Floor Statements

Mr. President, today I come to the floor to report the FHA Modernization Act of 2007. This is vitally important legislation, and I want to take a moment to express my thanks to Senator Martinez for his very close collaboration and support in putting this legislation together. This is an original bill produced by the Senate Banking Committee, and as such, the rules prohibit us from obtaining cosponsors. However, I would like to recognize Senators Reed, Schumer, Bayh, Menendez, Brown, Kerry, Murray, Whitehouse, Martinez, Voinovich, Cornyn, and Coleman for their support of this bill and for their offers of cosponsorship.

The mortgage markets--particularly the subprime market--are in the midst of a meltdown. Historically high default and foreclosure rates generated, in significant part, by abusive and predatory lending practices, are threatening millions of American families with the loss of their most significant financial asset--their homes--at a cost of over $160 billion in home equity, according to testimony presented before the Banking Committee.

While these problems are addressed, we need to make sure that credit is available, including for subprime borrowers, on fair terms so that the people of this country have an opportunity to build wealth for the future.

A revitalized, strengthened, and modernized FHA can be and, under this legislation, will be a source of this constructive, wealth- building credit, both

for new homeowners and for people who are seeking a way out of the abusive loans in which they are currently trapped.

In short, by providing low-cost credit, without prepayment penalties, without teaser rates, and without other deceptive terms, FHA is a part of the solution to the predatory lending crisis we are experiencing.

Moreover, FHA has traditionally been an important tool for creating new minority homeowners, and for lower-, moderate-, and middle-income families to become homeowners. By modernizing FHA, we will help millions of families achieve their American Dream. FHA is in a strong position to play this role: an independent audit report indicates that FHA has a record $22 billion in capital, and a capital ratio, 6.82 percent, that is more than three times higher the mandated level of 2 percent.

The bill passed by the Committee, and which is being filed today does a number of important things: it raises FHA loan limits so that the program can reach many more people; it lowers downpayment requirements, while still ensuring that people will have a real stake in their new homes; it expands the reverse mortgage program for elderly homeowners by both raising the loan limit and removing the current cap on the number of these mortgages FHA can insure. I know Senators Reed, Crapo, and Allard strongly support this program; it reduces the origination fee that elderly homeowners can be charged for these mortgages by one- quarter, from 2 percent to 1.5 percent making it more affordable for seniors to take out these loans; and, it includes a major overhaul of FHA's manufactured housing program, authored by our colleagues Senators Bayh and Allard.

Taken together, these changes will help make FHA a more relevant and effective program. This legislation is supported by the Mortgage Bankers Association, the National Association of Home Builders, the National Association of Realtors, AARP, the Manufactured Housing Association, the Manufactured Housing Institute, and others. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

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

Mr. President, I offer my heartfelt congratulations to some of Connecticut's finest high school athletes: the girls swim team of Cheshire High School. Cheshire High recently set a national record with an astounding 235 dual meet wins in a row.

With its victory, Cheshire High breaks a record that had been held for 13 years by Elkhart Central High in Indiana--one of the longest- standing, most respected marks in high school swimming. Even more incredibly, the Connecticut streak dates back all the way to 1986, before any members of the current team were born.

Their record-setting night brought together parents who decorated the pool, painted their faces, and dressed up as the school's Ram mascot; more than 200 paying spectators; and the support of an entire community. For a town still struggling to overcome the memory of last July's notorious home-invasion murders, it was a joyous community celebration; I hope it will go a little way toward restoring the spirit of this Connecticut town.

For their teamwork and success, I applaud the Cheshire High swimmers:

Megan Aitro, Tara Aitro, Olivia Amato, Alexandria Barry, Jessica Bauer, Kailee Brown, Bridget Carmichael, Alyssa Carofano, Tina Chang, Katherine Collins, Kayla DeLuca, Adriana DiCenzo, Nicole Dicks, Rachael Dioses, Kelly Dolyak, Danielle Forrest, Amy Hudak, Kathryn Hummel, Kimberly Jerome, Jasmine Liu, Samantha Loignon, Shirin Lowell, Sofia Martone, Alexandra Maurice, Mairin McKinlay, Jessica Metcalf, Melissa Metcalf, Michaela Morr, Jessica Morse, Megan Mostoller, Stephanie Nguyen, Catherine Patrell, Brianna Perazella, Lauren Piccolino, Emilie Ptaszynski, Elissa Rosenfield, Sarah Schulefand, Morgan Schwenn, Meghan Shanahan, Sydney Smith, Jennifer Thompson, Margaret Tooley, Emma Velcofsky, and Elizabeth Visconti.

Congratulations are due as well their assistant coaches, William Lapman and Kristen Shanley, and their dedicated coach, Ed Aston, whom his team pulled, fully dressed, into the pool once the record was broken.

