Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise today to honor Mayor Don Wesely of Lincoln, Nebraska who on this day will relinquish his duties as leader of this great city in order to spend more time with his three children. After serving the Lincoln community for the past 25 years as mayor and a member of the Nebraska legislature, I believe Mayor Wesely has more than earned the opportunity.

Don Wesely began his career in public service in 1978 at the tender age of 24, when he became the third youngest person ever to serve in the unicameral legislature. While serving the 26th legislative district of northeast Lincoln for 20 years, Don sponsored or cosponsored over 300 initiatives that eventually became State law. His accomplishments as the chairman of the Health and Human Services Committee for 14 years have had a lasting effect on the State of Nebraska and his focus on those most in need has inspired his colleagues and constituents. When Don retired from the legislature in 1998, he was the eighth longest serving State senator in Nebraska history and he was only 44 years old.

As mayor, Don Wesely presided over the city during troubled economic times, but managed to leave the city on solid financial footing for his successors. Mayor Wesely is a strong supporter of the largest infrastructure project in the city's history the Antelope Valley Project and I can attest to his persistent advocacy of Federal assistance for all aspects of the project, including flood control, transportation improvements, and community development. Mayor Wesely was also instrumental in crafting a unique and historic public-private partnership that resulted in the baseball-softball complex that is now the home of the minor league Lincoln Salt Dogs baseball team. And in a true measurement of his success in office, Mayor Wesely was a tireless promoter of private investment in the Lincoln area. During his last 2 years in office, over 10,000 new jobs were created.

I had the pleasure and honor of working with Don Wesely both when I was Governor of Nebraska and now during my time in the United States Senate, so I can say with conviction that he has served Lincoln and the State with distinction. I am proud to call Don Wesely a friend, and I join the Senate and all Nebraskans in wishing he and his children Sarah, Amanda, and Andrew all the best as they begin an exciting new chapter in their lives.

I, too, believe that there is no more important component of this bill than its fiscal relief provisions, and I have serious reservations over any dividends language that would further hurt the States that we are trying to help. I join my colleague from Maine in asking my colleagues, the distinguished chairmen of the Senate Budget and Finance Committees, for assurances that they will do all they can in conference to prevent States from losing revenue as a result of any dividends language.

I, too, thank my colleagues for their assurances.

Colloquy between Senator Ensign and Chairman Grassley on the

Depreciation Treatment of Hospitality Business

Madam President, I come to the floor today to support and urge my colleagues to join in support of the amendment before the Senate for State fiscal relief. I begin by thanking my friend and colleague from Maine, Senator Collins, who has been stalwart in pushing for State fiscal relief for 2-plus years. We have worked very carefully, very closely to bring about this amendment that is before us today.

On two other occasions, we have had overwhelming support. We believe this amendment will potentially have that same level of support. I thank her for all of the work and leadership she has provided in making this possible.

I thank also the distinguished chairman of the Finance Committee, my friend to the east of Nebraska in Iowa, Senator Grassley. He has been a man of his word. We have worked very carefully, very closely on this issue and others. I thank him for contributing significantly to our effort to bring this amendment to the body.

Most of what needs to be said has been said already. I do want to emphasize, as Senator Grassley has, that this is temporary. It is for a 2-year period. And why is it temporary? Because one would expect that if we are going to grant stimulus programs to grow the economy, that after a reasonably short period of time, the economy will respond. That is the hope, that is the expectation, and that clearly is the goal, not only of this amendment but of the entire growth package before the Senate.

Our goal is to make sure that we grow the economy faster than we grow the deficit. It doesn't make a lot of sense to cut taxes in Washington and ignore what is happening in the State capitals. ether it is in Juneau or Lincoln or wherever it may be, what happens in State capitals with the State legislatures does matter.

Over the weekend, I was home in Nebraska and the local news media was covering in great detail the travail of the Nebraska Legislature in trying to take care of a growing budget deficit caused by declining revenues and increasing costs. Therefore, the news was replete on the subject day in and day out. So if we are going to try to change the attitude and improve the economy with active results in Washington, DC, it does not make sense to ignore what is happening in the State capitals.

We only have one tax pocket. The Federal Government is trying to put in some money. States have their hand in taking more out. That certainly is counterproductive to the goal we have if we ignore what is happening at the State level.

I have said that it is the equivalent of trying to drive a car with one foot on the accelerator and the other on the brake. We don't want what we are attempting to do here negated by what is going on in State capitals. This will permit us to do as much as we can to help avoid that.

