Floor Statements

Mr. President, today we are acting on House-passed legislation which contains a 1-year extension of the Defense Production Act, DPA, which I hope will be swiftly approved by the Senate. While I am delighted that this extension legislation was passed by the House Tuesday night, it is crucial to remember that many of this law's authorities, last renewed in 2003, expire on September 30. We have just a few legislative days to get this done. As the United Sates continues to fight two wars and respond to various natural disasters, it is important that we not allow key provisions to expire--provisions allowing our Government

agencies to ensure that American industry meets varying demands of national emergencies. Such measures involve mandates to keep industry producing critical resources for our military and first responders in times of crisis, and initiatives for maintaining crucial investments in strategic technologies.

During the Korean war, what was then the Senate Banking & Currency Committee--the precursor to today's Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs--authored the Defense Production Act to ensure the availability of key industrial resources for the Department of Defense, DOD. Over time, the Defense Production Act has been amended to include energy supply, emergency preparedness, and critical infrastructure protections, thereby allowing civilian agencies to respond rapidly to crises such as natural disasters and terrorist attacks.

In the last several months, the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs received two reports mandated by law from the Government Accountability Office and Department of Homeland Security. These reports highlighted major shortfalls in the administration's application of DPA authorities. Furthermore, I have been informed that in 2004, FEMA and other Federal agencies conducted their own internal review of DPA authorities and made several recommendations to the White House's Homeland Security Council. The White House chose not to act on those recommendations, and Congress has still not been fully briefed on these findings.

In a perfect world, we would fully analyze and incorporate appropriate findings of pertinent reviews. Unfortunately, due to time constraints of the current legislative session, including our work on measures to address the crisis in our financial system, it is clear that a complete assessment now of their conclusions would be impossible. But we should not simply reauthorize this act for another 5 years. The recommendations gathered in these valuable reports should be reviewed, considered for legislation in a workable bill, and enacted into law in the near future; not 5 years from now.

Simply put, granting a 1-year extension would provide our agencies with the authorities they need in the short term, but will also maintain the expectation that in 2009 the Banking Committee and the U.S. Senate will conduct a thoughtful review of these recommendations in hearings, mark-up, and floor consideration. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the Senate, as well as in a new administration, to see to it that the DPA is modernized to address the challenges of the 21st century. In the meantime, I thank my colleagues for working with me to approve this 2009 reauthorization.

First, I thank my colleague from Florida. Let me say I am rising to speak on a matter other than the matter the Senator is addressing, but I wish to commend him for his thoughts and ideas on the situation. We have had extensive hearings, of course, yesterday, 5 hours with the Secretary of the Treasury and the chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank and chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the head of this new agency with our GSEs. The House is going to have a hearing today. What is quite clear is the plan, as submitted by the Secretary of the Treasury, I think, generally--I say this politely--but across the spectrum, has been sort of rejected, a three-page bill asking for $700 billion.

I pointed out to someone yesterday a few years ago you could get a $100,000 no-doc subprime loan and the paperwork was four pages long. This is sort of a no-doc request here--not to try to be humorous about a situation such as this. But nonetheless we have a lot of work to do to try to put together a plan, but I hope we can do something because the situation is grave and it is serious and we have to respond.

I will but very quickly. I have about 4 minutes.

I don't want to negotiate with you on the floor of the Senate. There are a lot of ideas kicking around. I know that is one that has received some consideration.

Mr. President, I thank the majority leader, Senator Harry Reid. I thank Senator Coburn of Oklahoma as well. He has had a hold on this bill, the Emmett Till Unsolved Civil Rights Crime Act, which I coauthored going back some 3 years ago. In fact, Jim Talent, our former colleague from Missouri, was the original author of this legislation. I was his original partner in this effort going back to 2005. He left the Senate and was replaced by Claire McCaskill, a great friend and wonderful Senator from Missouri.

I introduced this bill separately along with Senator Leahy and some 12 other Members of the Senate, including Thad Cochran of Mississippi and Lamar Alexander of Tennessee. This has been a bipartisan effort that has been tied up for the last couple years, regretfully, but nonetheless that is

what it was. Today, the news that this bill has now passed the Senate is good news. I am deeply grateful to the majority leader, again, for sticking with an issue and not walking away from something as important as this is.

Some might argue that this is a long time in coming, others who say it is too little too late. In many ways, I suppose they could be right.

The subject matter, the name on this bill, Emmett Till, dates back 53 years.

Fifty-three years ago, a young boy of 14 was killed for no other reason than the color of his skin. His life was extinguished in the most brutal fashion imaginable.

When Emmett Till's body was discovered in the Tallahatchie River, it had been weighted down by a 75-pound cotton gin fan, tied around the boy's neck with barbed wire. His clothes had been stripped from him and burned. Emmett's body could only be identified by a ring the young boy had been wearing.

At the trial of the two White men who would later confess to the crime, few African-Americans dared to even testify at the trial, such was the atmosphere at the time. The all-White jury acquitted the two men, deliberating for a mere 67 minutes, which one juror reportedly said only took so long because they paused to drink a soda. The rationale for acquittal? That the prosecution had failed to prove that the body recovered from the river was even Emmett Till, so mutilated was his face and body.

A year later, the two defendants bragged about the killing to a magazine for a sum of $4,000.

Believe me when I say: there was no justice in this case--nor in countless other civil rights cases that remain unsolved to this day.

The failures of our legal system to bring to justice those who committed brutal crimes based solely on racial prejudice is not merely sad or tragic--in a country such as ours and at this moment in our history, it is inexcusable.

The sad truth is that for far too long, hate crimes were rarely investigated in this country. For far too long, murderers could walk free as long as they chose the so-called ``right'' victims. And so, whatever the merits of this legislation, The Emmett Till Act cannot erase that memory. It cannot erase even a single year that lapsed between crime and justice.

What it can do is keep even more years from piling on.

If we want to remove the great stain on our justice system that is the hundreds, maybe even thousands, of civil rights-era crimes that remain unsolved, we need to reopen the books on as many as we can.

That is what this legislation would do--bring justice to those who perpetrated these heinous crimes because of racial hatred by creating a mechanism that allows us to pursue them.

Can it bring back and make whole those who have suffered and were murdered by a racist criminal hand? Of course not. But in passing this, this Congress can reaffirm our Nation's commitment to the truth and to making equal justice not a dream but a reality.

As such, the Emmett Till Unsolved Civil Rights Crime Act would give the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation increased resources to reopen Civil Rights-era criminal cases which have gone cold--that is, unsolved civil rights murder cases that occurred prior to 1970.

It would do so by designating a deputy chief in the criminal section of the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ and a supervisory special agent in the civil rights unit of the FBI. These officials will be tasked with spearheading and coordinating efforts by Federal, State, and local law enforcement officers and prosecutors to bring long-time fugitives to justice.

For these purposes, it authorizes $10 million annually for fiscal years 2008 through 2017. This legislation also authorizes $2 million annually for DOJ to make grants to State and local law enforcement and $1.5 million annually for the Community Relations Service within DOJ to partner with local communities. I know that sounds like a lot of money, but when you talk about $700 billion to take care of some failed institutions verses a few million to pursue these cases, I hope my colleagues would recognize the value.

The time has come to confront the injustices of the past openly and honestly. For some of these crimes, it is too late. Last year, Tallahatchie County in Mississippi officially apologized for the trial in the Emmett Till case in which these two confessed killers lived the rest of their lives in freedom. To be sure, they are now dead and beyond the reach of justice.

But there was some measure of justice for the families of Andrew Goodman, James Chaney and Michael Schwerner--young civil rights workers who participated in the historic Freedom Rides in 1963.

Edgar Ray Killen was allowed to roam free for more than three decades. But his belated conviction in 2005 is proof that we can provide closure and hold those responsible for terrible crimes, even years after they have occurred.

With this legislation, we will launch one of the most exhausting manhunts in the history of our country to pursue those responsible for these acts. We can tell those who committed crimes who still roam this country free that they should never, ever, ever again enjoy a sleep- filled night; that is, as long as they live, the U.S. Government, our Government, will do everything in its power to apprehend them and bring them to the bar of justice.

That is the message we can convey today, with this legislation, to the families, the friends, and others who have lost loved ones, who put their lives on the line to press for justice and for helping our Nation achieve that ``more perfect Union'' that each and every generation has tried to achieve. Those ideals are at the heart of this effort. We may never be that perfect Union, but, as Abraham Lincoln understood intrinsically, each generation bears the responsibility for bringing us closer to that ideal.

With this legislation, the Senate and this Congress on this date early in the 21st century is saying simply: We will not forget, and we will not yield.

The hour is, obviously, very late. Memories are dimming. Those who can bring some important information to the legal authorities are passing away. This bill may be the last and best chance we will have as a nation to write a hopeful postscript in the struggle for racial equality in our Nation and to provide closure for these families at last.

