Floor Statements

Mr. President, four years ago, as projected budget surpluses reached over $5 trillion, Congress passed a tax cut bill that began the process of addressing the unfairness of the estate tax. Now in 2005, the surpluses have long since disappeared, and Congress has made no further progress on estate tax relief for America's family- owned farms and businesses--many of whom still pay this tax today.

Earlier this month, the House once again voted for a complete repeal of the estate tax. I myself have consistently supported complete repeal, I have voted in favor of full repeal on multiple occasions, and I will continue to support full repeal should that option be brought to the floor of the U.S. Senate for a vote in the future. Nevertheless, given the persistent state of our more than $400 billion annual deficits, it is increasingly doubtful such a bill could obtain the necessary votes in the Senate for passage right now.

I'm not alone in feeling that the votes just aren't there for full repeal. President of the U.S. Chamber, Tom Donahue, was quoted this week stating that the Chamber would likely support a good compromise coming out of the Senate. We all understand the state of affairs and I want to echo Mr. Donahue's sentiments. We must work together to bring relief to those that this tax affects most--family-owned farms and businesses.

It is the family-owned farms and businesses across Arkansas and all across this Nation that serve as the backbone of our rural communities. To put it simply, they are the economic engines of rural America. It is the family-owned businesses that provide jobs, wages, and health care for my constituents. It is the family-owned businesses that sponsor Little League, they pay local taxes, they are a part of the community. They live there. And that's why family-owned businesses aren't the ones that are shutting down and heading off-shore. When we force family businesses to spend valuable assets on estate planning and life insurance rather than on investing and expanding their businesses, we are putting them at a disadvantage to their publically-traded competitors. I, for one, intend to fight for these family businesses, fight for these communities, and fight for the jobs in rural America.

In the wake of the House vote and the real lack of votes here in the Senate to pass a complete repeal bill, talk of compromise has raised speculation of higher exemptions and/or lower tax rates as an alternative to complete repeal.

Quite frankly, I believe these compromise approaches are incomplete solutions to the problems faced by family-owned farms and businesses. Certainly, I understand that a higher exemption and lower rates will be considered as part of a compromise. But both are expensive and inefficient methods to specifically reach family-owned farms and businesses.

Given the restraints of our budget deficits today, I ask, how can we raise the exemption high enough, or lower the rates low enough, to provide necessary relief for family farms and businesses?

We could not get there in 2001 when projected surpluses reached $5 trillion. What makes us think we can solve this problem today with projected deficits totaling $2.6 trillion in the President's budget?

We took these approaches in 2001, and family-owned farms and businesses still face this tax today, so we should be leery of any compromise approach that considers only rates and exemptions. They were incomplete compromise solutions then--and they will be tomorrow.

In this environment, I feel we are seriously losing ground on coming to a fair and final resolution of this issue. In the meantime, the current state of the law places many family-owned businesses in an extremely uncertain and precarious position--a law that taxes family- owned businesses today, then repeals the tax in 2010, and then snaps back to pre-2001 law in 2011 is simply not responsible on our part. This amounts to nothing more than a nightmarish rollercoaster ride for the businesses we intended to help!

So, we need to set some priorities and go about the business of lifting this tax from these family-owned farms and businesses first.

On the subject of setting priorities, I would like to relay a statistic that may startle my colleagues a bit. The IRS Statistics of Income for 2003 show that only 7.4 percent of the estate tax is paid on ``farm assets, closely held stock, or other non-corporate business assets.'' These 7.4 percent should be our first priority in any compromise the estate tax. The remaining 92.6 percent of assets--such as widely-held stock, bonds, insurance proceeds, art, and real estate partnerships--should not drive or dictate our actions at the expense of America's family-owned farms and businesses.

This simple statistic helps lead us to a targeted solution which should cost less and immediately help those we intended to help in the first place. Today, I introduce the ``Estate Tax Repeal Acceleration for Family-Owned Businesses and Farms Act''--or ExTRA. Under ExTRA, an estate may voluntarily elect to exclude an unlimited portion of family business assets from the estate tax. The carryover basis rules will apply to these business assets and no estate tax will be paid on them. That is the same deal that repeal promises--but we do so immediately and permanently--and at a fraction of the cost.

My bill does not seek to change current law to repeal the estate tax. It would leave in place the scheduled increases in the unified credit, the decreases in rates, and the repeal of the estate tax in 2010. My bill would only seek to rectify the special circumstances of family- owned businesses and farms, in an attempt, not to inflame the issue further, but to resolve this issue now and forever for those this effort was originally intended to help.

The goal of the Lincoln bill is that no family-owned farm or business will ever pay the estate tax. Americans are driven to build their lives and their communities and they want to be able to pass that on to the next generation. What comes of the American dream if someone works hard all their life to build something to pass on to their family, their legacy, and it has to be sold for taxes.

If there is an idea that will protect the American dream and the family-owned business, we should not be reluctant to put it on the table. Today, I am introducing such an idea, and I firmly believe such an approach must be part of any compromise if one is reached. In fact, I will not support any compromise that does not take care of family businesses in Arkansas.

I urge my colleagues to take a look and study the Lincoln bill to immediately and permanently repeal the estate tax for family owned farms and businesses.

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

Mr. President, as debate about the supplemental appropriations for military operations and reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan comes to a close, I would like to ensure that our focus remains on the welfare of our Nation's troops.

That is why I would like to speak on behalf of the men and women who are serving in our Nation's Armed Forces--those currently on active duty as well as in the National Guard and Reserves--who are serving today in Iraq, Afghanistan, and across the globe.

Since the President declared an end to major combat operations in Iraq on May 1, 2003, 1,419 American troops have died in Iraq and more than 11,000 have been wounded.

Even if combat in Iraq is something that no longer makes the front pages of our newspapers, it is still agonizingly clear that our troops remain in danger.

That is why it is even more important for this body to use sound judgment and good planning. One of my major concerns is that year after year we have found a way to take the process of funding military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan out of our regular budget process.

I am frustrated, quite frankly, that we have been subjected to this biannual ritual. I am frustrated that questioning the timing of these requests may cause our political opponents to call us unpatriotic. But, most of all, I am frustrated that doing my duty as a U.S. Senator could be considered anything less than keeping a sacred trust with our men and women in uniform.

In April of 2003, just a little over 2 years ago, Congress, at the President's request, provided approximately $78 billion to meet the challenge in Iraq. Six months later, in October of 2003, the administration came back to us and requested another $87 billion in the form of a supplemental appropriation to fund continuing operations in Iraq.

In early June of 2004, the Senate voted for another $25 billion to keep operations going through the end of that year. Now we are faced with yet another emergency supplemental request of more than $80 billion.

I agree that there is a need to adequately fund our troops. We must do everything we can to protect our men and women who are in harms' way. What I don't understand, quite frankly, is this President's inability or unwillingness to make this request a part of the normal budget and appropriation process that we go through every year.

As you recall, in April of 2003, the President requested $78 billion in emergency military funding. We were at the beginning of a war. Although it was a war of our choosing, I understood the uncertainty that war brings. Furthermore, I understood the value of not allowing our enemies to get a read on our intent by peering into our budget process over the course of a year. I supported the President's request.

A mere 6 months later, President Bush returned to this body to request another $87 billion for ongoing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. At that time, our troops were facing the imminent and ever-present danger of guerilla attacks.

