Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the memory of a dedicated law enforcement officer, Deputy William ``Joe'' Hudnall of the Kern County Sheriff's Department. For the past 9 years, Deputy Hudnall worked tirelessly to provide the citizens of Kern County with safety and service. On the evening of November 14, 2006, Deputy Hudnall's life was tragically cut short in the line of duty when a vehicle driven by a suspected drunk driver struck his patrol vehicle on Highway 178 near Kernville.

Deputy Hudnall graduated from the Kern County Sheriff's Department Academy and began his career at the pretrial section of Lerdo Jail. In nearly a decade of service to the department, he also worked at the Frazier Park substation and Metro Patrol before moving to the Kern Valley substation. Throughout his career, Deputy Hudnall demonstrated a passion for law enforcement and commitment to helping others, qualities that enabled him to become a respected and model member of the Kern County Sheriff's Department. Deputy Hudnall's colleagues shall always remember him for his professionalism and devotion to serving the public.

Deputy Hudnall is survived by his wife Carrie and four children. When he was not on duty or spending time with his beloved family, Deputy Hudnall was an avid fisherman who also enjoyed working in his yard. Deputy Hudnall served Kern County with honor and dignity, and fulfilled his oath as deputy sheriff officer. His contributions to law enforcement and the many lives that he touched will serve as a shining example of his legacy.

We shall always be grateful for Deputy Hudnall's service and the valor that he displayed while serving and protecting the people of Kern County.

Mr. President, today I ask my colleagues to join me as I honor the memory of a dedicated public servant, Sacramento County sheriff's deputy Jeffrey Mitchell. For 9 years, Deputy Mitchell devoted his life to protecting the citizens of Sacramento County. On October 27, 2006, Deputy Mitchell was tragically killed in the line of duty.

Upon graduation from Westmont High School in 1986, Jeffrey Mitchell joined the U.S. Air Force and served as a security officer for 5 years. After leaving the Air Force, he earned a teaching credential at California State University, Sacramento, and taught as a substitute teacher at local schools. His talent, passion, and humor dealing with students, coupled with his dedication to education, made him a natural teacher in the classroom.

In 1997, Jeffrey Mitchell chose to continue his public service and joined the Sacramento County Sheriff's Department. He brought with him the same good-natured spirit that he exhibited in his previous professions to his new career in law enforcement. Jeffrey Mitchell served as the recreational technician at Rio Cosumnes Correctional Center in Elk Grove and was promoted to deputy in 2002.

Deputy Mitchell's family, friends, and colleagues all remember his infectious smile and kind heart. He is survived by his wife Crystal, son Jake, and sister Kim Gervasoni. Deputy Mitchell was a devoted family man who chose to work the overnight shift so he could pick his son up from school and prepare dinner for his wife when she arrived home from work. He shared his love of sports with Jake and coached his T-ball team.

Deputy Jeffrey Mitchell served the County of Sacramento with honor and distinction and fulfilled his oath as a deputy sheriff. His contributions and dedication to public safety are greatly appreciated and will serve as a shining legacy to his service.

We will always be grateful for Deputy Mitchell's exemplary service and the sacrifices he made.

Mr. President, it is with a heavy heart that I ask my colleagues to join me today in honoring the memory of an extraordinary Californian, Elizabeth Terwilliger.

To the Marin County community, Elizabeth Terwilliger was a renowned naturalist and educator, beloved by school children and adults, who leaves an amazing environmental legacy. She died on November 27, 2006, at the age of 97. She is survived by her daughter Lynn, her son John, and several grandchildren.

Elizabeth Cooper was born in Hawaii in 1909. She moved to the mainland to pursue a master's degree in nutrition from Columbia University in New York and then attended Stanford nursing school. While at Stanford, she met her husband, Dr. Calvin Terwilliger. After World War II, the couple settled in Mill Valley, CA, where they raised two children.

Elizabeth took her children on nature walks throughout Marin County. Soon, she was leading nature walks for local Girl Scout and Boy Scout troops. Her unique hands-on style and storytelling ability became known throughout the community, and soon she began leading field trips for area schools and environmental organizations. Leading such trips 5 days a week became her life's work.

For the 50 years that followed, every child growing up in Marin County knew Mrs. Terwilliger. She was a famous and beloved educator who traveled across the county in her familiar van filled with life-like animal models to teach school children about nature. Upon sight of her characteristic floppy straw hat, children would come running and follow her through the woods with excitement and adoration. They would soak up her stories and bring them home to teach their parents.

Those who knew Mrs. Terwilliger well recount her mesmerizing personality, her passion for nature and wildlife, and her openhearted way with children and adults alike.

In 1984, President Ronald Reagan honored Mrs. Terwilliger as an outstanding volunteer. While accepting the award at the White House, she shared one of her famous stories about ``Mr. Vulture'' and had President Reagan holding his arms over his head in the ``V'' position, representing a vulture in flight.

In addition to leading nature education programs, Mrs. Terwilliger was an advocate for environmental conservation and open space. She campaigned for a monarch butterfly preserve, bicycle paths, wetlands, and open space preservation. She received numerous awards and has two preserves named after her: Terwilliger Marsh in Mill Valley and Terwilliger Grove in Muir Woods.

She founded the Elizabeth Terwilliger Nature Education Center, which later became known as WildCare. Using educational programs developed by Mrs. Terwilliger, the center provides nature programs for over 40,000 Bay Area school children each year. The center also treats thousands of wildlife each year, rehabilitating them and returning them to their natural environment.

Mrs. Terwilliger often said, ``While you're learning, you're living.'' Her life's passion was to teach people how to embrace and love nature. She was a local treasure and a wonderful, inspiring woman.

I knew Mrs. Terwilliger and respected and admired her greatly. She will be deeply missed.

For those of us who were fortunate to know her, we take comfort in knowing that school children will continue to learn from Mrs. Terwilliger's unique educational style at WildCare. Her vision, her passion, and her spirit will remain in the countless lives she touched.

Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

I ask unanimous consent the further reading of the amendment be dispensed with. I wanted the beginning read because this is a very simple amendment.

Mr. President, this is a very simple amendment. What we are saying is this deal should not go forward until India has agreed to cut off military-to-military ties with Iran and that the President so certifies.

The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is the keystone of our efforts to stop the spread of nuclear weapons throughout the world. Back in the 1960s, there was widespread concern that dozens of nations would have nuclear weapons within a decade. Just months before his death, President Kennedy warned of this dire threat, saying:

I ask you to stop and think for a moment, what it would

mean to have nuclear weapons in so many hands . . . that

there would be no rest for anyone then, no stability, no real

security, no chance of effective disarmament. There would

only be the increased chance of accidental war, and an

increased necessity for the great powers to involve

themselves in what otherwise would be local conflicts.