We all bring a unique commitment to this case. Representative John Lewis, my great and dear friend in the other body who has worked so hard to see this bill become law, was a hero of the civil rights movement--is still a hero, I might point out--who nearly gave his life ensuring that the promise of America can be realized for all of our citizens and in all of our communities. Others may simply recognize when justice has not been served.

I have spoken many times about my father on this floor, in this Chamber, about how in the 1930s he was among the first, as a member of the Justice Department, long before the Civil Rights Division, to prosecute the Ku Klux Klan and other civil rights cases for the Department of Justice. I have spoken about his work as a prosecutor pursuing Nazi war criminals at the Nuremberg war trials, where he stood face to face with the men who committed crimes that were so horrifying, so enormous, that few believed they could have possibly happened-- until, that is, my father set out meticulously proving them, step by step, piece by piece. I believe the same is true of civil rights crimes in this country.

His body of work, including his service to this body, never fails to remind us that when we reaffirm our commitment to the rule of law, when we act not out of vengeance but in pursuit of justice, we most live up to the promise as Americans. However tardy that pursuit may be, affirming that enduring commitment is what this effort is about today.

Again, I thank immensely the majority leader and others who have been a part of this effort. We thank Jim Talent, the Senator from Missouri, who originally authored this bill, and I am proud to have joined with him some 3 years ago and proud to have picked up that mantle in this Congress, along with, as I say, 13 of our other colleagues here, to be a part of this effort that has produced this passage a few minutes ago.

I wish to thank the steadfast support of allies and friends such as John

Lewis in the Congress, the House of Representatives, who made this possible, and many organizations that helped us shepherd this legislation through the Senate: the NAACP, the Southern Law Poverty Center, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, and so many others.

In addition, I thank the Emmett Till Justice Campaign and its president, Alvin Sykes. We heard Senator Coburn talk about this a few moments ago, and I wish to associate myself with his remarks. He is a remarkable individual. Mr. Sykes's determination has helped the Senate get to this historic moment.

I wish to mention Simeon Wright, as I had the pleasure of meeting Simeon Wright and his wife a few weeks ago. Simeon Wright is Emmett Till's cousin, and he was sharing that bed with him that night 53 years ago when his cousin was ripped out of that bed, never to be seen again, except for his mutilated body. Simeon Wright is getting on in years now. But it was an honor to meet him and his wife, and his determination and commitment on behalf of his family helped us arrive at this moment. So to Simeon Wright and his family, the moment has come, and this bill will now become law.

It is vital that we bring to justice those individuals who committed these heinous crimes. It is essential to their families that we reaffirm this Nation's commitment to the rule of law.

I thank all of my colleagues for supporting the Emmett Till Unsolved Civil Rights Crime Act.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, first let me thank my dear and longtime friend, Senator Max Baucus, for his kind comments. I appreciate them very much. And let me thank him and Senator Grassley as well. There are a lot of people to thank about all of this, but we wouldn't be here today talking about this were it not for Max Baucus and Chuck Grassley making it possible, as part of the tax extenders bill, to deal with this longstanding issue, mental health parity, that affects so many millions of our fellow citizens. I am confident mental health parity is going to become the law of the land before we adjourn, in a few days, this session of Congress.

I rise in strong support of the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008, which, as I mentioned, is included in the tax extenders package. This is a very proud moment for millions of Americans who have fought for this but also who know, who are themselves, have family members, neighbors, friends, neighbors, coworkers affected by mental illness.

Let me begin by commending someone who is not here today, Senator Ted Kennedy, who we all know is recovering from a strong challenge himself at his home in Massachusetts. He asked me, along with Barbara Mikulski, to take on a couple issues when he had to leave and go back home to try and get his health back. Barbara Mikulski did a remarkable job in dealing with the higher education bill. Senator Kennedy asked me to monitor and work with our Senate colleagues and our colleagues in the other body on the mental health parity bill. While it has not yet been adopted, we are about to do so in the Senate. It is a moment to congratulate our friend and colleague from Massachusetts who needs no further words from me about his commitment or his family's commitment, his remarkable sisters, Eunice Shriver, Jean Kennedy Smith, and his brothers over the years. This has been a family crusade, the issue of mental health parity, in addition to the work of Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici.

This is also a great triumph. I know it is a matter of deep pride but also of relief as well that at long last we will recognize the importance of mental health. Let me mention Pete Domenici. Pete is a wonderful friend of mine. We are two people of opposite political parties who don't agree on a lot, looking back over the years we have been here together. We have taken different sides of many issues. But Pete and Nancy Domenici are remarkable people. He will be leaving the Senate in a few days after a distinguished career. I had the honor of being with Pete and Nancy in Las Cruces, NM, to speak at a dinner for him at the Pete Domenici Center for Public Policy, which is now going to be part of New Mexico State University. I had dinner with Pete and several colleagues, past and present, who have worked with him over the years. The Domenicis know about this issue, not just from an intellectual standpoint but a personal one as well. It is a matter of great pride to Pete and his family as well that our country, at least by the expression of this body and the other, recognizes the deep importance of this issue. We will hear shortly from my friend from Oregon who understands this matter very well indeed, personally, as well.

I thank all those involved. Paul Wellstone was a remarkable guy. What a tragedy to lose him a few years ago, him and his family, in that dreadful plane crash. No one cared more about this issue day in and day out than Paul Wellstone. The first day he arrived, he started talking about it and never stopped during his tenure. Today, we are recognizing him by calling this the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici mental health parity bill. His son Dave has been a champion on behalf of his father's cause. I wish to mention Dave and how proud his parents would be that he has carried this cause on to both Chambers. Patrick Kennedy as well has championed this issue on the House side, Senator Ted Kennedy's son, who is a distinguished Member in his own right of the House of Representatives and has done a great job on this issue. I know there are a lot of others who are part of this. I don't want to forget anyone.

I ask unanimous consent that a list of some 250 organizations that have been a part of this crusade be printed in the Record. I also ask unanimous consent that a statement by Mrs. Rosalynn Carter, Former First Lady of the United States and Chairwoman of the Carter Center's Mental Health Task Force, in support of passage of the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 be printed in the Record.

I thank them and others who have been a part of this. Senator Harry Reid, the majority leader, doesn't often get recognized, but without him, none of this happens. While we associate mental health parity issues with Senator Kennedy and Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici and others, the majority leader makes all this possible. While he probably wouldn't say so himself on this issue, I can guarantee you we were not going to leave for this session of Congress without a chance to vote on this issue. Harry Reid made it a quiet, personal commitment that this body would have a chance to express itself on this issue. Without that kind of commitment from the distinguished majority leader, these matters often can slip away and disappear. To Harry Reid, the majority leader, the Senator from Nevada, to the millions of people affected by this issue as well, we thank him for his commitment.

This legislation has the potential to impact 1.8 million insured individuals from my home State of Connecticut, 150 million Americans in the United States, but with 1 in 5 American families directly affected by mental illness, the impact of this legislation will be much broader. Every one of us, every American knows a friend, has a relative, a neighbor, a coworker, colleague whose life has been touched by mental illness in one way or the other. With this legislation, we are saying that mental illness will no longer take a backseat to physical illness.

With this legislation, we are taking an important step toward tearing down the stigma that people with mental illness face every single day and have for decades. The Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act will end health insurance discrimination between mental health and substance abuse disorders and medical and surgical conditions. Upon passage of this bill, health insurers will no longer be permitted to charge higher copays or limit the frequency of treatment for people with mental illness than what they would for a medical or surgical condition. The bill before us builds on what the Senate passed unanimously 1 year ago. The bill strengthens the requirements around out-of-network benefits for mental illness and improves the transparency of decisions made by insurance companies with respect to mental health coverage.

A component of the bill I wish to highlight is its protection of State laws that provide for greater consumer protection than what exists in Federal law. I take pride in the fact that I represent the small State of Connecticut. Yet my State recognized the disparity between insurance coverage for physical and mental illness years ago. They did so by taking a significant step to address mental illness by enacting strong mental health parity and consumer protection laws. These laws far exceed what currently exists in Federal law, and I believe the bill before us today will allow my State and others to maintain those strong laws in the future. The protection and preservation of State law is an issue I have fought long and hard for during Senate consideration of this bill. It is an issue of crucial importance to my State and will no doubt be a central issue next year, when I hope this body acts on legislation to finally make mental health care universal in this country as part of a universal health care effort.

Of all the health care issues I have worked on, it is a rarity to find an issue with as many diverse interests putting their full weight behind passage of a bill such as this. As I mentioned, more than 250 national organizations, representing consumers, family members, advocates, professionals, and providers have signed a letter urging Congress to pass this legislation

into law. It is so important that we have that kind of support. I will not go through all the organizations involved, but I wish to highlight the work of the Connecticut Psychological Association, Aetna, which is headquartered in Hartford, and the Connecticut Insurance Department and Office of Healthcare Advocacy. They have all played an important role in this legislation.