Also, many of our troops were expressing concerns that they were not adequately trained for the specialized demands of peacekeeping and policing that the reconstruction effort required.

Moreover, the dangers and difficulties that our troops faced went far beyond the threat posed by attacks from insurgents and guerillas. I grew increasingly concerned about the conditions under which many of our troops were being forced to serve in the Middle East.

I was consistently hearing about shortages of quality food and water. I was hearing that our troops were not properly equipped with the tools of warfare. I was hearing of parents sending their children bullet- proof vests because the military could not or would not provide them.

Although the administration had completely misjudged the nature of this conflict, I understood that our troops must not suffer because others had let them down. I understood that whatever this administration's shortcomings were in terms of planning, our troops' safety and well being came first. I supported the President's request.

Once again, in June of 2004, this administration asked for another $25 billion supplemental for the ongoing efforts in Iraq. At that time, we were spending money in Iraq at an unexpectedly high rate, the promised money from Iraqi oil receipts was becoming an urban legend, and we were still dealing with a pervasive insurgency.

By June of 2004, we knew or should have known that Iraq was going to be a part of this Nation's financial responsibility for some time to come. But I understood that the situation was still uncertain. We had only been in Iraq little more than a year and I was sure that the President's 2006 Defense budget proposal would more accurately reflect the costs of the war. I understood that we could not drop the ball on the welfare of our troops. I supported the President's request.

Now the President is requesting an additional $80 billion to support ongoing military efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan. It seems as if we have been here before. I have to ask myself, when does an ``emergency'' supplemental request become sufficiently routine that it should be considered as part of our normal budget process?

Over the last 2 years we have been subjected to this ``emergency'' four times. We have had two budgets come to Capitol Hill from this administration in that time. Neither of those budgets requested one thin dime in support of our troops in Iraq or Afghanistan.

The present way in which we fund these conflicts is irresponsible and unsustainable. This administration, by not properly submitting this request through the normal budget and appropriations process, has effectively cut off our oversight role.

We now only have a scant few weeks to consider one of the most important pieces of funding legislation we will consider this year. Furthermore, as this supplemental becomes more and more routine, we run the risk of hiding the true costs of the war from the American people.

The American people have every right to know, in as clear and straightforward a manner as possible, what the financial costs of the war are. By excluding those costs from the normal budget process we obscure the true effect of this conflict on our national debt, our budget and our economy. I believe that the American people deserve more transparency from us.

We are now at the point where poor budget planning is no longer acceptable. We can no longer accept the argument that unexpected events have changed our outlook therefore we must have a supplemental. We know that Iraq is unpredictable. We know that unforseen events occur. Our planning must be flexible enough to accommodate this reality.

We see very clearly the effects of poor planning. We have seen it in the way our troops have been inadequately equipped early on in this conflict. We have seen it in the way this administration has failed to properly budget and has been forced to run to Congress for emergency funds every 6 months.

In spite of the haphazard way that this administration has planned for the

financial aspects of this conflict, this Congress must keep faith with our troops and the American people. Part of that is making sure that we hold this administration and any future administrations accountable for proper planning.

We must make sure that our troops are properly equipped and provided for and we must make sure that the American people have a true sense of the economic impact of this war.

We know that we will continue to have a commitment in Iraq. The level of that commitment is no longer a surprise. I expect to see that commitment reflected in the next Defense budget that is submitted to this Congress for consideration. I do not believe that another supplemental request beyond this one would be appropriate except in the most extreme circumstances.

We must make sure that our troops are safe and have the equipment they need. But, we must also make sure that the America they return to is stronger than the one they left. We must make sure that their children will not be burdened with the debt of our irresponsibility. We must make sure that we are never accused of shirking our duty to create an America with more opportunity, more hope and more prosperity.

We can only do that when we understand that our insistence on using the normal budget process to fund ongoing operations in Iraq is not an affront to our men and women in uniform, but rather, it is our way of honoring them and the nation that they are fighting to protect.

Mr. President, I rise today to honor one of the oldest houses of worship in Arkansas. This month the First Missionary Baptist Church of Little Rock, AR, will celebrate its 160th anniversary.

The First Missionary Baptist Church was founded in 1845 by Wilson Brown, a slave, who felt led by God to establish a house of worship. In order to fully understand this remarkable achievement we must look at the era in which this church was founded.

First Missionary Baptist Church was established 15 years before the Civil War began and 18 years before the Emancipation Proclamation. Men and women of African descent during those times were viewed as property and had no legal rights. It certainly took courage and vision to establish a church under such circumstances.

Over the years, the First Missionary Baptist Church family has been a witness to history. Many important figures of the civil rights movement have stood in First Missionary's pulpit to deliver stirring messages.

Reverend Roland Smith, the church's fifth pastor, was active in the civil rights movement and invited powerful leaders such as Dr. Benjamin Elijah Mays and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. to speak from the pulpit. Dr. King spoke in April 1963, just 4 months before the ``March on Washington'', and his famous ``I have a dream'' speech. The podium and bible he used that day are still on display in the vestibule of the church sanctuary.

In 1991, the church hosted another great leader, the Governor of Arkansas Bill Clinton. A few short months later Gov. Clinton launched his bid to become President of the United States. I guess you might say that the pulpit at First Missionary Baptist Church is a launching pad to greatness.

Although First Missionary Baptist Church has great historical significance, its spiritual significance is most important. For 160 years, this church has been a beacon of hope and a spiritual oasis to thousands of Arkansans. This church has worked hard to fulfill the calling of Christ spoken of in the 4th chapter of Luke--to preach the gospel to the poor; to heal the brokenhearted; to preach deliverance to the captives; and recovering of sight to the blind; to set at liberty them that are bruised, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord. In the end, that is First Missionary Baptist Church's greatest legacy.

Mr. President, first, I withdraw a pending amendment, No. 481, which I offered earlier in this debate.

Mr. President, I call up my amendment 482.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may add Senator Pryor as a cosponsor of this amendment.

Mr. President, first of all, I compliment Chairman Cochran for all of his hard work on this bill, and I appreciate so many of the Members who I have been able to work with for a better understanding in how we approach the ability we have to help our service men and women. That is exactly the intention of my amendment-- to provide the Army the ability to study some of the tools that are used in other branches of the armed services in order to be able to provide the correct direction on the leave policies that they have.

We all certainly share our pride and our gratitude for the service men and women from our Guard units and Reserve units in our home States who have portrayed such courage and dedication to our Nation and to the freedoms for which they fight. As they return, we want to ensure that every opportunity is made available to them, and certainly we want to give them everything they need to readjust and transition back into their communities. So I am delighted to be able to offer this study. It is giving the Army National Guard the opportunity to study what the Air National Guard and Air Force do in their leave policy. I hope we can do more with the leave policy of our Guard and Reserve as they return home.

I appreciate the work the chairman has done. I look forward to the opportunity to be able to move our amendment forward. We got an OK from our side and, apparently, got the OK from the other side. Hopefully, we can move it forward.

Thank you, Mr. President.

First, I commend my colleagues from California and Vermont for recognizing such a remarkable woman, someone who represents everything that is good and peaceful about America and who set an example in such a tumultuous time and place but clearly giving all of the love she had to give at a time when it was needed the most. I thank my colleagues for taking the time to recognize that.