There is the human side. Quite honestly, in Nebraska, for example, with this projected budget shortfall, the University of Nebraska, the State colleges are all taking significant cuts. Nebraska teachers are out of work because of lower State aid to education. In fact, when it comes to health care coverage and child care options, more than 15,000 children have already been cut from Medicaid benefits and another 2,000 families have lost their child care. More harsh cuts are on the way unless we do something to help fill the revenue gap. This amendment does that.

Some have suggested that this is bailing out the States or somehow it is a gift that we are doing out of the generosity of Washington. I have encountered the generosity of Washington, generally, as a former Governor when things were given to us. They were called underfunded and unfunded Federal mandates. This is not what we are about today. We recognize that one of the best ways to help the States with their problems today is to take care of these needs and make sure that we don't have what we are doing here negated by action at the State level, which is to respond by supporting additional FMAP funding for a period of 2 years, as well as recognizing that the State and local governments are also feeling the pinch with the fast growing requirements due to hometown security under homeland security requirements. They do not have the luxury to run deficits, nor should they.

Therefore, what we propose is $10 billion to be split between the States and local governments on a block grant basis. This will help provide some relief from property taxes that would otherwise most assuredly rise as the cost of local governments are passed on to taxpayers.

As we look at this package, as we look at State fiscal relief, I hope we will continue to have the bipartisan support we have had in the past. Whether it is 75 or 80 votes is secondary. I certainly hope it would be overwhelming support for this effort.

For those who would say what kind of stimulus will come from this effort, there are studies that show that 1.24 will be returned in one year. From my perspective, a 24-percent return on this sort of investment to take back to the States is a good return, and it is certainly a stimulus to the economy. Therefore, it is a stimulus to the future of this great country.

I appreciate the opportunity. I thank my colleague, the Senator from Maine, for her support, for her constant counseling on how we should go about this effort. I thank her for the time to speak on this very important amendment.

I yield the floor to the Senator from Maine.

I am glad my friend from Maine has asked that question so that I can provide some assurances to our colleagues. On behalf of our group of Senators offering this amendment, let me be clear: We have drafted this provision in such a way that the increase in the FMAP will end June 30, 2004. My colleagues will be glad to know that there is precedent for Congress passing short-term Medicaid matching rate increases that have not become permanent.

In 1981, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act reduced Medicaid matching rates for 3 years, while also creating exemptions for States that had high unemployment rates, special hospital review programs, or strong fraud and abuse recovery systems. At the time when this was enacted, some in Congress worried that these changes would be permanent, but these provisions expired on schedule without any particular controversy or efforts to extend them.

There is even a more recent example: The Omnibus Consolidated Rescissions and Appropriations Act of 1996 granted

a temporary increase in the FMAP to Louisiana. The State's matching rate rose from the normal rate of 72.08 percent to a special enhanced rate of 84.28 percent in State fiscal year 1995-96 and from the normal rate of 71.49 percent to an enhanced rate of 81.46 percent in State fiscal year 1996-97. This temporary State relief was granted because the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 tightened disproportionate share hospital payment policies and posed a hardship for Louisiana at a time when the State's economy was faring badly. The State was able to use these temporary funds to avoid disruptions in essential services. The temporary increase in Louisiana's FMAP expired as scheduled.

These provisions expired as planned after fulfilling their mission of temporary relief to help these States transition through a difficult period. Congress has been able to maintain discipline in the past. There is no evidence that a temporary increase in Medicaid matching rates will inevitably become permanent. In fact, because our amendment in no way adjusts how future FMAPs are calculated, it does not effect a permanent change in FMAPs for States.

Mr. President, I rise today to congratulate Officer Keith P. Thompson of the Omaha Police Department on his selection as Officer of the Month for March 2003 by the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund.

After receiving his initial training in law enforcement as military police officer in the U.S. Army, Officer Thompson joined the Omaha Police Department where he served the people of Omaha honorably until a tragic event occurred on August 28, 1996.

On that day a stolen vehicle collided with Officer Thompson's cruiser. Miraculously, both he and his partner, Officer Mark Negrete, survived the crash. While Officer Negrete escaped with only minor injuries, the accident left Officer Thompson in a coma for 20 days. Against all odds, he survived the collision, the coma, and the surgery that followed, but complications left him paralyzed.

It would have been easy for Officer Thompson to give up on his law enforcement career at that point. But instead, he fought back through months of grueling therapy, battling paralysis, memory loss, and difficulties with his speech.

After rejuvenating his memory and fine motor skills, Officer Thompson enrolled in Goodwill's Head Injury Rehabilitation and Employment, or HIRE, program where he mastered computer keyboarding. Through it all, Officer Thompson's wife Ann and their three children believed in him and were at his side helping him overcome the challenges and obstacles that had been set in his path.