It is a true team, and town, achievement; and if I could list here the names of all 278 athletes who contributed their part to the streak, I certainly would. Instead I simply extend my admiration and my best wishes for many more wins to come.

Madam President, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3963, the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act. This bipartisan agreement is our second attempt to do what is right for our Nation's children. There are few more important issues facing the Senate than the

health and well-being of our Nation's youth. The vote to pass this legislation is a vote for children.

As the father of two young daughters, I clearly understand how important it is to know that if one of them gets sick that they have the health insurance coverage that will provide for their care. For millions of parents, every slight sniffle or aching tooth could mean the difference between paying the rent and paying for medical care. Today we have an opportunity to help give those parents peace of mind about their children's health.

Despite the broad bipartisan support that already exists for this bill, Chairman Baucus and Senator Grassley, among others, have worked tirelessly to build more support and accommodate the bill's critics. They should be commended for their work and dedication. Thanks to them and many others, this legislation represents an even more thorough compromise while still covering 10 million children. There are explicit changes designed to address criticisms by the bill's opponents. H.R. 3963 makes it even more clear that States must cover the poorest children before expanding their programs. And it ensures that illegal immigrants cannot get benefits.

But even with these changes the bill continues providing coverage for 6.6 million children currently enrolled in CHIP and provides coverage for 3.1 million children who are currently uninsured today. It gives States the resources they need to keep up with the growing numbers of uninsured children. It provides tools and incentives to cover children who have fallen through the cracks of current programs. And it will prevent the President from unfairly and shortsightedly limiting States' efforts to expand their CHIP programs to cover even more children. All together these efforts will reduce the number of uninsured children by one third over the next 5 years.

I am additionally very pleased that my Support for Injured Servicemembers Act amendment was included in the final SCHIP bill. This amendment provides up to 6 months of Family and Medical Leave Act, FMLA, leave for family members of military personnel who suffer from a combat-related injury or illness. FMLA currently allows 3 months of unpaid leave. Fourteen years ago, FMLA declared the principle that workers should never be forced to choose between the jobs they need and the families they love.

If ordinary Americans deserve those rights, how much more do they apply to those who risk their lives in the service of our country? Soldiers who have been wounded in our service deserve everything America can give to speed their recoveries--but most of all, they deserve the care of their closest loved ones.

The President's Commission on Care for America's Returning Wounded Warriors, ably led by Senator Bob Dole and former Secretary of Health and Human Services, Donna Shalala, has been instrumental in efforts to provide needed care for our returning heroes. It is not surprising that the Commission found that family members play a critical role in the recovery of our wounded servicemembers. Although the President has lauded the recommendations of the Commission and recently sent legislation to Congress to implement its recommendations, he continues to hold up the passage of this provision.

I am pleased that Senator Clinton is the lead cosponsor of my amendment. In addition, I am pleased that Senators Dole, Graham, Kennedy, Chambliss, Reed, Mikulski, Murray, Salazar, Lieberman, Menendez, Brown, Nelson of Nebraska, Cardin, and Obama are cosponsoring this amendment. I thank Senator Baucus and Senator Grassley for accepting this important amendment and appreciate the support of all of my colleagues in this effort.

Unfortunately the President still stands in the way. He continues to threaten to veto this important legislation. I am fearful that he will block yet another bipartisan compromise to cover children who need health care. This legislation is vital to the health and well-being of our children. It represents the hard work and agreement of an overwhelming majority of Members on both sides of the aisle. It is a testament to how important issues like children's health care can be addressed in a bipartisan manner by a united Congress. The President's policy of block and delay would mean Connecticut and other States would have to take away existing health coverage for hundreds of thousands of children when they should be covering more kids.

I urge my colleagues to support this critical legislation, and I urge President Bush to do what is right and sign it into law.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, it is with great pride that I join all of Connecticut in extending congratulations to the many young athletes who competed in the 15th Pan American Games, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. For over half a century, these games have brought together athletes from across the Western Hemisphere. This year 5,648 athletes from 49 countries came together in Rio to compete in 38 sports.

The Pan American games, similar to the Olympics, provide us another valuable opportunity to enjoy international athletic competition undertaken for pride and the love of the sport. By participating in the 15th Pan American Games, these young Americans have had an opportunity that few of their fellow Americans ever will--to join in competition with other young people from North, Central, and South America.

I would like to commend the 14 athletes from Connecticut who competed in the games: John Ball, Andrew Bolton, Eliza Cleveland, Reilley Dampeer, Robert Merrick, Alyssa Naeher, Todd Paul, Cara Raether, Geoffrey Rathgeber, Sarah Trowbridge, Karen Scavotto, Cameron Winklevoss, Tyler Winklevoss, Bartosz Wolski. It is with great pleasure and pride that I offer further congratulations to the Connecticut athletes who brought home three gold and five silver medals and one bronze medal. Without a doubt, the nine medals won by Connecticut's athletes contributed to America's overall victory at the 15th Pan American Games. It is my hope that these kinds of events will further unite our hemisphere.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Aeronautics Competitiveness Act of 2007 with my colleagues, Senators Voinovich and Warner.