But thanks to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, there are less than 10 nuclear weapons states in the world today. In fact, since the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty was first signed in 1968, more nations have ended nuclear weapons programs than have begun them. Countries such as Brazil, South Africa, and Japan decided to abandon their nuclear weapons program and join the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

India did not sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, instead choosing to develop nuclear weapons outside of the NPT regime. India developed a nuclear weapon in 1974 using a research reactor and materials provided by Canada and the United States of America in the 1950s. India had pledged to use the reactor only for peaceful purposes, but it failed to keep that promise. So by giving India a special deal to both possess nuclear weapons and receive civil nuclear assistance, it will be harder to convince nonnuclear weapons states to keep their commitment to forgo nuclear weapons.

The timing could not be worse. Right now, the international community is trying to convince one nonnuclear member of the NPT, Iran, to cease uranium enrichment because the IAEA cannot verify that its program is for peaceful purposes. We are also trying to roll back North Korea's nuclear program and convince them to rejoin the NPT.

India is becoming a recognized de facto nuclear power, but it is not required to take on any of the commitments made by the five recognized nuclear powers.

As The Economist reported earlier this year:

. . . the recognized nuclear powers--America, Russia,

Britain, France and China--are committed under the NPT to

curb their arsenals . . . on the way to eventual disarmament;

the deal with America lets India build as many bombs as it

chooses.

I think it is important to note what we are doing here. There is no limit on the number of bombs that India could build in this deal.

The Economist goes on to say that the five nuclear powers have:

at least all signed the treaty banning further nuclear

tests and have stopped producing more highly enriched uranium

and plutonium; India flatly refuses to do either.

Experts believe that this deal could allow India to vastly increase its production of nuclear weapons from about 6 a year to about 50 a year. What a contribution this Senate is making to world peace. I am absolutely stunned. We are going to have 50 nuclear weapons, perhaps, made in India, touching off an arms race in the region. That would not be in any country's interests, including our own.

Secretary Rice has argued that we are not helping India's nuclear weapons program because only a small amount of India's indigenous uranium would be needed for India's military weapons program. But listen to what the Congressional Research Service says:

The question for the United States is not whether India

intends to ramp up its weapons program with freed-up uranium,

but whether the U.S. and other states' actions create a new

capability for India to do so.

We call this fungible--fungible uranium. This should concern every single Senator, but unfortunately it doesn't appear to. It should concern every Senator who believes that the proliferation of nuclear materials is the most dangerous issue facing the country today and that is why I have supported all the amendments. Unfortunately, these amendments were defeated. They would have required the President to certify that this deal does not assist or encourage India to produce additional fissile material for weapons.

The amendment I am offering addresses a second area where the administration has failed to receive commitments from India and that has to do with India's military-to-military relationships with Iran.

Last spring, at the very same time that the President, our President, was in India to sign the United States-India Civil Nuclear Cooperation Agreement, two Iranian warships were visiting the headquarters of the Indian Navy's Southern Command. At the very same time that President Bush was in India to sign the United States-India Civil

Nuclear Cooperation Agreement, two Iranian warships were soliciting the headquarters of the Indian Navy's Southern Command. These warships were participating in a training program under the military cooperation agreement with Tehran that was signed in 2003.

The fact that India would conduct training exercises with the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism while the President of the United States is visiting New Delhi is simply unbelievable. My amendment says that the President may not provide civil nuclear assistance to India until he certifies that India has agreed to suspend military-to- military cooperation with Iran so long as the Government of Iran continues to support international terrorism.

My amendment does not say they can never have this deal. But it says they must not cooperate, military to military, with Iran until the day Iran is taken off the list of terrorists.

According to a March 2006 Defense News article:

In 2003 India and Iran signed a strategic agreement to

cooperate in defense and other matters. The deal was cemented

by the visit of then Iran President Mohammed Khatami to the

Republic Day parade in New Delhi, an honor usually reserved

for key allies. India still considers Iran to be a key ally

and this agreement on military cooperation is still in place,

even though Iranian actions are leading to the deaths of

American soldiers in Iraq as we speak.

General Casey has said that Iran is using surrogates to conduct terrorist operations, both against us and against the Iraqi people. He went on to say:

We are quite confident that the Iranians, through the

special operations forces, are providing weapons, IED

technology and training to Shia extremist groups in Iraq.

Of particular concern is the fact that Iran is providing a type of IED, or roadside bomb, that has a shaped charge and is particularly deadly.

So don't you think that if we are giving India this deal of a lifetime to receive nuclear technology from us, the least they could do is sign an agreement not to have military-to-military exercises and relationships with a country that is, in essence, bringing death and destruction to our sons and daughters in the United States military?

For more than 20 years, Iran has been the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism. It supports Hezbollah, several Palestinian terror groups such as Hamas and, according to the State Department, Iran is also:

. . . unwilling to bring to justice senior al-Qaida members

it detained in 2003 and has resisted numerous calls to

transfer custody of its al-Qaida detainees to their countries

of origin or to third countries for interrogation and/or

trial.

It seems to me we should convince our friend--India--to suspend its military-to-military cooperation with Iran. The Boxer amendment will have that result, because they want this deal and I believe they would act to cut off these military-to-military relationships.

It is also very important to point out that the United States has already sanctioned Indian entities and individuals for missiles and WMD-related transfers to Iran. In 2004, the United States imposed sanctions on two Indian scientists for nuclear-related transfers to Iran. Both scientists were high-ranking officials in the Nuclear Power Corporation of India, Limited. In December 2005, sanctions were imposed on two Indian chemical companies for transfer of chemical-related items to Iran, and as recently as last July, sanctions were imposed on two more chemical manufacturers in India for transfers to Iran. In May 2005, India passed a law on weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems. But according to CRS, the administration has not yet assessed India's export control law and regulation, and

. . . some observers have stated that India does not have

the necessary regulations in place to implement the law, and

that India's resources for implementation are remarkably

limited.

In other words, they have a Weapons Control Act, but experts believe they are not enforcing it. History tells us that they, in fact, have acted wrongly, to pass on technologies that are harmful, to Iran. So it seems to me, with this history, my colleagues should be supporting this amendment. I believe they should be and I regret that I need to offer it. I thought it would be accepted. I thought it would not be a problem. That it would be treated in many ways is obvious. The President, it seems to me, should have made severing military ties with Iran a precondition to civil nuclear cooperation. But, unfortunately, the United States is giving away more than it received in this deal.

My friends who want to desperately see this passed tonight are voting down amendment after amendment. And we are taking a deal in which, as former Senator Nunn said, ``India was a lot better negotiator than we were.''

That is Sam Nunn. We know how hard he worked with the current chairman of this committee to stop nuclear proliferation. What did he say of this agreement? ``India was a lot better negotiator than we were.''