On September 25, 1997, less than 13 months after the accident, Officer Thompson returned to duty at Omaha's Central Police Headquarters. He currently serves as the first line in nonemergency communications with the community as part of the Information Service Unit's Telephone Response Squad. He also speaks regularly to recruit classes about the dangers of high, speed pursuits.

Officer Thompson serves his community every day he goes to work, but he also serves as an inspiration to all those who meet him or hear his story. He is living proof that with courage, determination, and heart, all obstacles can be overcome.

I congratulate Mr. Thompson on the recognition he has deservedly received. It is truly an honor for him, his family, the Omaha Police Department, and the State of Nebraska.

Mr. President, this important renewable fuels legislation is one of the pillars for economic development for rural America--one segment of the population that has lagged behind during the economic surge of the 1990s and is suffering under the combined effects of the current economic slowdown and a 2-year devastating drought--Drought David.

This legislation is important for rural America. Last year, we completed the farm bill--the first part of the economic revitalization plan for rural America. And while the Midwest has been blessed with rain over the past month, we continue to struggle with the ongoing effects of drought. Economic stimulus can come in many forms, and renewable fuels is certainly one of the viable options for increased economic stimulus in rural America, especially in my home State of Nebraska.

We need to be working hard to craft a comprehensive rural development plan that will spur investment in agribusiness and promote economic activity in the agriculture center. This bill, the Fuels Security Act of 2003, is an important part of such a rural development plan.

It is clear that use of ethanol, as part of a renewable fuels standard is a win-win-win situation: a win for farmers, a win for consumers, and a win for the environment. That is why I rise as an original cosponsor and strong supporter this renewable fuels legislation.

If passed, the Fuels Security Act will establish a 2.3-billion-gallon renewable fuels standard in 2004, growing every year until it reaches 5 billion gallons by 2012. There are many benefits to this legislation.

It will dispute 1.6 billion barrels of oil over the next decade; reduce our trade deficit by $34.1 billion; increase new investment in rural communities by more than $5.3 billion; boost the demand for feed grains and soybeans by more than 1.5 billion bushels over the next decade; create more than 214,000 new jobs throughout the U.S. economy; and expand household income by an additional $51.7 billion over the next decade.

It is quite apparent that increased use of ethanol will do much to boost a struggling U.S. agriculture economy and will help establish a more sound national energy policy.

The greater production of ethanol will also be beneficial to the environment. Studies show ethanol reduces emissions of carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons by 20 percent and particulates by 40 percent in 1990 and newer vehicles. In 2001 ethanol reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 3.6 million tons, the equivalent of removing more than 520,000 vehicles from the road.

A choice for ethanol is a choice for America, and its energy consumers, its farmers and its environment.

Enactment of the Fuel Security Act--along with other provisions in this bill that emphasize new sources of energy production from renewables like wind power, as well as conservation to further reduce our dependence upon foreign sources of energy--will help us to reverse our 100-year-old reliance on fossil fuels a more pressing concern than ever given the possibility of military conflict in the Mideast and the continuing economic turmoil in Venezuela.

I am unabashedly proud of what my home State has accomplished in this area. Within the State of Nebraska, during the period from 1991 to 2001, seven ethanol plants were constructed and several of these facilities were expanded more than once during the decade. Specific benefits of the ethanol program in Nebraska include: $11.15 billion in new capital investment in ethanol processing plants; 1,005 permanent jobs at the ethanol facilities and 5,115 induced jobs directly related to plant construction, operation, and maintenance--the permanent jobs alone generate an annual payroll of $44 million----and more than 210 million bushels of corn and grain sorghum is processed at the plants annually. These economic benefits and others have increased each year during the past decade due to plant expansion, employment increases, and additional capital investment.

If each State produces 10 percent of its own domestic, renewable fuel, as Nebraska does, America will have turned the corner away from dependence on foreign sources of energy.

When you take a hard look at the facts, you will see that this legislation is nothing but beneficial for America. The Fuels Security Act is balanced, comprehensive, and is the result of the dedication of so many, especially Senator Daschle and Senator Lugar.

Now I ask my colleagues to join me in promoting new opportunities for the technologies that will put our Nation and the world's transportation fuels on solid, sustainable, and environmentally enhancing ground. We owe it to our country now--and to future generations-in pass this legislation.