Again, I urge my colleagues to act now and pass this bill. We tip our hat to Ted Kennedy, Paul Wellstone, Pete Domenici, and all those who fought and care about this issue. It is a great moment for the country.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to support, with Senator Wicker, a resolution to raise awareness about spina bifida, the most common, permanently disabling birth defect. This often devastating birth defect occurs during the first month of pregnancy when the spine fails to close completely, leaving a permanent opening and resulting in a multitude of serious medical complications.

Thanks to modern medicine and technological advances, most babies born with spina bifida--1,500 to 2,000 a year--survive, and many are now living longer than ever before. It is estimated that in the United States no less than 70,000 people, and possibly as many as 130,000 people, currently live with spina bifida. This is wonderful progress, but there are substantial hurdles that can prevent those with spina bifida from reaching their full potential.

For a person with spina bifida, the body, mind, and spirit are all under assault. Most children with the worst form of spina bifida must undergo a surgery to insert a permanent shunt to drain fluid from the brain for the duration of their lives. People with spina bifida may endure any combination of full or partial paralysis, seizures, bladder and bowel problems, latex allergies, learning disabilities, depression, and other psychosocial issues. The promise of an extended life expectancy for individuals with spina bifida may be dampened by the new challenges they face in education, job training, independent living, health care for secondary conditions and aging concerns. Far more needs to be done to improve the quality of life for those suffering with spina bifida.

I applaud the groups that labor so diligently to offer support to the many Americans with spina bifida and their families. In particular, I extend my gratitude to the Spina Bifida Association, which has been dedicated to this important issue for more than three decades. They are steadfast advocates for those whose lives have been touched by spina bifida, working across our Nation to improve lives through education, research, and service.

The Spina Bifida Association, together with the National Spina Bifida Program at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other groups, is working hard to spread the word to the 65 million women at risk of having a baby born with spina bifida. On any given day in the United States, eight births are affected by spina bifida or a similar birth defect of the brain and spine. It is estimated that 70 percent of birth defects such as spina bifida are preventable by consuming an adequate amount of folic acid prior to pregnancy. This is a simple step that women can take to reduce their risk, but far more outreach and education is required to reach women with this important message.

It is time to renew our efforts to prevent spina bifida and help the many individuals and families living with spina bifida. The resolution we will adopt today calls for a greater commitment to spina bifida prevention and to improving the quality of life of those affected by it, increased funding for evidence-based spina bifida research, and further development of the National Spina Bifida Patient Registry. Taken together, these efforts will help decrease the incidence of spina bifida and improve available treatments and quality of life for those living with it. I wholeheartedly urge my colleagues to join with me in support of this resolution.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Vision Preservation Act of 2008 with my colleague Sen. George Voinovich. The goal of this legislation is to help Americans avoid the personal tragedy of unnecessary, preventable vision loss. This important legislation is supported by Prevent Blindness America, the American Foundation for the Blind, the American Academy of Ophthalmology, and the American Optometric Association

Right now there are an estimated 80 million Americans suffering from potentially blinding eye disease. Three million more Americans struggle with low vision. 1.1 million more are legally blind. Glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy, cataract and age-related macular degeneration, AMD, and other vision problems are costing tens of thousands of people in the United States their ability to see each year. With the aging baby boom generation moving toward retirement age, these numbers are expected to grow considerably. It is estimated that by 2030, the number of blind and visually impaired people will double if nothing is done.

Unsurprisingly, ``The Economic Impact of Vision Problems: The Toll of Major Adult Eye Disorders, Visual Impairment, and Blindness on the U.S. Economy,'' a study conducted by Prevent Blindness America, reveals that vision loss carries significant cost to individuals, private insurers, health care providers, and the Federal government. The study indicates that the direct and indirect costs of vision loss among adults are $51.4 billion. And over a lifetime, the cost for just one

person dealing with this terrible condition is $566,000. The lifetime costs associated with just those Americans born with vision loss in 2000 is $2.5 billion.

But what makes vision loss even more tragic is that half of all blindness is preventable if action is taken soon enough. There are many health and financial challenges our nation is facing that we may just have to weather. But here is one we can do something about--and we should. That is why Sen. Voinovich and I are introducing the Vision Preservation Act. This legislation would improve and strengthen important public health programs at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, and the Health Resources and Services Administration, HRSA. Specifically, it would expand existing public education and awareness efforts to empower Americans to do what is necessary to protect their own vision. This legislation would also incorporate vision screening, prevention, and rehabilitation into the Maternal and Child Health Block Grants and the Community Health Centers so low income Americans who are most likely to go without needed prevention and screening can be alerted to the early warning signs of vision loss. It would improve the training and education of health professionals so that they are better prepared to help their patients identify and deal with conditions that could lead to vision loss.

These are simple steps that we in the Senate can take to help make sure that millions of Americans can live without fear of losing their sight. I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting this legislation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and a letter of support be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Vision Preservation Act of 2008 with my colleague Sen. George Voinovich. The goal of this legislation is to help Americans avoid the personal tragedy of unnecessary, preventable vision loss. This important legislation is supported by Prevent Blindness America, the American Foundation for the Blind, the American Academy of Ophthalmology, and the American Optometric Association

Right now there are an estimated 80 million Americans suffering from potentially blinding eye disease. Three million more Americans struggle with low vision. 1.1 million more are legally blind. Glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy, cataract and age-related macular degeneration, AMD, and other vision problems are costing tens of thousands of people in the United States their ability to see each year. With the aging baby boom generation moving toward retirement age, these numbers are expected to grow considerably. It is estimated that by 2030, the number of blind and visually impaired people will double if nothing is done.

Unsurprisingly, ``The Economic Impact of Vision Problems: The Toll of Major Adult Eye Disorders, Visual Impairment, and Blindness on the U.S. Economy,'' a study conducted by Prevent Blindness America, reveals that vision loss carries significant cost to individuals, private insurers, health care providers, and the Federal government. The study indicates that the direct and indirect costs of vision loss among adults are $51.4 billion. And over a lifetime, the cost for just one

person dealing with this terrible condition is $566,000. The lifetime costs associated with just those Americans born with vision loss in 2000 is $2.5 billion.

But what makes vision loss even more tragic is that half of all blindness is preventable if action is taken soon enough. There are many health and financial challenges our nation is facing that we may just have to weather. But here is one we can do something about--and we should. That is why Sen. Voinovich and I are introducing the Vision Preservation Act. This legislation would improve and strengthen important public health programs at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, and the Health Resources and Services Administration, HRSA. Specifically, it would expand existing public education and awareness efforts to empower Americans to do what is necessary to protect their own vision. This legislation would also incorporate vision screening, prevention, and rehabilitation into the Maternal and Child Health Block Grants and the Community Health Centers so low income Americans who are most likely to go without needed prevention and screening can be alerted to the early warning signs of vision loss. It would improve the training and education of health professionals so that they are better prepared to help their patients identify and deal with conditions that could lead to vision loss.

These are simple steps that we in the Senate can take to help make sure that millions of Americans can live without fear of losing their sight. I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting this legislation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and a letter of support be printed in the Record.

Madam President, I know the Senator from Michigan is maybe doing so, but as I understand it, there was objection raised to the consideration of a managers' amendment regarding, I guess, 100 amendments. One of those amendments is a proposal of Senator Shelby and I, along with a unanimous vote of our Banking Committee, after lengthy discussion. It was the Iran sanctions proposal, which took a lot of work and effort to put together.

This was a comprehensive package, widely endorsed across the country by organizations to give us the kind of leverage necessary for us to bring Iran to the negotiating table diplomatically to reduce the threat that their potential nuclear arsenal poses to us, our allies, the State of Israel and others.

I appreciate the fact that the managers of this bill had included this amendment in their managers' package. It would be a great travesty, in my view, for us to leave here having the other body having adopted similar language. This is the one opportunity for this body to embrace an economic sanctions proposal which would give us tremendous leverage in our efforts to bring Iran to that table.

To lose that opportunity would be a serious loss of opportunity for this country. So, again, my dear friend from Virginia was here. Therefore, on behalf of those of us on the committee, unanimously, the Dodd-Shelby Iran sanctions divestment nonproliferation amendment to the DOD authorization bill, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding any agreement with respect to S. 3001, it be in order for the Senate to consider amendment No. 5572 and that the amendment be considered and agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I will be very brief.

I commend our colleague from New Jersey, a wonderful member of the Senate Banking Committee who has been invaluable over the last 18 months as we confronted a morass of problems that, as he very properly and accurately points out, began building up years ago.