Since the Wright brothers first flew at Kill Devil Hills, aeronautics has been an iconic American industry. The ability to fly is no less remarkable because it has now become commonplace; and in fact, that a flight across the country is now routine is a wonder in itself. Very few advances have had the national and global impact of the progress of aeronautics, and at the core of those advances has been a robust tradition of American ingenuity and production.

The challenges in aeronautics continue to shift. The air traffic control system is under strain, and my colleagues on the Commerce Committee have worked diligently this year to chart the path for a complete overhaul of the system. There are environmental pressures the industry has not faced before, including pressure to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. At the same time, new sectors of the business, including light jets, show the potential for astonishing growth. All of these challenges require significant technology advances, and a significant investment in research.

We find ourselves at a crossroads. The European Union has written a report entitled ``European Aeronautics: A Vision for 2020.'' I can summarize the vision: it is to supplant the U.S. as the global leader in aeronautics in the next 13 years. Toward that goal, the E.U. is investing about $860 million per year at today's exchange rates in a research fund for aeronautics and ``sustainable surface transport.'' With the investments of individual countries, the total research spending on civil aeronautics is closer to $4.5 billion. In contrast, this year's budget for NASA aeronautics research will be on the order of $550 million. Aeronautics is the first ``A'' in NASA, but receives less than one-thirtieth of the funds.

The aeronautics industry is part of the fabric of American life, and has the highest trade surplus of any industry, at $52 billion last year. But U.S. preeminence is far from assured. This is why I am proud to introduce a bill that will help to ensure the future competitiveness of U.S. aeronautics. It increases the authorization level for NASA aeronautics programs by 20 percent per year for the first 2 years, with a smaller increase in the third year. It creates a more transparent and inclusive process for stakeholder input into research priorities, and encourages NASA to take selected technologies farther along from basic research towards development. And it invests in the workforce by providing for scholarships for graduate students at NASA and the FAA, and creating a program modeled on the Independent Research and Development program.

I believe the future is bright for this vital industry, and I strongly feel that we should be unwilling to cede leadership to anyone in this area, no matter how determined they may be. I urge my colleagues to support this bill to preserve the leading role of U.S. aeronautics.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Aeronautics Competitiveness Act of 2007 with my colleagues, Senators Voinovich and Warner.

Since the Wright brothers first flew at Kill Devil Hills, aeronautics has been an iconic American industry. The ability to fly is no less remarkable because it has now become commonplace; and in fact, that a flight across the country is now routine is a wonder in itself. Very few advances have had the national and global impact of the progress of aeronautics, and at the core of those advances has been a robust tradition of American ingenuity and production.

The challenges in aeronautics continue to shift. The air traffic control system is under strain, and my colleagues on the Commerce Committee have worked diligently this year to chart the path for a complete overhaul of the system. There are environmental pressures the industry has not faced before, including pressure to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. At the same time, new sectors of the business, including light jets, show the potential for astonishing growth. All of these challenges require significant technology advances, and a significant investment in research.

We find ourselves at a crossroads. The European Union has written a report entitled ``European Aeronautics: A Vision for 2020.'' I can summarize the vision: it is to supplant the U.S. as the global leader in aeronautics in the next 13 years. Toward that goal, the E.U. is investing about $860 million per year at today's exchange rates in a research fund for aeronautics and ``sustainable surface transport.'' With the investments of individual countries, the total research spending on civil aeronautics is closer to $4.5 billion. In contrast, this year's budget for NASA aeronautics research will be on the order of $550 million. Aeronautics is the first ``A'' in NASA, but receives less than one-thirtieth of the funds.

The aeronautics industry is part of the fabric of American life, and has the highest trade surplus of any industry, at $52 billion last year. But U.S. preeminence is far from assured. This is why I am proud to introduce a bill that will help to ensure the future competitiveness of U.S. aeronautics. It increases the authorization level for NASA aeronautics programs by 20 percent per year for the first 2 years, with a smaller increase in the third year. It creates a more transparent and inclusive process for stakeholder input into research priorities, and encourages NASA to take selected technologies farther along from basic research towards development. And it invests in the workforce by providing for scholarships for graduate students at NASA and the FAA, and creating a program modeled on the Independent Research and Development program.

I believe the future is bright for this vital industry, and I strongly feel that we should be unwilling to cede leadership to anyone in this area, no matter how determined they may be. I urge my colleagues to support this bill to preserve the leading role of U.S. aeronautics.