Amendment No. 481

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to lay aside the pending amendment, and I call up amendment No. 481.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. President, I rise today to offer an amendment of great importance to the returning guardsmen and reservists in my home State and in many other States. I think many of my colleagues, in understanding what I am trying to do, will agree that it is the right approach and the right thing to do for the men and women from our States who have done such an incredible job serving our Nation in Iraq and on behalf of not just Americans but the Iraqi people.

When our soldiers return home, some of them are finding they might only have a week or less before they are expected to reenter the workforce and return to civilian life. It is confusing at best to know with what they are going to be faced. The price of gasoline has gone up tremendously since they deployed almost 2 years ago. They have seen a lot of changes in their communities, perhaps changes in their work, changes in their families, the loss of loved ones, certainly the growing of their little biddies. But many of the soldiers of Arkansas's 39th Infantry Brigade found they had absolutely no leave left when they returned to our home State of Arkansas. This left them with very few options other than to return to work immediately or, in some cases, to begin looking for work immediately, within a week of when they returned to their home soil.

These soldiers had just spent nearly 18 months in Iraq, risking their lives to defend the freedoms we cherish as Americans. They witnessed scenes of tragedy and violence they never expected to encounter but willingly accepted as part of their mission in service of this great Nation. It is part of

our job as legislators to make sure they are taken care of when they return home, that we honor their sacrifices, their duty, and their courage. We are not doing our job if soldiers are forced to return to civilian life within a week of returning home from theater.

I have been out to Walter Reed, as have many of my colleagues, and seen our soldiers recovering from horrific wounds suffered in this conflict. One of the soldiers from Arkansas had taken a rocket- propelled grenade directly to his chest. You would not have known it, though, from talking to him. He was proud of the work he and his fellow soldiers had been doing in Iraq. He missed his unit and was ready to return to them and finish the rebuilding process they had begun.

As I left his room, one of the nurses approached one of my staffers and said that while many of the soldiers were doing very well, she was very concerned for them once they got back to their homes, into their communities, trying to readjust themselves to a way of life from which they had been absent while they were in Iraq, while they were experiencing events that oftentimes only they could think of in their own hearts.

Many of them underwent daily therapy sessions where they discussed these experiences with their fellow soldiers. Unfortunately for our guardsmen and reservists, they do not come back to a base where they are surrounded by people who have had a similar experience, people to whom they can talk, people with whom they can empathize, those who can understand the unbelievable circumstances and situations they experienced in Iraq.

The nurse was also concerned that what they were receiving in the hospital there would all end once they returned to their hometowns--the therapy, the discussions, certainly the medical treatment.

Imagine you are a soldier who, thankfully, has made it home from Iraq or Afghanistan without serious injury, the joyousness of coming home to your home, to your family, to your community, and upon returning to a pace of life 180 degrees from anything you have witnessed within the last year and a half, you are expected to turn on a dime and adjust immediately to the world you left behind. This is a great injustice and one that cannot be ignored.

My amendment is very simple. It would allow a guardsman to accrue bonus leave when he or she was placed on active duty for 6 months. This would give guardsmen more leave by altering how training days for the National Guard and Reserve are counted for the purposes of determining their leave. Currently, any training less than 29 consecutive days does not count toward accruement of leave.

This amendment would change current policy when a guardsman is placed on active duty for a period of 180 consecutive days. Upon that 180th consecutive day of active duty, all previous days spent training in the past 5 years, no matter their duration, would be counted for the purpose of determining how many days of leave the guardsmen would have. This would effectively give the guardsmen and reservist a bonus period of leave when they were deployed for longer than 6 months.

The look-back period for determining the new leave, as I mentioned, would be capped at 5 years. This would prevent substantial disparities in accrued leave from occurring between a guardsman with 20 years of service and a guardsman with only 3, perhaps.

We must do all we can to ensure our guardsmen are given every opportunity to readjust to life outside of the combat zone. When they return to our arms, we must embrace them and give them the time and the elements they need to readjust themselves. For some, it may be as simple as getting their finances back in order or perhaps spending time with their spouse or their children or their extended family. Maybe it is getting re-equipped back in their household or in their community. Maybe it is getting re-engaged, remembering those people who surround them who can provide them the unconditional love and support they need to put behind them the experiences they may have had, so they can look forward and be proud of the service they have given and know their country embraces them.

For others, it may be more difficult. Either way, they deserve an opportunity to deal with these issues without having to worry about returning to or finding work in order to put food on the table so soon after giving so much in service to this great country.

Our guardsmen found themselves in two circumstances where they were given passes, but were required to take leave when they have returned now from that 180-plus days of service, of giving their heart and soul to make sure the freedoms we enjoy are protected.

We should do all we can to make sure as they come back into our American communities, they come back into their families, they can do it with dignity and the support of this great country and the military service they have served.

I urge the Senate to adopt my amendment. I ask my colleagues to take a look at it. I think it is very simple and something we could do without much folderol. We could get it done and make sure all these soldiers are well taken care of.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, today, I rise in support of an amendment to the emergency supplemental to provide an additional $1.98 billion for veterans health care. I am a cosponsor of this amendment because I believe that when we talk about the costs of war, we cannot forget the brave men and women who are returning from war every single day.

In the past couple months, my home State of Arkansas has seen the return of over 3,000 brave men and women from the Army National Guard, who answered their Nation's call to serve in Operation Iraqi Freedom. Many of them will need ready access to health care as they attempt to transition back to the civilian lives they knew before the war.

I am troubled because they are returning to a veterans health care system that is underfunded and overburdened. Increasing health care costs and an influx of thousands of new veterans each month makes it essential that we do what we can to provide for veterans health care, and we do it now.

This amendment would enable the VA to absorb the new veterans being added to the system and would reverse many of the critical budget shortfalls that have left many VA facilities without the medical staff or equipment they desperately need. It would also provide $40 million for every veterans regional network so they can better meet their local needs.

My father fought in Korea and I was raised from an early age to have tremendous respect for the unselfish service of the men and women of the Armed Services. As a United States Senator, I believe we have an obligation to provide them with the health care they were promised and to honor the benefits they have earned. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment because it is the right thing to do, it is our moral responsibility, and it should be a priority for each and every one of us.

Mr. President, today I rise to pay tribute to Arkansas Harry Vines, president of the National Wheelchair Basketball Association.

The National Wheelchair Basketball Association is the largest and oldest wheelchair sports organization in the world. Established in Champagne, IL, in 1948, the National Wheelchair Basketball Association has provided opportunities for individuals with physical disabilities to learn to play and compete in the game of basketball. For more than 50 years, thousands of individuals ranging from young children to disabled war veterans have benefited from the programs of the National Wheelchair Basketball Association.

Harry Vines of Sherwood, AR, has served as the National Wheelchair Basketball Association president since 2001. Mr. Vines is well known in Arkansas for his many volunteer activities. He has served as the coach of the Arkansas Rollin' Razorbacks, a wheelchair basketball team that he helped established in 1978. In addition, Mr. Vines has coached the U.S. Wheelchair Basketball team four times in international competition and served in numerous administrative roles in the organization over the past 28 years.