This did not all of a sudden happen 18 months ago. As I said so many times, this was not a natural disaster. This was avoidable. That is the great tragedy of all of this. Had we had regulators on the beat--as he describes it, cops on the beat--had the legislation that passed overwhelmingly in this Congress actually been enforced with regulations promulgated dealing with deceptive and fraudulent practices in the residential mortgage market as many as 4 years ago--without a single regulation, under the leadership of this administration, being promulgated--we could have avoided the ``no doc'' loans, the liar loans, the subprime predatory lending, luring innocent people into dreadful situations that these brokers and lenders knew they could never afford to pay and then packaging them and branding them triple-A mortgages and selling them off as quickly as they wrote them to get paid off themselves and then pass on the responsibility to someone else. All of that history is replete as to how this situation unfolded. Now, of course, they want to avoid the blame for the consequences--this crowd does--for what happened.

The Senator from New Jersey laid it out very well. The public needs to know that. They also need to know what we should be doing together to get it right. We have a lot of work in front of us to get it right, but in order to get it right, we also have to acknowledge what went wrong, and there is a long history of what went wrong here.

I welcome the remarks of my colleague and thank him for his leadership and look forward to working with him.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Madam President, may I inquire what is the business before the Senate.

I thank the Chair.

Madam President, I have an amendment I have filed with the floor leadership on this bill dealing with Iran sanctions. It is called the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability and Divestment Act for 2008. I want to share some thoughts about this proposal with my colleagues. I am fully cognizant that our friend from Michigan, Senator Levin, the manager of this bill, has a lot of amendments with which he is dealing. I don't know whether we will have a chance to actually vote on this bill, but I want to spend a few minutes talking about the importance of this amendment and its value.

Obviously, there is a lot going on today with the financial crisis in the country. As chairman of the Banking Committee, I will have more to say about that tomorrow. I have been having conversations with fellow committee members among others.

Today I want to talk about this issue specifically and then address an issue as well dealing with the devastation of Hurricanes Gustav and Ike and Tropical Storms Fay and Hanna that ripped through the Caribbean.

We are considering, of course, the Defense authorization bill. This proposal, adopted and developed by the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs in conjunction with my Republican colleague and friend, Richard Shelby of Alabama, former chairman of the committee, would impose tough new sanctions on the Government of Iran, to authorize investors to divest from companies active in Iran's energy sector and to combat the proliferation of black market weapons networks overseas.

I am delighted to have my colleague, Senator Shelby, as a sponsor of the amendment. In my view, we need a comprehensive strategy on Iran that builds our leverage within the context of a major new diplomatic push for meaningful negotiations.

Let me be clear. Sanctions against the Government of Iran are not an end unto themselves but, rather, one means of driving a resolution of the problem of Iran's apparent nuclear ambitions. The Europeans' recent decision to impose additional financial sanctions on Iran is a very positive development that exerts further pressure to that end. The approach embodied in the bill I am talking about this afternoon is targeted and strategic, maximizing the economic leverage of the United States, our partners and allies in Europe and elsewhere, and international investors, while avoiding the risk of a more indiscriminate approach.

The Banking Committee exercises jurisdiction over virtually all aspects of U.S. financial and economic sanctions policy toward Iran, which can be summarized in three categories: No. 1, the U.S. trade and investment ban administered by the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control; No. 2, sanctions against foreign companies that invest substantially in the energy sector, proceeds from which support Iran's proliferation or terrorism-related activities; and, No. 3, targeted financial measures, including freezing assets of individuals involved in that proliferation.

Last year, the committee conducted a hearing on the effectiveness of Iran sanctions. Working with the administration, the Banking Committee acted swiftly to strengthen the U.S. trade/investment ban, and ultimately we saw enactment in October of the International Emergency Economic Powers Enhancement Act. This new law holds violators of U.S. sanctions law accountable, adding, I might add, jail time and severe fines against those investing in Iran or other state sponsors of terror.

Also, last year, shortly after the House of Representatives acted on its version of Iran-related legislation, I then asked the majority leader, Senator Harry Reid, to expedite Senate consideration of various Iran-related bills. The leader, as you might expect, agreed and moved quickly. But we were unable to clear them completely on the other side of this Chamber, which I regret.

The Government Accountability Office then issued a report last December raising questions about whether our current sanctions regime against Iran furthers U.S. policy objectives and how they might be made more effective. Among other things, that report concluded that the ongoing illegal transshipment of sensitive dual-use technologies from often unwitting U.S. and other Western suppliers to countries such as Iran--sometimes through three or four levels of suppliers--is one very effective way around current U.S. sanctions.

In recent months, the Banking Committee refined and combined in one package various pieces of the Iran-related legislation, accommodating concerns of Members on both sides of the political aisle and those of the Bush administration. We now have a very streamlined bill that I hope will enjoy broad bipartisan support if I am given the opportunity to offer it on the Defense authorization bill. This streamlined version of this sanctions bill was reported out of the Banking Committee in July by a strong bipartisan vote of 19 to 2.

The missile tests that Iran conducted in July were provocative, and its persistent refusal to abide by United Nations Security Council demands--despite a host of sanctions already in place--is very troubling. Iran's behavior with respect to weapons proliferation, support for terrorism, destabilization of its neighbors, and threats against our allies and interests demands a very serious response.

We only have a few weeks remaining in this legislative session. We will not return to actually legislate until late January of next year. I would hope we would find time, whether on this bill or some other vehicle, to enact, as I am confident we can, with a strong bipartisan vote, this Iran sanctions idea. This bill is one very important part of that response.

I again thank Senator Shelby, my colleague, as well as other committee members, Republicans and Democrats, who worked together to pass this legislation. Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana, Senator Brownback of Kansas, Senators Smith, Durbin, Lautenberg, and others have worked very hard on the Iran issues and deserve a great deal of credit for the product we have been able to put together. I thank, as well, Senator Obama for his critical work on this Iran divestment legislation which, again, was adopted in a strong bipartisan fashion by the committee as part of its integrated bill.

Current U.N. Security Council sanctions against the Government of Iran have been extremely important, but I think we have an obligation to take measures, consistent with the objectives of the U.N. sanctions, to increase the leverage of the United States and our allies in a much more aggressive, diplomatic, and political initiative to bring Iran back to the table and ultimately persuade its Government to change its behavior.

Let me describe briefly the sanctions provisions.

First, the bill expands the definition of ``person'' under the Iran Sanctions Act to include financial institutions, underwriters, guarantors, and other business entities and extends the applicability of sanctions to oil and gas pipelines and tankers. It imposes a broad ban on imports directly from Iran to the United States and exports from the United States to Iran of those few items still able to be shipped while exempting food and medicines to Iran, certain informational materials, and aids to navigation designed for safe operation of commercial aircraft.

The bill also provides for a freezing of assets of those members of the diplomatic community or Iranian military who have been identified by the President of the United States as active in weapons proliferation or terrorist activity. The bill clarifies that U.S. entities that establish a subsidiary for the purpose of getting around U.S. sanctions laws can be held liable for the activities of their subsidiaries. The bill also increases funding to the Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence of the Treasury Department to ensure that the international financial system is not used by those who support terrorism or engage in proliferation-sensitive activities.

Finally, this bill imposes new requirements that the President actually make a determination and report every

6 months to Congress regarding the sanctionability of certain eligible investments in Iran's energy sector. This is designed to address the problem of billions of dollars in oil and gas investment projects being subject to sanctions--over $27 billion in eligible oil and gas investments since 1999, according to the Congressional Research Service--but successive administrations refusing to make final determinations required by law, much less impose appropriate sanctions on entities involved in such projects, I might add, have raised some certain issues.

In addition to expanding U.S. sanctions on the Government of Iran, this bill would also provide a simple formula for divestment from firms which invest significant amounts in Iran's energy sector with provisions patterned after the Sudan Accountability and Divestment Act that we all voted for earlier this year.

The rationale for this is straightforward. Many of us believe Americans should be able to divest from energy firms doing business with the Iranian regime whose policies they abhor and which by their presence indirectly help to prop up that regime. They should be given the tools they need to make socially responsible decisions, and investors who choose to divest--States, large pension and mutual funds, and others--should be held harmless for these decisions. Likewise, firms which continue to do business in the energy sector in Iran should recognize the substantial risks involved in this decision and adjust their strategies accordingly.

This bill is as much about enabling investors to manage risk as about having Congress set foreign policy. Make no mistake. Investing in Iran these days is risky business, and investors should be fully informed of those risks going in. This bill does not require divestment, it simply permits it, as with the Sudan legislation--if the investments in Iran's energy sector are substantial and if the divestment process is crafted consistent with the provisions of this bill.

Divestment from Iran is already well underway nationwide, prompted by campaigns patterned after the South African divestment movement and that involving the Sudan. Eight States of our country have already enacted Iran divestment legislation. Other States have enacted broader divestment legislation focused on state sponsors of terrorism. Many more States are considering Iran divestment measures in their State legislatures or have taken steps administratively to allow for such divestment.