So those of us on the Senate floor who are trying to get a better deal, who are trying to change this deal, are being voted down--boom, boom, boom. We are taking a deal that Sam Nunn said essentially they ``bested'' us on.

I come from a State with a huge Indian population. Our Indo-Americans are prominent in our State. I support strong relations with India. India is the world's largest democracy. It is so important for us to work together to promote our mutual interests.

I am proud to be a member of the Senate India Caucus and have nothing but the utmost respect for the Indian people. But this deal is not a good deal for America. This deal is not a good deal for the world.

Proponents of this legislation say our bilateral relationship with India is important. I agree with them. I have great hopes for the future of our two nations. It is so important that we work together. But somebody tell me how we are better off when we have an India that can build up to maybe 50 bombs.

Somebody explain to me how we are better off when we don't even have a clause in here that says that India has to receive military-to- military relationships with Iran before this goes ahead. Somebody explain it to me. I don't think it has been explained.

I am happy the Harkin amendment was adopted. It says that India has to work with us to make sure Iran doesn't get a nuclear capability, as they are trying to do now. If we adopted that amendment, why can't you adopt this amendment which simply says shut off those military-to- military agreements between India and Iran before this goes forward?

I wish the administration would have worked harder to craft a better deal, a more balanced deal that would have been a net win for nonproliferation, while securing India's commitment to suspend its military relationship with Iran.

As Robert Einhorn, a nonproliferation expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on which I am so proud to serve, ``the deal was concluded in great haste, driven by the calendar of the Bush-Singh meetings rather than by the seriousness and complexity of the task at hand.'' Everybody knows it. We knew it at the time. And I had hoped we could then make this a better deal.

I have worked hard. I have tried. We have lost amendment after amendment after amendment. It is so regrettable. It is regrettable that we rushed into this agreement. But we have a chance to improve this agreement in behalf of the Boxer amendment. I urge its adoption.

I retain the remainder of my time.

How much time do I have remaining?

I will try not to take the full time, but I want to respond to my colleagues.

The debate has been much ado about a very straightforward and simple

amendment. My amendment has nothing to do with the transfer of lethal weapons. My colleague Senator Biden talked about that. Nothing to do with that. My amendment, in the real world, I don't believe could be seen as a killer amendment. It is a simple amendment.

My colleague Senator Bond is right. He says a lot of other countries have relationships with Iran. No other country gets a deal like this where we give nuclear technology and there is absolutely no control on the number of bombs India could build. Experts tell us it could be as many as 50 a year. I don't think that makes the world safer.

But to help me with this treaty, to give my constituents a feeling that we are protecting them, at the least, say you are getting this deal, you are going to be able to build a lot of weapons with it, then cut off your military-to-military ties with the leading terrorist nation in the world--Iran--a nation that is at this very moment hurting our troops in the field in Iraq.

Now, my colleague Senator Biden, I agree with completely when he says--and I do believe this--Senator Lugar, if President, would have cut a better deal. I could say Senator Biden, if President, could have cut a better deal, but we don't have a better deal. And I don't live in a world where you sit back and say, oh, too bad. This isn't about buying a piece of cake. We are not going to the store and buying a toy. It is about giving nuclear technology to a country that has, in fact, been called out by our own country because it has in the past transferred information about WMDs, nuclear weapons, missiles, to Iran. We have called them out on that. So why can't we ask them simply to stop these military-to-military programs they have with Iran?

Again, when we stand up and say, gosh, this is a killer amendment, they will walk away, it sounds weak to me. It does not sound as though we are the strongest nation in the world. Who would walk away from this deal? India is not a member of the NPT, not a signatory, and they are getting all this information from the United States of America on nuclear civilian technology, with no cap on the number of bombs they can build, and they are going to walk away from this because we simply ask them not to have military-to-military cooperation with the world's leading sponsor of terrorism?

I don't get it. So I think my colleagues have made this complicated when it is really very simple. We do this deal with India, the least they can do is cut off their military-to-military cooperation with Iran.

With that, Mr. President, I conclude my remarks. I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. President, I will be very brief. We are giving India a one-of-a-kind deal that no one else gets: civilian nuclear technology and no cap on the number of bombs they can build.

The least we can do is ask them to cut off their military ties with the biggest state sponsor of terrorism--Iran. Iran is building the IEDs that are killing our soldiers in Iraq. The least we can do is ask the President to certify that they have cut off military-to-military relationships with Iran.

Why is it important? Look at this Defense News: ``Indian Navy Trains Iranian Sailors.''

We know they have these ties. If we really believe we are doing something good, we should at least expect India to cut off military ties with the leading state sponsor of terrorism--Iran. I urge an ``aye'' vote.

Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, today I rise to pay tribute to 47 young Americans who have been killed in Iraq since July 18. This brings to 639 the number of soldiers who were either from California or based in California who have been killed while serving our country in Iraq. This represents 22 percent of all U.S. deaths in Iraq.

LCpl Geofrey R. Cayer, 20, died July 18 from a nonhostile incident in Al Anbar province, Iraq. He was assigned to 3rd Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA.

SPC Joseph A. Graves, 21, died on July 25 in Baghdad, Iraq, from injuries sustained when his military vehicle encountered a vehicle- borne improvised explosive device and small arms fire. He was assigned to the 110th Military Police Company, 720th Military Police Battalion, III Corps, Fort Hood, TX. He was from Discovery Bay, CA.

LCpl James W. Higgins, 22, died July 27 from wounds received while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar province, Iraq. He was assigned to 1st Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA.

Cpl Phillip E. Baucus, 28, died July 29 while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar province, Iraq. He was assigned to 3rd Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Twentynine Palms, CA.

Sgt Christian B. Williams, 27, died July 29 while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar province, Iraq. He was assigned to 3rd Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Twentynine Palms, CA.

LCpl Anthony E. Butterfield, 19, died July 29 while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar province, Iraq. He was assigned to 3rd Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Twentynine Palms, CA. He was from Clovis, CA.

PFC Jason Hanson, 21, died July 29 while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar province, Iraq. He was assigned to 3rd Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Twentynine Palms, CA.

LCpl Kurt E. Dechen, 24, died August 3 from wounds received while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar province, Iraq. He was assigned to 1st Battalion, 25th Marine Regiment, 4th Marine Division, while attached to Regimental Combat Team 5, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA.

Petty Officer 2nd Class Marc A. Lee, 28, was killed on August 2 during combat operations while on patrol in Ramadi, Iraq. Lee was an aviation ordnanceman and a member of a SEAL team based in the San Diego area.

LCpl Jeremy Z. Long, 18, died August 10 while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar province, Iraq. He was assigned to 1st Battalion, 7th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Twentynine Palms, CA.