On April 9, 2005, Mr. Vines, as the National Wheelchair Basketball Association President, will present the first series of National Wheelchair Basketball Association Spirit Awards in Phoenix, AZ. The Spirit Award recognizes the work of the many volunteers and organizations that support the National Wheelchair Basketball Association. The 2005 Spirit Award recipients are Evelyn Bologna of Lexington, KY; Jim Hayes of Arlington, TX; Tim Stout of

East Moline, IL; and the Rehabilitation/Education Program at the University of Illinois in Champaign, IL.

Mr. President, I applaud Harry Vines' dedicated service to the National Wheelchair Basketball Association and his exemplary leadership.

Mr. President, there is not enough time in the day for me to talk about agriculture because it is in my veins. I do come to the floor to support my colleague from Montana. A few weeks ago, I came to the floor to note my extreme disappointment in President Bush's ag budget proposal, and really his entire budget proposal as it relates to rural America. I reiterate my support for our farmers and our rural communities by speaking in strong support of this amendment.

Our agricultural producers and the folks who live in rural America are every bit a part of the fabric of this American family. There is no reason why they should be asked to carry a disproportionate share of the sacrifice in dealing with this historic debt. I join President Bush in wanting to deal with this historic debt. But there is no reason in this world why rural communities and agricultural producers----

Thank you. I do want people in this country to know that the people in rural America, whether it is ag producers, who have absolutely no certainty about the things that contribute to what they have to do; they have no control over the weather, no substantial control over trade. Yet, they did have a role to play, as everybody in this body did, in the contract that came about in the farm bill.

This is not the appropriate place to breach that contract. It is not the appropriate place to turn on the people of rural America that support this great Nation in the safest, most abundant and affordable food supply in the world. We have an opportunity to look at what we can do for rural America.

I encourage my colleagues to support the Senator from Montana.

Mr. President, I would imagine that everyone in this body has heard equally as much from their local sheriffs as I have about the problem of methamphetamines across this country, particularly in rural America.

What this amendment does is it takes and restores the funding from the COPS initiative to methamphetamine enforcement and cleanup. We have seen tremendous increases across this great Nation in this destructive drug and what it is doing to rural America.

I compliment some of my colleagues on the other side--Senator Coleman and Senator Talent--who have done a lot of work on this issue. We have good cosponsors on this side.

We pay for this initiative by some of the tax loopholes that did not seem to get closed in the FSC/ETI package. We are glad to work with our colleagues in any way possible to get this funding out to our States, out to our local law enforcement officers. They are having a devastating time trying to address this issue, and I hope my colleagues will take a look at the amendment.

We will be more than willing to work with the other side on how we pay for it. It does need to be paid for.

We can modify the amendment if the Senator would like.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to modify my amendment that I have just offered and that the funds necessary to implement this amendment be taken from the 920----

Senator Coleman did ask to be listed as a cosponsor. I ask unanimous consent that both Senator Talent and Senator Coleman be added as cosponsors to my amendment.

Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent to modify my amendment.

Mr. President, today I rise to express my views on our budget and the priorities and ideas I believe we must focus on as a nation. First, I want to reiterate my extreme disappointment in President Bush's budget with respect to how it affects our rural communities. While reducing our Nation's historic deficit is essential, the burden and sacrifice shouldn't rest disproportionately on the backs of rural America--all Americans should share the burden. In my opinion, the President's budget relies too heavily on working families in rural America to make sacrifices while the President continues to advocate additional tax cuts for the ultrawealthy.

We have to find a responsible way for all Americans to share in this burden, and I think that my constituents stand ready to accept their share of that sacrifice. However, I am not going to ask the working families of this country to shoulder the entire burden. Rural programs are often the first programs on the chopping block, yet these are among the most important to our local communities and the economies they support. Our spending cuts must be balanced even if it requires rolling back the tax cuts for the ultrawealthy.

I have a long standing commitment to rural America and our Nation's farmers and I understand the challenges they face to maintain and strengthen their way of life. That is why I am so disappointed that this President has decided, through his budget, that our farmers and our rural communities are no longer a priority for him and his Administration.

I would like to take a few moments to focus on five areas where I believe the President failed rural America. The first area that the President's budget has come up short is with respect to rural law enforcement.

The President's budget cuts close to $1.9 billion in funding for local and state law enforcement and first responders. These cuts will be particularly crippling to rural law enforcement and inhibit a wide range of services including their ability to combat Arkansas' growing methamphetamine problem.

The President's budget includes a 27 percent cut, totaling approximately $455 million, in first responders funding. These cuts would hinder critical state and local efforts to protect our communities by making less funding available for the preparedness of first responders and citizens, public health, infrastructure security and other public safety activities. I am particularly concerned with how these cuts would affect the amount of federal Homeland Security funding provided to small and rural states such as Arkansas.

The President's budget includes a $215 million cut which would force rural fire departments to cut back on equipment purchase, safety training, fire prevention programs, and the purchase of new vehicles. These grants are especially important to Arkansas' rural and volunteer fire departments. Since 2001, the FIRE Act grant program has provided vital resources to many of Arkansas' 900 fire departments, 85 percent of which are voluntary. Since last Spring, more than 180 awards have been granted to Arkansas fire departments, totaling over $12 million.

Also, the President's budget proposes eliminating the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program, which was budgeted at $536.5 million last year. I am deeply concerned with the elimination of this important program because it would significantly impact the ability of Arkansas law enforcement to combat the state's growing meth problem. The existence of 19 Drug Task Forces, funded by the Byrne Grants, are especially crucial in a state like Arkansas, which was recently ranked third in the nation, per capita, in terms of the number of meth labs seized and has recently seen the number of labs seized per year exceed 1,200.

The President's budget includes an 80 percent cut, totaling approximately $489 million, in COPS funding. Since Congress created this successful initiative with my support in 1994, the COPS Programs has assisted Arkansas law enforcement agencies in reducing violent crime across the state. In doing so, it has helped counties throughout Arkansas hire additional officers for community policing and homeland security activities by helping provide for their salaries and benefits. Since 1998, the Drug Enforcement Administration has used COPS funds for the training and certification of 379 state and local law enforcement officers as of June, 2004.

I want to make a special note of the fact that this budget cuts the COPS Methamphetamine Enforcement and Clean-Up by $32.5 million. These cuts would be greatly felt in Arkansas, where the use of methamphetamine is growing and has become the #1 priority for my state's drug law enforcement. COPS funding provided for the clean up and disposal of hazardous wastes found at 810 meth lab sites seized by Arkansas state and local law enforcement in 2003, and funded the cost which totaled more than $1.39 million.

The President's budget includes a 49 percent cut, totaling approximately $186 million, in Juvenile Justice Programs. These cuts would dramatically weaken the Juvenile Justice System, whose funds support state and local efforts to prevent juvenile delinquency and address juvenile crime. The President also seeks the elimination of the Juvenile Accountability Block Grants, JABG, which was funded by Congress in FY 2005 at $55 million. All of these cuts will significantly hamper rural law enforcement.

The second area where this President's budget short changes rural America is in hea1thcare. At a time when 45 million Americans are uninsured, the President's budget eliminates 28 important health programs, which total $1.369 billion. Two of the most important programs for rural health are Medicaid and the Area Health Education Centers or AHECs.