Mr. President, I have some comments I want to make about the FISA legislation. But before doing so, I commend my colleague from North Dakota. I have joined with him on so many occasions in the past. Once again, his eloquence and passion about these issues is evident this morning. We have worked together. We have sponsored legislation on a number of matters. I will join him in the efforts he raised today. He has described a situation that most Americans find horrific.

As to the point he makes on the issue of supporting our troops, I find it offensive that anyone would suggest, because we disagree with the policy, we are somehow putting our soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen at risk. I strongly suggest, as does my colleague from North Dakota, that our continuing policy in Iraq has made us less safe, less secure, more vulnerable, more isolated in the world and, in fact, the very soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines we admire are in greater jeopardy because of a continuation of this policy. I will be joining with him and others as we try to bring this to a halt, not in 2009 or 2013 but hopefully this year. I commend him for his comments.

Mr. President, for 6 years the President has demonstrated time and again that he doesn't respect the role of Congress, nor does he respect the rule of law. It is the latter point that I want to address this morning because it is the rule of law which draws us all together, regardless of politics, ideology, or party. It is the rule of law, not of men, which we swear to uphold when we take the oath of office in this Chamber, as Members do in the other Chamber, and certainly as the President does on January 20 every 4 years.

For 6 years this President has used scare tactics to prevent the Congress from reining in his abuse of authority. A case in point is the current direction in which this body appears to be headed as we prepare to reform and extend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

Many of the unprecedented rollbacks to the rule of law by this administration have been made in the name of national security.

The Bush administration has relentlessly focused our Nation's resources and manpower on a war of choice in Iraq. That ill-conceived war has broken our military, squandered our resources, and emboldened our enemies.

The President's wholesale disregard of the rule of law has compounded the damage done in Iraq, made our Nation less secure, and as a direct consequence of these acts, we are far less secure, far more vulnerable, and certainly far more isolated in the world today.

Consider the scandal at Abu Ghraib, where Iraqi prisoners were subjected to inhumane, humiliating acts by U.S. personnel charged with guarding them.

Consider Guantanamo Bay. Rather than helping to protect the Nation by aggressively prosecuting prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, these individuals have instead become the symbol of our weakened moral standing in the world. Who would have ever imagined it?

Consider the secret prisons run by the Central Intelligence Agency and the practice of extraordinary rendition that allows them to evade U.S. law regarding torture.

Consider the shameful actions of our outgoing Attorney General who politicized prosecutions in the U.S. Attorney's Office, who was more committed to serving the President who appointed him than laws he was sworn to uphold as Attorney General.

Consider the Military Commissions Act, a law that allows evidence obtained through torture to be admitted into evidence.

It denies individuals the right to counsel.

It denies them the right to invoke the Geneva Conventions.

And it denies them the single most important and effective safeguard of liberty man has ever known, the right of habeas corpus, permitting prisoners to be brought before a court to determine whether their detainment is lawful.

Warrantless wiretapping, torture, the list goes on.

Each of these policies share two things in common.

First, they have severely weakened our ability to prosecute the global war on terrorism, if for no other reason than they have made it harder, if not impossible, to build the kind of international support and cooperation we absolutely need to succeed in our efforts against stateless terrorism.

And second, each has only been possible because the U.S. Congress has not been able to stop the President in his unprecedented expansion of executive power, although, I might add, some in this body have certainly tried.

Whether these policies were explicitly authorized is beside the point. In every instance, Congress has been unable to hold this administration to account for violating the rule of law and our Constitution. In each instance, Republicans in the Congress have prevented this body from telling this administration that a state of war is not a blank check.

And those are not my words. Those are the words of Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, nominated by President Ronald Reagan.

And today, it appears that we are prepared to consider the proposed renewal of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a law that whatever form it eventually takes will almost certainly permit the Bush administration to broadly eavesdrop on American citizens.

Legislation, as currently drafted, that would grant retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that helped this administration violate the civil liberties of Americans and the law of this Nation.

While it may be true that the proposed legislation is an improvement over existing law, it remains fundamentally flawed because it fails to protect the privacy rights of Americans or hold the Executive or the private sector accountable if they choose to ignore the law.

That is why I will not stand on the floor of the Senate and be silent about the direction we are about to take.

It is time to say: No more.

No more trampling on our Constitution.

No more excusing those who violate the rule of law. These are fundamental, basic, eternal principles. They have been around, some of them, for as long as the Magna Carta.

They are enduring.

What they are not is temporary. And what we do not do in a time where our country is at risk is abandon them.

My father served as executive trial counsel at the Nuremberg trials of Nazi war criminals in 1945 and 1946.

What America accomplished at those historic trials was not a foregone conclusion. It took courage. When Joseph Stalin and even a leader as great and noble as Winston Churchill wanted to simply execute the Nazi leaders, we didn't back down in this country from our belief that these men, as terrible as they were--some of the worst violators in the court of history of mankind--ought to have a trial. We did not give in to vengeance.