SGT Jeffrey S. Brown, 25, died on August 10 in Rutbah, Iraq, of injuries sustained on August 8, when his helicopter crashed. He was assigned to the 82nd Medical Company, Fort Riley, KS. He was from Trinity Center, CA.

Hospitalman Chadwick T. Kenyon, 20, died on August 20 from wounds sustained when his Light Armored Vehicle struck an improvised explosive device while on combat patrol in Rawah, Iraq. He was assigned to the 3rd Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion, 1st Marine Division, 1st Marine Expeditionary Force, Twentynine Palms, CA.

LCpl Randy L. Newman, 21, died August 20 while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar province, Iraq. He

was assigned to 3rd Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Twentynine Palms, CA.

Cpl Adam A. Galvez, 21, died August 20 while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar province, Iraq. He was assigned to 3rd Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Twentynine Palms, CA.

Chief Petty Officer Paul J. Darga, 34, died August 22 when his Explosive Ordnance Disposal Team was struck by an improvised explosive device while responding to a previous strike in the Al Anbar province, Iraq. Darga was assigned to Explosive Ordnance Disposal Mobile Unit Two, serving with the 1st Marine Logistics Group, Camp Pendleton, CA.

SGT David J. Almazan, 27, died on August 27 in Hit, Iraq, of injuries suffered when an improvised explosive device detonated near his vehicle during combat operations. Almazan was assigned to the 1st Battalion, 36th Infantry Regiment, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 1st Armored Division, Friedberg, Germany. He was from Van Nuys, CA.

LCpl Shane P. Harris, 23, died on September 3 while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar province, Iraq. He was assigned to 3rd Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Twentynine Palms, CA.

Hospital Corpsman 2nd Class Christopher G. Walsh, 30, died on September 4 from wounds sustained when his vehicle struck an improvised explosive device while on combat patrol in Al Anbar, Iraq. His Navy Reserve Unit was attached to the I Marine Division in Camp Pendleton,

Mr. President, I take this opportunity to recognize Alameda County Sheriff Charles Plummer, who is retiring after more than 54 years of dedicated service in law enforcement.

Sheriff Plummer began his career in law enforcement in 1952 with the city of Berkeley Police Department. His dedication to the Berkeley Police Department was evident over the 23 years he spent with that agency, where he ultimately rose to the rank of acting chief of police.

Following his service with the Berkeley Police Department, Sheriff Plummer was appointed chief of police for the city of Hayward in June of 1976. During his 10 years with the Hayward Police Department, Sheriff Plummer employed many innovative and successful programs. In 1979, Sheriff Plummer volunteered the Hayward Police Department to be one of five trial sites to test the law enforcement service standards established by the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, CALEA, becoming the ninth law enforcement agency in the Nation, and the first west of the Mississippi, to be accredited by CALEA. Sheriff Plummer was later elected to CALEA, served as its president, and has since been a strong advocate for the accreditation of law enforcement agencies.

Most memorably, in his role as Hayward chief of police, Sheriff Plummer initiated what became known as ``The Cardinal Sins,'' a set of simple, straightforward rules demanding honesty from all employees and prohibiting bigotry, the acceptance of bribes, and the use of controlled substances. Many officers felt that adherence to these rules helped build a bond of trust between law enforcement and the communities they served. Today, ``The Cardinal Sins'' have become standard in many law enforcement agencies throughout the Nation. Under his leadership, the Hayward Police Department became one of the most highly respected law enforcement agencies in the country.

In 1986, Sheriff Plummer was elected sheriff of Alameda County. In his capacity as sheriff, he opened the new Santa Rita jail, the sixth largest facility of its kind in the United States; he established a marine patrol unit to protect the shoreline of Alameda County; he opened a state-of-the-art Office of Emergency Services Center; he has achieved CALEA accreditation for the sheriff's office; and has also received accreditation for many branches of the sheriff's office, including Prison Health Services, the County Crime Laboratory, and the Explosive Ordinance Unit. Under his leadership, the Alameda County Sheriff's Office is the only agency in California to earn the National Sheriff's Association prestigious ``Triple Crown Award.''

In addition to his regular duties as Alameda county sheriff, Sheriff Plummer has served as head of Region II in the California Law Enforcement Mutual Aid System, a statewide program under the Office of Emergency Services that restores order during emergencies, including civil unrest, and provides assistance to local agencies during other unusual events. Throughout his career, Sheriff Plummer has also been active in numerous professional organizations including the Peace Officer's Research Association of California, the Peace Officer Standards and Training, the Police Executive Research Forum, and the International Association of Chiefs of Police.

In his spare time, Sheriff Plummer has been very involved in his community, serving as past president and a member of the Hayward Rotary Club. He is a lifetime volunteer for the Boy Scouts of America, serving on the executive council in San Francisco, and a lifetime member of the Southern Alameda County Chapter of the NAACP. Sheriff Plummer has generously given his time to such organizations as the YMCA and the Salvation Army.

For over half a century, Sheriff Plummer has dedicated his life to promoting excellence in law enforcement and the communities he has served. He has served with honesty, integrity, and a commitment to excellence. I am confident that, even in retirement, Sheriff Plummer will continue to touch lives with his good will and compassion. I wish him the very best and hope he enjoys his much deserved retirement.

Mr. President, I would like to take a few moments to discuss an issue of critical importance to the military families at Beale Air Force Base in Yuba City, CA.

The Child Development Center, CDC, at Beale Air Force Base is in dire need of refurbishment. While the Beale community has gone to great lengths to ensure that the dependents of military personnel at Beale have a safe place to be cared for and to learn, the reality is that the existing CDC is woefully inadequate.

The existing structure which is approximately 40 years old is worn, outdated, and far too small. In fact, I understand that for over the past 5 years, the waiting list for placing students in the facility has not dropped below 100 children.

To make matters worse, the CDC may even pose a potential health risk to children. Old and worn carpet cannot be replaced because doing so would expose the children to asbestos. This is unacceptable.

Our men and women who are serving our country simply should not have to worry that their children are being exposed to hazardous material. We owe them far more than that.

The Air Force has reached the conclusion that it will take $14 million to refurbish the Beale CDC. It is my understanding that funding to upgrade the CDC is included in the fiscal year Defense plan for 2008. It is extremely important that this funding for the CDC be included in the President's budget request for 2008.

Mr. President, today I have a very heavy heart as I pay tribute to five fallen U.S. Forest Service firefighters from California. It is an honor to talk about their heroic deeds, but it is heartbreaking.

These five heroes died in the line of duty while protecting families and homes in the Esperanza Fire west of Palm Springs. We deeply mourn the loss of Engine Captain Mark Loutzenhiser, Fire Engine Operator Jess McLean, Assistant Fire Engine Operator Jason McKay, Firefighter Daniel Hoover-Najera, and Firefighter Pablo Cerda.