With respect to Medicaid, Arkansas will lose more than $560 million in Medicaid dollars over the next 10 years under the President's cuts. In 2010, Arkansas will lose more than $55 million. Mr. President, these cuts would cause more than 5,700 Arkansas seniors and 22,000 children to lose their healthcare coverage.

One of the most devastating cuts affects Arkansas' Area Health Education Centers. Arkansas has six such centers. The President's budget would eliminate these vital centers for health and health education.

The third area where this budget fails rural America is in regard to education. The President has proposed cutting education funding by $530 million nationwide. Such a funding cut would hurt rural school districts in Arkansas that rely on federal dollars such as Title I, which provides services to low income students. The President's cuts to Title I could affect more than 28,000 Arkansas children.

Arkansas school districts are already struggling to meet the demands of the new No Child Left Behind law, which the President has never fully funded, so now is not the time to cut such vital funding. I note with special interest that the President's budget proposes extending the No Child Left Behind law to high schools at the expense of eliminating 48 programs, including all the vocational and technical education programs, education technology state grants, GEAR UP, Safe and Drug-Free Schools initiatives and the Communities State Grants, TRIO Talent Search and Upward Bound programs.

This budget proposes funding Arkansas' program at $128 million, nearly $90 million less than what the No Child Left Behind Law calls for. This budget proposes funding Arkansas' After School program at $12 million below what No Child Left Behind mandates. This could affect more than 15,000 Arkansas children. On top of that the President's budget cuts IDEA funding by more than $37 million.

The fourth area where this budget fails rural America is in relation to economic development. The President's budget would drastically cut economic initiatives relied on by Arkansas' rural communities. The economic development initiatives specifically benefit communities in Arkansas of 3,000 or fewer residents.

The President's budget restructures how Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program grants are allocated. Last year, CDBG alone was funded at $4.8 billion. The President proposes to consolidate CDBG with 17 other local assistance programs and fund the entire group at $3.71 billion. This would make it more difficult for Arkansas' Department of Economic Development to compete for this type of funding. These cuts could severely impair the state's ability to provide grants to Arkansas' rural communities. In addition, this move would directly impact the 14 entitlement cities that receive CDBG funds (cities include: Bentonville, Conway, Fort Smith, Jonesboro, Rogers, Texarkana, Fayetteville, Hot Springs, Jacksonville, Little Rock, North Little Rock, Pine Bluff, Springdale, and West Memphis). CDBG funds have been used for a variety of projects in Arkansas, including senior citizen centers, public health facilities, childcare facilities, affordable housing rehabilitation and construction projects, and rural fire stations.

The fifth area where this budget fails rural America is with respect to agriculture. The fine print of the President's budget includes drastic cuts in farm and commodity programs that are vital to Arkansas' farmers. The President's proposed cuts would break a firm promise the Federal government has made to American farmers and ranchers. Furthermore, the President's proposed cuts in Food Stamps will severely impact rural Arkansans.

The President did not have to propose cuts in these programs. The entire farm bill is one-half percent of the Federal budget. Yet, he chose these cuts

that endanger entire communities in rural America. He chose to protect tax cuts for the ultra wealthy above our working farm families who are the backbone of rural America.

This should be a wake up call to the heartland of this country--many of whom supported President Bush's re-election. These programs have huge impacts on the quality of life in our rural communities. From his recent proposal to privatize Social Security, to these devastating cuts in his budget--the President has made it abundantly clear that he's going after working families in rural America.

Unfortunately, the FY 2006 Senate budget resolution we are debating today is only marginally better than the President's request. In my opinion, this resolution doesn't reflect the values and priorities of my state or the nation. The proposal before us ignores critical needs in my state and in rural communities across our nation. Specifically, the resolution, like the President's budget, would cut funding for Veterans, for education and training, for local law enforcement, for transportation and for agriculture and nutrition programs.

I am pleased we have made some improvements in the budget presented by the President during consideration in the Senate but unfortunately I believe the burden imposed by this budget still falls disproportionately on the backs of working families, especially those in rural communities throughout Arkansas and the nation.

Even though I am compelled to oppose the budget before the Senate today, I will continue to stand up for the priorities that are critical to the citizens of my state during the appropriations process ahead.

Mr. President. I rise today to honor the life of Landon S. Giles. Private First Class Giles was a passionate and free-spirited young man who lived his life with an admirable sense of adventure and courage. He was also a brave soldier who proudly and honorably served his Nation in uniform. In doing so, he gave his life while improving the lives of those he saw as less fortunate while helping to bring freedom and hope to a land that has known only oppression and fear. The way he lived his life is a testament to the kind of person he was. The State of Arkansas and our Nation will mourn his loss but will remain forever grateful of the service he rendered on behalf of us all.

PFC Giles was born and raised in the southwestern Arkansas town of Arkadelphia. From an early age, his sense of adventure and his athleticism would contribute to the way he spent his childhood. If he wasn't playing golf, football or baseball, he was most likely hiking or on a hunting trip with friends and family. Above all, PFC Giles loved to travel, where he could experience foreign cultures, see new places and meet new people. His father's job required an extensive amount of travel overseas and it allowed him the opportunity to do just that.

Through travels with his father, PFC Giles had the opportunity to see much of the world. When he was just 12, he became a certified scuba diver while diving at Sipadan, an island off the coast of Malaysia. Additionally, he would go on to experience memorable journeys such as climbing volcanoes in the South Pacific, deep-sea fishing off the coast of Australia, surfing in Hawaii, and riding an elephant through parts of Thailand. It was a rare privilege of which he took full advantage. It was an adventure that required courage and imagination and he loved every minute of it. Such was his life.

Wherever that life took him, his friendly personality and outgoing nature provided him with a natural gift for making friends quickly and easily. At the same time, his work ethic, dedication, and discipline earned him the respect of his teachers and coaches. Throughout his time at Arkadelphia High School, PFC Giles would call upon these traits when he spoke of entering the military. Shortly before his graduation, he joined the United States Army through their delayed-entry program. Since he had not yet reached the age of 18, he asked his mother, Kim, to fill out the necessary paperwork. Although she disapproved of his decision, she also saw how determined and passionate he felt about it and ultimately complied.

A month after his graduation last May, PFC Giles entered the Army as an indirect fire infantryman, assigned to the Army's 3rd Infantry based in Fort Stewart, GA. The day he was deployed to the Middle East for Operation Iraqi Freedom, his sister, Jennifer, told him she didn't want him to go to war. In a gesture befitting of who he was, he replied simply ``it's better I go and not come home than someone with a wife and children.'' In Iraq, his courage was surpassed only by his selflessness. He often spoke of his heart-felt belief that the Iraqis were being treated unjustly and had no one to fight for their rights. He became a champion of this cause and while proudly serving his country, was also proud to help the people of Iraq in their fight for freedom. Tragically, after serving in Iraq for only a few weeks, he was killed when an improvised explosive device detonated near his patrol on February 26.

Back in the community he called home, countless friends and neighbors, as well as strangers who simply wanted to pay their respects, lined the procession to his burial service. Many held small American flags in their hands, others simply held their hands over their heart. The community's outpouring of grief was tempered only by its outpouring of appreciation. Their fallen hero had returned home and it was readily apparent that his sacrifice would not soon be forgotten.