I commend the 20,000 registered nurses working in Nebraska as we celebrate National Nurses Week. From May 6- 12, we recognize the diverse ways in which registered nurses, the largest health care profession, are working to improve health care. From bedside nursing in hospitals and long-term care facilities to the halls of research institutions, State legislatures, and Congress, the depth and breadth of the nursing profession is meeting the expanding health care needs of American society.

I also urge more Nebraskans to consider nursing as a career. Although nursing is one of the most noble professions, more nurses are desperately needed. The Department of Health and Human Services predicts that the number of nursing vacancies nationwide will rise from its current total of 126,000 to 275,000 in 2010. The shortage of nurses in Nebraska is also reaching epidemic proportions, with one in 10 nursing positions unfilled.

My colleagues and I want to provide more educational opportunities for people who want to become nurses. In response to the national nursing shortage, the Nurse Reinvestment Act of 2002 was signed into law in August 2002. The Nurse Reinvestment Act provides scholarships to nursing students who agree to provide 2 years of service in a health care facility with a critical nursing shortage. It also allows for the canceling of up to 85 percent of a student's graduate studies loans if they later teach at a school of nursing. The act also provides grants to improve nurse education, practice, and retention as well as a program for training and education in geriatric care that will enable nurses to better serve the growing population of older Americans. State and national public service announcements will promote nursing and raise awareness of the financial assistance that is available.

A loan forgiveness program is also available. The Nurse Education Loan Repayment Program will pay 60 percent, or up to $30,000, of an RN's student loan balance in exchange for 2 years of service. If an eligible participant elects to stay for another year, an additional 25 percent of the loan, or up to $7500, will be repaid.

Nebraska also has a loan forgiveness program for nursing students. A limited amount of $1,000 loans are awarded each year. The loan is forgiven if the graduate practices nursing in Nebraska for at least 1 year following graduation.

Again, I commend the work of Nebraska's nurses and send my best wishes during National Nurses Week.

Mr. President, today I join Senator Brownback in introducing the Rural Community Hospital Assistance Act. This legislation is intended to ensure the future of small rural hospitals by restructuring the way they are reimbursed for Medicare services by basing the reimbursements on actual costs instead of the current pre- set cost structure.

Current law allows for very small hospitals--designated Critical Access Hospitals, CAH, to receive cost-based Medicare reimbursements. To qualify as a CAH the facility must have no more than 15 acute care beds.

In rural communities, hospital facilities that are slightly larger than the 15 bed limit share with Critical Access Hospitals the same economic conditions, the same treatment challenges, the same disparity in coverage area but do not share the same reimbursement arrangement. These rural hospitals have to compete with larger urban-based hospitals that can perform the same services at drastically reduced costs. They are also discouraged from investing in technology and other methods to improve the quality of care in their communities because those investments are not supported by Medicare reimbursement procedures.

The legislation would provide cost-based Medicare reimbursement by creating a new ``rural'' designation under the Medicare reimbursement system. This new designation would benefit seven Nebraska hospitals. Hospitals in McCook, Alliance, Broken Bow, Beatrice, Columbus, Holdrege and Lexington would fall under this new designation, and would have similar benefits provided to nearly sixty other Nebraska hospitals classified under the CAH system.

The legislation would also improve the hospitals with critical access status. Nearly sixty existing CAH facilities in Nebraska already receive cost-based reimbursements for inpatient and outpatient services. The legislation would further assist these existing CAH facilities by allowing them a return on equity for technology and infrastructure investments and by extending the cost-based reimbursement to certain post-acute services.

Rural hospitals cannot continue to provide these services without having Medicare cover the costs. If something

is not done, the larger hospitals may be forced to cut back on the number of beds they keep--and the number of people they care for, and others may be forced to close their doors. These hospitals provide jobs, good wages, health care and economic development opportunity for these communities. Without access to these hospitals, these communities would not survive. The Rural Community Hospital Assistance Act will ensure that the community has access to high quality health care that is affordable to the patient and the provider.

Mr. President, today I join Senator Brownback in introducing the Rural Community Hospital Assistance Act. This legislation is intended to ensure the future of small rural hospitals by restructuring the way they are reimbursed for Medicare services by basing the reimbursements on actual costs instead of the current pre- set cost structure.

Current law allows for very small hospitals--designated Critical Access Hospitals, CAH, to receive cost-based Medicare reimbursements. To qualify as a CAH the facility must have no more than 15 acute care beds.

In rural communities, hospital facilities that are slightly larger than the 15 bed limit share with Critical Access Hospitals the same economic conditions, the same treatment challenges, the same disparity in coverage area but do not share the same reimbursement arrangement. These rural hospitals have to compete with larger urban-based hospitals that can perform the same services at drastically reduced costs. They are also discouraged from investing in technology and other methods to improve the quality of care in their communities because those investments are not supported by Medicare reimbursement procedures.