Mark Loutzenhiser was 44 years old and had 21 years of firefighting service. He was a certified emergency management technician, EMT. He had previously worked as a hotshot crewman for the Vista Grande Hot Shots and also as a volunteer firefighter for Riverside County. He majored in fire science at Mount San Jacinto College. He was a longtime resident of Idyllwild, CA, and was a wonderful supporter and coach for the youth sports program. He is survived by his wife Maria Loutzenhiser.

Jess McLean was 27 years old and had 7 years of firefighting service. He had been a hotshot for 3 years with the Vista Grande Hot Shots. He graduated from Banning High School in 1997 and attended fire science classes at Crafton Hills College. He was a resident of Beaumont, CA. He is survived by his wife Karen McLean and his mother Cecelia McLean.

Jason McKay was 27 years old and had 5 years of Forest Service experience and 4 years as a volunteer firefighter in Adelanto. He also served on the Mojave Greens Type II crew. He was a certified EMT and earned an associate's degree in fire science. He was a resident of Phelan, CA. He is survived by his mother Bonnie J. McKay and his father Robert McKay.

Daniel Hoover-Najera was 20 years old and in his second season of firefighting. He worked on the Tahquitz Type II crew in 2005 and was a seasonal employee in 2006. He graduated from San Jacinto Mountain View High School in 2004. He was a resident of San Jacinto, CA. He is survived by his mother Gloria Ayala and his father Timothy Hoover.

Pablo Cerda was 23 years old and in his second season with the Forest Service. He was previously of the Tahquitz Type II crew. He graduated from Los Amigos High School in Santa Ana in 2001 and attended Fire Academy of Riverside Community College. He was a resident of Fountain Valley, CA. He is survived by his father Pablo Cerda, Sr.

These five U.S. Forest Service firefighters on Engine Crew 57 on the San Jacinto Ranger District were dispatched early on the morning of Thursday, October 26 to fight the Esperanza fire. As the fire blazed out of control, they bravely fought it when they were overrun by flames.

Mark, Jess, Jason, Daniel, and Pablo are true examples of why we call firefighters heroes. They bravely and selflessly risked their lives time and time again trying to protect California. No more could be asked of anyone. Tragically, they have fallen in one of these battles. We know why their friends, family, and colleagues are so proud of them and so devastated by their loss. Their loss reverberates throughout California and our Nation.

I send my sincere condolences to their families, their communities, and all of the firefighters who had the honor of serving with Mark, Jess, Jason, Daniel, and Pablo over the years.

These firefighters are extraordinary heroes. And we will not rest until we have found those responsible for this horrific crime.

Mr. President, I would like to take this opportunity to extend my most sincere congratulations to all of the 2006 Nobel laureates. These individuals have shown themselves to possess some of the world's most creative and accomplished minds, and each has made a remarkable contribution to humanity. I am extremely proud to say that California is home to three of these individuals. Their names are Roger D. Kornberg, recipient of the Nobel Prize in chemistry; Andrew Z. Fire, recipient of a share of the Nobel Prize in medicine; and George F. Smoot, recipient of a share of the Nobel Prize in physics.

Dr. Roger D. Kornberg was born into the shadow of a giant in the scientific community. Dr. Kornberg's father, Dr. Arthur Kornberg, won a share of a Nobel Prize in 1959 for his trailblazing work on DNA information transfer. Dr. Roger Kornberg's decision to follow in his father's footsteps reflects a man of clear vision and unshakable will, and it is extraordinarily inspiring to see an individual meet the high standard that was set before him.

Dr. Kornberg graduated from Harvard University in 1967 and went on to get his doctorate from Stanford in 1972. For the last 26 years, Dr. Kornberg has been a professor of structural biology at Stanford, conducting cutting-edge research while guiding his students in their exploration of nature's mysteries. Over that time he tirelessly probed the questions surrounding how information is stored in genes and transferred to other parts of a cell. This process is called transcription, and it holds a key to understanding of how cells operate.

As a result of Dr. Kornberg's efforts, we can now visually demonstrate how

information encoded in a cell's DNA blueprint is read and duplicated into what is called messenger RNA. This constitutes a significant leap forward in our knowledge of cellular mechanics and has brought us closer to identifying and rectifying the disturbances in the transcription of genetic information that is the cause of common killers like heart disease and cancer. Dr. Kornberg's work has already influenced the development of drugs and therapies for various conditions and is opening new avenues for future research.

The story of Dr. Andrew Z. Fire is equally impressive and inspirational. Although extremely modest in demeanor, Dr. Fire has demonstrated world-class intellectual ability and unquenchable drive since childhood. Having graduated high school at the age of 15, Dr. Fire attended the University of California, Berkeley, after being turned down by his other choice: Stanford. Now, at age 47, Dr. Fire has achieved the highest pinnacle of success in his field, opened up previously inaccessible areas of research with vast potential for the future of medicine, and gotten into Stanford, where he is the third Nobel laureate of the institution's proud medical school.

Dr. Fire, like Dr. Kornberg, was recognized for his years of exploration into RNA and its role in transcription of genetic information. More than 15 years ago, Dr. Fire became interested in understanding the genes involved in the earliest steps of cellular development. In an attempt to plot cellular development from the beginning, Dr. Fire designed an experiment that produced the exact opposite of the anticipated result: After injecting a worm with a piece DNA to increase the expression of a particular gene, Dr. Fire inadvertently succeeded in suppressing the gene completely. This result would eventually lead to the discovery of a fundamental mechanism for controlling the flow of genetic information--that of RNAi, or RNA inference, which quashes the activity of specific genes. This discovery was termed the ``Breakthrough of the Year'' in 2002 by Science Magazine and has earned Dr. Fire and his colleague, Dr. Craig Mello, the 2006 Nobel Prize for medicine.

The potential benefits of the discovery of RNA inference are limitless. By using RNAi to silence one gene at time and observing abnormalities the behavior of cells, researchers are able to identify the function of genes, and potentially, use silencing to reduce or eliminate cellular activity harmful to human health. Dr. Fire's many achievements constitute an extraordinary contribution to our understanding of how life operates at its most basic level, and demonstrate his outstanding talent and unwavering commitment to improving the health of his fellow human beings.

Dr. George F. Smoot has for years been examining the cosmos in search of an answer to the biggest question of them all: How did it all begin? To an amazing degree, Dr. Smoot has been answering this seemingly unanswerable question. For 50 years, scientists struggled in vain to support the Big Bang theory with hard, indisputable evidence. Dr. Smoot dealt the contentious theory a further challenge when, in 1976, he and others found startling evidence that galaxies are clustered together and not, as previously thought, spread evenly throughout the universe. This observation conflicted with temperature readings that consistently found space to be an even temperature of 2.7 degrees above absolute zero. Dr. Smoot had presented the scientific community a quandary: How could the heat be evenly distributed through the universe if galaxies were not?

