Floor Statements

Mr. President, the Senate is not in order.

Mr. President, I want to say to my colleagues who read this bill--I don't know if I can hold it, but here it is. I asked that it be put on everybody's desk. That is a rule in the Senate. You can require that because I think just looking at this you see how not to legislate. I think Senator McCain has made that point eloquently.

I am going to speak for about 5 or 6 minutes now. I am going to speak more later.

I thank my colleagues who found that ``Big Brother is watching you'' language in this massive bill. It is a horrific thought that some person working for the Government can identify a taxpayer and go after him or her, or go after a business without penalty. This is unheard of. If this is a new America, then let me say we have a lot

of work to do around here, and things are going to be slowed down because as much as everyone wants to get home and get with their families, not the least of which is the folks on the floor right now, we may have to sacrifice a little bit if this is the kind of legislation that comes before us in this huge packet.

I am going to take just a few minutes to run through another piece of legislation that was thrown in here without any vote in the Senate, without any hearing in the Senate, without any discussion in the Senate, and that is the so-called Weldon amendment which has very many adverse consequences for millions and millions of women of reproductive age in our country.

The Weldon amendment is a sham conscience clause. It takes a good conscience clause that was put in place so that doctors who have a moral or religious objection to performing abortion do not have to do that, but what this does is says anyone who wants can claim a conscience clause without giving any reason, and expands it to HMOs and insurance companies. Imagine giving an HMO a conscience clause. Since when do HMOs have a conscience? I haven't met one that did so far.

Now, any business entity can decide to tell its doctors who work for it that they cannot give women information about their constitutional right to choose, even in the cases of rape, incest, and life of the mother. In this bill, millions of American women are now at risk, if they are the victim of incest or rape or their life is at stake, they will be denied services and referrals. It is extraordinary to me.

Women will be left abandoned in emergency by overriding the Federal Medicaid law. It abandons women in emergency rooms who have life- threatening pregnancies. It overrides title X requiring referral to appropriate clinicians or clinics. It overrides State laws.

Now you have from my colleagues who run this place, the Republicans, who always say they don't like Big Brother--first, you have them going after your tax return, and now you have them overriding State laws that respect a woman who may be in deep trouble because of incest, or rape, or her life may be threatened.

Can you imagine that? When the American people learn about this--that a woman could stagger in, having been raped by a relative, and she does not have to be told her constitutional rights. Let me tell you, that treats women worse than criminals.

Let us see what we do about criminals. We make sure criminal suspects have to be told their constitutional rights. These folks could be suspected of the most heinous crimes. We have to tell them they have a right to remain silent; anything they say could be used against them in a court of law; they have a right to an attorney before they can be questioned; if they can't afford an attorney, one will be appointed. And then they are asked, Do you understand these rights?

A woman who may be quite poor, who may not know all of her constitutional rights, up to now has been protected because all the laws we have on the books say she needs to be told what her rights are. Look what we do here to women. Women don't have their constitutional rights explained to them. Under Roe v. Wade, a woman has a right in the first 3 months of her pregnancy to be told that the decision is hers, without government interference. After that, she has to be told that her health and life must always be protected throughout her pregnancy. These are the constitutional rights of women.

Yet with this Weldon language which was put into this bill, without a Senate hearing, without Senate debate, without a Senate vote, a woman will be treated worse than suspected criminals.

I am happy to.

The State law will be overridden, my friend. And your State--and I know you and Senator Corzine are here to fight for your State. You fight for your State every single day. Right now, in this package, without one hearing, your State, if this bill passes, is going to be told from now on they cannot in any way have protections for women in the law if that State takes Federal funds. Of course, they all take Medicaid funds. They will not be able to protect women. Not only won't they be able to protect women in the sense that the woman can have a legal procedure, but the woman won't even be able to get a referral.

Yes. There is a gag rule on doctors. The way it would work would be this: If an organization, an HMO, or a hospital, or an insurance company decides it no longer wants to either provide abortion services or even refer a woman to abortion services, they can say to the doctor who works for them, if you want to work here, forget about it. You cannot refer a woman for an abortion. You can't tell her about her constitutional rights. It is a gag rule that will now be permitted on the doctors of this country to the detriment of the patient.

I will go over this quickly.

Under current law, doctors can choose a conscience objection to provide abortion services. We all support that. If a doctor personally declares a conscience objection problem, he or she does not have to perform an abortion. However, if a doctor doesn't have a conscience objection, under the Weldon amendment, HMOs and insurance companies who no longer wish to provide women with information on their constitutional rights can prohibit doctors from performing them and referring women; they will lose their job.

Yes. That is why I call it a sham conscience clause. It took a conscience clause we passed in 1997 that was very fair, because none of us, pro-choice or not, wanted to say to a doctor you must perform a procedure that you have a religious objection to, and now we have taken that and thrown it out. We say for whatever reason or for no reason, not only a doctor but an HMO, an insurance company, can decide they don't want to offer the service regardless of State law, regardless of local law, and regardless of Federal law.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for 4 more minutes.

Absolutely. What we have going on here is this enormous spending bill, and buried in it is legislation that was tacked on, in many cases never discussed, such as this one Senator Conrad discovered, where a committee staff can look at Senator Grassley's tax returns or my tax return, or Senator Corzine's income tax returns, or anybody's tax return, and give it to the press. They could choose someone who is a constituent of ours. They could choose someone and find out what charities they are contributing to.

This is the big government watching us, and the Weldon amendment is tucked in here without any vote by this Senate, either in committee or on the floor. I will tell you right now, talk about big government watching you. This is big government overriding State laws in many States. It is big government that is abandoning women in the emergency rooms who have life-threatening pregnancies, who walk into emergency rooms, and under a different law that protects this woman, she has to be stabilized. No more; not with the Weldon amendment.