The legislation would provide cost-based Medicare reimbursement by creating a new ``rural'' designation under the Medicare reimbursement system. This new designation would benefit seven Nebraska hospitals. Hospitals in McCook, Alliance, Broken Bow, Beatrice, Columbus, Holdrege and Lexington would fall under this new designation, and would have similar benefits provided to nearly sixty other Nebraska hospitals classified under the CAH system.

The legislation would also improve the hospitals with critical access status. Nearly sixty existing CAH facilities in Nebraska already receive cost-based reimbursements for inpatient and outpatient services. The legislation would further assist these existing CAH facilities by allowing them a return on equity for technology and infrastructure investments and by extending the cost-based reimbursement to certain post-acute services.

Rural hospitals cannot continue to provide these services without having Medicare cover the costs. If something

is not done, the larger hospitals may be forced to cut back on the number of beds they keep--and the number of people they care for, and others may be forced to close their doors. These hospitals provide jobs, good wages, health care and economic development opportunity for these communities. Without access to these hospitals, these communities would not survive. The Rural Community Hospital Assistance Act will ensure that the community has access to high quality health care that is affordable to the patient and the provider.

Madam President, we are all very proud of the outstanding service of our military personnel during a series of significant military operations. Our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines, both Active and Reserve, have responded admirably to our Nation's call to service. These brave military personnel have demonstrated superb service by their participation in Operation Noble Eagle, Operation Enduring Freedom, and Operation Iraqi Freedom. Since the 1991 Persian Gulf war, our personnel have served in a number of other contingency operations, including operations in Kosovo, Bosnia, Southwest Asia, and Haiti.

For the most part, our service men and women serve without complaint. However, we know that continuous deployments create hardships for them, their families, and for employers of members of the Guard and Reserve who have been ordered to active duty. There is no way to remove all of the hardships that go with extended and dangerous military service, but we can make sure that they are adequately compensated when they do endure these hardships.

The Personnel Subcommittee of the Armed Services Committee recently held two hearings that included testimony about our Guard and Reserve Troops. We learned:

Although income loss data for current operations is not available, data for past military operations show that about a third of mobilized Guard and Reserve personnel have some income loss, a third have no change, and a third actually report an income increase. GAO reported that a DoD survey conducted in 2000 revealed that ``the average total income change for all members (including losses and gains) was almost $1700 in losses.'' Certain groups, such as self-employed reservists and medical professionals in private practice, reported greater income loss than the average estimated for all reservists.

Reserve component members who have been mobilized are eligible for the same pay and benefits, health care, and family support as their Active component counterparts, although some of them face challenges in understanding and accessing their benefits. All of the services have programs in place to help the members and their families to obtain their benefits.

Despite the isolated news reports about income loss, Reserve component leaders indicate that their service members are not complaining about income loss and that they are happy about being called up to do what they signed up to do.

It is very important that we not create an income disparity whereby a mobilized Reserve component member would be paid more than his or her Active component counterpart of the same grade and experience performing the same duties.

About a third of Reserve component members are involved in some sort of educational program. Some have reported difficulties in maintaining their educational status; loss of academic credits, scholarships and grants; and loss of tuition and other fees paid when they were ordered to active duty. Although many colleges and universities are providing relief, not all are.

We also know that our Active component service members have been stretched with these frequent and lengthy deployments. Granted, they are in a little different circumstance because they volunteered for full-time military service, but these deployments are wearing on them and their families just as much as the mobilization affects Reserve component members and their families.

With this in mind, I recently introduced two bills, the Deployed Service Members Financial Security and Education Act of 2003 and the Mobilized Reserve Savings Account Act.

Deployed Service Members Financial Security and Education Act of 2003 is designed to compensate both Active and Reserve military personnel for frequent and lengthy deployments. It will authorize a new special pay of $1,000 per month for:

Active and Reserve component military personnel who are deployed for 191 or more consecutive days;

Active and Reserve component military personnel who are deployed for 401 or more days out of a rolling 730 day period; and

Reserve component military personnel who are mobilized for a second time within a year of being released from and earlier call-up.

This bill will also amend the Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief Act to protect the educational status and tuition payments of service members ordered to active duty and it will limit interest rates on their student loans while on active duty.

The Mobilized Reserve Savings Account Act will authorize a pretax savings plan for Guard and Reserve members that they can use to supplement their military income when they are ordered to active duty. This will serve as an incentive for those who know that their income on active duty will be less than their normal income.