It is a testament to Dr. Smoot's brilliance, ingenuity, and diligence that he, along with his colleague and corecipient of this year's Nobel Prize in physics, Dr. John C. Mather, would clear up the confusion resulting from the establishment of a ``lumpy'' universe and finally cement the Big Bang theory of the creation of the universe. To achieve that ambitious goal, Smoot overcame nearly insurmountable obstacles and broke through barriers that had thwarted previous generations of researchers. Dr. Smoot was a driving force behind NASA's construction and development of the COBE satellite, which under the direction of Dr. Smoot and Dr. Mather succeeded in detecting the minuscule variations in temperature that were anticipated by the Big Bang theory and the ``lumpy'' nature of the universe.

As a result of Dr. Smoot's incredible achievement, we now have a much clearer picture of where we came from and where we are going. His penetrating vision challenges the limits of human comprehension, transporting us to times and places that were once unreachable. Dr. Smoot has fundamentally changed the way we view the universe and secured his place as one of the most important astrophysicists of all time.

It is with great pleasure that I applaud all three of California's 2006 Nobel laureates. Dr. Kornberg, Dr. Fire, and Dr. Smoot have made extraordinary contributions to our understanding of how the universe operates, from the microscopic level of the cell to the vast level of galaxies. Their phenomenal insights have answered questions that have long puzzled the scientific community and raised new possibilities for the research of future generations. I thank these men for the many valuable gifts they have given humanity, not least of which is the gift of unbridled imagination and the belief that anything is possible.

Mr. President, I take this opportunity to recognize San Mateo County sheriff Don Horsley, who is retiring after 38 years of dedicated service to law enforcement and public safety.

Sheriff Horsley is a San Francisco Bay Area native who was born in San Francisco, raised in Daly City, and educated in the county's public schools. He graduated from Daly City's Westmoor High School before graduating with honors from San Francisco State University in 1969.

After a brief time as a classroom teacher, Sheriff Horsley entered into a career in law enforcement that has spanned 38 years.

Beginning as a patrol officer in Daly City and later serving as a patrol deputy officer in East Palo Alto, Sheriff Horsley was elected Sheriff of San Mateo County in June 1993. From the beginning, Sheriff Horsley has been dedicated to making his community a better and safer place to live. Under his leadership, the San Mateo County Sheriff's Office has implemented an extensive number of innovative programs to make the community safer, including community policing, graffiti abatement, gang intelligence/investigative unit, sexual habitual offender program, high-tech task force, school resource officer program, and a youth camp for at-risk youth. Sheriff Horsley also established an after school Sheriff's Activity League to help kids succeed in school and stay out of gangs.

After the tragedy of September 11, 2001, Sheriff Horsley stepped into a leadership role and joined the FBI in a regional Joint Terrorism Task Force. He established a regional information sharing network with the nine Bay Area counties and directed the Sheriff's Office of Emergency Services to take the lead to ensure that the county's first responders and public health workers had the equipment and training to respond to disasters. Sheriff Horsley also worked with regional transit agencies to establish a transit unit of deputy sheriffs to patrol bus and rail transportation within the county.

Sheriff Horsley was also a fierce advocate for the construction of a state-of-the-art forensic crime lab that is used by local, regional, State, and Federal agencies to solve crimes. Sheriff Horsley tirelessly worked with the Bay Area Congressional Delegation, including my office, to obtain funding to ensure that the forensic crime lab had the latest in crime fighting technology.

Among his many accomplishments, Sheriff Horsley currently serves as cochair of the Attorney General and State Superintendent of Public Instruction's Safe Schools Task Force; vice chair of the Northern California High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area; chair of the San Mateo County Vehicle Theft Task Force and Vice Chair for the County Narcotics Task Force. Sheriff Horsley has also been a member of the executive board of the California State Sheriffs' Association since 1996, served as the past chair of the San Mateo County Criminal Justice Council and as a past member of the board

of directors of the California Peace Officers' Association.

Sheriff Horsley has not only improved public safety but has worked tirelessly with local elected officials, schools, and community organizations to foster a strong sense of community and improve the lives of children and families in San Mateo County.

Sheriff Horsley's service to San Mateo County and dedication to public safety throughout California is inspiring. I have been honored to work with him. I am confident that, even in retirement, Sheriff Horsley will continue to touch lives with his good will and compassion.

Mr. President, today, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing entrepreneur and philanthropist Charles A. Bibbs as he is recognized by the Black Voice Foundation for his exceptional contributions to ethnic art.

Charles Bibbs is a recognized and accomplished artist, known for his representations of ethnic and cultural themes. Throughout his life, he has been lauded and recognized by numerous community and philanthropic organizations for his work in the multicultural communities and his dedication to music and art. His work has been featured in several exhibits, on the Internet, and on several local and national television stations.

Since he was a young person, Charles Bibbs has possessed a strong talent for art and artistic creation. Throughout his career, he worked in corporate America and funded his artistic cultivation through that work. In 1985, Bibbs was able to fuse his strengths in business with his passion for artistic expression and formed B Graphics and Fine Arts to publish and distribute his own artwork. Since that time, Bibbs has become a dedicated and renowned ethnic artist and has worked passionately for cohesion and unity within marginalized communities.

Recently, Charles Bibbs has spent much of his time conducting seminars and workshops to educate and inspire young people and reinforce educational institutions. He formed Art 2000, a nonprofit visual art association that works to inform local communities about art, and helps to inspire art patrons and artists themselves. From this organization has come Images Magazine, which is the first national publication dedicated to ethnic art. As well, this has inspirited the traveling ethnic art exhibit ``Art on Tour.'' Along this same vein, Bibbs' passion for jazz music led him to the creation and founding of Inland Empire Music and Arts Foundation, a nonprofit organization that has hosted an annual world-class jazz and art festival in southern California for the past 3 years.

Art and graphic representations are powerful tools that can help unite communities and inspire young people. The work and example of Charles Bibbs has inspired countless individuals and continues to bring art and music to our Nation's youth. I applaud Charles Bibbs and look forward to many more years of cultural representation and youth enrichment from this great American artist.

Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating the 100th anniversary of the city of Lodi, a thriving, family-oriented community located in California's San Joaquin Valley.

The city originally known as Mokelumne was founded in 1869 when Charles O. Ivory and John M. Burt established the Ivory Store, an enterprise that attracted scores of homesteaders and businesses to the area. In order to avoid confusion between the towns of Mokelumne, Mokelumne Hill, and Mokelumne City, the city's name was officially changed to Lodi in 1874. According to local folklore, the city's new name was inspired by a successful local racehorse, as horse racing was a popular activity in the area during this period. By the time its residents overwhelmingly voted for incorporation on November 27, 1906, Lodi was already one of the fastest growing communities in San Joaquin County.