Some colleges and universities have begun to divest their holdings, as well, and efforts are underway at many more. Large cities, nonprofit organizations, pension and mutual funds have joined this campaign. It is a campaign that enjoys, I might add, worldwide support, and that could provide significant economic leverage to the diplomatic and political efforts to curtail Iran's apparent nuclear ambitions.

How would it work? First, the amendment authorizes States and localities to divest from companies involved in the energy sector in Iran and sets universal divestment standards. Secondly, the bill allows mutual fund and corporate pension fund managers to cut ties with companies involved in these key sectors and offers limited protection from lawsuits for those choosing to divest or not to invest in the first place, while preserving their normal fiduciary duties. Third, this bill allows State and local governments to divest their public pension funds from businesses invested in Iran's energy sector. Fourth, it establishes a new mechanism for disclosure for firms divesting their holdings in such entities and sunsets, I might add, the divestment mechanism when the President of the United States certifies that Iran has ceased its support for international terrorism and its support of weapons of mass destruction.

Let's be very clear about what this amendment achieves in terms of divestment--and what it does not do. It does not outsource foreign policy to State and local governments or run afoul of the supremacy clause of the Constitution, as some have claimed. Rather, it protects the rights of investors to make socially responsible decisions--to refrain from holding assets that may serve to bolster the Government of Iran. It allows States and other investors to divest in a relatively uniform way, if they so choose, so they may avoid the complications of diverging approaches.

Under this bill, States can act out of concern for the long-term financial and reputational risks posed by an affiliation with certain investments in the nation of Iran. Once identifying these specific risks, States are to inform the companies with a notice detailing such issues--not merely based on a foreign policy concern but on the State's assessment of the economic risks posed by investments in firms involved in certain energy-related business in Iran. It thus outlines a Federal divestment policy--a complicated and yet very clear path consistent with U.S. unilateral and multilateral sanctions already imposed, I might add--and authorizes investors to act consistently with that policy, again, if they so choose.

Finally, and very importantly--unlike other legislation acted upon by Congress--the amendment I am offering provides new incentives for countries to strengthen their export control systems to stop the illegal diversion of sensitive and dual-use technology to countries such as Iran and imposes additional licensing requirements on those who refuse to cooperate.

As we confront the realities of a global marketplace, with manufacturers assembling parts of complex machinery such as aircraft and computers from a supply chain spanning the globe, and as regimes such as Iran, North Korea, and Syria trawl various transshipment hubs for such parts to assemble high-technology weapons, it makes sense to address this problem head on.

We have developed a way to do this similar to an approach previously proposed in regulatory form by the administration, with an array of carrots and, if necessary, sticks to prod unwilling countries to get serious about developing and implementing tough, comprehensive export control rules and systems. This measure will strengthen antidiversion measures, and it will help countries willing to bolster their systems to do so and impose tighter licensing restrictions on those countries that have a record of spotty enforcement or that are unwilling to improve their systems.

I was pleased we were able to come to an agreement on this comprehensive approach in the Banking Committee. I might point out that similar legislation was adopted under the leadership of Senator Max Baucus and Chuck Grassley at the Senate Finance Committee, also, I might add, on a bipartisan basis. Much more assertive diplomacy and efforts to bolster our relationship with Iran's people, coupled with tougher financial measures such as these to increase economic pressure to bring the Iranian Government to the table, is the way forward for U.S. policy.

Our European and other allies continue, as I mentioned earlier, to work closely with the United States to increase economic and diplomatic pressure on Iran. I happen to believe this measure complements those diplomatic efforts. It is providing the kind of tools that those who are responsible for the conduct of foreign policy ought to have that will give them the leverage necessary to try and bring Iran back to that negotiating table, back to that political table, that will allow us to diffuse this growing problem, this threat that we all worry about, and bring us to a conclusion that will be satisfactory to us and to Iran, as well, I might point out. The steps contained in this bill are consistent with the strong international consensus that Iran's behavior is unacceptable, and they are in sync with the U.N. sanctions and those additional sanctions imposed by our allies.

Again, I thank my colleagues, particularly Senator Shelby of the Senate Banking Committee, and the 17 other members of that committee, for the adoption of this comprehensive, bipartisan proposal on Iran sanctions. My hope would be, as I said earlier, that we would have the opportunity to offer this proposal before the conclusion of this session of Congress.

Madam President, I wish to briefly, if I could, turn to another subject matter, and one that has certainly captured the attention of all of us in recent days; that is, of course, these tremendous storms that have been raging through the Caribbean as well as, of course, the devastating damage in Texas in the Galveston area, particularly. The sights and the pictures we

are all witnessing on television and in the newspapers certainly bring back the dreadful memories of Katrina. These storms that have ravaged our country are natural disasters. Certainly our prayers and our hopes are with the people of the Galveston area and others who have been afflicted by the terrible flooding in the Midwest. We are concerned about them, and we will do everything we can to help them put their lives back in order.

The devastation we have witnessed is heart-rending, and I think it is incumbent upon us to respond generously and speedily to help the tens of thousands along the Texas coast who need our help.

I rise also to discuss the humanitarian catastrophes inflicted against the people of the Caribbean. I chair the subcommittee on foreign relations that deals with Latin America, and I am particularly interested, obviously, in what happens in this part of the world. I served as a Peace Corps volunteer not far from the Haitian border of the Dominican Republic when I left college in 1966. I served for 2 years in that country, and I have gone back many times over the years and have maintained a close relationship. So when I see these storms ravaging the island of Hispaniola, which includes the Dominican Republic and Haiti, and roar through the island of Cuba--it has done such devastation; I am told it is the worst storm to inflict such damage on that country in more than a half of century--I wish to take a moment to talk about what we might do.

I support an amendment offered by Senator Lugar, the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and which we have introduced on a bipartisan basis. We hope this might be something that all of our colleagues would support as well. It is to respond to the devastation these storms have caused on the island of Cuba to the Cuban people.

Across the Caribbean, millions of people have been displaced, lost their homes, and watched helplessly as bridges and infrastructure were washed out, leaving them isolated and without supplies. They face serious shortages of food, medicine, and hope.

The need in Haiti is extremely grave. USAID has undertaken an urgent program in Haiti, where hundreds of storm victims have died, thousands of homes have been destroyed, and untold people have been weakened by chronic malnutrition, lack food and water. USAID has already launched a $20 million program to rush assistance to the suffering people of Haiti, and further needs are certain to be identified there in our hemisphere's poorest country where the average income is something like a few dollars a week. It is a nation that has been devastated over the last number of years.

In Jamaica, 72 communities have been hit hard, leaving a dozen people dead and thousands without shelter. The U.S. Ambassador in Kingston has declared a disaster and has begun disbursing $100,000 there. USAID is working with the Jamaican disaster specialists to purchase and deliver hundreds of thousands of dollars of supplies to communities cut off when roads were washed out. The relief supplies include hygiene kits, plastic sheeting, jerry cans, and blankets.

This very effective response brings relief to innocent victims of the storms and it projects the American message of concern and hope for our Caribbean neighbors. Unfortunately, I cannot say the same for our response to the crisis caused by the hurricanes that have battered the lives of the 11 million people on the island of Cuba. Evacuations of 2 million citizens helped reduce the loss of life, but the damage is immense. Hurricanes Gustav and Ike destroyed 150,000 homes and seriously damaged 200,000 others. The United Nations estimates that Cuba suffered between $3 billion and $4 billion in losses. Hundreds of thousands of victims are without shelter, fresh water, and electricity, damage to agriculture is massive, food and medicine are in short supply, and the need for materials to repair homes vastly overtakes supply.

The State Department offered to disburse $100,000 in emergency funds through the U.S. Interests Section--our Embassy in Havana--which is a step in the right direction, and I applaud them making that offer. In addition, over the weekend the State Department offered an emergency shipment of $5 million of assistance to Cuba. Cuban officials--in what I think is a very shortsighted move, in my opinion--rejected the offer, saying they would not accept a handout from a country that would not sell the same items to them.

The administration has also authorized certain U.S.-based nongovernmental organizations, with activities the administration has previously approved, to provide larger amounts of humanitarian assistance in Cuba, including cash donations to approved recipients for 90 days. These Government-approved channels for assistance to Government-approved recipients are again steps in the right direction, but given the devastation that has occurred, it is not hardly enough. They disallow, moreover, the outpouring of assistance from Americans individually who want to help directly and generously, as Americans do in times such as these, not just through administration-approved channels.