These bills are relatively modest proposals that will assist our service men and women who are asked to spend the most time away from their homes and families. It is the least we can do.

I would like to end my remarks by also, once again, thanking all the members of our armed services and their families for the sacrifices made to defend this nation. Your efforts have not gone unappreciated by the folks back home.

I ask that the proposal be printed in the Record. The proposal follows.

Mr. President, I rise today in support of the amendment of my good friend from Indiana that will help State and local health departments pay for the cost of administering the smallpox vaccine.

The threat of terrorism, both foreign and domestic, is real and should not be taken lightly. We prepare for these threats by preparing our first responders--including our health care professionals. Whenever and wherever disasters have struck, health care professionals have responded selflessly by lending their skills, time, and expertise to help victims and their families. Now we are asking them to safeguard the health care infrastructure by being vaccinated against smallpox. The least we can do is make sure that the funds are available to provide the vaccinations.

The vaccinations are more expensive than anticipated. Vaccinating against smallpox is not like giving flu shots. Preparation and training is needed to administer the vaccine by trained professionals who must be able to carefully screen vaccine recipients for potential adverse reactions. Followup is also needed to check on health status. All of this takes time and resources. My State of Nebraska has already vaccinated 2500 workers at a cost of about $140 per person for a total of $350,000.

The resources to pay for and administer these vaccinations have been diverted from other important bioterrorism preparedness activities. The financial assistance provided in this amendment will allow States to dually safeguard against smallpox without diverting funds ``from other important bioterrorism preparation efforts. Without this additional funding, vaccinating against smallpox is essentially an unfunded mandate to the States.

As any biological attack would certainly be a Federal priority, it is both unfair and ineffective not to provide Federal funds to prepare for the possibility. A virus will not stop at State lines. Our efforts to prevent the spread of a devastating illness should be national in scope, as should be the funding to pay for it.

I commend the Senator from Indiana for introducing the amendment.

Madam President, I thank my colleague from Arkansas for yielding time to speak this morning and compliment the Senator from Texas for a very graphic expression of the treatment of the Iraqi people by our military.

I rise today to show my support for our troops, both those serving abroad and those providing vital support here at home and their families.

Our men and women in uniform have proven over and over that they are the best military force in the history of the world. Today I would like to pay tribute to their bravery and their continued commitment to America and to freedom. Americans show their gratitude through words and through deeds. But often it seems like that is not quite enough. Our soldiers on the frontlines are putting their own lives at risk in defense of this Nation and the freedoms we unfortunately sometimes take for granted. We cannot match that sacrifice, but we can do our utmost to let them know that the entire Nation is united behind them.

As we fight battles in Iraq and continue our military presence in Afghanistan, Bosnia, South Korea, and other nations around the world, it is more important now than ever that we pledge ourselves to honoring the commitments we make to our troops, just as they honor our country through their service.

And we must pledge that we will all support and comfort their families while they are deployed. It is very difficult to be separated from loved ones in the best of circumstances--I hope that all our military men and women know that we will help their families through this difficult period until they are able to come back home and rejoin their families.

I would also like to express my gratitude to the service personnel deployed stateside, at bases like Offutt Air Force Base in Bellevue, NE and the National Guard headquarters in Lincoln and all those who serve all over the country serving in similar capacities. Through their work maintaining equipment, keeping our intelligence channels open, and keeping our homeland safe, they continue to ensure that our nation has the best run, best trained, and best staffed military in the history of the world.

We must also recognize the changing face of our military. No longer are our Nation's armed forces primarily composed of full-time troops. Now, a sizable number of our service members are reservists and guardsmen. We do not make the distinction of the troops in the field who are active duty, ready Reserves or Guard members. We should not make a distinction in our policies that affect them. This week, this Chamber spoke with one voice in resolving to make sure our Reserve and Guard members have the equipment and support they need. We will now see that vote through.

I also note that reservists are particularly likely to come from the ranks of the Nation's first responders. For those police officers, firefighters, and EMTs who serve in the Reserves, they honor our Nation twice--providing hometown security and then putting on another uniform to provide national security. We need to make sure that the burdens placed on them and their families do not make it more difficult for them to serve.

It is my pleasure to be here today to address these issues and to make sure that we join together in support of our troops and we do so recognizing not only their sacrifice but also the sacrifice their families make.

I would particularly like to recognize those Nebraskans serving in uniform. Right now, we have approximately 400 Nebraska Army National Guardsmen participating in peacekeeping missions in Bosnia and 675 Guardsmen serving in Afghanistan as part of Operations Enduring Freedom and Noble Eagle.