I wanted to say to my colleagues that I was willing to stand on my feet as long as it takes because of the outrage I feel for the women in this country because of the way they are treated in this bill. But I have been able to work with Senator Frist, Senator Reid, and Senator Daschle, and it looks as though we will be able to reach an agreement to have a vote on my bill to repeal this Weldon amendment within the next couple of months. At that time, we will shed light on it. I will have far more to say about it. I wanted to tell my friends here--and I thank Senator Feinstein, Senator Lautenberg, and Senator Corzine, who are on the floor--how much I appreciate your leadership on this.

This is an outrage.

I will not allow a vote until we have a colloquy read on the floor between myself, Senator Reid, and Senator Frist which promises we will be able to have an up-or-down vote on the Weldon amendment sometime around April, sometime before that, where we can debate this on both sides, where we can share our views on it. Then I will feel in my heart we have done the right thing by the women in America, at least protecting them by letting the light shine on this piece of legislation, which is a shame for the women of this country, overriding State law, overriding laws that protect a woman who might walk into an emergency room, practically at death's door, and no longer would receive treatment.

I thank my colleagues.

Mr. President, I am a little confused. I am really confused.

Senator Conrad, who brought this issue to the Senate's attention, solves the problem by asking unanimous consent to take this offensive language out of the bill, this ``Big Brother is watching you and your tax returns'' out of the bill, and the passion showed by Senator Stevens in his previous remarks, I was really taken in by them. I felt that he was really upset and that he wanted to resolve this matter. Yet we have an objection to take this out.

If the House went home, bring the House back. They shouldn't have gone home with this terrible provision pending.

I don't quite understand what just happened. I guess there will be an explanation, but let the record be clear there was objection from the Republican side to take out this offensive language which gives permission for the chairman of the Senate and House Appropriations Committee to designate staff to look at any American's tax return, any business tax return they decide they want to spy on.

There was a unanimous consent request to delete that by Senator Conrad, and there was an objection. I am confused. We could have resolved that, and it could have been taken care of, but instead we have an objection. I am sure there is a good reason. Maybe Senator Stevens will explain it, but deleting the language resolves it on our side, and we can get on with the bill.

I have a problem with the health issue in this bill that is going to adversely affect women of America. I talked to Senator Stevens. He was very honest and said it had to stay in because of the House, but I was able to work with Senator Reid and Senator Frist and we got agreement and I will not object because we will have a chance to vote up or down on that offensive legislation sometime before April 30.

Senator Conrad made a very wise motion to, essentially, ask unanimous consent to remove the offending language, and we could have resolved it.

I am confused.

I yield the floor so my colleague can have his own time.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, I am strongly opposed to a provision included in this omnibus bill that has never been debated or considered by the Senate. It denies millions of women basic information about their constitutional rights and endangers women who are in desperate situations in pregnancies caused by rape or incest or pregnancies that threaten their health or their life. Again, this provision has never been considered or debated by the Senate, yet it is included in this appropriations bill.

Given the rules of the Senate, there is no way I can strike this provision of the bill at this point. I could delay the passage of the bill, but I cannot strike this outrageous provision.

When the Senate returns to session in January, I will be introducing legislation to repeal this so-called Weldon provision. I feel strongly the Senate must debate, consider, and vote on this issue. It is too important to millions of American women to be slipped into an Omnibus appropriations bill. Therefore, I ask the majority and soon-to-be minority leaders to commit to bring before the Senate by April 30, 2005, my bill to repeal the so-called Weldon amendment, with a minimum of 4 hours of debate and an up-or-down vote on my bill without amendment. I ask the majority leader if he will comment on this?

I thank the two leaders and I urge the vote.

Mr. President, I am pleased that the Northern California Coastal Wild Heritage Act has been included in the Senate amendment to H.R. 620. I, along with my colleague from California, Senator Feinstein, are the sponsors of the Senate companion measure, S. 738. I would like to thank Senator Domenici, the Chairman of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, and Senator Bingaman, the Ranking Democratic Member, for working with us to achieve passage of this very important legislation. I would like to enter into a colloquy with Senators Feinstein, Domenici and Bingaman to clarify our intent behind some of the wilderness management provisions in the bill.

I fully concur, and I thank my colleague for raising this issue. I would like to ask the chairman and ranking Democratic member whether they share our view that the designation of these areas as wilderness does not preclude their continued use by horsepackers, subject to the agency's management discretion to protect area resources.

I agree as well.

I fully concur.

I do, and I thank my colleague from California for her work on this issue.

Mr. President, it is my honor to speak in recognition of Supervisor Rex Bloomfield, a strong advocate for the preservation of open space, improvement of county services, and balanced planning for the future of Placer County.

Rex Bloomfield has dedicated the last 12 years as Supervisor to improving his community and Placer County. His many accomplishments are testament to his strong leadership and devotion to public service. By creating the Placer Legacy Program he has helped to preserve thousands of acres of open space and agricultural lands in Placer County. Committed to the fight for clean air, he initiated the Sacramento Ozone Summit and worked hard to adopt regional policies to reduce smog, for which he received the American Lung Association's regional award for outstanding leadership. Supervisor Bloomfield established Placer County's first redevelopment area to help fund community projects, such as the Squaw Valley Community Park. Throughout his three terms in office he has made many improvements to his district. Four parks were built, miles of new trails for recreation were constructed, a new library was built with two others expanded, fire safe councils and fire fuels reduction programs were created, Sheriff substations in outlying areas were added, emergency personnel were provided more safety equipment and medical supplies, and a computerized emergency telephone system to warn residents of pending danger was established.

Rex Bloomfield has not only committed himself to the betterment of Placer County as supervisor, but also as a teacher and involved member of the community. His teaching career has spanned 31 years. He is currently teaching fifth grade at Alta Vista School in Auburn. He has been a board member with the Sierra Economic Development District, Sierra Planning Organization, Foothill Airport Land Use Commission, Placer County Air Pollution Control District, Placer County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Colfax Veterans Memorial Hall Board, and Foresthill Veterans Memorial Hall Board.