As then, the issue before us today is the same.

Does America stand for all that is still right with our world or do we retreat in fear?

Do we stand for justice that secures America or do we act out of vengeance that weakens us?

I am well aware this issue is seen as political. I believe Democrats were elected to help strengthen our Nation, elected to help restore our standing in the world.

I believe we were elected to ensure that this Nation adheres to the rule of law and to stop the administration's assault on our Constitution.

But the rule of law is not the province of any one political party. It is the province of each and every one of us as American citizens, on our watch and our generation, to make sure we are safer because of its inviolable provisions.

Mr. President, I know this bill has not been reported out of the Judiciary Committee yet.

But I am here today because if I have learned anything in my 26 years in this body, particularly over the last 7 years, it is that if you wait until the end to voice your concerns, you will have waited too long. That is why I have written the majority leader informing him that I will object to any effort to bring the legislation to the Senate floor for consideration.

I hope my colleague, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Senator Leahy is able to remove this language from the FISA bill. Pat Leahy is as strong a defender of the Constitution as any Member of this body.

But if he is unable to do so, I am prepared to filibuster this bill.

President Bush is right about one thing: The debate is about security but not in the way he imagines it.

He believes we have to give up certain rights to be safe.

I believe the choice between moral authority and security is a false choice.

I believe it is precisely when you stand up and protect your rights that you become stronger, not weaker, as a nation.

The damage that was done to our country on 9/11 was stunning. It changed the world forever.

But when you start diminishing our rights as a people, you compound that tragedy. You cannot protect America in the long run if you fail to protect our Constitution. It is that simple.

History will likely judge this President harshly for his war of choice and for fighting it with a disregard for our most cherished principles.

But history is about tomorrow. We must act today and stand up for the Constitution and the rule of law.

Mr. President, this is the moment. At long last, let us rise up to it.

I urge my colleagues to join me in this effort.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise to honor the life of one of the finest men I have known in this body: Senator Paul Wellstone of Minnesota. Paul--along with his wife Sheila and his daughter Marcia; his staff members Will McLaughlin, Tom Lapic, and Mary McEvoy; and pilots Richard Conry and Michael Guess--died in a plane crash 5 years ago to the day. Five years, half a decade already: The time has passed so quickly that it comes as a shock to stop and recall just how long Paul has been gone. In marking his death, we remember that the years are passing just as fast for each of us, and that they can take us, as they took our friend Paul, when we are least ready to go. What a privilege we have to serve here--what a short time we are given! Paul's death and Paul's life remind us to fill that short time with all the best we can bring. Paul Wellstone did: He lived just 58 years, and yet it seems that in that time, he lived enough to fill two or three or four lives.

Paul was a champion wrestler who became a champion scholar; a tireless activist and organizer who became a beloved professor; everywhere and always a fighter, full of energy and zeal and real love for the people he spoke for in this Chamber. He was, in the proud tradition of his State, one of the happiest warriors I have ever known. He was an intellectual, a Ph.D., but never abstract; all the theories in the world meant nothing to Paul if they couldn't lift up the single mother struggling to support a family or the torture victim seeking refuge in America or the sufferer of mental illness marked with an unjust stigma.

Paul suffered with each of them. In fact, the pain that Paul felt in his life--the ache of his multiple sclerosis, the challenges of growing up the son of immigrants, the pain of his brother's mental illness-- became his most powerful political weapon. Pain cuts some of us off, but not Paul Wellstone: He found the greatest salve in reaching out, in traveling up and down Minnesota in the dead of winter in his rickety green campaign bus; in taking time to thank the cooks, waiters, and janitors who served at so many of Paul's events; in stretching out an appearance to two or three times its planned length because he was so caught up in a conversation, until his staff were forced to grab him by the arm and literally drag him out of the room.

He was given 12 years to make his mark in the Senate. And in that time, he helped ensure that toddlers all through this country would have a head start in life. He ensured that his State would be a refuge for victims of torture who came here from the dungeons of Central America or Asia. He fought hard against sex trafficking and against domestic violence with Sheila Wellstone, herself a leading advocate for battered women. He helped make sure that families stayed warm in the winter, because the government gave them the heating assistance they needed. And inspired by the struggles of his brother, he struggled to end the discrimination against the mentally ill by insurers. In that last cause, I was particularly proud to stand beside Paul; and finally enacting mental health parity legislation would be a fitting honor to his memory.

Paul did so much more than ever could be expected with the short time he was given; he was driven by an untiring spirit. But he also understood that legislation, as much good as it has the power to do, is something of a symptom, an outward phenomenon; the deeper causes of what we accomplish in this Chamber are the movements and forces that put us in office, that make one cause prosper and another weaken-- Paul's ear was to the ground and his eyes were on the roots. He was a Senator-organizer: and as much energy as he put into legislating, he put more into building a movement that would outlast him.