Large numbers of the Cuban-American community in our country, eager to help family members back on the island of Cuba, are blocked from doing so by tough regulations that the administration implemented in 2004 in an effort to promote the collapse of the Cuban regime. These regulations dramatically and drastically impair citizens of our country--who come ethnically from the island of Cuba and who have family members there--of the ability to visit their families during this time, even under extraordinary circumstances such as the death of a loved one. The regulations drastically impair their ability to send cash assistance to families in the same manner as all other Caribbean, Central American, and Mexican families do--families who have citizens in this country and have families in Jamaica and Haiti, the Dominican Republic--to go there and provide assistance to them.

It is no secret that the U.S. embargo on Cuba has been, at least in my view, a dismal failure. Rather than weaken the Cuban Government and force it to change, it has only served to weaken the Cuban people and deprive them of any hope at all. The administration's tougher regulations circumscribing Americans' right to help family and friends in dire need in Cuba are part of the same failed policy. Apparently, some in the Bush administration believe that holding firm on embargo policy--even during a humanitarian disaster--will discredit Fidel or Raul Castro and lead to their precipitous downfall. When human suffering is as massive as we see in Cuba today after these hurricanes, there is no room, in my view, for such cynicism.

Despite the obvious need for a total overhaul of policy toward Cuba, the amendment Senator Lugar and I have introduced today addresses only the immediate humanitarian crisis and only on a temporary basis. For a period of 180 days, our amendment would lift prohibitions on Americans with families in Cuba to travel to the island to provide help during the crisis. Secondly, only for 180 days, our proposal would ease restrictions on the cash remittances by any American to Cuban people at this time of extreme need--only for 180 days. Thirdly, our proposal would expand the definition of gift parcels that Americans are authorized to send to the Cuban people or nongovernmental organizations over the next 180 days to include food, medication, clothing, hygiene items, and other daily necessities. Fourth, the bill would allow the cash sale using mechanisms similar to those already in place for the sale of agricultural products, of certain items Cubans need to rebuild their homes, again for a limited period of 180 days.

Let me be absolutely clear. These measures do not lift the embargo at all. They have nothing to do with the embargo per se but merely loosen some of these less humane regulations implemented in 2004 in a direct response to a humanitarian crisis. Cuban Americans in this country ought to be allowed to help their family members on the island of Cuba during this time--for 180 days--to be able to send food and clothing and medicines, some cash remittances, or to travel there to help out, and they should not be banned by the United States of America.

Let me promise you something: Hugo Chavez will be filling that gap. Why are we going to allow, in this hemisphere, someone in Venezuela whom we abhor

to step in to provide some assistance and help when the United States ought to be doing something, at least allowing people to step in to make a difference in the lives of these people?

These are modest steps that allow the greatness and the generosity of the American people to shine through without political or ideological filters. I can think of no better way of giving the Cuban people a message of hope that we stand with them. We disagree with their Government and their Government policies, and we are not likely to change that anytime soon. But we care about them and what happens to their families and their children. In a natural disaster, the worst in 50 years, an island country 90 miles off our shore, we ought to be able to do a better job than sit here and lecture about geopolitics and allow them to go through this suffering without allowing people to help others to get back on their feet again.

The intent of this amendment has broad support. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops wrote:

In light of the devastation and humanitarian disaster

caused by recent hurricanes in Cuba and the efforts of

extended families, friends and organizations to reach those

in need, I urge you, [President Bush] to suspend--even

temporarily--Treasury and Commerce Department restrictions

and licensing requirements for humanitarian travel and

remittances by American citizens and assistance by not-for-

profit organizations. At times of crisis, there are simple

and basic acts of charity on which people rely.

The Catholic bishops and numerous NGOs are right, and we know it, and I think we should help.

To those who think that refusing to help will somehow serve our U.S. national interests, I make just two observations. We need to be honest with ourselves: To be seen as wanting the Cuban people to suffer and starve--while we rush to the aid of their Caribbean neighbors--is not going to contribute to our common goal of promoting a peaceful, democratic transition, which Cuba desperately needs and deserves, and good relations between our countries in the future.

Moreover, as we stand on the sidelines, other countries are more than willing to fill that vacuum. As I mentioned a moment ago, President Chavez of Venezuela has been most generous, according to press reports. Russia has sent four cargo planes with tons of emergency supplies and construction materials. China has provided over $300,000. Spain has already sent planeloads of relief supplies. Brazil, Argentina, and Mexico are offering assistance without political restrictions.

Senator Lugar and I believe this is a moment in which we ought to set aside--at least for 180 days--our differences to a nation of people who are less than 100 miles off our shore, who have family members--many courageous people who live in this country and who want to do something to help their family members and friends as they go through recovering from these terrible storms that have ravaged their nation. At the appropriate time, Senator Lugar and I wish to offer this amendment and urge our colleagues, whatever other differences we may have had and will have on Cuban policy, this is a moment when we all ought to come together to step up and make a difference in the lives of people who, frankly, could use the help.

I yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I rise to support wholeheartedly the ADA Amendments Act of 2008. Nearly 20 years ago Congress passed the groundbreaking Americans with Disabilities Act. Because of its enactment and implementation, our country has made progress in eliminating the historical stigma previously associated with disability and guaranteeing basic civil rights and liberties to people with disabilities. I was a proud supporter of the ADA then, and I am a strong supporter of the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 now. In the years since the ADA became law, the courts have inappropriately limited its scope, and many Americans with disabilities have been denied the rights the law was intended to give them. This legislation will serve to ensure that those rights are protected and that people with disabilities are fully protected. It is my hope that this legislation will also help America become more accepting of diversity.

I would like to take a moment to applaud Senator Harkin for his leadership on the ADA. Without his leadership neither the ADA, nor this legislation, would have been possible. I also would like to praise my good friends Senator Kennedy and Senator Hatch, whose commitment to the issue made the passage of this legislation possible.

For decades, we have fought for the civil rights of people with disabilities, combating the antiquated mindsets of segregation, discrimination, and ignorance. Our Nation has come from a time when the exclusion of people with disabilities was the norm. We have come from a time when doctors told parents that their children with disabilities were better left isolated in institutions. We have come from a time when individuals with disabilities were not considered contributing members of society. Those times have thankfully changed. The passage of the ADA in 1990 provided the first step toward that change our country so desperately needed.

Although we have come along way in the past 18 years, the Americans with Disabilities Act has not afforded the full protections that this antidiscrimination statute originally intended to provide. The law has been repeatedly misinterpreted by the courts that have used an extremely narrow definition of disability. This definition is so narrow that many defendants with clear disabilities cannot even get their case heard in a courtroom because they do not qualify as having a disability. People with disabilities excluded from protections under the ADA include those with amputations, muscular dystrophy, epilepsy, diabetes, multiple sclerosis, cancer, and intellectual disabilities.

Ultimately, a series of Supreme Court rulings established precedents that leave many of our fellow citizens with disabilities little or no protections under current law. These decisions created a platform for future courts to say that a person does not have a disability when they benefit from mitigating measures such as medications, therapies, or other corrective devices. Ironically, this means that people with disabilities who use measures such as assistive technology to help them lead more self-sufficient lives are ultimately not protected from discrimination related to their disability. The Supreme Court decisions further narrowed the definition of disability by imposing a strict and demanding standard to the definition of disability--barring Americans coping with intellectual disabilities from the law's protections.

Equal protection under the law in the United States of America is not a privilege, but rather, it is a fundamental right due every citizen of our Nation, regardless of race, gender, national origin, religion, sex, age, or disability. It is unacceptable to deny any individual his or her right to those protections because of a misconstrued definition of disability. Our country has an obligation to its citizens to ensure that their fundamental rights are protected, and, if those rights are violated, that the option of recourse is available.

This antidiscrimination legislation would move us forward as one Nation in the direction that was intended 18 years ago. If this bill is signed into law, it will provide much needed clarification on the definition of disability, covering those individuals that rightly need protections under this law. The bill rejects the findings of the Supreme Court cases and specifies that mitigating measures are not to be considered in disability determining and clarifies that the definition should be more broadly interpreted.

Fortunately, we are a changing society, and we have come a long way since those times of segregation and stigma. Recognizing that our society needs to take yet another step to improve the civil rights of our fellow citizens, I urge my colleagues to join with us and pass the ADA Amendments Act of 2008.

I sincerely hope my colleagues will join me in bettering our country by passing the ADA Amendments Act. As we are a just society, I will continue to fight for the rights of my fellow Americans with disabilities so that we all have an equal chance to achieve the American dream. I urge my fellow colleagues to support this essential piece of legislation on behalf of the American people.

Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Semester of Service Act--a bill which would offer young people the opportunity to spend a semester serving their communities during their junior or senior year of high school. I want to thank Senators Cochran and Kennedy for joining me in introducing this legislation.

Throughout the U.S., there are mounting problems and unmet needs.

We have millions of families losing their homes. We have 14 million children that have no supervised place to go after school. We have a health care system that is barely able to hold itself together. And we have veterans and seniors who have given so much to our country unable to get the treatment they were promised and retire with the dignity they have earned.