I commend Rex for dedicating his life to his family and his community. His accomplishments have touched the lives of many, and his impact on his community and Placer County will be long remembered. I extend my sincere best wishes for his continued health, happiness, and good work. Rex Bloomfield is a distinguished member of the community, and it is with great pleasure that I recognize him today.

Mr. President, I would like to make some comments about our friends who are departing the Senate.

I thank Senator Edwards for spending some time in this Chamber. When you came in, we were faced with some tough legal issues. We turned to you and you stepped up to the plate. I appreciate that. I thought you did us proud--I am not only speaking as a Democrat, I am speaking as an American--on the campaign trail with the passion for people. You are so articulate and you brought the economic issues home to everyone. I think everyone is better for it.

You are right about Senator Kerry. I think he would have made a great President. I think history will look at his campaign and be kind to him because John Kerry had dignity in his campaign. He stuck to the issues. The debates were fantastic. I believe it served our President well. He had to step up to the plate as well on many of the issues.

I also want to say how much I am going to miss Fritz Hollings, an amazing man; protector of the consumers, guardian of the budget.

Senator Graham is a champion on the environment and some other issues, protecting senior citizens and Social Security. We will need to hear his voice.

Senator Breaux was always out there trying to pull us together.

I have to say a word about Senator Fitzgerald because of some tough environmental votes. There he was standing with me. I remember one time he said, I have to stand with you because my son will never talk to me again. It was good to work with him as well.

I want to finish my remarks by saying Tom Daschle is a man of great courage and compassion and wisdom, quiet leadership. I think today as we listened to his remarks, his farewell to the Senate, we saw his goodness, we saw his intelligence, and as my senior Senator said, it is tough to imagine people wanting something different than what Tom Daschle offered them. But that is what it is about. It is about elections.

I say that Tom Daschle will go down as a great leader of this Senate, as a man who put issues ahead of his own personal gain. I think he is a role model for each and every one of us. He is a class act.

I say to him and Linda, Godspeed. I know that in future years you will be very much on the scene because you have so much to offer. You have such a sense of history and such a sense of the future. It is bittersweet. But it is an honor to have known Tom.

Thank you very much.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I wish to recognize and share with my colleagues the compassion and dedication of Reverend Cecil Williams in honor of his 40 years of community service to the San Francisco community.

Reverend Williams has been Pastor of San Francisco's Glide Memorial Church since the early 1960s. He has built a community congregation of over 10,000 members and is recognized as a national leader on the leading edge of social change.

Reverend Williams has led Glide Memorial Church to be a political voice for equal rights and a safe haven for the oppressed. His congregation has lent its support to those who speak out on national issues of importance, such as the Vietnam war, nuclear weapon development, affirmative action and HIV/AIDS prevention.

When Reverend Williams joined Glide Memorial Church in the 1960s, he transformed it into a sacred space that honors diversity, expression, and the celebration of life.

I would like to share a couple examples of Reverend Williams' tremendous work. In the 1960s, Reverend Williams launched a free meal program at Glide that expanded in the 1980s to providing three meals a day to the hungry and homeless. The program currently serves over 1 million meals a year to members of the larger San Francisco community.

In the 1990s, feeling the need to reach out to those involved in drug abuse, Reverend Williams took his message against drugs into the community, using a bullhorn in front of housing projects to call addicts and dealers out to recovery.

As Reverend Williams begins his 40th year at Glide Memorial Church, he is now serving as Glide's CEO and Minister of National and International Ministries. He continues to bring forth new ideas on how to battle the problems inflicting the San Francisco community, including poverty, drug abuse, violence and despair. He is a respected and revered leader who brings together people searching for acceptance, social justice and spiritual growth.

I hope you will all join me in celebrating the remarkable service of Reverend Cecil Williams for the past 40 years at Glide Memorial Church. I wish him many more years of rewarding experiences to the San Francisco community and beyond.

Madam President, I send my deepest condolences to the family of Christopher Reeve, one of the bravest Americans, who fought so hard to prove that even with the most horrific injuries, one could still be involved in community life, and who dedicated himself to raising awareness for stem-cell research, for the hope and the dream of so many of our people who suffer every day, that they may have a cure in their lifetime.

Christopher Reeve was Superman in the movies, but that was make- believe. He was Superman in real life.

My heart goes out to everyone who knew him and to the disabled community who counted on him. It is such a tragedy to lose him.

Expressions of Thanks

Madam President, I have a number of people to thank.

On Friday night, the Senate passed the Veterans' Benefits Improvements Act and included my bill to designate the memorial being built at Riverside Veterans Cemetery as the National POW-MIA Memorial. Congressman Calvert authored the House bill.

I am so proud the Senate acted first on this bill. I have been to the cemetery. I have seen a model of the memorial. This is going to be the veterans cemetery, national POW memorial. It is going to draw people from all across the country. So many of our people were at one time POWs. The numbers are staggering. And, of course, there are some who we don't know what happened to. They deserve this kind of memorial.

I thank Senators Specter and Graham for helping me with this bill.

Second, last night the Senate passed a House bill by Representative George Miller--I introduced the Senate companion piece--to adjust the boundaries of the John Muir National Historic Site in Martinez, CA. We are glad about this because it is going to bring some improvements to this area. I thank Senators Domenici and Bingaman for that.

Also last night something very special occurred here for the people of California and the people of this Nation. The Senate passed the California missions bill to help preserve the historic missions in the State of California. It has been a long, hard road. These missions are so important to the history of the West. These missions were built in the 1700s, and they are crumbling. We had to struggle to get the Senate into committee to pass the bill, and they did it.

