLPPP during conference.

public charter school funding

Mr. President, the recent incident in which Blackwater USA reportedly killed at least 11 Iraqis and wounded several others has prompted a long overdue examination of the role that private security contractors are playing in Iraq. An article in today's Washington Post titled ``U.S. Pays Steep Price for Private Security in Iraq'' helps to highlight the exorbitant mark-up that private security contractors are reportedly charging the U.S. Government.

Last week, the Senate accepted an amendment to the Defense Department authorization bill that I offered that will require Federal departments to report information to Congress on the total number of contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan, the companies awarded these contracts, and the cost of the contracts. The provisions of the amendment are drawn from the Transparency and Accountability in Military and Security Contracting Act, S. 674, that I introduced in February.

The American people have a right to know how their tax dollars are being spent in Iraq and the role that security contractors are playing in that conflict. We need to make sure that security contractors in Iraq are subject to adequate and transparent oversight and that their actions do not have a negative impact on our efforts to bring the war in Iraq to a responsible end.

I ask to have printed in the Record the text of the article from the Washington Post.

The article follows.

[From the Washington Post, Oct. 1, 2007]

U.S. Pays Steep Price for Private Security in Iraq

(By Walter Pincus)

It costs the U.S. government a lot more to hire contract

employees as security guards in Iraq than to use American

troops.

It comes down to the simple business equation of every

transaction requiring a profit.

The contract that Blackwater Security Consulting signed in

March 2004 with Regency Hotel and Hospital of Kuwait for a

34-person security team offers a view into the private-

security business world. The contract was made public last

week by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee

majority staff as part of its report on Blackwater's actions

related to an incident in Fallujah on March 31, 2004, when

four members of the company's security team were killed in an

ambush.

Understanding the contract's details requires some

background: Regency was a subcontractor to another company,

ESS Support Services Worldwide, of Cyprus, that was providing

food and catering supplies to U.S. armed forces in Fallujah

and other cities in Iraq. And ESS was a subcontractor to KBR,

a subsidiary of Halliburton, which had the prime contract

with the Defense Department.

So, Blackwater was a subcontractor to Regency, which was a

subcontractor to ESS, which was a subcontractor to

Halliburton's KBR subsidiary, the prime contractor for the

Pentagon--and each company along the way was in business to

make a profit.

Under the contract, Regency was to pay Blackwater

$11,082,326 for one year, with a second year option, to put

together a 34-person team that would provide security

services for the ``movement of ESS's staff, management and

workforce throughout Kuwait and Iraq and across country

borders including the borders of Iraq, Kuwait, Turkey and

Jordan.''

Blackwater's personnel were to do more than just convoy

security. They were also to run command centers in Kuwait and

Iraq 24 hours a day, seven days a week, that were to control

all ESS security operations; prepare risk assessments;

develop security procedures; train ESS personnel in security;

and even vet other Iraqi security forces hired by Regency.

But their main role was to provide ``tactically sound and

fully mission capable protective security details, the

minimum team size [being] six operators with a minimum of two

vehicles to support ESS movements.''

Blackwater's pricing was to be on ``a per person support

basis, not including costs for housing, subsistence, vehicles

and large equipment items,'' according to the contract. The

team would be made up of two senior managers, 12 middle

managers and 20 operators.

Regency was to provide Blackwater personnel with housing

and necessities, including meals, as well as office space and

administrative support. In addition, Regency would provide

basic equipment, including vehicles and heavy weapons, while

Blackwater was responsible for purchasing individual weapons

and ammunition.

According to data provided to the House panel, the average

per-day pay to personnel Blackwater hired was $600. According

to the schedule of rates, supplies and services attached to

the contract, Blackwater charged Regency $1,075 a day for

senior managers, $945 a day for middle managers and $815 a

day for operators.

Acording to data provided to the House panel, Regency

charged ESS an average of $1,100 a day for the same people.

How the Blackwater and Regency security charges were passed

on by ESS to Halliburton's KBR cannot easily be determined

since the catering company was paid on a per-meal basis, with

security being a percentage of that charge.

Halliburton's KBR blended its security costs into the

blanket costs passed on to the Defense Department.

How much more these costs are compared with the pay of U.S.

troops is easier to determine.

An unmarried sergeant given Iraq pay and relief from U.S.

taxes makes about $83 to $85 a day, given time in service. A

married sergeant with children makes about double that, $170

a day.

Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in

Baghdad overseeing more than 160,000 U.S. troops, makes

roughly $180,000 a year, or about $493 a day. That comes out

to less than half the fee charged by Blackwater for its

senior manager of a 34-man security team.

Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to provide teachers an extra tool for the important work they do. This legislation will expand an approach that is successfully improving student behavior and the climate for learning in thousands of schools across the country: Positive Behavior Supports. I am pleased to be joined by Senators Durbin and Sanders in introducing the Positive Behavior for Effective Schools Act, and I urge other colleagues to join us.

Good school climate supports good teaching. Positive Behavior Supports are already being used in my home State of Illinois, where there is a network to provide assistance for schools that adopt this approach. In these schools, students are taught about positive behavior, teachers and administrators are supported in learning motivational techniques, and adults set the same high standards for student conduct as they do for student achievement. Students are helped to see the importance of behaving in a way so that they and their classmates can learn. The components necessary to do this on a school- wide basis include an agreement by the entire staff to define and support appropriate student behavior. Although this seems simple, it is often more effective than surveillance cameras, zero tolerance or other get-tough approaches to school discipline.

Positive Behavior Supports programs deal with discipline problems based on one simple premise: stop problem behavior before it starts. The specifics of the program are research-based, backed by both experiment and experience. With Positive Behavior Supports, learning time increases, and students do better. It makes sense that with fewer disruptions, with less time in the principal's office, or out of school, students can focus more, and so learn more.

Positive Behavior Supports are already established in many places. Universities and resource centers work with over 6,700 schools in 38 States. To help teachers teach our children, today I propose that we expand this innovative program. The Positive Behavior for Effective Schools Act amends ESEA to allow Title I funds to be used for Positive Behavior Supports, and creates an office in the Department of Education to assist in these efforts. The act provides flexibility for schools and districts to use Title I funds, so that schools and teachers can choose to receive assistance to improve school climate and thereby support teaching and opportunities for students to learn.

My good friend from Illinois, Congressman Phil Hare, has introduced companion legislation in the House, and I urge my colleagues to join our effort in the Senate. Let us give our teachers an additional tool to support their teaching. Let us give our children the benefit of high expectations and supports for good behavior. Let us give our schools the opportunity to adopt this approach. Let us help our kids by supporting Positive Behavior Supports.

Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to provide teachers an extra tool for the important work they do. This legislation will expand an approach that is successfully improving student behavior and the climate for learning in thousands of schools across the country: Positive Behavior Supports. I am pleased to be joined by Senators Durbin and Sanders in introducing the Positive Behavior for Effective Schools Act, and I urge other colleagues to join us.

Good school climate supports good teaching. Positive Behavior Supports are already being used in my home State of Illinois, where there is a network to provide assistance for schools that adopt this approach. In these schools, students are taught about positive behavior, teachers and administrators are supported in learning motivational techniques, and adults set the same high standards for student conduct as they do for student achievement. Students are helped to see the importance of behaving in a way so that they and their classmates can learn. The components necessary to do this on a school- wide basis include an agreement by the entire staff to define and support appropriate student behavior. Although this seems simple, it is often more effective than surveillance cameras, zero tolerance or other get-tough approaches to school discipline.

Positive Behavior Supports programs deal with discipline problems based on one simple premise: stop problem behavior before it starts. The specifics of the program are research-based, backed by both experiment and experience. With Positive Behavior Supports, learning time increases, and students do better. It makes sense that with fewer disruptions, with less time in the principal's office, or out of school, students can focus more, and so learn more.

Positive Behavior Supports are already established in many places. Universities and resource centers work with over 6,700 schools in 38 States. To help teachers teach our children, today I propose that we expand this innovative program. The Positive Behavior for Effective Schools Act amends ESEA to allow Title I funds to be used for Positive Behavior Supports, and creates an office in the Department of Education to assist in these efforts. The act provides flexibility for schools and districts to use Title I funds, so that schools and teachers can choose to receive assistance to improve school climate and thereby support teaching and opportunities for students to learn.

My good friend from Illinois, Congressman Phil Hare, has introduced companion legislation in the House, and I urge my colleagues to join our effort in the Senate. Let us give our teachers an additional tool to support their teaching. Let us give our children the benefit of high expectations and supports for good behavior. Let us give our schools the opportunity to adopt this approach. Let us help our kids by supporting Positive Behavior Supports.