In 1907, in an effort to publicize a large carnival to promote Lodi's famous Tokay grapes, a mission-style arch was erected at Pine and Sacramento Streets. The Lodi Arch, one of the few remaining Mission Revival ceremonial arches left in California, has served as an entrance into Lodi for the past century. In 1919 and 1926, the world-famous A & W Root Beer and the Supertreader, the first successful full-circle tire retreading mold, were respectively introduced to the world within a short distance from the Lodi Arch. To many people, this remarkable landmark symbolizes the city's proud history and economic vitality.

In 1956, the Federal Government officially recognized Lodi as a winegrape growing region, thus allowing vintners to label their wine as originating from Lodi. However, it was not until 1986, when the Lodi Appellation was formally approved, that Lodi began to shed its label as the wine industry's best kept secret to become one of the emerging wine-producing regions in the Nation. Today, Lodi is home to a highly regarded and vibrant wine industry where nearly two dozen wineries utilize exemplary viticulture practices to consistently produce wines that are renowned for their quality.

The city of Lodi has grown from a town of less than 2,000 residents from the time of its incorporation to a flourishing and diverse community of 63,000 that rests in the middle of one of the most dynamic regions of California. The state of the city as it turns 100 is best captured by its slogan: ``Livable, Lovable, Lodi.'' The story of the city's first 100 years is a testament to the value of community, vision, and optimism. As the residents of the city work together to make their city a better place to call home, I congratulate them on their centennial anniversary and wish them another 100 years of good fortune and success.

No problem.

Mr. President, I wish to add 5 minutes to the time I was allocated, so it would be 15 minutes.

Mr. President, I say to my colleague, Senator Landrieu-- --

Thank you, Mr. President. I trust my 15 minutes will start at this point.

Thank you so much.

Mr. President, I say to my colleague Senator Landrieu, I think she made a very clear statement about where we stand on oil drilling in this country. And she is so right. A narrow bill passed here that is going to help her State. It is going to help the country. It stays away from the hot-button issues. It stays away from the California coastline, which Republicans and Democrats in our State are united in saying we need that coastline protected for our economy. It is quite different than my friend's. We respect each other, and we understand it.

So what she is simply saying to the House is: We want to do something. We do not want to be a do-nothing Congress. Let's do something. Let's do the bill the Senate crafted, which again, I say to the Presiding Officer, you were involved in.

Just before she left the Chamber, I wanted to say how strongly I appreciate her explanation of where we are.

Well, Mr. President, we have a very narrow bill before us, the border fence bill, which we cannot broaden; and that is why I opposed cloture on that bill. I do not oppose building a fence where you need to do it, where the border is porous. I do not have a problem with that. What I have a problem with is this narrow approach to the immigration issue which precludes us from truly fixing our problems.

We are ignoring a lot of problems in this Congress, but I will tell you what is emerging as an enormous problem, and that is, the problem that farms are having all across this country because we have neglected to take care of the issue of farm labor.

In California, our farm community is in serious trouble. I sat with my dairy folks, my ranchers, my farmers. We grow over 80 crops in our State. Senator Feinstein was eloquent in laying out how huge an industry it is. These are folks who never come to me with fear in their eyes. They are frightened because their crops are dying on the vine and in the fields across the State of California, and from what I have heard, in other States as well.

This is tragic for us. We could lose these farmers. We could lose agriculture. And we have a chance--Senator Craig, Senator Feinstein, and I, and others, have teamed up and said: Let's use this opportunity to broaden our approach. Senator Kennedy, of course, was the first to craft a comprehensive piece of legislation, which we voted out of here.

Now, I do not understand--I spoke with Senator Frist, and he seemed to acknowledge there is a problem--why we cannot permit as part of this fence bill a very simple emergency piece of legislation that will sunset but just says let's make sure our agriculture community can survive, can continue.

Let me show you a photograph of one of my constituents looking at her crop of pears, which is rotting on the ground. You look at her face, and you see what this means to her.

Let me tell you what it means to the people of our Nation. We export these fruits and vegetables all throughout the Nation and, of course, throughout the world. It is going to mean higher prices, that decreased availability of products. But this Congress will not let us address this issue.

To the Republican leadership, I beg you one more time--and even some in your own party are begging you--we have to do more than one thing at a time. You have to take the problem and solve it. So this whole notion of we will take care of the fence first, and in a few years we will take care of something else--let me tell you, these farmers cannot last. They are facing economic disaster.

As I said before, this is not a Democratic or Republican issue. I can assure you that the people who have come to see me are part of the Republican base. They are perplexed. They do not understand it. They are the owners, entrepreneurs, the family farmers, the large farmers, and they have come together with labor. It was intense to get the two sides together. It started in the late nineties.

I remember when Senators Craig and Kennedy came with great excitement and said that we have a deal between labor and management, everyone supports AgJobs. We went out to the floor and we have more than 60 votes for this. Yet because of the maneuvers on the floor by the Republican leadership, we cannot offer the AgJobs bill. No one can explain it to me.

Republicans are facing the charge of being a do-nothing Congress. We want to do something for our farmers. We want to help you. Let's please take care of our farmers. Take care of this woman who is looking at her whole life disappear in front of her because she doesn't have enough labor to pick these pears.

The United Fresh Produce Association wrote Senator Frist a letter. It has a headline that I have never seen in a letter:

Farmers to Congress: Support a Safe and Secure American

Food Supply, Pass an Immigration Fix Before the Election of

2006.

These are people who don't really get that involved in politics, but they get it. They know an election is coming, and they are sending us a message to fix this. Further, they say:

A safe and domestic food supply is a national priority at

risk. With real labor shortages emerging, agriculture needs

legislative relief now. The choice is simple: Import needed

labor, or import our food.

What they are saying is, at the end of the day, we will not have a safe, secure, and healthy food supply. This is not the time, it seems to me, that we want to lose that. With all of the talk about terrorism--and we all fear it--we want a safe food supply. We don't want to have to depend on food coming in from other places. We want to depend on our farmers and their great history and their great legacy.

We also will lose three to four American jobs for every farm worker job. Mr. President, I will say that again. We will lose three to four American jobs for every farm worker job.

They say:

Any solution must recognize agriculture's uniqueness--

perishable crops and products, rural nature, significant

seasonality, and nature of the work.

Building a fence is not going to help our people. I am not against it; I voted for it. It is not a problem to me to build a fence. But don't come out here and say: Aren't we great and doing something; we are building a fence and now everything is fine. That is hogwash.