These men and women hail from Chadron, Gering, Scottsbluff, North Platte, Lincoln, Kearney, Falls City, Wahoo, Fremont and a number of other cities across our State. There is no part of Nebraska that is not represented overseas in our military.

Nebraskans are also represented by 25 members of the 24th Medical Company training for deployment to Kosovo as well as 125 Nebraska Air National Guardsmen deployed in regions around the world. I am very proud of the service of my fellow cornhuskers.

I had the opportunity this past fall to visit with a few of these troops serving at Aviano Air Force Base in Italy. It was a real pleasure to sit down with SSgt Michale Varney of Murray, SrA Aaron Mueller of Weeping Water, MSgt Edward Coufal of Plattsmouth, and Airman Elizabeth Ahrens of my hometown of McCook. I can honestly say that they are truly among the best Nebraskans that our State has ever produced.

Thank you for this opportunity to show my support for our troops.

The ACTING PRESIDING pro tempore. The Senator from Idaho.

I estimate 5 minutes.

Mr. President, it is a pleasure to join with my colleague from the State of Maine. We have been working for a long time to bring about help for the States in the area of Medicaid and in the area of welfare reform and social services.

Our amendment makes it clear that the Senate recognizes the partnership between the Federal Government and the States, and is committed to helping the States see their way out of their dire budget situation.

How bad is this budget shortfall? The States are currently experiencing the worst fiscal crisis since World War II. States have accumulated $26 billion in deficits this year on top of $50 billion in deficits from last year. Even greater gaps, reaching upwards of $70 to $85 billion in deficits, are projected for the next fiscal year. It is, in fact, a crisis.

But the budget crisis is more than just numbers and dollars. This is about real people. And the people of our States have been hit hard by the tough economic times. Nearly every State is required to have a balanced budget, even during a recession. The rainy day funds have run dry and funding for programs as critical as Medicaid have been cut to the bone. The only option left for many States is to cut critical programs even further or raise taxes.

Just last year, Nebraska reduced the number of low-income working families that were eligible for assistance with childcare. More than 2,000 Nebraska families have lost childcare assistance as a result of this change. Those hardest hit are families that have managed to stay off welfare for more than 2 years. These families who have slowly but steadily made progress to self-sufficiency may soon find themselves struggling to pay their childcare bills and returning to the welfare rolls. Childcare assistance is integral to any effort to move families from welfare to work and to keeping low-income parents employed. State fiscal relief will protect the progress we have made in welfare reform over the past decade from being undone.

Many of the other cuts are being considered in the areas of education, health care, social services, and corrections.

My office recently received a call from Sharon Walters of Omaha, NE. The message she relayed is a good illustration of how these proposed cuts are affecting real people. She wanted to make sure I know the importance of my efforts to provide State fiscal relief. She represents Bethphage, an organization that provides community-based services for people with disabilities. She was worried because much of their funding comes from Medicaid. Because of so many proposed cuts to the Medicaid program, Bethphage and other programs like theirs, may soon be forced to limit the good work they do if State budgets do not see some relief soon.

State fiscal relief is not only needed to protect education, health care, Medicaid and other social service programs, it is needed to stimulate our economy.

In discussing various jobs and growth proposals with my colleagues this year, I have repeatedly asked them to ``Show me the Stimulus'' and demonstrate how proposed tax cuts or spending will get our economy back on track.

Although economists differ on the stimulative effect of the varying tax cut proposals, I think there is little question that providing States with fiscal relief would be a boost to the economy. In fact, State fiscal relief may provide more ``bang for the buck'' than many of the other stimulus proposals being discussed. According to a recent study done by Mark Zandi at economy.com every dollar spent in State fiscal relief will create $1.24 in demand the following year.

At a time when we are trying to get the economy back on track, it would be irresponsible for the Senate to turn its back on this nationwide crisis and do nothing.

It doesn't make much sense to cut taxes in Washington while States are

forced to raise them in Lincoln, Des Moines, Topeka, Pierre, Saint Paul, or wherever and other State capitals throughout the United States. State fiscal relief is a commonsense approach to getting our economy back on track. As well, it is the right thing to do. Not only will State fiscal relief shield the people of our States from some of the tough economic times, to some extent, it will also stimulate our economy and return individuals and States alike to financial security.

Again, I thank my colleagues--Senators Collins and Rockefeller--for their work on this important effort and urge my colleagues to join us in supporting this amendment.