Landon Giles was an inspiration, not only because of the way he lived his life, but because of who he was. He was a loving son, brother, and friend, and he was also a hero. Although his time with us was way too short, his legacy will forever live on in the example he set and the many lives he touched. In the words of his mother Kim, ``I want him to be remembered as a strong, brave, compassionate person who put his life on the line to defend our country and help those less fortunate than us.''

My thoughts and prayers go out to all those who knew and loved this special young man.

Mr. President, every year in March we celebrate Women's History Month. It offers us the opportunity to honor the women who have made historical contributions to our Nation. It also allows us time to reflect on their achievements, which continue to inspire us every single day.

Today, I rise in tribute to one of these very special women. A woman dear to my heart and dear to the hearts of generations of Arkansans, whose courage and convictions forever changed the history of this Great Body. That woman is Hattie Ophelia Wyatt Caraway. On January 12, 1932, this Arkansan became the first woman ever elected to the United States Senate.

When we think of the life of Hattie Caraway, we think of a life devoted to the family, State, and country that she loved so deeply. Those who knew her were drawn to her endearing sense of humor, her gentle and dignified manner, and her warmth. The example she set, both personally and professionally, has always been an inspiration to me, and as the second woman to serve Arkansas in the U.S. Senate, I feel a special bond with Hattie and am humbled to follow in her footsteps.

Hattie Caraway came to this distinguished body on November 13, 1931, following the death of her husband, Senator Thaddeus Caraway. An appointment by the Governor of Arkansas allowed her to temporarily fill the seat of her husband, and the historic special election that followed allowed her to achieve what no woman had ever achieved--an elected seat in the U.S. Senate. It was not only a testament to the openmindedness and fairness of the people of Arkansas, but it was a testament to Hattie Caraway and the kind of woman she was.

Upon the conclusion of her husband's term, it was generally expected that Hattie would retire and quietly settle down with her family back in Arkansas. In doing so, the seat that she and her husband had proudly served for 12 years would go to one of the candidates, including a former Governor and U.S. Senator, who were now running for the nomination. But Hattie Caraway was never one to make decisions based on the expectations of others. With a firm belief that ``women are just as loyal, courageous, and self-sacrificing as men,'' she stood boldly in the face of overwhelming odds to campaign for a full Senate term. Although she had little campaign funding and was less experienced than her male opponents, she got support from an unlikely source--the legendary Senator Huey Long, of neighboring Louisiana.

Not only were the Caraways and the Longs close friends but Senator Long had come to respect his new female colleague for her undaunted courage in voting against special interests and standing up for the people in her home State. Upon arriving in Arkansas for the campaign, what the two of them would accomplish together that first week of August in 1931 would become legend. The week-long ``Hattie and Huey Tour'' wound its way through the State, speaking in more than 35 communities, traveling over 2,000 miles, and drawing huge crowds. With the fiery Long imploring crowds that, ``If Wall Street and their gang succeed in defeating enough Senators who have stood with the people like this little woman from Arkansas has . . . You'll never be able to get anyone from this State to stand by you again,'' he effectively introduced Hattie to new areas

of the State. As a result, the depression-stricken Arkansans who had endured months of unemployment, poverty, and low farm prices began to see Hattie Caraway for who she was, an honorable friend and neighbor who would always remain an advocate for the best interests of them and their families. At the polls, the people of Arkansas stood by Hattie in overwhelming numbers, doubling the votes of her nearest rival and carrying 61 of Arkansas' 75 counties.

In the Senate, it was rare for ``Silent Hattie'' to participate actively in debate or deliver a speech to the chamber. She had learned from her husband's years of public service and was weary of the politicians who placed a higher priority on hearing their own voice than working on behalf of the people they were elected to represent, often remarking, ``It's funny how they talk on after we've all made up our minds.'' Senator Caraway took her responsibilities as a legislator seriously and built a reputation among her colleagues as a woman of integrity who showed a determination to faithfully champion the interests of Arkansas above everything else.

Although she maintained her political independence, Hattie was a proponent of much of the legislation proposed under President Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal. As a friend to the veterans and a critic of lobbying groups, Hattie also advocated commercial aviation safety and used her seat on the Senate Agriculture Committee to fight for farm relief and flood control on behalf of Arkansas farmers. Her diligent service and effective advocacy of legislation for Arkansas won her another term in 1938, beating in the Democratic primary a legend in Arkansas politics who would later serve 34 years in the U.S. Senate, John L. McClellan.

Quickly becoming accustomed to breaking the Senate's gender barriers, Hattie became the first woman to chair a Senate committee, the Committee on Enrolled Bills, in 1933 and 10 years later would become the first woman to serve as Presiding Officer on the floor of the Senate. Her legacy would also be distinguished by the support she offered for many of the Nation's historical pieces of legislation. One of these bills was President Roosevelt's lend-lease proposal and Hattie gained national notoriety by speaking assertively on its behalf. This program of lending supplies and materials to England to assist in their war effort was viewed by many isolationists in the United States as an unnecessary measure that would drag our Nation into war. In that time, women were seldom involved in issues of war and national security but Hattie's voice was influential in passing the lend-lease bill through Congress. Hoping to avoid war at all costs, she felt lend-lease would only strengthen England's effort to provide the ``last wall protecting us from Naziism.'' As the proud mother of sons serving our Nation in uniform, she was a credible voice on the issue and her plea to view the matter without emotion struck a chord among Americans.

Hattie's historic Senate career came to a conclusion during the Democratic primary of 1944, when she was defeated by another Arkansas political legend, J. William Fulbright. At the conclusion of her final term, Hattie was honored by her Senate colleagues with a standing ovation on the floor of the Senate. Those on hand described it as ``almost without precedent.''

Although Hattie passed away in December of 1950, her impact is still felt in the institution she served and by all of those who have found inspiration in the life she led. In 1996, a portrait of Hattie was placed just outside the Senate Chamber in the U.S. Capitol. The portrait is only the second in the Senate's permanent art collection which honors a woman; the first is Pocahontas. In 2001, Hattie made history again when she became the first Arkansan to ever appear on a stamp and I was proud to help unveil the 76-cent Hattie Caraway definitive stamp, as a part of the Postal Service's ``Distinguished Americans'' series.

While there are many ways for us to remember Hattie, her lasting legacy will live on in those who have been inspired by her example and in the generations of women seeking elective office who have followed the road she has so boldly paved. We have come a long way since the Suffragist Movement at the beginning of the last century, and we have women like Hattie Caraway to thank. Thirty-one women have followed Hattie Caraway to the U.S. Senate, and today, a record 14 women are currently serving. With the 68 women serving in the U.S. House of Representatives, a record 82 currently women serve in the U.S. Congress today. Hattie would be proud. It is up to us to continue the progress she made and to urge a new generation to follow the heroic example set by her and so many other pioneering women.

When I think of Hattie Caraway, I think of a quote she made throughout her 1932 campaign. I carried it with me throughout my first Senate campaign: ``If I can hold on to my sense of humor and a modicum of dignity, I shall have a wonderful time running for office whether I get there or not.'' Well, Hattie, you got there. In the process, your humor carried you through and your dignity earned you the affection of generations who are inspired to follow in your footsteps despite whatever barriers they may encounter or traditions they must overcome.

In the illustrious history of this great body and in the hearts of those who are inspired by her courage, one woman clearly stands out. Her name is Hattie Caraway. I am proud that she is from my home State of Arkansas, and I am proud to call her one of my heroes.