We must pass an AgJOBS bill, and we can do it today. Our farmers and our

ranchers are begging us to do it. They need a solution. Our farm economy in some areas is becoming paralyzed. I showed you Toni Skully. They were unable to harvest 35 percent of their crop. This is what is happening all over California. I have been told it is also happening to my lemon growers in San Diego. They are experiencing a 15- to 20- percent harvest loss. Avocado farmers in Ventura County are worried about workers for the December planting season. Tree fruit growers in Fresno County have seen the labor force decrease by as much as 50 percent. In Sonoma, as many as 17,000 seasonal farm workers have not returned to work in the fields.

Again, I don't have a problem with the fence. We need to build it where we have a porous border. But that doesn't help our people.

Agriculture is a $239 billion-a-year industry, and if we refuse to provide a solution to labor shortages now, we are jeopardizing our domestic economy and our foreign export market. We are driving up production costs that get passed on to consumers. Our consumers are already having trouble with health care costs, with gasoline costs, with college tuition--oh, and now they are going to have problems putting food on the table.

This is not the time to turn away from our farmers. All of this is happening for absolutely no reason. There is no problem in allowing us to proceed with this amendment to offer AgJOBS. I have been on the AgJOBS bill, probably since 2000, 2001, and we continue to have strong support for it. But, again, because this Republican Congress can, apparently, only do one thing at a time, when it comes to immigration, we are precluded from offering this amendment.

Mr. President, my farmers are proud, as are yours. My ranchers and my dairy families are proud. They don't ask for much. But when they came to meet with me--and they have come several times--and I saw the look on their faces.

I said: What is it?

They finally said: You have to act.

I said: The fence bill is coming up.

They said: Maybe that is a chance now. We can get AgJOBS attached to it.

I went to Senator Kennedy, and I said to him at a caucus luncheon: They are bringing up the fence bill, so why don't we move forward?

He said: I am working on it, and I hope we can have a comprehensive approach. A lot of people care about this.

Apparently, there are not enough Republican leaders who care about it because we are being told there won't be an amendment for AgJOBS. This is certainly a place where Democrats and Republicans should come together. I simply don't understand why they allow our farmers to suffer, to worry, to wonder, to lose money, and then they have to come to us and ask for emergency help. They don't want emergency help.

AgJOBS is supported by United Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Association, the Agricultural Coalition for Immigration Reform, the National Council of Agricultural Employers, the Western United Dairymen, the California Grape and Tree Fruit League, California Citrus Mutual, the California Strawberry Commission, the California Association of Wine-Grape Growers, and the California Canning Peach Association.

The AgJOBS bill has pulled together both the owners and the workers. I thank Senators Craig and Kennedy for doing that. All they need is for us to do our job. The Senate is choosing to neglect a major sector of our Nation's economy--a bill supported by 62 Senators.

Again, the farm community has been a traditional Republican stronghold. So this isn't even good politics. I say to my friends it is bad politics, and it is bad policy. At the end of the day, we can still insist that Senator Frist allow us to offer the Craig-Kennedy- Feinstein-Boxer measure, and all of us who care about this bill have a chance to do it. We don't want lip-service. We don't want calming talk. We want action. We want action now. We want to help the farmers, the consumers, the workers.

We don't want to see another industry fall apart right beneath our noses. We have enough problems going on with people losing their health care, they cannot afford college, and the housing market is in a precarious situation. Why would we not come together and take care of this important constituency?

In closing, a headline from last Friday's New York Times reads:

Pickers Are Few, and Growers Blame Congress

And they should blame Congress. Pretty soon it will be consumers blaming Congress, and they should. So let's get our act together. Let's get it done. Thank you very much.

I yield the floor.

I agree with Senator Bingaman's understanding. It is not our intent to create any new right with respect to these permits.

I agree. The language in this bill does not impose requirements on the State of California.

Mr. President, this is a great day for California.

After years of hard work by my colleagues, Senator Feinstein and Congressman Mike Thompson and I, the Northern California Coastal Wild Heritage Wilderness Act passed the Congress today. It now goes to the President's desk for his signature.

I want to thank my colleague, Senator Feinstein, and Congressman Mike Thompson for all of their great work on this bill. Without their tireless support, we would not have gotten to this point.

Anyone who has ever visited California or been fortunate enough to live there is keenly aware of the State's natural beauty indeed, more than most States, California's wild beauty--is an essential part of its identity.

California's natural beauty and way of life has enticed millions to come and live there but that very enticement is now threatened by exponential growth--35,900,000 people live in my State, according to the 2004 U.S. Census estimate, and that figure is growing by leaps and bounds daily.

That is why so many Californians have come together to support this bill and protect some of the last great natural places in the State.

Thousands of average citizens and over 200 local businesses, outdoor groups, and other interests support the bill these include Harwood Industries, the Adventures Edge Mountain Bike Store, and K.B. Homes, the largest homebuilder in California.

There have been 23 supportive votes or resolutions from city councils, county boards of supervisors, tribal councils, and other boards since 2001.

Our Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, supports it, as do 40 former or current local elected officials of both parties in Lake, Mendocino, Napa, and Humboldt Counties.

When one considers what we are trying to preserve, it is easy to see why Congressman Thompson and I have such broad support for our legislation. I would like to share a few examples.

First and foremost is the spectacular King Range, the wildest portion of California's coast--it boasts the longest stretch of undeveloped coastline in the lower 48 States. Next, I would like to share Cache Creek it is home to the second largest wintering bald eagle population in California and a herd of rare Tule elk, which is the world's smallest elk. Cache Creek is popular with white water rafters for its rapids and scenery.

Next, the Middle Fork Eel River, which hosts 30 to 50 percent of the State's summer-run steelhead trout population, an endangered species, and critical to California's fishermen and tribes. It also has spectacular ancient forests of oak pine and fir. Our bill provides improved protections for this pristine area.

These are but three of the dozens of examples I could show you today. Californians want to protect the sanctity of these lands, and our bill does just that.

Before I conclude, there are some people I need to thank. First, I again thank Senator Feinstein, my partner in the Senate on this bill. Her work on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee was invaluable, and John Watts of her staff helped greatly. Congressman Thompson tirelessly championed this bill in the House, and Jonathan Birdsong, his legislative director, put in countless hours of work to accomplish this.

I also thank Senators Bingaman and Domenici of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. They, along with Senators Craig and Wyden, have worked very well with me to protect these special places and helped me move this bill forward. Finally I need to thank David Brooks and Frank Gladics of the Energy Committee staff for working so carefully and conscientiously on this bill.

God has given Americans an exceptionally beautiful treasure in its wild landscape, and my State is blessed with some of its best.

We must be good stewards of that gift and share it with future generations that is what Theodore Roosevelt, John Muir, John Wesley Powell, Ansel Adams, and other great Americans did, and we have places like Yosemite and Yellowstone to cherish because of their actions.

Mr. President, because the Congress passed this bill today, future generations will be thanking us for preserving places like the King Range and other parts of the stunning, wild, and unspoiled northern California coast.