So I wish that Paul were still at his desk in this room today; maybe grayer and a little more stooped, but still giving his all to the fight to end a misguided war, one he opposed since the outset, or pouring out all his passion against torture and lawlessness in our own government. I wish we still had his voice.

But on another level, I know that it doesn't matter. The activists and candidates and grassroots organizers trained by Wellstone Action, a nonprofit set up in Paul's name, still memorize a phrase he used to remind us all that politics is first and foremost about those we serve: ``It's not about me, it's not about me, it's not about me.'' Paul knew that the name at the top of the bill, the politician at the top of a ballot, the voice speaking the words matters little. The citizens whom we serve are the ones who matter most, and Paul's commitment was, first and foremost, to those of our citizens whose lives are spent at the margins of our society.

``Some people,'' Paul's home newspaper wrote today, ``live lives so large that they never really die.'' It was true of Paul Wellstone, and his wife Sheila, and his daughter Marcia. May we live in their example, so that those words will one day be true of each of us.

First, I would like to thank and congratulate the distinguished chairman of the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations Subcommittee on putting together this vitally important appropriations bill that will restore and grow funding for so many of our Nation's domestic health, education and labor programs. In particular, he should be commended for his leadership in support of funding for domestic HIV/AIDS programs.

As a senior member of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions-- HELP--Committee, I am deeply troubled by the impact Public Law 109-415, the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Modernization Act of 2006, has had on the State of Connecticut. Is the distinguished chairman aware that the State of Connecticut lost a total of $3.3 million in Federal funding in the current fiscal year as a result of improper implementation of the reauthorization by the Bush administration?

I am particularly concerned because these funding cuts so deeply impacted Connecticut's two transitional grant areas, formerly eligible metropolitan areas, Hartford, which lost nearly $1.5 million, and New Haven, which lost nearly $1.6 million. Urban areas in my State, like many urban areas throughout the U.S. with a long history of the presence of this disease, have systems of medical care and treatment that have been disrupted by the Ryan White CARE Act reauthorization bill. When I put my support behind the final reauthorization bill, it was with the understanding that this bill would do no harm to my State. In fact, an analysis of the reauthorization bill provided by the Government Accountability Office and others prior to its passage showed that the State of Connecticut and the cities of Hartford and New Haven would gain over $2 million as a result of its passage. However, this has not been the case.

Yes, it is. Connecticut is not listed among the States with sufficiently reliable and accurate names-based reporting of living non- AIDS cases of HIV. During negotiations on the reauthorization bill, I was told by officials in the Bush administration that Connecticut's names-based reporting system could not yet be considered sufficiently reliable and accurate because it had not reported HIV cases by name for four consecutive years. Connecticut would not be in that position until 2009, at the earliest. The result has been that my State lost $3.3 million in Federal funding.

I am also deeply troubled by reports of how HRSA may be measuring urban areas' demonstrated need for supplemental funding. Under Public Law 109-415, HRSA can consider the impact a decline in formula funding under title I would have on individuals living with HIV/AIDS for purposes of supplemental grant funding. It is my understanding that this language targets urban areas whose decline in formula funding has meant a decline or disruption of services for people living with HIV/ AIDS by giving them priority in the supplemental funding process.

It is my hope that the impact of a decline in formula funding under title I will be measured based on the urban areas' prior year formula award. This is because applicants for supplemental funding do not know their current years' formula award at the time they apply for supplemental funding and therefore neither the applicant nor HRSA can measure the current years' decline or disruption of services for individuals living with HIV/AIDS. It is my hope that I can work with the distinguished chairman in conference to provide some clarification and guidance to HRSA on this critically important issue.

It has been stated that the Ryan White reauthorization bill better targeted funding so that infected persons would have better access to high quality health care. Residents in the State of Connecticut do not have better access to high quality health care as a result of the Ryan White reauthorization bill. However, there is funding in the House- passed Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education appropriations bill that is targeted to cities losing funding under title I. I strongly support this targeted funding and urge that it be maintained in the final conference report.

I thank the Senator for his consideration.

(At the request of Mr. McConnell, the following statement was ordered to be printed in the Record.)

Madam President. I rise to fulfill again my most painful obligation as Senator: to mark the life of another young Connecticut man who died in our country's service. SGT Jason Lantieri was killed this month in Iraq.

Sergeant Lantieri's life was, up to the last moment, a story of moving success. At the age of 11, he was a troubled child from a broken home, lost in the foster care system. But two caring foster parents helped to transform him: Jon and Kathy Miller, of Killingworth, who took Jason into their home and became a new mother and father to him. ``We just decided to go and ask if he could become part of our family,'' Kathy Miller recalled. It wasn't long before Jason was succeeding in school, serving on the student council, and competing in three sports. In his obituary, the Hartford Courant called it ``a life redeemed.''