Each of us has our own personal story about a woman who has provided our lives with hope and inspiration. During this month, take some time to tell that story. By doing so, you will not only honor their efforts but may also inspire a member of our younger generation with both the imagination to think a bit larger, and the courage to boldly turn their dreams into reality.

Mr. President, today I rise, along with my friend, colleague and fellow Arkansan, Senator Mark

Pryor, to introduce a bill to direct the Treasury to mint a commemorative coin in celebration of the 50th anniversary of the integration of Central High School in Little Rock, AR.

Our colleagues in the House have led the way in this effort with a bill written by Representative Vic Snyder and co-sponsored by the entire Arkansas delegation.

On September 2, 1957, nine African-American students made their way to the front doors of Central High School in the city of Little Rock, AR. In our modern era, this seems like a very normal moment. And in truth there is nothing particularly special about students making their way to school on the first day of class. However, in 1957, this was a Nation changing event.

Ernest Green, Elizabeth Eckford, Jefferson Thomas, Terrence Roberts, Carlotta Walls, Minnijean Brown, Gloria Ray, Thelma Mothershed and Melba Pattillo showed courage in the face of strong opposition. Their principled stand helped to move the State and the Nation forward as it marched toward greater equality for all.

What happened in Little Rock almost 50 years ago is not only a testament to the Little Rock Nine, but it is also a testament to those who supported them. It is a testament to the people of Little Rock of all hues who decided that they would confront their own consciences. And it is testament to those who, upon reflecting on the matter, decided that doing what is right was worth the cost.

Theie decision to move this Nation forward makes me proud to be an Arkansan. It makes me proud to be an American. That's why I'm especially pleased to introduce this legislation to direct the Treasury to issue these commemorative coins. This bill is a small token of recognition of the gift that the Little Rock nine and the entire Little Rock community has given to this Nation.

I believe that someone who was there can say it better than I can. At the 20th anniversary of the integration of Central High, Ralph G. Brodie, the '57-58 student body president, spoke at a special ceremony where he paid tribute to the Little Rock Nine. He addressed the three of the Little Rock Nine who were present saying: ``You've done much to assure the rights of others. Yours were acts of courage, and I salute you.''

I join him. I salute the Little Rock Nine and I salute those, both black and white, who helped to successfully integrate Central High School.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, Today, I rise to honor the life of SSG William Robbins. At home in Arkansas, he was, above all else, a loving family man who devoted himself entirely to his wife and his children. On the front lines of Operation Iraqi Freedom, he was a dedicated soldier who bravely fought to bring security and stability to a nation torn apart by war.

Staff Sergeant Robbins was born and raised in the small, southern Missouri town of Poplar Bluff. He spent his childhood, as many children do, playing with his friends with whom he shared a love for the outdoors. From an early age, he knew he wanted to be a soldier, and regardless of where he was or what he did, that thought was never far from his mind.

In 1990, he moved to Arkansas and settled in the North Little Rock area. It was there he met the love of his life, his future wife Kimberly, and together they would raise two beautiful daughters, 5- year-old Tristan Ellis, and Abigail, who was less than a year old. It was clear to those who knew him best that his family was his pride and joy and he cherished every minute he spent with them. This fun-loving soul had a special affinity for children and at family gatherings was often found with the youngest of the group, playing games and bringing smiles to everyone's faces.

In the Arkansas National Guard, SSG Robbins worked full-time as administrative sergeant at the Guard's armory in Beebe. Last year, he was one of only about a dozen soldiers from the armory mobilized for duty in Operation Iraqi Freedom. It would prove to be a bittersweet time for the Robbins family; just as the family welcomed home William's mother Janice, a major in the Army Reserves returning from a deployment in Germany, they bid him farewell with prayers of a safe return.

Staff Sergeant Robbins' deployment was the first in his 11-year service in the Arkansas National Guard. While in Iraq, he was attached to the 206th Field Artillery Battalion of the 39th Infantry Brigade, and was selected to work in a military advisory capacity with the Iraqi National Guard. As American forces sought to transition more of their security and stabilization responsibilities to the Iraqi people, SSG Robbins advised and trained these civilian volunteers on infantry tactics as well as the fundamental aspects of being a soldier.

Last fall, SSG Robbins took his military leave and was able to return home for a short time. It was a much-needed reprieve from the dangers of Iraq and offered him the opportunity to return to the place he called home and spend time with the people he cared for most. It also offered him the opportunity to explain to Tristan, who was simply too young to fully understand, why her father had been away and when he would be back for good. As best he could, he explained to her the circumstances of his absence and even the possibility that he may not return. He was once a young man with a parent in the military and could relate to the lack of comprehension children often have in these situations. Relying on this perspective, as well as the natural gift he had always shown in relating to children, Tristan's father was able to provide her with some much needed comfort and understanding.

Along with many of the soldiers from the 39th, SSG Robbins' mission was soon coming to an end and he was to scheduled to return to Arkansas in late March or April. Upon his return, he was looking forward to a new job with the Arkansas National Guard at Camp Robinson's Regional Training Institute in North Little Rock. Even more so, he was looking forward to being reunited with his family. When he spoke with Kimberly, he reminded her how very much he loved her and couldn't wait to come home. When he spoke with Tristan, he told her how much he looked forward to seeing her again so he could take her in his arms and swing her like an airplane.

Tragically, he passed away on February 10 from a gunshot wound at his home base at Camp Taji. While the loss for Kimberly and her family will be felt deeply, they have found some solace knowing that his last days were spent doing what he wanted to do, helping people. In the days following his death, it was clear to his family the impact he had on each of their lives. It was also quickly apparent that although he was no longer with them, his presence would always be felt; whether it was the devotion and thoughtfulness evident in the basket of chocolates and Valentine's Day card he sent Kimberly just before his death, the spirit embodied in the eyes of Abigail who turned 1 year old on February 23, or the courage that Tristan, thanks to her father, has shown in trying to understand what has happened. They are lasting examples of not only the remarkable way he led his life, but more importantly, are a testament to the kind of man he was.

My thoughts and prayers go out to the family and friends of William Robbins, and to all those who knew and loved him. His 31 years with us were far too short, but his legacy of love and service to his Nation will remain with us forever.

Mr. President, today, I would like to rise and pay tribute to the life of Army Specialist Lyle Rymer II. Lyle Rymer was the type of person his family and friends knew they could always rely upon. Despite his easygoing nature and quiet demeanor, he was a go-getter who always did more than was asked or expected of him. He was a loving husband and proud father who devoted himself to his family and their well-being. He was also a brave soldier with a devotion to his country, who died a hero while protecting his fellow soldiers.

As the youngest of three children, Specialist Rymer was born and spent his early childhood in Fort Smith, AR. He was a shy kid but had a gift for making others laugh and was always quick to make friends. In many ways, he was a typical teenager, who enjoyed hanging out with his friends, with whom he shared a love for fishing and hotrods. He was a hard-working student who went to high school in Roland, OK, a small town just 5 miles west of Fort Smith. Although he studied small engines at a vocational tech school half a day during his junior and senior years, he remained focused on getting his high school diploma on time, with his friends and with his class. In 1999, he did just that.