We can debate how best to solve these problems and others. Some suggest the market can do the job. Others believe the government has an appropriate role to play.

But one thing upon which we can all agree is that when we provide service to our communities, we can tackle so many of our toughest challenges. Service that draws upon our collective imaginations, ideas, and resolve. No one is better equipped to take part in that effort, Mr. President, than our Nation's young people.

As the father of two young daughters, every day I bear witness to the energy, enthusiasm and imagination children bring to every single thing they do. And if the online communities of today teach us anything, it is that young people yearn for shared experiences--for experiences that take them out of their comfort zones to introduce them to new people, put them in new situations and teach them things they might never otherwise learn.

As a young man serving in the Peace Corps, I learned for myself how much we can grow and learn and, more importantly, the difference we can make when we serve. Today, what children need from us is the impetus and leadership to redirect that boundless energy of theirs toward the betterment of our communities. Unlocking the remarkable potential in our young people is what this legislation is all about.

With a semester of service, they can help tutor elementary-school students. They can assist those living in our veterans' hospitals or in hospice. Or they can help clean up neighborhoods and the environment. Those are just a few of the opportunities the Semester of Service Act offers. The difference service makes to our younger generation is as clear as the need for it.

We talk so much about ways to improve academic performance in our schools. Well, when community service is integrated into our students' curricula at school, we know that young people make gains on achievement tests. Service-learning results in grade point averages going up and more positive feelings about high school.

The benefits of service-learning go well beyond the classroom. When young people participate in community service activities they feel better able to control their own lives in a positive way. They are less prone to engage in risky behavior, more likely to engage in their own education, and far more aware of the career opportunities before them.

Indeed, research shows that for every dollar we spend on a service- learning project, $4 worth of service is provided to the community involved. That means by authorizing $200 million for fiscal year 2009, as this legislation does, our country will save more than half a billion dollars in service performed.

This legislation works by creating a competitive grant program that provides school districts, or nonprofits working in partnership with local school districts, the opportunity to have students participate in a semester of service in their junior or senior year for academic credit. These students are required to perform a minimum of 70 hours of service learning activities over 12 weeks, with at least 24 of those hours spent participating in field-based activities--outside of the classroom.

By engaging both the public and private sector, Semester of Service teaches civic participation skills and helps young people see themselves not merely as residents in their communities--but resources to them.

Ultimately, that is what this legislation is about. As with our legislation to strengthen and expand AmeriCorps and increase senior involvement in national service, this bill is about maximizing our resources. It's about increasing participation, engaging our young people, and lifting up our communities. That is why communities from all across this Nation have endorsed this Semester of Service legislation.

If we ask all Americans to take responsibility for the future of our country as we do with this legislation, I believe our best days can be ahead of us--not in the memories of the past, but in the world of our children. We can move forward as a Nation, lead the world and create a better, brighter tomorrow for all of us.

Let us start that journey today.

Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Encore Service Act of 2008--legislation which would offer Americans 55 years of age and older the chance to serve their communities and use their expertise and life lessons to give back to the country that has given them so much. I want to thank Senators Cochran and Kennedy for joining me in introducing this legislation.

As we have discussed time and time again, the challenges facing America are mounting--from an aging population to a broken health care system to challenges in our schools that put our children's futures at risk.

These are problems that countless Americans have lived and struggled with--that we here in this institution have debated for years, decades even. We can disagree amongst ourselves about how to solve them--and we certainly have. But what we can all agree on is the impact citizens can make when it comes to facing some of our biggest challenges.

We know the extraordinary things ordinary citizens can accomplish for our communities when given the opportunity--the difference they can make in our schools and nursing homes, in veterans' hospitals and in helping those living on fixed incomes.

We know the character of our people in our darkest moments. Indeed, while September 11 may have showed us that our world had changed--it was September 12 that reminded us: Americans had not. The community blood drives, the heroic work of our Nation's firefighters, the floods of donations--all were a powerful reminder that Americans are always ready to give back when their country calls.

I will never forget the Mayor of Pass Christian Mississippi telling me about an elderly Connecticut couple who drove all the way to the Gulf Coast in the wake of Katrina for no other reason than to help their fellow countrymen and women. Contrary to what some suggest, I believe the American people are starved for opportunities to serve--and stand at the ready not just in times of crisis, but every day. Americans are simply waiting to be asked. I am introducing this legislation today because, it is time they were.

The truth is, no one is more ready or more poised to make a difference--in our communities and throughout our country--than older Americans.

We have all heard about the aging Baby Boomer generation--in the next decade alone, the number of Americans 55 years and older is expected to grow by another 22 percent. But for all the well-publicized challenges that growth presents, it's time we also recognize something else: The opportunities it offers--if we seize them.

Studies tell us that more than half of those considered a part of the Baby Boomer generation are interested in providing meaningful service to their communities. Countless older men and women who have given so much to their country throughout their lives want to continue to serve their communities as they enter their later years.

Why wouldn't they? After a lifetime of hard work, raising a family, and paying taxes, Americans look forward to retirement--to enjoying their golden years with the security and dignity they have earned. They are living longer, healthier lives than any generation in history. And they recognize something elemental:

Life doesn't end at retirement. For many, it is only beginning-- leading perhaps to a second career in the public or nonprofit sector. There can be no greater gift passed on to future generations than the lessons of the past. But the truth is, we too often fail to draw upon the experience, knowledge and ideas of previous generations. What is missing is the opportunity.

Providing older Americans those opportunities is what the Encore Service Act is all about. It creates an Encore Service Program that provides Americans 55 years and older with opportunities to serve communities with the greatest need--to volunteer in our Nation's schools, to help keep our neighborhoods clean, safe and vibrant, and so much more. In return for their service, which may include extensive training and a significant commitment of time, they can receive a stipend and education award, much like AmeriCorps does for younger generations.

Best of all, that stipend can be transferred to children or grandchildren. Imagine what that means for a grandmother or a grandfather who could literally put thousands of dollars into their newborn grandchild's college savings fund as a result of this program-- funds that can only be used after the

child turns 18 and can be kept for up to 20 years. Of all the new ideas in this legislation, perhaps this one is the most exciting.

This legislation also creates an Encore Fellows program that places older Americans in one-year management or leadership positions in public or private not-for-profits. These year-long fellowships not only increase the capacity of public service organizations already doing tremendous work in our communities, they also promote those who have already had full, successful careers, perhaps in the private sector, to lend their expertise and experience to the cause of community or public service.

The Encore Service Act also creates a Silver Scholars program that awards older Americans with an education scholarship of up to $1,000 in exchange for volunteering with public agencies or private nonprofits between 250 and 500 hours a year. As with the Encore Service Program, they can use these awards for themselves or transfer them to children, grandchildren or other qualified designees.

Lastly, this legislation expands the capacity and builds on the success of current Senior Programs by raising the authorization funding levels for the Foster Grandparent, Senior Corps and RSVP programs. We all know that seniors and these programs have already made a remarkable difference in our communities. That is why our legislation raises program eligibility levels from 125 to 200 percent above poverty and ensures that all programs will be open to any individual 55 years and older.

The Encore Service Act authorizes $326.7 million in new funding for fiscal year 2009, and such sums as necessary for subsequent years. Ultimately, this bill is about unlocking the remarkable potential in older Americans. It is about creating ample opportunities for them to use their skills and talents to give back to their communities--to elementary schools, retirement homes, soup kitchens operating out of local churches, libraries, and other centers of our communities.

It is about harnessing the power of experience. We all know that when called upon, every generation of Americans has risen to the challenge, often beating great odds to pass on a stronger, safer, more prosperous world to its children and grandchildren.

Americans are ready once again for leadership that marshals the same unity, purpose and generosity that so defined our country in the wake of 9/11, and has so defined our Nation so many times before. That is what the Encore Service Act of 2008 is about. I am honored to introduce it today.

Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Semester of Service Act--a bill which would offer young people the opportunity to spend a semester serving their communities during their junior or senior year of high school. I want to thank Senators Cochran and Kennedy for joining me in introducing this legislation.

Throughout the U.S., there are mounting problems and unmet needs.

We have millions of families losing their homes. We have 14 million children that have no supervised place to go after school. We have a health care system that is barely able to hold itself together. And we have veterans and seniors who have given so much to our country unable to get the treatment they were promised and retire with the dignity they have earned.

We can debate how best to solve these problems and others. Some suggest the market can do the job. Others believe the government has an appropriate role to play.

But one thing upon which we can all agree is that when we provide service to our communities, we can tackle so many of our toughest challenges. Service that draws upon our collective imaginations, ideas, and resolve. No one is better equipped to take part in that effort, Mr. President, than our Nation's young people.