I thank Senators Domenici, Bingaman, Feinstein, and Smith. I thank Judge William Clark, Stephen Hearst, Rick Ameil, Dr. Knox Mellon for everything they did. It is a very important day for us in California for these missions and for California history and American history.

FSC/ETI Conference Report

That gets me to the business at hand. I want to start off by thanking Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana for her impassioned defense of our National Guard and Reserve. Like her, I am shocked and dismayed that the House conferees on the FSC bill before us stripped out an important provision to give tax relief for those employers who continue to pay their reservist employees after they are called up for Active Duty and deployed.

Four in 10 members of the Guard and Reserves suffer a pay cut when they are called up for Active Duty. In other words, the pay they receive when activated is not as much as the salary they receive in the private sector. As a result of this pay gap, their families suffer. Car payments are missed, medical insurance lapses, childcare is unaffordable. Our Guard and reservists are sent to the front lines with the burden of knowing their families back home will struggle to make ends meet.

I could not say anything that could match the eloquence of Senator Landrieu and, of course, her chart that she gave me to hold up again. This says, ``What should $434 million pay for? One year of the Landrieu amendment on Guard and Reserve tax credit, or $44 million for ceiling fans?''

I think the answer is clear to most Americans. As a result of Senator Landrieu's eloquence, now America knows what happened in the back rooms, when the only thing missing was the cigar smoke--but maybe that was there as well when these bills were written.

Why is this so critical? Senator Landrieu explained it. Part of Senator Landrieu's amendment involves a bill that I wrote where we reimburse State and local governments who do the same thing. In other words, if a city in New York State suffers the loss of a policeman because he is called up and reactivated because he is in the Reserves, many cities across our great land are paying that differential to the Reservists or the National Guardsmen. I will tell you, it is hurting those entities very much to do this. I am very sad that part of the bill was dropped. And what we were able to get, with the help of Senator Landrieu, was a sense of the Senate that the conferees should, in fact, take a look at this, and the President ought to consider taking care of these governments and the cost of this payment to the Reservists and the Guard in his next budget.

I am very glad we were able to do that. I thank Senator Daschle, who phoned me late last night; Senator Grassley, who was very helpful in writing that; of course, my staff, who worked hard with Senator Landrieu's staff to come to a solution; Senator Harry Reid, who is such a workhorse around here, who helped make it happen.

I have to hope that this President, who is sending our Guard there every day, sending our Reserves, and extending their time there, would feel a little

compassion--compassionate conservative--for these reservists and these guardsmen who are suffering a cut in pay to put themselves in harm's way. As we all know, well over a thousand are dead--not just guardsmen and reservists, but other military personnel as well.

I am confident that if we have a President Kerry, he will be eager to work with us to solve this problem because he knows war firsthand. He knows the worst thing you can do to someone who has a family back home is to put on top of their worry about whether they are going to make it through the war without a serious injury, or perhaps not make it through at all--put on top of that the fear that their families are going to be driven into poverty. Forty percent of the troops now in Iraq are members of the Guard and Reserve.

Last year when I visited Walter Reed Army Medical Center to visit our wounded troops, I came across one young soldier who was severely wounded. During the course of the conversation, he told me that from the time he was wounded, every aspect of his care, treatment, and transportation was carried out by members of the Reserves. This soldier told me he had the highest respect for the capabilities of our Guard and Reserve, and he was eternally grateful for their professionalism.

It is important to speak out and say we are in support of our troops. But in those closed-door meetings they are handing out tax breaks to people who import ceiling fans. It seems to me the first thing the conferees should have done is ensure that the Landrieu provision and Boxer provision were kept in. Senator Landrieu is on the floor of the Senate and, again, I thank her for her leadership. We all look forward to the day when our guards and reservists can return home, be reunited with their families, and have their jobs back and make sure their families are whole.

I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a list of the States that are paying this money to these reservists and are getting nothing from us, when the Federal Government is taking these people out--this President--and activating the Guard and Reserves, putting them in harm's way and not reimbursing State and local government.

I see the Senator from Oklahoma here. His State pays for Guard and Reserve when they are called up, as do the others included in the list.

I say thank you to all of these States and cities for stepping up to the plate. You deserve the support of the Senate. You deserve to have legislation passed and not just a sense of the Senate, which I am happy we did, but I am not naive about these things; I have been here too long to know it is kiss-off to get a sense of the Senate. But at least we got there. What happened was this provision that passed the Senate was knocked out in conference while goodies were given all around.

I want to make a point about this bill. There are some good things in this bill. I wrote one of the main provisions, along with Senator Ensign, called the Invest In the USA Act. Some people don't understand it. It says we give a break to countries who have their funds abroad, and if they bring them home and put people to work with them, they get a tax break in the next 12 months. This is a stimulus and job creation. Economists, Democrats and Republicans, say it is going to be very effective.

Senator Lincoln and I worked on runaway production. That is important. Of course, the underlying premise of a tax cut to encourage manufacturing is very important. We eliminate the preferential tax treatment of ethanol. That is important. We partially close the SUV loophole. I compliment Senator Nickles for that. I think we can do more, but he stepped up to the plate on that. The thing with the $100,000 loophole was ridiculous. I am happy we have gone back to the original loophole of $25,000, which is still too much, but it is a big improvement.

I also thank Senator Snowe for her tax fairness for naval shipbuilders, which is important. What is bad in the bill is the tobacco cave-in, where the FDA doesn't get the authority to regulate this tobacco, and there is a bailout. I don't have a problem with the bailout with farmers, but this was an opportunity to save our children.

The overtime regulation from Senator Harkin is stripped from the bill. It is going to hurt our people badly when they no longer get overtime. Outsourcing--the provision by Senator Dodd--passed 70-26. You would think we could have fought for that, but it is out. And, of course, the reservists tax credit that we talked about. There also was a tax credit for farmers for water conservation that I strongly supported. It was stripped from the bill.