Sergeant Lantieri went on to earn a business degree, but, like so many energetic young men before him, signed up with the Army for a chance at travel and adventure. By all accounts, he had his wish, from Alaska to Europe to Iraq with a transportation unit in the 25th Infantry Division. Still, with all those who choose to serve in this time of war, Sergeant Lantieri knew that wearing his country's uniform meant risking his life. A video posted on his Web page shows how he confronted danger with a sardonic sense of humor: Below footage of an explosion in the desert, his caption reads, ``Just another day at the office.''

In a war zone, death can come in any daily routine. Its constant presence means that in war there is no routine and that is just another sacrifice soldiers make for our sake. Last week, a transportation accident crushed Jason between two vehicles. He was 25.

The two strangers he came to call Mom and Dad have a last record of his voice--a call from Iraq on their answering machine. The message is still there, and I imagine it always will be. They also have the military photos that show Jason in his uniform and beret, with a firm, unsmiling face. ``I hardly recognize that person,'' said Kathy Miller. ``That's just a little piece of Jason. It's not the whole picture of who he is.''

She remembers his class-clowning, his toughness on the soccer field, and his mischieviousness playing with her grandchildren--qualities that aren't in the picture.

The tragedy is that Sergeant Lantieri has lost his whole life; the

class clown and the grown foster son are dead along with the soldier. We can only answer that tragedy with grief and with gratitude, pledging to remember his rich life in its entirety.

Mr. President, today Senator Domenici and I submitted a resolution designating next week, the week of October 21- 27, 2007 as ``National Character Counts Week.'' I have worked for many years on the issue of character education and hope that by designating a special week to this important cause, students and teachers will come together to participate in character building activities in their schools this week and throughout the year.

Senator Domenici and I first established the Partnerships in Character Education Pilot Project in 1994 and since then we have worked together regularly to commemorate National Character Counts Week. Character education is about celebrating what's right with young people while enabling them to develop the knowledge and life skills necessary in order to embrace ethical and responsible behavior. I am pleased that we are continuing our efforts today to help expand the ability of States and schools to make character education a central part of every child's education.

While English, math and science provide the figurative bricks of schools, character education provides the mortar. Trustworthiness, respect, responsibility, fairness, caring, and citizenship are the six pillars of character. The standards of conduct that arise out of those values constitute the foundation of ethics, and therefore, of ethical decisionmaking. Character education provides students a context within which to learn. If we view education simply as the imparting of knowledge to our children, then we will not only miss an opportunity, but we will also jeopardize our future.

Currently, there are character education programs across all 50 States in rural, urban and suburban areas at every grade level. I hope that in celebrating National Character Counts Week, that more schools in every State adopt similar programs.

Character education programs work. Schools across the country that have adopted strong character education programs report better student performance, fewer discipline problems, and increased student involvement within their communities. Children want direction; they want to be taught right from wrong. Young people yearn for consistent adult involvement, and when they get it, according to surveys, they are less inclined to use illegal drugs, vandalize property or commit suicide. The American public wants character education in our schools, too. Studies show that approximately 90 percent of Americans support schools teaching character education.

Character education can and is being incorporated into children's lives in and outside of the classroom. It provides a helping hand to our schools and communities to ensure our children's futures are bright and filled with opportunities for success. Character education not only cultivates minds, it nurtures hearts. While our children may only represent one-quarter of our population, they are 100 percent of our future.

I submit that character transcends religious, cultural, political, and socio-economic barriers. I believe our country is having a renewed focus on character and this resolution sends a wonderful message to Americans and will help those of us involved in character education reinvigorate our efforts to get more communities and schools involved. So today, Senator Domenici and I submitted a resolution to accomplish just that and hopefully our renewed effort will bring together even more communities to ensure that character education is a part of every child's life. I hope that my colleagues will join us in this important effort.

Mr. President, today Senator Ensign and I, along with 29 cosponsors, are submitting a concurrent resolution with the House of Representatives designating October 18, 2007 as Lights On Afterschool Day. Lights on Afterschool brings students, parents, educators, lawmakers, and community and business leaders together to celebrate afterschool programs. This year, more than 1 million Americans are expected to attend about 7,500 events designed to raise awareness and support for these much needed programs. In addition, Lights On Afterschool 2007 marks the 10th anniversary of 21st Century Community Learning Centers, the primary Federal initiative supporting afterschool programs.

Approximately 90 percent of parents say that having a safe, positive place where their child can go after school will improve their child's well-being. However, 14 million school-age children--or 25 percent of all school-age children--are left unsupervised after school and miss the opportunity to attend a safe, positive place that supports their growth and well-being.