Following high school, Specialist Rymer worked construction and later joined the Arkansas Army National Guard. His grandfather had retired from the Air Force, and he began considering enrolling in airborne school or making a career out of the Army. He was proud to serve his country but, more importantly, he wanted to make a better life for him and his family; his wife LaTisha and son Sean.

March of last year brought a welcome addition to the Rymers: a baby daughter Jasmine. What should have been a joyous time for the family proved to be bittersweet. Just as Jasmine was born into the world, her father was on a plane heading for Kuwait and service in Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Specialist Rymer was assigned to the National Guard's 239th Engineering Company under the 39th Infantry Brigade, based out of Boonesville. Although he was a world away, he was proud to serve in Iraq with the 39th, a Brigade made up of 4,200 soldiers, including over 3,000 Arkansans. He also found comfort in the regular conversations he had with his family, usually on the weekends, when he could check on their welfare and let them know about the experience he was having.

In November, Specialist Rymer was granted a 2-week leave and returned home. It gave him a chance to visit with family and friends, spend time with LaTisha and Sean, but also to see his beautiful baby daughter, Jasmine, for the very first time. He would cherish this all too short time with his loved ones and, upon his return to Iraq, made sure to tell his fellow soldiers just how proud he was of the family that was awaiting his return.

The 239th, in which Specialist Rymer served as a heavy equipment operator, would play a vital role in American efforts to bring security and stability throughout Baghdad, completing more than 1,800 missions in the area. In spite of the dangerous environment and stressful conditions he and his comrades often worked under, Specialist Rymer always found a way to brighten a mood and bring smiles to their faces. He grew to love the soldiers he served with, and they loved him in return. As often happens in times of war, many of these soldiers, serving thousands of miles from home, began to consider themselves much more than fellow soldiers; they were a family and they would do absolutely anything for each other.

Tragically, on January 28, a few short weeks before Specialist Rymer was to return home, he was killed in action. The 239th was securing an area near a Central Baghdad marketplace in preparation for the upcoming Iraqi National elections. Specialist Rymer was guarding the members of his unit as they were helping place concrete traffic barriers. He was struck and killed by a single bullet from a nearby sniper.

The loss of this special young man, the first fatality for the 239th, was felt deeply by the troops who served with him. To honor Specialist Rymer, over 150 of them attended a memorial service at their brigade's chapel on base, just north of Baghdad. At the service, they all raised their right hands in salute to their fallen comrade, whom they loved and respected, and who gave his life in the protection of theirs. The company commander, CPT Jason Meharg, echoed the unspoken sentiment of his troops, ``We'll refocus and continue . . . But we won't forget.''

Even more deeply, the loss of Specialist Rymer will be felt by the family and the many friends he leaves behind. On February 7 at the Fort Smith National Cemetery, over 100 people showed up to his gravesite service to pay respects and to honor this fallen hero.

To many of us, the awards Specialist Rymer earned for his service will serve as a reminder of the courageous and selfless way in which he lived his life. To LaTisha, memories of the time shared with her husband and the pride felt in the family they built together will remind her of so much more. Although Sean and Jasmine may not be able to fully comprehend the meaning of their father's sacrifice or realize the impact he had on so many others, they will one day be old enough to understand, from the words of their mother and those who knew Lyle Rymer best, just how very much he loved them.

My thoughts and prayers are with the Rymer family and with all those whose lives were touched by this special young man. We will be forever grateful for his service and for the sacrifice he made on behalf of us all.

Mr. President, today, I rise with a heavy heart to honor the life of a courageous young man from the State of Arkansas, and to pay tribute to the sacrifice he made on behalf of our way of life. Brian Hopper lived his life with an energy, sense of adventure, and courage that we can all admire. These were the qualities he displayed throughout his childhood, playing and hunting in the woods around his home in northeast Arkansas. They were also the qualities that ultimately drew him to military service, bravely defending freedom in a land he had never known.

Lance Corporal Hopper grew up just outside of the small Arkansas town of Wynne. Like other boys his age, he enjoyed growing up in the countryside; spending his time in the woods and trails near his home. Much of this time was spent with his hunting buddy, his father Rob, who taught him how to shoot when he was six. Together, they could often be found fishing or looking for deer, squirrels, and rabbits.

At Wynne High School, Lance Corporal Hopper was a member of the drama club and the school's broadcast journalism class, where he helped with the daily news program. He graduated in the Spring of 2002, and it was clear to friends and family that his next step would be enlistment in the U.S. Marine Corps. Although he was turned down by Marine Corps recruiters in Arkansas because of recent reconstructive knee surgery, this resilient young man would not be detoured. Instead, he made the trip to neighboring Mississippi and met with a new set of recruiters. He never mentioned his knee surgery and was allowed to enlist in September of 2002. He would go on to attend the School of Infantry in January of 2003, where he trained to become a rifleman.

Lance Corporal Hopper made a brief trip home during Christmas of 2003, following the completion of boot camp. It was quickly apparent to his family that he not only matured physically, but he also spoke and acted differently. The young man they had watched grow up over the years was now truly a marine, and his father couldn't have been more proud.

As a part of Operation Iraqi Freedom, Lance Corporal Hooper was deployed to the war-torn nation last summer and quickly earned the reputation of a tough, loyal soldier who repeatedly rose above the call of duty. During military operations in Fallujah, he earned his first Purple Heart after taking on incoming fire. The flak jacket he was wearing saved him from serious injury, and possibly death. Soon after, he earned yet another Purple Heart from much more severe wounds. After raiding an Iraqi home and shooting an armed insurgent, he was struck by an explosion from a fallen grenade that left shrapnel in his knee, leg, arm, and face. Although his wounds were severe enough to have him airlifted to Germany, he chose to stay in Iraq with his unit. His personal safety was an afterthought to the loyalty he had for his comrades and the mission before them. Although he still carried pieces of shrapnel in him, he would carry on the fight. It was a testament to the courage and the heart of this brave marine.

On January 26, he boarded a CH-53E helicopter on a routine mission to help guard the Syrian border for the Iraqi elections. Tragically, the helicopter crashed amid severe weather conditions in western Iraq. All 31 soldiers aboard were killed, and it was destined to become the deadliest day of the war thus far for American forces.

Lance Corporal Hopper's brother, Patrick, who was also serving in Iraq as a marine lance corporal, would accompany his brother's body on that final flight home from Dover Air Force Base to Memphis. Emergency vehicles would shut down every intersection between Memphis and Wynne and allow the two brothers to return home to their family.

On the day of Lance Corporal Hopper's funeral, the State flag was flown at half-mast over the State Capitol in Little Rock. Along the 12- mile procession from the memorial service to Harris Chapel Cemetery, friends, neighbors and mourners lined the streets to show their respect and to honor this fallen Arkansas hero. Many held American flags high, many saluted, and others held their right hands over their heart.

At his final resting place, Lance Corporal Hopper was buried with full military honors. It was just a short walk from the home and the woods where he had spent his childhood, and it served as a reminder of how very far he had come in his life. The courageous and honorable way in which he lived his 21 years is a testament to the kind of person he was. When we think of Brian Hopper, we will think of this legacy, and will be reminded of how we are forever grateful to this brave young man for the sacrifice he made on behalf of freedom, and on behalf of us all. My thoughts and prayers go out to his family, friends, and to all those who knew and loved him.