The film industry was treated very badly in this bill.

We are killing the goose that lays the golden egg because the film business is a terrific export business and they get treated very badly.

So we had a chance to have a great bill. Instead, we have a bill that has some good provisions but also has some horrific provisions in it. It is a terrible way to legislate, but the Landrieu-Boxer provision that was stripped out which dealt with our reservists and our National Guard, all I can say to Senator Landrieu is that a picture speaks a thousand words. Her poster showing the choices that this Republican Congress made is something that I hope the American people are watching because this is unforgivable. I am going to fight with my friend from Louisiana until we fix this problem.

I yield the floor.

Will my friend yield for a very brief moment and I will be finished.

I wonder if my friend would place in the Record a number of letters--I didn't have a chance to do it before--from various cities in California, also from the International Association of Firefighters. Will my friend do that?

I wonder if my friend would mind if I could read one letter, which will take about 60 seconds.

This is one of the typical letters from the City of Sacramento:

Dear Senator Boxer: On behalf of the City of Sacramento, I

am pleased to offer our support for S. 1845, which would

assist local governments that continue to pay employees who

are deployed to active duty.

Last year, eight of our permanent employees were activated

to service in Iraq. We are

proud of these employees and support them by making up the

difference between military and civilian pay. We also pay the

City contribution for their families to continue their health

benefits.

The cost to the City of Sacramento was approximately

$73,000 last year. With the current budget crisis affecting

California cities, S. 1845 is needed to ensure that cities

like ours do not shoulder this financial burden alone.

If we can provide any further information or support as

your office moves this legislation, please contact Aaron

Chong, Law and Legislation Coordination, at (916) 808-6762.

Thank you for your support of our brave men and women and

their families.

This is a specific letter that wraps it up just the way the Senator has, in a very simple, straightforward way. But I do appreciate the Senator putting these letters in the Record and being able to stand shoulder to shoulder with the Senator until we fix this problem.

I thank the Senator.

Mr. President, because of previous long-standing commitments in the State of California and an unexpected family illness, I was not able to be present to vote on the Senate Intelligence Reform Resolution. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Earlier this week, the Senate overwhelmingly passed legislation to implement recommendations of the 9/11 Commission in terms of reforming the intelligence structure of the executive branch and strengthening our efforts at homeland security. That was an important bill, and I hope we can quickly resolve differences with the House so that it can be sent to the President for his signature.

Equally important, however, is to implement intelligence reforms here in the Senate, as was also recommended by the 9/11 Commission.

This resolution strengthens the Senate Intelligence Committee, and it creates a new Intelligence Appropriations Subcommittee. In addition, the Government Affairs Committee will become the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and the Committee will have greater jurisdiction over the Department of Homeland Security.

All three of these steps will streamline operations in the Senate and make it easier for the Senate to conduct meaningful oversight of intelligence and homeland security.

Mr. President, will my friend yield for a question?

Mr. President, first, I thank my friend from Illinois. We had the Senator from Utah talking about how wonderful everything is with that prescription drug plan the Senator from Illinois and I voted against and Senator Kerry does not support either. The reason we voted against it is it does not do much for our seniors. It is very costly for them when they need it. It is not there because after a certain amount of expenditure, the benefit stops. We call it benefit shutdown, donut hole--different names. Lots of us are trying to fix it.

One of the main problems is what my friend described--a prohibition on the Medicare agency from negotiating with these giant drug companies for lower prices. This is where I want to ask my friend a question.

If someone from the Government came up to one of our constituents who was looking for a new bike for their son and said, You cannot shop around, you have to take whatever that store on the corner says you have to pay, I do not think that would be very popular for the Government to do. I am sure my friend would agree.

Essentially, that is what we are doing here. We are essentially taking the leverage away from Medicare to help our seniors get lower prices by telling them, even though there are 40 million Americans-- that is my understanding--on Medicare, they cannot use that power and that leverage to sit across from Pfizer or any of the big companies and say: If you want to get on our formulary, you have to lower this price.

It seems stunning to me that Senator Hatch would come to the floor and say it is not true. He said: We do not stop Medicare, we just stop the agency that runs Medicare. Talk about flimflam. Talk about misleading the seniors. Is that what the Senator from Illinois heard the Senator say?

Will my friend continue to yield to me?

Again, I want to thank my friend for moving to the bigger issue of all of our citizens, leading off with the issues that are facing our seniors. But I want to get back to our seniors.

My friend said it is interesting that the date of the prescription drug benefit is after the election because it is such a bad benefit and they do not want people to see there is really not very much there. They thought they could run on this as an issue, but I say to my colleague seniors are smart.

We say this is the greatest generation. This is the generation that has kept us free, and they are smart. I am sure my friend has seen what I have seen. As I go around my State, seniors are saying, please fix this thing, allow Medicare to negotiate for lower prices. Do not have the benefit that shuts down just when we need it the most. It is too expensive. Allow importation of pharmaceutical products through Canada. I am sure my friend is having that same experience.

The thing they did not count on, President Bush and our friends on the other side, is that the seniors see this on the horizon. They get it. They are used to reading the small print, and I believe they are letting us know that they are quite unhappy.

I want to ask my friend this: One would think, after looking at what the Veterans' Administration does for its people, when they sit down, knowing they have millions of veterans behind them, and negotiate with a drug company and get those prices down, perhaps a third less, maybe even a half lower than what they sell for normally on the market, one would think that would have been the perfect model for this group that wrote this bill to emulate what the Veterans' Administration does for its veterans.

Oh, no, no. Was not my friend surprised when it turned out that instead of taking the model that has been developed for veterans on pharmaceutical prices, where the Veterans' Administration sits across the table from the big drug companies, essentially, and bargains for lower companies, that instead of taking that model they are reversing that model and prohibiting Medicare to negotiate?

Will the Senator yield?