As the father of two young daughters, every day I bear witness to the energy, enthusiasm and imagination children bring to every single thing they do. And if the online communities of today teach us anything, it is that young people yearn for shared experiences--for experiences that take them out of their comfort zones to introduce them to new people, put them in new situations and teach them things they might never otherwise learn.

As a young man serving in the Peace Corps, I learned for myself how much we can grow and learn and, more importantly, the difference we can make when we serve. Today, what children need from us is the impetus and leadership to redirect that boundless energy of theirs toward the betterment of our communities. Unlocking the remarkable potential in our young people is what this legislation is all about.

With a semester of service, they can help tutor elementary-school students. They can assist those living in our veterans' hospitals or in hospice. Or they can help clean up neighborhoods and the environment. Those are just a few of the opportunities the Semester of Service Act offers. The difference service makes to our younger generation is as clear as the need for it.

We talk so much about ways to improve academic performance in our schools. Well, when community service is integrated into our students' curricula at school, we know that young people make gains on achievement tests. Service-learning results in grade point averages going up and more positive feelings about high school.

The benefits of service-learning go well beyond the classroom. When young people participate in community service activities they feel better able to control their own lives in a positive way. They are less prone to engage in risky behavior, more likely to engage in their own education, and far more aware of the career opportunities before them.

Indeed, research shows that for every dollar we spend on a service- learning project, $4 worth of service is provided to the community involved. That means by authorizing $200 million for fiscal year 2009, as this legislation does, our country will save more than half a billion dollars in service performed.

This legislation works by creating a competitive grant program that provides school districts, or nonprofits working in partnership with local school districts, the opportunity to have students participate in a semester of service in their junior or senior year for academic credit. These students are required to perform a minimum of 70 hours of service learning activities over 12 weeks, with at least 24 of those hours spent participating in field-based activities--outside of the classroom.

By engaging both the public and private sector, Semester of Service teaches civic participation skills and helps young people see themselves not merely as residents in their communities--but resources to them.

Ultimately, that is what this legislation is about. As with our legislation to strengthen and expand AmeriCorps and increase senior involvement in national service, this bill is about maximizing our resources. It's about increasing participation, engaging our young people, and lifting up our communities. That is why communities from all across this Nation have endorsed this Semester of Service legislation.

If we ask all Americans to take responsibility for the future of our country as we do with this legislation, I believe our best days can be ahead of us--not in the memories of the past, but in the world of our children. We can move forward as a Nation, lead the world and create a better, brighter tomorrow for all of us.

Let us start that journey today.

Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Encore Service Act of 2008--legislation which would offer Americans 55 years of age and older the chance to serve their communities and use their expertise and life lessons to give back to the country that has given them so much. I want to thank Senators Cochran and Kennedy for joining me in introducing this legislation.

As we have discussed time and time again, the challenges facing America are mounting--from an aging population to a broken health care system to challenges in our schools that put our children's futures at risk.

These are problems that countless Americans have lived and struggled with--that we here in this institution have debated for years, decades even. We can disagree amongst ourselves about how to solve them--and we certainly have. But what we can all agree on is the impact citizens can make when it comes to facing some of our biggest challenges.

We know the extraordinary things ordinary citizens can accomplish for our communities when given the opportunity--the difference they can make in our schools and nursing homes, in veterans' hospitals and in helping those living on fixed incomes.

We know the character of our people in our darkest moments. Indeed, while September 11 may have showed us that our world had changed--it was September 12 that reminded us: Americans had not. The community blood drives, the heroic work of our Nation's firefighters, the floods of donations--all were a powerful reminder that Americans are always ready to give back when their country calls.

I will never forget the Mayor of Pass Christian Mississippi telling me about an elderly Connecticut couple who drove all the way to the Gulf Coast in the wake of Katrina for no other reason than to help their fellow countrymen and women. Contrary to what some suggest, I believe the American people are starved for opportunities to serve--and stand at the ready not just in times of crisis, but every day. Americans are simply waiting to be asked. I am introducing this legislation today because, it is time they were.

The truth is, no one is more ready or more poised to make a difference--in our communities and throughout our country--than older Americans.

We have all heard about the aging Baby Boomer generation--in the next decade alone, the number of Americans 55 years and older is expected to grow by another 22 percent. But for all the well-publicized challenges that growth presents, it's time we also recognize something else: The opportunities it offers--if we seize them.

Studies tell us that more than half of those considered a part of the Baby Boomer generation are interested in providing meaningful service to their communities. Countless older men and women who have given so much to their country throughout their lives want to continue to serve their communities as they enter their later years.

Why wouldn't they? After a lifetime of hard work, raising a family, and paying taxes, Americans look forward to retirement--to enjoying their golden years with the security and dignity they have earned. They are living longer, healthier lives than any generation in history. And they recognize something elemental:

Life doesn't end at retirement. For many, it is only beginning-- leading perhaps to a second career in the public or nonprofit sector. There can be no greater gift passed on to future generations than the lessons of the past. But the truth is, we too often fail to draw upon the experience, knowledge and ideas of previous generations. What is missing is the opportunity.

Providing older Americans those opportunities is what the Encore Service Act is all about. It creates an Encore Service Program that provides Americans 55 years and older with opportunities to serve communities with the greatest need--to volunteer in our Nation's schools, to help keep our neighborhoods clean, safe and vibrant, and so much more. In return for their service, which may include extensive training and a significant commitment of time, they can receive a stipend and education award, much like AmeriCorps does for younger generations.

Best of all, that stipend can be transferred to children or grandchildren. Imagine what that means for a grandmother or a grandfather who could literally put thousands of dollars into their newborn grandchild's college savings fund as a result of this program-- funds that can only be used after the

child turns 18 and can be kept for up to 20 years. Of all the new ideas in this legislation, perhaps this one is the most exciting.

This legislation also creates an Encore Fellows program that places older Americans in one-year management or leadership positions in public or private not-for-profits. These year-long fellowships not only increase the capacity of public service organizations already doing tremendous work in our communities, they also promote those who have already had full, successful careers, perhaps in the private sector, to lend their expertise and experience to the cause of community or public service.

The Encore Service Act also creates a Silver Scholars program that awards older Americans with an education scholarship of up to $1,000 in exchange for volunteering with public agencies or private nonprofits between 250 and 500 hours a year. As with the Encore Service Program, they can use these awards for themselves or transfer them to children, grandchildren or other qualified designees.

Lastly, this legislation expands the capacity and builds on the success of current Senior Programs by raising the authorization funding levels for the Foster Grandparent, Senior Corps and RSVP programs. We all know that seniors and these programs have already made a remarkable difference in our communities. That is why our legislation raises program eligibility levels from 125 to 200 percent above poverty and ensures that all programs will be open to any individual 55 years and older.

The Encore Service Act authorizes $326.7 million in new funding for fiscal year 2009, and such sums as necessary for subsequent years. Ultimately, this bill is about unlocking the remarkable potential in older Americans. It is about creating ample opportunities for them to use their skills and talents to give back to their communities--to elementary schools, retirement homes, soup kitchens operating out of local churches, libraries, and other centers of our communities.

It is about harnessing the power of experience. We all know that when called upon, every generation of Americans has risen to the challenge, often beating great odds to pass on a stronger, safer, more prosperous world to its children and grandchildren.

Americans are ready once again for leadership that marshals the same unity, purpose and generosity that so defined our country in the wake of 9/11, and has so defined our Nation so many times before. That is what the Encore Service Act of 2008 is about. I am honored to introduce it today.

Mr. President, I rise today to honor the life and career of Babe Ruth, one of America's greatest baseball players. The man we know as Babe Ruth, was born on February 6, 1895, as George Herman Ruth, Jr. and passed away 60 years ago on August 16, 1948. In his obituary, the New York Times called him ``a figure unprecedented in American life. A born showman off the field and a marvelous performer on it, he had an amazing flair for doing the spectacular at the most dramatic moment.'' Although he played his last season in 1935, Ruth still holds the records for all-time highest slugging percentage. Ruth's 714 career homers and his consistent dominance in the batter's box rightly earned him the nickname, ``The Sultan of Swat.''

However, Babe Ruth was more than a superior ballplayer. Although his dramatically big swing earned him a place in the record books, Mr. Ruth was a figure of legendary proportions who permanently changed the game of baseball and made it a fixture in American life. His famous ``called'' shot in the 1932 World Series is so ingrained in our national memory and baseball lore that even our youngest children playing tee-ball in backyards across the country seek to emulate this iconic moment.

Mr. Ruth was also famous for his generosity, working for the Red Cross during World War II, organizing charity golf tournaments with longtime adversary Ty Cobb, appearing at benefits, and buying more than $100,000 in war bonds. A year before his death, he established the Babe Ruth Foundation, which provided assistance to disadvantaged children. Linda Ruth Tosetti, Mr. Ruth's granddaughter, is a resident of Connecticut, and today I would like to remember her grandfather, one of the greatest sports legends in our Nation's history.