Quality afterschool programs benefit youth, families, and communities. Students enrolled in afterschool programs are more likely to be engaged and go farther in education. They are also more likely to avoid risky behavior and criminal activity. Afterschool programs help parents successfully balance their work and home-life. In addition, these programs promote adult involvement with youth, which helps to create more cohesive communities invested in the future of our children.

In our work on the Senate Afterschool Caucus, Senator Ensign and I have been working for more than three years to impress upon our colleagues the importance of afterschool and are proud to say that 35 of our colleagues have joined the Caucus. We hope that they, along with other Members of the Congress, will join us on October 18 to celebrate the importance of afterschool programs in their communities back home.

Mr. President, I speak in memory of my dear friend, William E. McAnulty, Jr., justice of the Kentucky State Supreme Court. He died last month of lung cancer, at the age of 59.

Justice McAnulty should have been with us for many more years. But Bill lived a life that could have been called complete no matter when his book closed--complete because it was full of love, full of humor, and full of pathbreaking work.

Bill jumped at the chance to be the first African American to serve on Kentucky's Supreme Court, declaring that he didn't have time to wait to make history. ``And to those many, many before me,'' he added, ``thank you for not waiting.''

And Justice McAnulty knew that, just as he owed a debt to the civil rights pioneers who came before him, he in turn would be remembered by those who came after: After his success, he said, black lawyers ``will understand the door is open and they are able like any other lawyer or judge to enter. I've looked at my entire career as being someone who could pave the way for others behind me.''

``He was simply born to be a judge,'' said a prominent Kentucky attorney. But when I met Bill at the University of Louisville law school, his accomplishments on the bench were still far in the future.

What I remember most from our student days together is his mischievous streak for practical jokes and his crackling sense of humor--qualities that served him wonderfully as a judge.

When a lawyer paused in the middle of a lengthy closing statement and asked Bill to wake a snoring juror, he replied: ``You put him to sleep. You wake him up.'' And when this University of Louisville graduate and life-long Democrat was preparing for brain surgery in the last days of his life, he asked the doctor for assurances that he wouldn't wake up a University of Kentucky fan or with the judicial perspective of Justice Clarence Thomas.

Bill faced his sudden illness and his imminent death with a bravery I wish we could all be blessed to emulate. In one sense, it was deeply unfair for that sickness to strike only a year after his crowning achievement, service on his State's highest court. But as Bill would have told us, only a false measure of success could be stolen so easily.

Bill earned a much deeper kind. In the words of Ralph Waldo Emerson quoted at his funeral: ``To laugh often and much; . . . To know even one life has breathed easier because you have lived--this is to have succeeded.''

So I join Bill's surviving loved ones--his father William, his wife Kristi, and his four children--in their sadness. At the funeral, the presiding pastor implored Kentucky's Governor, ``We know you can't give us another Judge McAnulty, but please give us somebody like him.''

A success like the life of Justice William E. McAnulty, Jr., is no cause for mourning. But we grieve Bill's death, and I can't deny that I will miss this best of friends very, very much.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Student Bill of Rights. This bill would ensure that every child in America has an equal opportunity to receive a high quality education.

The Student Bill of Rights would achieve this goal by providing America's children with components needed for a solid education. These components include highly qualified teachers, challenging curricula, small classes, current textbooks, quality libraries, and up-to-date technology.

Currently, federal law requires that schools within the same district provide comparable educational services. The Student Bill of Rights would extend that basic guarantee of equal opportunity to the state level by requiring comparability of resources across school districts within a state.

More than 50 years ago, Brown v. Board of Education struck down segregation in law. Over 50 years later, we know that just because there is no segregation in law does not mean that it does not persist. Today, our education system remains largely separate and unequal, and in light of a recent Supreme Court decision, we need to find more creative ways to promote equity in our schools.

All too often, where a child's family can afford to live determines whether that child is taught by a high quality teacher, has access to the best courses and instructional materials, goes to school in a new, modern building, and otherwise benefits from educational resources that have been shown to be essential to a quality education. In fact, the U.S. ranks at the bottom among developed countries in the disparity in the quality of schools available to wealthy and low-income children. This gap is simply unacceptable, and it is why the Student Bill of Rights is so important to our children's ability to gain the skills they need to be responsible, participating citizens in our diverse democracy, and to compete and succeed in the global economy.

While other factors such as supportive parents, motivated peers, and positive role models in the community are also beneficial to academic achievement, we know that adequate resources are crucial to providing students with the opportunity to receive a solid education.

The quality of a child's education should not be determined by his or her ZIP code. The Student Bill of Rights will help ensure that each and every child gets a decent education, and in turn, an equal opportunity for a successful future. I hope that my colleagues will join me in supporting the Student Bill of Rights.