Would you keep the chart up. This is a shocking chart. This is not about politics or rhetoric. This is a fact. The fact is, we came off of the Clinton administration where 20.7 million new jobs were created, and we are at the end of the Bush administration and a loss of 1.6 million jobs. They will make every excuse in the book for it. The fact is, we have that kind of record, even though we are in raging deficit spending.

I am an economics major. Granted, it was a long time ago that I went to college and I got my degree in economics, but one of the things they taught us in economics 101 was that when you wanted to rejuvenate the economy--deficit spending. So here we have a President who is deficit spending, who has stolen every penny from the Social Security trust fund to pay for his tax cuts, throwing hundreds of billions--let's be exact, between $120 billion and $200 billion at Iraq with no end in sight to bear the burden of that war, let alone the human loss of life, and with all of this deficit spending we see a loss of 1.6 million jobs. It is shocking to see this type of record.

The President goes around with the music blaring, saying how great his economic program is, as my colleague pointed out, and all of these great new jobs that are being created. I want to ask my friend, for the jobs that are being created--and there are some, although it is very anemic--isn't it true that the average pay of those jobs is approximately $9,000 less a year than

the pay of the jobs that have been lost? If my friend, in answering that question, could talk about what that means to families who have to pay the higher costs of health care, college tuition, gas prices, and all the things we need to pay for, it would be helpful.

Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Reid be granted the hour which will come to me postcloture.

I ask unanimous consent that it be yielded to Senator Daschle.

I make that point.

As I listened to my friend in his usual way of kind of tying together the pieces and as we get ready to watch our Presidential candidate tonight, I am wondering if my friend is beginning to see a pattern by this administration which is kind of just coming in.

Mr. President, I might say that I am going to give my hour to Senator Reid.

I am sorry for the interruption.

As I hear the Senator from Illinois talk--and I think back to the first debate where I believe all of America now knows there was no plan for Iraq following the stunning military victory. There was no plan for after that military victory, and we are paying a heavy price. I have come to this floor and eulogized those being lost.

There is no plan for Iraq.

By the way, that was pointed out not only by Democrats such as Senator Kerry, Senator Biden, and Senator Dodd, who sit on the Foreign Relations Committee, but also by Senators Lugar, Chafee, and Hagel, who also sit on that committee. There was no plan.

I am asking my friend, as we look at the disastrous factual statistics on this economy, whether he believes there really was a plan as to how we were going to continue the Clinton administration record on job creation, stem the loss of manufacturing jobs, and stem the loss of outsourcing jobs, which, shockingly, people in this administration say is good for our economy. Was there a plan? Was there a plan to make sure that health care premiums would be affordable for our people? Was there a plan to lower prescription drug prices for our people through importation? Was there a plan for gas prices? My God. My friend put up a chart--$1.81 average. People in California would be thrilled at $1.92 a gallon. We are looking at $2.30, $2.40, $2.20, $2.50 a gallon. When the Senate voted in a bipartisan way to beg this administration to stop filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve so we could put downward pressure on the prices, nothing has really happened.

To conclude my question, I am beginning to see a pattern of kind of a ``flying by the seat of your pants'' administration where there is no plan to make life better for people, whether it is our men and women in uniform in Iraq, whether it is our consumers, our middle-class families, working families, and all of our families in regard to health care and gas prices.

Could my friend comment on that bigger picture?

Mr. President, today I rise to pay tribute to 29 young Americans who have been killed in Iraq since September 3. All of them were from California or were based in California.

Petty Officer 3rd Class Eric L. Knott, age 21

Petty Officer Knott was killed September 4 when the area in which he was working was struck by enemy fire. He died of shrapnel wounds and had been supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom.

He was assigned to Naval Mobile Construction Battalion 4, Port Hueneme, CA.

Lance Corporal Lamont N. Wilson, age 20

Lance Corporal Wilson died September 6 due to enemy action in Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to second Battalion, first Marine Regiment, first Marine Division, Camp Pendleton, CA.

Corporal Mick R. Nygardbekowsky, age 21

Corporal Nygardbekowsky was killed in action September 6 from an explosion while conducting combat operations in the Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to second Battalion, first Marine Regiment, first Marine Division, Camp Pendleton, CA. He was from Concord, CA.

Lance Corporal Joseph C. McCarthy, age 21

Lance Corporal McCarthy was killed in action September 6

from an explosion while conducting combat operations in the

Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to second Battalion, first Marine Regiment, first Marine Division, Camp Pendleton, CA.

He was from Concho, CA.

Lance Corporal Quinn A. Keith, age 21

Lance Corporal Keith died September 6 due to enemy action in Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to second Battalion, first Marine Regiment, first Marine Division, Camp Pendleton, CA.

Lance Corporal Derek L. Gardner, age 20

Lance Corporal Gardner was killed in action September 6 from an explosion while conducting combat operations in the Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to Headquarters Battalion, first Marine Division, Camp Pendleton, CA.

He was from San Juan Capistrano, CA.

Private First Class David Burridge age 19

Private First Class Burridge died September 6 due to enemy action in Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to second Battalion, first Marine Regiment, first Marine Division, Camp Pendleton, CA.

Lance Corporal Michael J. Allred, age 22

Lance Corporal Allred died September 6 due to enemy action in Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to second Battalion, first Marine Regiment, first Marine Division, Camp Pendleton, CA.

First Lieutenant Alexander E. Wetherbee, age 27

First Lieutenant Wetherbee died September 12 from injuries received from enemy action in Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to 3rd Assault Amphibian Battalion, first Marine Division, Camp Pendleton, CA.

Private First Class Jason T. Poindexter, age 20

Private First Class Poindexter died September 12 due to enemy action in Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to second Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment, first Marine Division, Camp Pendleton, CA.

Specialist Edgar P. Daclan, age 24

Specialist Daclan died September 10 in Balad, Iraq when his patrol was responding to indirect fire and an improvised explosive device exploded.