I thank my colleagues and thank the Presiding Officer for this time.

Mr. President, today it is my honor to recognize Michael Neil Nelson for his many years of dedicated and selfless service to the State of Nebraska.

Since 1992, Michael Nelson has worked for the Lincoln, NE Department of Housing and Urban Development. As a housing rehabilitation specialist, he has aided hundreds of Lincoln families by rehabilitating their homes and improving their quality of life. Mr. Nelson has also assisted first-time home buyers in finding suitable housing for their families, and has taught many homeowners how to maintain their investment and enhance the neighborhood.

Mr. Nelson was instrumental in establishing a Rebuilding Together affiliate organization in Lincoln. Rebuilding Together preserves and revitalizes houses and communities, assuring that low-income homeowners, particularly those who are elderly and disabled, and families with children, live in warmth, safety, and independence. Through this worthwhile initiative, Mr. Nelson spent countless hours recruiting and organizing volunteers in our community. He worked tirelessly to secure donations from community members and often spent his weekends arranging project publicity and outreach efforts.

Mr. Nelson has always viewed his job with housing initiatives as his way of improving our community. His construction management expertise, coupled with his ability to connect with citizens, makes him a valuable asset to our community. His hard work was often noticed, and he received many accolades from his clients and awards from the city for going above and beyond his responsibilities.

I am proud to represent Nebraskans like Michael Nelson who are committed public servants. Volunteer services are an essential part of communities. The selfless efforts of committed citizens like Mr. Nelson make our communities a better place to live and improve the quality of life for our neighbors. The city of Lincoln and State of Nebraska are fortunate to have Michael Nelson as a member of their community.

Mr. President, I would like to express my strong support for Lincoln, NE's application for a community health center. I met recently with Secretary Tommy Thompson and discussed the proposal with him. He reacted positively, assuring me that the application would be given top priority.

The need for this facility in Lincoln is great. Lincoln is experiencing an influx of immigrant families who lack health care coverage and are in critical need of medical care. And Nebraska, like other States, is facing budgetary constraints due to the downturn in the economy and reduced its Medicaid rolls leaving more people without health insurance.

The new health center, which will be called the Peoples' Health Center of Lincoln, will provide many services to the area including: primary medical care, primary dental care and oral health education, lab services, social work and health education. With the Federal funds, the community will be able to proceed to develop these health services to the uninsured and underinsured in Lincoln.

I look forward to HHS's grant announcement and am hopeful that Lincoln's application will be approved.

Mr. President, today it is my honor to recognize Kathleen ``Kathy'' Danek for her many years of dedicated and selfless service to the State of Nebraska. Ms. Danek exemplifies true volunteerism: dependable, endless energy and passionate commitment to worthwhile causes.

Kathy Danek has long been a distinguished member of the American Postal Workers Union, AFL-CIO. Ms. Danek, through tireless work in several State and local agencies, earned the position as National Legislative Aide and Editor for the Auxiliary to the American Postal Workers Union. She has participated in numerous training activities to help auxiliary and union members understand the importance of grassroots involvement. Ms. Danek was also resoundingly elected to the District 1 Board of Education for the Lincoln Public Schools.

In addition to her service on the Board of Education and with the Postal Workers, Ms. Danek has always been an active member of St. Patrick's Catholic Church, often spending her free time teaching students and volunteering with St. Patrick's athletic programs. Her work also includes service with the Girl Scouts, the Lincoln Juniors Volleyball club, the Lancaster County Democratic Party, the YMCA as a softball and volleyball coach, and fundraising for the Doris Blair Softball Complex.

Because of her tireless work in the community, her peers have elected her President of the Lincoln Northeast High School Parent Advisory Board, President of the Lincoln Northeast High School Booster Club and Community Representative for the Lincoln Public Schools Graduation Requirement Committee. In addition, she has been selected as a member of the LPS High School Principal Selection Committee and was a community representative for the Northeast High School Media Center Committee. Ms. Danek has also devoted her time to Huntington and Dawes Middle schools.

Ms. Danek is a longtime resident of Lincoln, NE. She has been married to her husband Terry for 30 years. Together they have four daughters; Christine Goche, Wendy Danek, Kelly Witter, Megan Danek. They have two grandchildren, Bailey and Harrison Goche.

I am proud to represent Nebraskans like Ms. Danek who are committed public servants. Volunteer services are an essential part of communities. The selfless efforts of committed citizens like Ms. Danek, make our communities a better place to live and improve the quality of life for our neighbors. The city of Lincoln and State of Nebraska are fortunate to have Kathy Danek as a member of their community.