He was assigned to the first Battalion, 18th Infantry, first Infantry Division from Schweinfurt, Germany.

He was from Cypress, CA.

Lance Corporal Dominic C. Brown, age 19

Lance Corporal Brown died September 13 due to a non-combat related incident in Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to Headquarters Battalion, first Marine Division, Camp Pendleton, CA.

Staff Sergeant Guy S. Hagy, Jr., age 31

Staff Sergeant Hagy died September 13 in Baghdad when an improvised explosive device detonated near his observation post.

He was assigned to the first Battalion, 12th Cavalry Regiment, first Cavalry Division, Fort Hood, TX.

He was from Lodi, CA.

Maj. Kevin M. Shea, Age 38

Maj. Shea died September 14 due to enemy action in Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to first Marine Regiment, first Marine Division, Camp Pendleton, CA.

Lance Corporal Matthew D. Puckett, age 19

Lance Corporal Puckett died September 13 due to enemy action in Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to 3rd Assault Amphibian Battalion, first Marine Division, Camp Pendleton, CA.

Corporal Adrian V. Soltau, age 21

Corporal Soltau died September 13 due to enemy action in Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to 3rd Assault Amphibian Battalion, first Marine Division, Camp Pendleton, CA.

Lance Corporal Drew M. Uhles, age 20

Lance Corporal Uhles died September 15 from injuries received due to enemy action in Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to first Battalion, 7th Marine Regiment, first Marine Division, Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, Twentynine Palms, CA.

Corporal Jaygee Melaut, age 24

Corporal Melaut died September 13 due to enemy action in Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to 3rd Assault Amphibian Battalion, first Marine Division, Camp Pendleton, CA.

First Lieutenant Andrew K. Stern, age 24

First Lieutenant Stern died September 16 from injuries received due to enemy action in Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to first Tank Battalion, first Marine Division, Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, Twentynine Palms, CA.

Corporal Steven A. Rintamaki, age 21

Corporal Rintamaki died September 16 due to enemy action in Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to 3rd Battalion, first Marine Regiment, first Marine Division, Camp Pendleton, CA.

Corporal Christopher S. Ebert, age 21

Corporal Ebert died September 17 due to enemy action in Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to second Battalion, first Marine Regiment, first Marine Division, Camp Pendleton, CA.

Lance Corporal Gregory C. Howman, age 28

Lance Corporal Howman died September 15 due to enemy action in Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to second Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment, first Marine Division, Camp Pendleton, CA.

Lance Corporal Steven C.T. Cates, age 22

Lance Corporal Cates died September 20 due to enemy action in Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to first Battalion, 7th Marine Regiment, first Marine Division, Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, Twentynine Palms, CA.

Sergeant Benjamin K. Smith, age 24

Sergeant Smith died September 22 due to enemy action in Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to first Tank Battalion, first Marine Division, Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, Twentynine Palms, CA.

Lance Corporal Ramon Mateo, age 20

Lance Corporal Mateo died September 24 as result of enemy action in Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to Headquarters and Service Company, 7th Marine Regiment, first Marine Division, Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, Twentynine Palms, CA.

Sergeant Timothy Folmar, age 21

Sergeant Folmar died September 24 as result of enemy action in Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to second Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment, first Marine Division, Camp Pendleton, CA.

Lance Corporal Aaron Boyles, age 24

Lance Corporal Boyles was killed in action September 24 from small arms

fire while conducting combat operations in the Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to Headquarters and Service Company, 7th Marine Regiment, first Marine Division, Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, Twentynine Palms, CA.

He was from Alameda, CA.

Sergeant First Class Joselito O. Villanueva, age 36

Sergeant First Class Villanueva died September 27 in Balad, Iraq when he was at an observation post and was shot by a sniper.

He was assigned to the 9th Engineer Battalion, first Infantry Division, Schweinfurt, Germany.

He was from Los Angeles, CA.

Private First Class Kenneth L. Sickels, age 20

Private First Class Sickels died September 27 in Al Anbar Province.

He was assigned to first Battalion, 7th Marine Regiment, first Marine Division, Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, Twentynine Palms, CA. He was from Apple Valley, CA.

Two hundred and eighty three soldiers who were either from California or based in California have been killed while serving our country in Iraq. I pray for these young Americans and their families.

LIEUTENANT David Kingsley Memorial Service

Mr. President, the Economic Development Administration provides critical support to distressed communities. Included in this reauthorization bill is assistance for the productive reuse of abandoned industrial facilities and the redevelopment of brownfields. I support that effort.

Unfortunately, the bill also includes new language allowing EDA to do site assessment and remediation. This is, and should remain, the job of the Environmental Protection Agency. As is evident in the manager's amendment to the bill, it is Congress's intent that EDA abide by the same site assessment and remediation standards and protocols as does

Mr. President, I take this opportunity to recognize the City of Pacifica for its efforts to renovate and restore Pacifica State Beach.

California's beaches are an integral part of our State's heritage. Whether they are vast expanses of flat, sandy

shores or rocky cliffs overlooking the ocean, California's beaches are diverse and beautiful. People from all over the world come to participate in the myriad activities California's beaches offer. With over a thousand miles of coastline, California is truly a State that thrives on its beaches.

For over 10 years, the City of Pacifica has striven to renovate Pacifica State Beach, which serves as a gateway to Northern California's spectacular coastline. The city has demonstrated a great commitment to protect, enhance and restore the 4 miles of shoreline that define the community. Through the strong leadership of Pacifica Mayor Jim Vreeland and countless other local, State, and Federal representatives, many changes have been made at Pacifica State Beach.

From the restoration of sand dunes and wetlands, to the creation of bike paths, coastal trail paths and a new skate park, to habitat enhancement and new amenities for visitors, the renovation of Pacifica State Beach has been a success. The City of Pacifica has not only understood the importance of protecting and restoring California's fragile coastal areas, its restoration efforts are a model of balancing environmental needs, public access and economic necessities.

The City of Pacifica's dedication to the community is inspiring, and its vision and commitment in protecting California's coastal resources should be commended. I congratulate the City of Pacifica for its hard work, and wish all concerned the best as they dedicate Pacifica State Beach on October 16, 2004.

Mr. President, I am pleased and honored to salute my constituent Merle Johnson, who served America with bravery and distinction behind enemy lines during World War II.

Merle Johnson joined the National Guard in 1939, at age 16. He was mobilized the following year and was sent to Hawaii 2 weeks after the attack on Pearl Harbor.

In October 1942, he was sent to the Solomon Islands with the Army's 25th Infantry Division, which conducted mop-up operations after the Marines' bloody assaults on Guadalcanal and New Georgia Island.

After being wounded in action and recovering on New Caledonia, Merle volunteered to join a unit that would become known to the world as Merrill's Marauders. This elite group of Army Rangers was formed to conduct extremely dangerous top-secret missions behind Japanese enemy lines in Burma.

The Marauders' most famous and important mission was to capture the strategic airfield at Myitkyina, Burma. To accomplish this goal, they had to fight their way for 9 months through more than 600 miles of jungle, surrounded by Japanese troops. By the time they captured the airfield, more than 2,500 of the 3,000 Marauders had been killed, wounded, or struck by illness.

For his valiant service, Merle Johnson was awarded a Purple Heart, three Bronze Stars, three Battle Stars, and a Presidential Unit Citation.

After the war, Mr. Johnson worked on the production line at Rockwell Corporation and as a labor organizer for the steelworkers union. He now lives in Tustin, CA.

Earlier this year, Mr. Johnson represented Merrill's Marauders during the dedication ceremony for the World War II Memorial. This monument now stands as a tribute to Merle Johnson, Merrill's Marauders, and 16 million other brave men and women who served America in World War

Mr. President, forty years ago this month, President Lyndon Johnson signed the Wilderness Act, which set aside some of the most quintessential American landscapes in this vast country. This visionary law first protected about 9 million acres of public lands. Today, as a result of a bipartisan commitment by successive Congresses and Presidents, 105 million acres of land are protected in 44 States.

California is blessed to have nearly 14 million acres permanently protected as wilderness for the public to enjoy and as a legacy for future generations. These areas include some of the most spectacular lands and diverse ecosystems, including forests, deserts, coastal mountains and grasslands.

Americans have long recognized the need to protect our public lands and their vast resources. John Muir, along with U.S. presidents from both parties, including Teddy Roosevelt, foresaw the need for us to protect these precious lands, lest they be lost forever.

Wilderness provides a place of refuge from urban pressures. Millions of Americans retreat to wilderness to fish, hunt, horseback ride, cross-country ski, hike and pursue other recreational breaks from everyday life.

Wilderness protects watersheds that provide clean water to our cities and farms. Forests cleanse our air and provide habitat for countless plant and animal species, many of which are endangered. Wilderness provides something else that is harder to measure, solitude and peace. California's population of nearly 36 million will balloon to 50 million in the next 20 years, so space will become even more precious.

I am pleased to cosponsor Senator Feingold's resolution honoring the 40th anniversary of the Wilderness Act. I am also pleased to be the author of the California Wild Heritage Act, which would protect approximately 2.5 million acres of public lands as wilderness. The areas that would be protected by this legislation include: the King Range on the Lost Coast in Northern California; the White Mountains in eastern California, home to the ancient Bristlecone Pines; and Eagle Peak in San Diego County, which includes the headwaters of the San Diego River and is home to great plant and animal diversity.

These and many other areas deserve the protection that was envisioned back in 1964, when the Wilderness Act was signed into law.

I believe that our beautiful and varied landscapes help make us the people that we are. Today, we look back and are thankful for those who worked to set aside the rich tapestry that is our wilderness heritage. But looking back is not enough. We must also dedicate ourselves to securing the irreplaceable remaining unprotected wilderness areas as our legacy for those who follow us.

Mr. President, it is my honor to speak in memory of the late Coleen Jarvis, Vice Mayor of the City of Chico and strong advocate for women, children, and the less fortunate. She will always be remembered for her love of family, politics and the people whom she served so ably.

Coleen Jarvis dedicated her time and energy to improving her community. She fought to improve conditions for women, children, and the homeless. Coleen served as coordinate for the local rape crisis center and worked at Legal Services of Northern California, giving legal aid to those in need. ``The community of Chico lost a resourceful, energetic, dedicated and smart leader in the too-soon death of Council Member Coleen Jarvis.'' said Butte County Supervisor Jane Doaln. ``I first met Coleen when she worked on behalf of victims of rape and we continued our friendship and shared work on behalf of our loved community in many venues. Coleen had a deep commitment and worked very hard to improve our community and to remind us of our rightful duty to recognize and resolve the needs of the poor. We all were better representatives due to her efforts. She is sorely missed.''

Coleen became an important community leader through her hard work. She was elected to the Chico City Council in 1966, and served almost 8 years. As a council member, she continued to fight for her progressive values. She was passionate about the issues and people she held dear. She was known by her colleagues and friends as a giving person who possessed great integrity, drive, intellect, and wit with an energy and spirit that drove her to fight for what she believed in. Chico Mayor Maureen Kirk reflected, ``Coleen was a public servant full of integrity, passion, commitment, empathy, inclusion, tolerance, and intelligence. Her legacy is the Torres Community Homeless Shelter, the first step in her quest to find a solution for homelessness. Coleen will be sorely missed. In her 46 years, she accomplished more than 99 percent of us would accomplish in twice as many years.

Coleen Jarvis committed her life to her family and the world around her. She touched the lives of many, and her impact on her community will be long remembered.